4 ms·

> You're just defending the right of a giant corporation to communicate poorly in a way that enriches them. Thanks for the downvote (I guess) but no, I'm doing

> You're just defending the right of a giant corporation to communicate poorly in a way that enriches them. Thanks for the downvote (I guess) but no, I'm doing no such thing. I'm explaining that the giant monopoly is going to do what the giant monopoly does. Really almost all subscriptions are like this -- they depend on you forgetting to cancel. And this one is a bit more up-front than most. > It's absolutely insane that you think Adobe has fulfilled their obligations to communicate to the customer what they're getting into by putting "annual plan paid monthly" in a drop-down next to a button. Sorry, this is a straw man. I didn't at all say that I thought those four words fulfilled their obligations. What I said is, they have a maximally clear four word way of summarising the plan right at the beginning of the payment flow. I'm quite sure they need to do a bit more to explain what the early cancellation options are at some point in the payment flow. But right before you even try to buy, they do explain you're buying an annual plan, don't they? FWIW, if you do not grasp that "annual plan" means an annual plan and then think about what your early cancellation options might be, perhaps you shouldn't be using the company credit card. Complaining loudly that you can't use something clearly marked as an annual plan for just one month is a bit of a stretch.

civilized 5y ago
What a staggering battery of distortions. Company credit card? You're just assuming that everyone doing this is spending someone else's money? Everything you've written functions to blame the victim and leave Adobe harmless here.
- CharlesW 5y ago
  > You're just assuming that everyone doing this is spending someone else's money? To be fair, you're also assuming that starving artists are paying for Photoshop. A quick "Adobe" search on your BitTorrent tracker of choice may change your mind.
  - civilized 5y ago
    Plenty of low-income people do their best to follow the law out of conscientiousness. I know some of them personally. I object passionately to the idea that, when people misunderstand communication that's designed to be maximally misleading, subject only to the constraint of legal defensibility, they are entirely to blame for falling into the trap. Adobe should be very clear and upfront about their early cancellation fees.
    - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
      "Annual plan, billed monthly" is demonstrably not maximally misleading. If it said "monthly subscription" without clearly identifying the annual commitment, that would be maximally misleading. I will grant you that it could say "Yearly plan", not "Annual plan", and be less misleading; they do appear to use this alternative phrasing in A/B tests. If anyone from Adobe is reading this thread: make that change. (And sort out your Photography plan: make a slimmer version of Photoshop that really does have just the features photographers need, and offer a plan for that.)
      - civilized 5y ago
        Monthly subscription would simply be a legally indefensible lie.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    Yes, but also we're talking about the whole Creative Cloud suite, not Photoshop here. There's a Photoshop-only plan that costs about £11 per month and there are Black Friday deals which are well understood by the budget photographer world to provide better value for money than this. (Even then it is poor value for money, IMO; other packages cover 95% of the functionality of Photoshop and cost less than a year of this, and I really think the market understands that now)
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  > What a staggering battery of distortions. I don't know who you're really angry at but it doesn't seem to be down to me. Maybe dial it back a bit. > Company credit card? You're just assuming that everyone doing this is spending someone else's money? The tweet talks about the the full Creative Cloud suite (something close to £750/yr), and yes, the majority of these people are either spending the company's money or that of their own freelance business. It's an eye-wateringly expensive commitment otherwise. This kind of commitment encourages due diligence.
CapsAdmin 5y ago
> Thanks for the downvote (I guess) but no, I'm doing no such thing. I'm explaining that the giant monopoly is going to do what the giant monopoly does. Isn't it our job as consumers to raise awareness and try to change this behavior though? There's something about this sort of argument that seems off to me. Someone complains about someone doing X, then someone else comes along and says it's always been like that. Why does that matter?

civilized 5y ago

What a staggering battery of distortions. Company credit card? You're just assuming that everyone doing this is spending someone else's money? Everything you've written functions to blame the victim and leave Adobe harmless here.

CharlesW 5y ago
> You're just assuming that everyone doing this is spending someone else's money? To be fair, you're also assuming that starving artists are paying for Photoshop. A quick "Adobe" search on your BitTorrent tracker of choice may change your mind.
- civilized 5y ago
  Plenty of low-income people do their best to follow the law out of conscientiousness. I know some of them personally. I object passionately to the idea that, when people misunderstand communication that's designed to be maximally misleading, subject only to the constraint of legal defensibility, they are entirely to blame for falling into the trap. Adobe should be very clear and upfront about their early cancellation fees.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    "Annual plan, billed monthly" is demonstrably not maximally misleading. If it said "monthly subscription" without clearly identifying the annual commitment, that would be maximally misleading. I will grant you that it could say "Yearly plan", not "Annual plan", and be less misleading; they do appear to use this alternative phrasing in A/B tests. If anyone from Adobe is reading this thread: make that change. (And sort out your Photography plan: make a slimmer version of Photoshop that really does have just the features photographers need, and offer a plan for that.)
    - civilized 5y ago
      Monthly subscription would simply be a legally indefensible lie.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  Yes, but also we're talking about the whole Creative Cloud suite, not Photoshop here. There's a Photoshop-only plan that costs about £11 per month and there are Black Friday deals which are well understood by the budget photographer world to provide better value for money than this. (Even then it is poor value for money, IMO; other packages cover 95% of the functionality of Photoshop and cost less than a year of this, and I really think the market understands that now)
unfocussed_mike 5y ago
> What a staggering battery of distortions. I don't know who you're really angry at but it doesn't seem to be down to me. Maybe dial it back a bit. > Company credit card? You're just assuming that everyone doing this is spending someone else's money? The tweet talks about the the full Creative Cloud suite (something close to £750/yr), and yes, the majority of these people are either spending the company's money or that of their own freelance business. It's an eye-wateringly expensive commitment otherwise. This kind of commitment encourages due diligence.

CapsAdmin 5y ago

> Thanks for the downvote (I guess) but no, I'm doing no such thing. I'm explaining that the giant monopoly is going to do what the giant monopoly does. Isn't it our job as consumers to raise awareness and try to change this behavior though? There's something about this sort of argument that seems off to me. Someone complains about someone doing X, then someone else comes along and says it's always been like that. Why does that matter?