| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/07/2013 08:39:24 PM · #151 |
Originally posted by Neil:
What the heck is their cloud version anyway...does it not run as a local app? Does it really run on their servers? And yet it's as full featured as the standalone versions? So if you're away from an internet connection, you are SOL? |
No, it runs as a desktop app, just as it does now. But it will need to validate the license every 30 days or so, and if your payments aren't current they'll cut you off. I've read you're OK up to 90 days if you do not connect online, but when you are connected, expect it to validate at least once every 30 days.
I've worked with encrypted e-Books and it works much the same way. |
|
|
|
05/07/2013 08:39:41 PM · #152 |
Originally posted by George:
What about working from home? I plan on splitting the price of SolidWorks with my employer soon (for a home license); we'll see how that goes. |
as a CE student what do you use solidworks for? you wont be using it in practice as a civil engineer i know that much.
|
|
|
|
05/07/2013 08:44:41 PM · #153 |
Originally posted by Ann:
Originally posted by George:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by George:
Also, I'm a Civil Engineering student. I'll have plenty of other (more expensive) software to purchase eventually, so it'll be hard to justify any sort of upgrade plan.
|
Not really unless you plan on starting your own engineering firm straight out of school. (Maybe you could do that, but I'd advise against it til you have a bit of experience.)I've worked as an engineer for 15+ years and have never had to supply my own engineering software. I'd run from any employer who does. Most companies won't let you install unauthorized software on their machines for work because they don't want to invalidate or compromise their licensing agreements with their software suppliers over potentially being accused of software piracy, not to mention the ethical issues. |
What about working from home? I plan on splitting the price of SolidWorks with my employer soon (for a home license); we'll see how that goes. |
Any respectable company that wants you to work from home will either a) give you a laptop with the software you need, b) give you the software licenses you need for your home machine, or c) have some way you can remote into a machine that has the software installed. In the modern world, it's usually option c). |
this, also from personal experience logging in remotely sucks. the products we use from Bentley (autodesk competitor) offer home use license of their software, i'm pretty sure autodesk offers the same. although autodesk isn't real big in the field of civil engineering, Bentley pretty much owns all the government agencies, all but 2 states now i believe. Private authorities and railroads still use autodesk though and of course surveyors. |
|
|
|
05/07/2013 09:06:15 PM · #154 |
Unless things change, it looks like I am on my last version of Photoshop.
I can't see paying that kind of money to rent software, upgrades or not. Add to that the fact that I do not trust the security of the cloud, this pretty much puts an end to it. As far as I can see, this is a money grab, and an excuse to punish those of us who do not pirate software for their misdeeds.
After seeing what dedicated hackers can do to the best defenses, I do not see the cloud as secure. By keeping my stuff on my hard drive, I present a fairly small low value target. Giant servers, with thousands of accounts are a much higher value large target. I'm not worried about theft of my images, it is the theft of my account information and personal data that I fear.
Interesting that Topaz came out with their own master program for their plug-ins several months ago. I wonder if they saw this coming. |
|
|
|
05/07/2013 09:10:27 PM · #155 |
I can't agree with you more.
I bought CS2 as an upgrade I think in 2006.
I'm still using CS2, it fits my purposes just fine
Its 2013.
My cost: $180 (upgrade)
My cost as CC: $1680 (at $20/mo)
% Increase = 833 %
Clearly, Adobe realizes this, it makes the best business sense for them. But, as a result, I can no longer get adobe products.
This type of payment scheme makes a lot of sense for large businesses that deal with licenses. I have personal software at work that is maintained now under a business license. Fortunately, the software company makes it worth the while.
Adobe just marketed themselves out of the individual hobbyist. Not that they seem to care.
Originally posted by Mike:
how will student pricing work is a question i have. I'm a student, bought cs5 for about $200. im still using it and will for the foreseeable future. so far i have paid $200 for 3 years worth now and actually I'd probably get another 3 out of provided some killer technology hadn't come out in a later release. now it sounds enticing at $15 a month, but once i quit paying i lose it all, and who's to say adobe cant kill that pricing or what happens when im no longer a student in two years?
monthly fees make less and less sense, at least to me. |
Message edited by author 2013-05-07 21:16:09. |
|
|
|
05/07/2013 09:20:27 PM · #156 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
Unless things change, it looks like I am on my last version of Photoshop.
I can't see paying that kind of money to rent software, upgrades or not. Add to that the fact that I do not trust the security of the cloud, this pretty much puts an end to it. As far as I can see, this is a money grab, and an excuse to punish those of us who do not pirate software for their misdeeds.
After seeing what dedicated hackers can do to the best defenses, I do not see the cloud as secure. By keeping my stuff on my hard drive, I present a fairly small low value target. Giant servers, with thousands of accounts are a much higher value large target. I'm not worried about theft of my images, it is the theft of my account information and personal data that I fear.
Interesting that Topaz came out with their own master program for their plug-ins several months ago. I wonder if they saw this coming. |
You still keep all your files locally. The program is installed locally. The cloud is for license validation.
They do give you 20 GB of storage that you can use to collaborate in the cloud with clients/colleagues.
The only thing that has changed is the licensing, everything else works exactly the same way.
Calling it "Adobe Cloud" is misleading. I think they are just trying to jump on the "cloud" hype.
Azure Services from Microsoft, now THAT'S a real cloud based service. |
|
|
|
05/07/2013 09:32:18 PM · #157 |
| Looks like Photoshop CS6 is still available for download through Amazon.Com |
|
|
|
05/07/2013 09:41:05 PM · #158 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
I can't agree with you more.
I bought CS2 as an upgrade I think in 2006.
I'm still using CS2, it fits my purposes just fine
Its 2013.
My cost: $180 (upgrade)
My cost as CC: $1680 (at $20/mo)
% Increase = 833 %
Clearly, Adobe realizes this, it makes the best business sense for them. But, as a result, I can no longer get adobe products.
This type of payment scheme makes a lot of sense for large businesses that deal with licenses. I have personal software at work that is maintained now under a business license. Fortunately, the software company makes it worth the while.
Adobe just marketed themselves out of the individual hobbyist. Not that they seem to care.
|
Completely agree!!! If you look at my skill set and the fact that I am a hobbyist, do I really need anything other than CS2... The last thing I need is another monthly bill and I am perfectly content with CS2. I really think from a company standpoint, this is a really bad move for Adobe, and a really good move for the competition. It should get interesting.
Message edited by author 2013-05-07 21:41:48. |
|
|
|
05/07/2013 09:45:39 PM · #159 |
That's what I'm hoping for.
Its the same a cell phones. We used to pay $80+ for cell phones we never really used. There were lots of people in the same boat. Then, come Tracfone. Now, we spend $17 a month for something that matches us.
This only opens up a reason for other companies to develop things we can use.
Its happened before. I use "Matlab" at work. Its expensive. But colleges and individuals can use "R". Its open source, and fits the purposes of many people just fine. I'm hoping this will be no different.
Originally posted by Sirashley:
Completely agree!!! If you look at my skill set and the fact that I am a hobbyist, do I really need anything other than CS2... The last thing I need is another monthly bill and I am perfectly content with CS2. I really think from a company standpoint, this is a really bad move for Adobe, and a really good move for the competition. It should get interesting. |
|
|
|
|
05/08/2013 02:13:31 AM · #160 |
Photoshop CC: Adobe responds to reaction //www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05/08/Adobe-photoshop-cc
Originally posted by :
Were you expecting such a negative response from the photographic community?
We expected a higher degree of this type of reaction from the hobbyist photographic community because currently there's not a lot of photography-specific value in our subscription products.
|
|
|
|
|
05/08/2013 02:18:22 AM · #161 |
Originally posted by Article posted by paynekj:
What support can CS6 users expect?
Barring something unforeseen from Apple and Microsoft, we plan to update Photoshop CS6 for the next Mac and Windows operating system releases. Once Camera Raw 8 is completed for Photoshop CC, we are going to release a version of it for CS6 that includes any new camera support but without any of the new CC tools and features.
|
That sounds much more reasonable. Still a crappy model, but, it's sounding less totally insane. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 02:35:39 AM · #162 |
| When I bought CS6 Master Suite last year, I paid extra to have a free upgrade to the next version should it occur within the following 18 months. Doesn't sound like that was a wise move.... |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 06:01:53 AM · #163 |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 07:36:42 AM · #164 |
Originally posted by Cory:
That sounds much more reasonable. Still a crappy model, but, it's sounding less totally insane. |
its looking more and more like and overreaction by us, however i'm still not thrilled with the subscription idea. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 08:01:03 AM · #165 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by Cory:
That sounds much more reasonable. Still a crappy model, but, it's sounding less totally insane. |
its looking more and more like and overreaction by us, however i'm still not thrilled with the subscription idea. |
I don't think it is an overreaction at all. This is the end of the product line for most photographers. It's not economically viable to move to Adobe's Creative Cloud, and they've made it clear that they're happy to move on without us.
Two key statements:
Originally posted by Adobe VP of Creative Solutions, Winston Hendrickson:
We expected a higher degree of this type of reaction from the hobbyist photographic community because currently there's not a lot of photography-specific value in our subscription products. |
and
Originally posted by Adobe VP of Creative Solutions, Winston Hendrickson:
The reason behind the subscription-only move is the logistics of supporting two sets of software. |
The CS platform is dead, and might get a watch on its way out the door by being made compatible with the next OS versions, but I wouldn't expect anything else. And the plug-in problem begins in earnest then, as they will need to develop for the Creative Cloud and the old CS platform. We know how these things go.
This is a much easier product to manage on their part, and they're willing to lop off the amateurs, hobbyists and even professionals that don't upgrade with every version to make it easier. As a business person I think it's a great move. Stay focused, stay lean. But as a customer I'm a bit insulted.
I'll use CS6 until the wheels fall off, but that's the end of the line for me, and I'm looking forward to what the competition — which should have a renewed sense of purpose today — comes up with.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2013 08:20:09 AM · #166 |
im not happy about it either.
but even for hobbyist and amateurs at $700 a pop it wasn't cheap. neither are our cameras or the lenses. some of us wont think twice about dropping $1000 on a piece of glass yet we get upset when the software to take our images to the next level is expensive?
maybe because it isn't a tangible piece of equipment, something we can hold, and now its even less so.
Photoshop is expensive, and it will continue to be so, they only thing that really changed is how often you pay them. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 08:43:23 AM · #167 |
Well I am gonna stick with cs5 for as long as I can...I also will not pay a monthly fee to use a product that I should be able to purchase outright and use for a few years.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2013 08:52:20 AM · #168 |
That's because it doesn't expire.
Unless you drop it.
:)
Originally posted by Mike:
some of us wont think twice about dropping $1000 on a piece of glass |
That is not true. It really depends on how you look at it. If you want an individual product it can very easily cost you far more than buying it outright. For those who want all the applications it may be more cost effective.
I think their licensing idea is a great one. But the fact that it is the ONLY option is simply raping the smaller individual.
Originally posted by Mike:
Photoshop is expensive, and it will continue to be so, they only thing that really changed is how often you pay them. |
Message edited by author 2013-05-08 08:55:15. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 09:11:17 AM · #169 |
Originally posted by Mike:
im not happy about it either.
but even for hobbyist and amateurs at $700 a pop it wasn't cheap. neither are our cameras or the lenses. some of us wont think twice about dropping $1000 on a piece of glass yet we get upset when the software to take our images to the next level is expensive?
maybe because it isn't a tangible piece of equipment, something we can hold, and now its even less so.
Photoshop is expensive, and it will continue to be so, they only thing that really changed is how often you pay them. |
It's easy to sell that that $600 lens for $450 after seven years. Software is worth squat after that long. I've got a drawer of worthless software.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2013 09:23:39 AM · #170 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Originally posted by Mike:
im not happy about it either.
but even for hobbyist and amateurs at $700 a pop it wasn't cheap. neither are our cameras or the lenses. some of us wont think twice about dropping $1000 on a piece of glass yet we get upset when the software to take our images to the next level is expensive?
maybe because it isn't a tangible piece of equipment, something we can hold, and now its even less so.
Photoshop is expensive, and it will continue to be so, they only thing that really changed is how often you pay them. |
It's easy to sell that that $600 lens for $450 after seven years. Software is worth squat after that long. I've got a drawer of worthless software. |
True, used software is one of the most worthless things on the planet. Hell, even devalued currency is more valuable - at least you can wipe your a** with paper. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 10:38:22 AM · #171 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
An interesting point - I have what seems to be a sort of cloud based Word application. Who gets to see the documents I edit? Including the one where I keep track of all my passwords? Where is that going? |
Reston, VA, and a distant place in New Mexico. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 11:00:03 AM · #172 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Just to clear up a couple of things mentioned early on in the tread:
1. You don't need to be on-line all the time. It checks for an active subscription once a month. So you can work off line as long as you connect to the internet at some point in 30 day intervals.
|
Reading over at Scott Kelby's blog he indicated if you paid by the year you could actually be away from the servers as long as 99 days. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 11:32:27 AM · #173 |
Originally posted by Erastus:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Just to clear up a couple of things mentioned early on in the tread:
1. You don't need to be on-line all the time. It checks for an active subscription once a month. So you can work off line as long as you connect to the internet at some point in 30 day intervals.
|
Reading over at Scott Kelby's blog he indicated if you paid by the year you could actually be away from the servers as long as 99 days. |
The way I read it is it checks every 30 days and cuts you off after 99 days if you never contact the mother ship. I would imagine if you can pay for a full year up front, it wouldn't check for a full year. Not sure on that one though. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 12:17:19 PM · #174 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by Cory:
That sounds much more reasonable. Still a crappy model, but, it's sounding less totally insane. |
its looking more and more like and overreaction by us, however i'm still not thrilled with the subscription idea. |
I don't think it is an overreaction at all. This is the end of the product line for most photographers. It's not economically viable to move to Adobe's Creative Cloud, and they've made it clear that they're happy to move on without us.
Two key statements:
Originally posted by Adobe VP of Creative Solutions, Winston Hendrickson:
We expected a higher degree of this type of reaction from the hobbyist photographic community because currently there's not a lot of photography-specific value in our subscription products. |
and
Originally posted by Adobe VP of Creative Solutions, Winston Hendrickson:
The reason behind the subscription-only move is the logistics of supporting two sets of software. |
The CS platform is dead, and might get a watch on its way out the door by being made compatible with the next OS versions, but I wouldn't expect anything else. And the plug-in problem begins in earnest then, as they will need to develop for the Creative Cloud and the old CS platform. We know how these things go.
This is a much easier product to manage on their part, and they're willing to lop off the amateurs, hobbyists and even professionals that don't upgrade with every version to make it easier. As a business person I think it's a great move. Stay focused, stay lean. But as a customer I'm a bit insulted.
I'll use CS6 until the wheels fall off, but that's the end of the line for me, and I'm looking forward to what the competition — which should have a renewed sense of purpose today — comes up with. |
Plenty of my friends are freelancers; graphic designers, photographers etc. They aren't upset, they are outright pissed off. |
|
|
|
05/08/2013 12:45:48 PM · #175 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
The way I read it is it checks every 30 days and cuts you off after 99 days if you never contact the mother ship. I would imagine if you can pay for a full year up front, it wouldn't check for a full year. Not sure on that one though. |
I don't interpret it that way. It seems to me that if you pay monthly, it will cut you off immediately after 30 days of being unable to phone home. If you pay annually, that time is lengthened to 99 days.
|
|
