4 ms·

Adobe is trying hard to become the next Oracle. Shit products combined with predatory license practices.

by t0mas88 2y ago

prox 2y ago
I am super happy with the Affinity Suite. One time price for a full version. So glad not to pay a dime to Adobe.
- throwadobe 2y ago
  I think Canva's dream is to become the next Adobe, so there's that.
  - prox 2y ago
    The moment they are going predatory with subscriptions or online only stuff I am gone. Affinity really had to put out a statement they aren’t going to do that. Let’s hope.
- vr46 2y ago
  I find them annoying to use but am happy to not have Adobe.
vjk800 2y ago
Why wouldn't they. Oracle stock has increase by 244% in the past 10 years and is at all time highest.
- echelon 2y ago
  Who actually buys Oracle? Apart from Java, don't tech companies avoid Oracle like the plague? Are they selling the MBAs at Fortune 500s? And is that how IBM stays afloat as well?
  - wiseowise 2y ago
    Isn't database their most selling product?
  - fbdab103 2y ago
    Every F500 company with historical Oracle installations built before the open source offerings were actually competitive. Even if every one of those decided today they were going to ditch Oracle, you are talking about multi-year initiatives.
  - stackskipton 2y ago
    Oracle has a ton of Line of Business software embedded into companies and migration is too massive to even consider so it remains. Peoplesoft, Siebel CRM and EBiz are huge. There is also plenty of 3rd party LoB software that requires Oracle databases as well. Also, yea, there is still plenty of companies onboarding Oracle Products, usually due to some new exec they hired who used it at last company and swears that it will revolutionize their business.
  - 7thaccount 2y ago
    Lots of people hate Oracle with a passion and will not use it for anything new. However, their existing production databases already use it and migration could take years and there is a lot of risk in doing that. As a result, they'll be profitable for years to come.
  - rvnx 2y ago
    One major factor are kickbacks. If you are working in a government or in a large company that can be the main factor for decision. https://investopedia.com/terms/k/kickback.asp https://investopedia.com/terms/k/kickback.asp The other one, is legacy systems. If you are a big bank, migrating away is a big risk, and anyway you make so much profit that it’s better to leave an extra 10M USD license fees in costs untouched, rather than risk destroying the 300M USD in profit. (Add that to the risk that your CTO may get mad because he won’t get his kickback)
    - pants2 2y ago
HKH2 2y ago
Yet people still pay them for a fix every month.
- dylan604 2y ago
  if you pay $X per month for their software that allows you to earn 100x that amount, then $X is nothing. $X per month when you make no money and just want to play around, have a fun hobby, or just try to learn so that maybe one day you too can have a job utilizing that software, then yeah, it can be expensive. I get it. Back in the days of installing Adobe software from floppies, I too was too broke to pay for it. Now, the use of Adobe software pays my bills. For people with hobbies, these other packages might be great alternatives. For working professionally, it's just easier to use the same tools as everyone else. It's just an expense of running a business. My biggest gripe now is all of the generative AI bullshit, but I don't use it, and it's just one of those things. I also don't use their cloud offerings, so I'm not worried about my work used for training data.
  - beej71 2y ago
    If $x is nothing then people will keep paying it and there'll be no need for early termination fees.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      You've maliciously manipulated what I said. I said if $X/month allows you to earn 100x $X, then it is worth it. Early terminations fees have absolutely nothing to do with that. At. All. Sometimes, people go on extended periods of not having work. Creative fields are very ebb&flow drought/flood type of work. If you're a solo person, sometimes you get bogged down in the current project to the point you don't have time to hunt for the next project. When the current project ends, you could hit a dry spell for an expended time. At that point, I could see wanting to stop paying for the software you are not currently using. However, back in the day, Photoshop was ~$1000 (using nice easy round number) for the full package. I think it was closer to $1500 for full, and $999 for upgrades, but that's too in the weeds. Updates were pretty much annually. So, you've got $1000/12 months = $83/month (but it was a lump sum payment only). Now, it's ~$60/month with much more frequent updates. If you paid the lump sum and then went on hiatus, you were still out that money. People complain about forced to not be able to use their 10 year old version because that's all the features you need. Okay, sounds legit. However, good luck installing any 10 year old software on modern OSes. There are times were software has to be kept up to date with the OS. The 32bit to 64bit was a big one even if it was more than 10 years ago. Again, I get trying to learn while not getting paid but needing to know it so you can have a chance to get paid. That's what I always told myself, that my using the pirated versions was for learning only. I never made any money from its use. Now, I get paid to use it, and I have a legit license. Pirating was much easier before the SaaS offerings, so I can appreciate that. For once, it pays to be old.
bongodongobob 2y ago
Photoshop, Lightroom, and Illustrator are shit? How so? I quite like them.
- ccvannorman 2y ago
  Photoshop hasnt added a feature I need in 10 years, yet I cant use the 10 year old single license I paid for, so now I pay yearly to subscribe. It's still the best on the market for me tho.
  - bongodongobob 2y ago
    As if software from 10 years ago doesn't need to be modified at all and doesn't require any work or maintenance :/
insane_dreamer 2y ago
Creative Cloud is shit, yes. But the products themselves are still excellent and or best in class; PS, InDesign, Illustrator, Lightroom etc
- vr46 2y ago
  Annoyingly, the products are extremely good and mature. Lightroom aside.
  - pants2 2y ago
    What a disaster Lightroom has been. They launched new Lightroom and renamed old Lightroom to Lightroom Classic. New Lightroom was missing a lot of features but was generally faster and more stable so I switched over. Then somehow Adobe decided they would refocus back on Lightroom Classic so I up and made the re-switch. It was a waste of time and money for everyone involved.
    - vr46 2y ago
      And barely scratches the surface of the catastrophe. What with mobile integration and my own shifting needs, what I didn’t need was the workflow confusion that Adobe introduced. Lightroom was the ultimate one-stop shop but I’ve now come to split my workflow up so much that the editing is now hot-swappable. C1 is looking vulnerable to RawTherapee, I gotta say. Lightroom is sadly a dot in the rear-view mirror.

Adobe is trying hard to become the next Oracle. Shit products combined with predatory license practices.

prox 2y ago

I am super happy with the Affinity Suite. One time price for a full version. So glad not to pay a dime to Adobe.

throwadobe 2y ago
I think Canva's dream is to become the next Adobe, so there's that.
- prox 2y ago
  The moment they are going predatory with subscriptions or online only stuff I am gone. Affinity really had to put out a statement they aren’t going to do that. Let’s hope.
vr46 2y ago
I find them annoying to use but am happy to not have Adobe.

vjk800 2y ago

Why wouldn't they. Oracle stock has increase by 244% in the past 10 years and is at all time highest.

echelon 2y ago
Who actually buys Oracle? Apart from Java, don't tech companies avoid Oracle like the plague? Are they selling the MBAs at Fortune 500s? And is that how IBM stays afloat as well?
- wiseowise 2y ago
  Isn't database their most selling product?
- fbdab103 2y ago
  Every F500 company with historical Oracle installations built before the open source offerings were actually competitive. Even if every one of those decided today they were going to ditch Oracle, you are talking about multi-year initiatives.
- stackskipton 2y ago
  Oracle has a ton of Line of Business software embedded into companies and migration is too massive to even consider so it remains. Peoplesoft, Siebel CRM and EBiz are huge. There is also plenty of 3rd party LoB software that requires Oracle databases as well. Also, yea, there is still plenty of companies onboarding Oracle Products, usually due to some new exec they hired who used it at last company and swears that it will revolutionize their business.
- 7thaccount 2y ago
  Lots of people hate Oracle with a passion and will not use it for anything new. However, their existing production databases already use it and migration could take years and there is a lot of risk in doing that. As a result, they'll be profitable for years to come.
- rvnx 2y ago
  One major factor are kickbacks. If you are working in a government or in a large company that can be the main factor for decision. https://investopedia.com/terms/k/kickback.asp https://investopedia.com/terms/k/kickback.asp The other one, is legacy systems. If you are a big bank, migrating away is a big risk, and anyway you make so much profit that it’s better to leave an extra 10M USD license fees in costs untouched, rather than risk destroying the 300M USD in profit. (Add that to the risk that your CTO may get mad because he won’t get his kickback)
  - pants2 2y ago

HKH2 2y ago

Yet people still pay them for a fix every month.

dylan604 2y ago
if you pay $X per month for their software that allows you to earn 100x that amount, then $X is nothing. $X per month when you make no money and just want to play around, have a fun hobby, or just try to learn so that maybe one day you too can have a job utilizing that software, then yeah, it can be expensive. I get it. Back in the days of installing Adobe software from floppies, I too was too broke to pay for it. Now, the use of Adobe software pays my bills. For people with hobbies, these other packages might be great alternatives. For working professionally, it's just easier to use the same tools as everyone else. It's just an expense of running a business. My biggest gripe now is all of the generative AI bullshit, but I don't use it, and it's just one of those things. I also don't use their cloud offerings, so I'm not worried about my work used for training data.
- beej71 2y ago
  If $x is nothing then people will keep paying it and there'll be no need for early termination fees.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    You've maliciously manipulated what I said. I said if $X/month allows you to earn 100x $X, then it is worth it. Early terminations fees have absolutely nothing to do with that. At. All. Sometimes, people go on extended periods of not having work. Creative fields are very ebb&flow drought/flood type of work. If you're a solo person, sometimes you get bogged down in the current project to the point you don't have time to hunt for the next project. When the current project ends, you could hit a dry spell for an expended time. At that point, I could see wanting to stop paying for the software you are not currently using. However, back in the day, Photoshop was ~$1000 (using nice easy round number) for the full package. I think it was closer to $1500 for full, and $999 for upgrades, but that's too in the weeds. Updates were pretty much annually. So, you've got $1000/12 months = $83/month (but it was a lump sum payment only). Now, it's ~$60/month with much more frequent updates. If you paid the lump sum and then went on hiatus, you were still out that money. People complain about forced to not be able to use their 10 year old version because that's all the features you need. Okay, sounds legit. However, good luck installing any 10 year old software on modern OSes. There are times were software has to be kept up to date with the OS. The 32bit to 64bit was a big one even if it was more than 10 years ago. Again, I get trying to learn while not getting paid but needing to know it so you can have a chance to get paid. That's what I always told myself, that my using the pirated versions was for learning only. I never made any money from its use. Now, I get paid to use it, and I have a legit license. Pirating was much easier before the SaaS offerings, so I can appreciate that. For once, it pays to be old.

bongodongobob 2y ago

Photoshop, Lightroom, and Illustrator are shit? How so? I quite like them.

ccvannorman 2y ago
Photoshop hasnt added a feature I need in 10 years, yet I cant use the 10 year old single license I paid for, so now I pay yearly to subscribe. It's still the best on the market for me tho.
- bongodongobob 2y ago
  As if software from 10 years ago doesn't need to be modified at all and doesn't require any work or maintenance :/

insane_dreamer 2y ago

Creative Cloud is shit, yes. But the products themselves are still excellent and or best in class; PS, InDesign, Illustrator, Lightroom etc

vr46 2y ago
Annoyingly, the products are extremely good and mature. Lightroom aside.
- pants2 2y ago
  What a disaster Lightroom has been. They launched new Lightroom and renamed old Lightroom to Lightroom Classic. New Lightroom was missing a lot of features but was generally faster and more stable so I switched over. Then somehow Adobe decided they would refocus back on Lightroom Classic so I up and made the re-switch. It was a waste of time and money for everyone involved.
  - vr46 2y ago
    And barely scratches the surface of the catastrophe. What with mobile integration and my own shifting needs, what I didn’t need was the workflow confusion that Adobe introduced. Lightroom was the ultimate one-stop shop but I’ve now come to split my workflow up so much that the editing is now hot-swappable. C1 is looking vulnerable to RawTherapee, I gotta say. Lightroom is sadly a dot in the rear-view mirror.