5 ms·

This is quite radical in my mind and very greedy on Adobe's part. How is abandoning the pay once per version of software a benefit to anyone other than Adobe?

This is quite radical in my mind and very greedy on Adobe's part. How is abandoning the pay once per version of software a benefit to anyone other than Adobe? I get weary of software that I have to bind to an active account indefinitely. There are use-cases that are no longer possible. 1) What if I wanted to get my 14 yo artistic niece Photoshop/Illustrator for her birthday? Now I would have to either pay $50 a month (for her), in the assumption she would get value out of it. At what point would I then transfer the subscription over to her should she want to become professional in it? 2) Let's say I bought After Effects with a retina mac and then in a year decide to sell it all on craigslist? Maybe I had a dream of becoming a movie director only to be put on hold because my father went into the hospital and I needed to be there for my mother? 3) A high school with older macs from 5 or 6 years ago has a small lab with Adobe Photoshop that was donated to them through an art grant. It's meant to be used to teach kids about photo retouching and color blending (things that have been in Photoshop for a decade if not more). I never minded when Adobe adopted strict licensing DRM because it didn't remove use-cases. Maybe someone from Adobe can shed light on how switching to a subscription only model will benefit anyone other than them? Is that not taking a step backwards?

kleinsch 13y ago
This is business. Why is Adobe expected to do anything that would benefit anyone other than themselves?
- vor_ 13y ago
  To please customers?
  - omegant 13y ago
    And let competitors enter their market.
- eightyone 13y ago
  You're making the assumption that this move will benefit Adobe.
daxelrod 13y ago
This is an excellent point. One nitpick, though: your niece is a student, so I think that would end up being $20 a month.
coldtea 13y ago
>1) What if I wanted to get my 14 yo artistic niece Photoshop/Illustrator for her birthday? Now I would have to either pay $50 a month (for her), in the assumption she would get value out of it. At what point would I then transfer the subscription over to her should she want to become professional in it? For just one app, it's $20/month. So you would pay $240 per year. You'd have to pay triple that and more to buy it -- and the "artistic niece" might not even use it that much at all. At least this way you can cancel. The main difference is instead of getting him a box, you get him a one or two year subscription. And also that it's cheaper. >2) Let's say I bought After Effects with a retina mac and then in a year decide to sell it all on craigslist? Maybe I had a dream of becoming a movie director only to be put on hold because my father went into the hospital and I needed to be there for my mother? Then CC is great! You only pay for as long as you use it. No need to pay a fortune beforehand and then have to put it up on Craigslist. >Maybe someone from Adobe can shed light on how switching to a subscription only model will benefit anyone other than them? Is that not taking a step backwards? Me for example. I can now get all those apps for $50 per month AND be constantly updated. No need to fork $2500 now (which is how much the Ultimate version costs), and like $1000 every 18 months to get the newer version. People pay $20 or $100 dollars for their VPS per month, $20 for Basecamp, $10 for Dropbox and such. How is $50 that much more?
- jagermo 13y ago
  Same here. I use the Creative Cloud for a year now and I wouldn't change back. The pricing model is perfect for me as it is way easier to claim taxes on smaller, monthly installments. Plus, I really prefer cloud downloads to disks. No lost keys, no scratched disks.

kleinsch 13y ago

This is business. Why is Adobe expected to do anything that would benefit anyone other than themselves?

vor_ 13y ago
To please customers?
- omegant 13y ago
  And let competitors enter their market.
eightyone 13y ago
You're making the assumption that this move will benefit Adobe.

daxelrod 13y ago

This is an excellent point. One nitpick, though: your niece is a student, so I think that would end up being $20 a month.

coldtea 13y ago

>1) What if I wanted to get my 14 yo artistic niece Photoshop/Illustrator for her birthday? Now I would have to either pay $50 a month (for her), in the assumption she would get value out of it. At what point would I then transfer the subscription over to her should she want to become professional in it? For just one app, it's $20/month. So you would pay $240 per year. You'd have to pay triple that and more to buy it -- and the "artistic niece" might not even use it that much at all. At least this way you can cancel. The main difference is instead of getting him a box, you get him a one or two year subscription. And also that it's cheaper. >2) Let's say I bought After Effects with a retina mac and then in a year decide to sell it all on craigslist? Maybe I had a dream of becoming a movie director only to be put on hold because my father went into the hospital and I needed to be there for my mother? Then CC is great! You only pay for as long as you use it. No need to pay a fortune beforehand and then have to put it up on Craigslist. >Maybe someone from Adobe can shed light on how switching to a subscription only model will benefit anyone other than them? Is that not taking a step backwards? Me for example. I can now get all those apps for $50 per month AND be constantly updated. No need to fork $2500 now (which is how much the Ultimate version costs), and like $1000 every 18 months to get the newer version. People pay $20 or $100 dollars for their VPS per month, $20 for Basecamp, $10 for Dropbox and such. How is $50 that much more?

jagermo 13y ago
Same here. I use the Creative Cloud for a year now and I wouldn't change back. The pricing model is perfect for me as it is way easier to claim taxes on smaller, monthly installments. Plus, I really prefer cloud downloads to disks. No lost keys, no scratched disks.