Photoshop and Creative Suite to be permanently subscription based

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

More details here:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05...ative-cloud-cc

The first year will cost $360 and it will then revert to the full price of $600.If you do not do a 12 month contract it will cost you $75 a month.

[Saracen]

Well, then that's me permanently on CS6 then. Or moving away from Adobe.

Having been a user of Photoshop since switching from Micrografx Picture Publisher in about 1993/4, they've finally managed to lose me. I guess this'll probably work in the corporate world, but personally, I am not paying for it on a subscription basis, and not going to their creative cloud. Not now, not ever.

I guess I ought to thank them, for saving me a fair bit in periodic upgrade fees.

[Funkstar]

I guess I should stump up for CS6 sometime before it becomes unavailable, really not interested in subscribing to this, would rather buy it outright every few years.

Still on CS3, and really that does me fine, getting old though.

[TheAnimus]

Soooo, a company has no choice as to if the new version provides better value or not over the last one.

I can understand this in some niche area, or a product requiring lots of investment, the vendor can guarentee continued cash flow and work on the software. I can sort of see it from the perspective of an OS or web browser because you really want to constantly push people to the latest version.

But graphic design? Remind me again Adobe, what the must have new features in Photoshop over the last 5 years are? A slightly better automatic fill based on patterns either side? Hmm.

[kalniel]

I guess if you are a pro then it's just a reasonable business expense at roughly the same cost as the usual upgrade cycle. If you're a part time shooter then you just hire the software for a month like you'd hire a lens.

It's amateurs who lose out, but then I've got by fine without photoshop so far so given I wasn't the target market before I'm probably not it now (LR and the GIMP have served well enough)

[pp05]

This looks like the new model where we rent the software rather than own and lose all rights on reselling when we move up.

$50 > £50. This will suit casual users more than those who want it full-time. I am assuming here that the software will still run locally, I can't help think why Adobe didn't allow customers who like to pay upfront the option of doing so. It is just download after all.

[TheAnimus]

I guess if you are a pro then it's just a reasonable business expense at roughly the same cost as the usual upgrade cycle. If you're a part time shooter then you just hire the software for a month like you'd hire a lens.

Not really. It's a service cost vs a capital expenditure. Many companies find their biggest problem is cash flow, holding off upgrading until its the right time is a good idea.

I was commenting on a friends enterprise he had far higher fixed monthly commitments than I considered healthy for a business of his turn over. People like him, who operate in the domain Adobe specialise in will not be helped by this.

I would suggest therefore a lot of businesses will not like this.

A lot of poxy graphics designer contractors on £300 a day will however.

[Saracen]

I guess if you are a pro then it's just a reasonable business expense at roughly the same cost as the usual upgrade cycle. If you're a part time shooter then you just hire the software for a month like you'd hire a lens.

....'

Well, it's a business expense to me, but I'll decide when, and indeed if I'm going to upgrade to a given version. And I certainly don't always do so. Also, with a version purchase, it's a one-off hit, not a monthly expense. No doubt Adobe won't give a hoot about little ol' me, but I'm not going for a monthly expense because it suits their cash flow.

....

It's amateurs who lose out, but then I've got by fine without photoshop so far so given I wasn't the target market before I'm probably not it now (LR and the GIMP have served well enough)

I've got to wonder, given the cost, what proportion of amateurs using Photoshop have a licensed version?

[kalniel]

I've got to wonder, given the cost, what proportion of amateurs using Photoshop have a licensed version?

Yes I wonder that too, shooting selves in foot by not supporting alternatives springs to mind.

[Saracen]

Yes I wonder that too, shooting selves in foot by not supporting alternatives springs to mind.

Well, I suppose Photoshop is widely regarded as "the best", so people that can get it, do so, and never-mind that for many, it's like using the main guns from a battleship to kill a fly ... that is to say, just a tad of overkill. And with one heck of a learning experience, too.

In reality, I can do almost everything I ever need to do with Lightroom and Elements (other flavours of editing software are available). I use Photoshop mainly because I have used it for so very long. But honestly, do I need it? Nope. And this move by Adobe will break me of the habit.

[Agent]

I guess this'll probably work in the corporate world, but personally, I am not paying for it on a subscription basis, and not going to their creative cloud. Not now, not ever.

Well given the chat at work today (we have hundreds of licences with them) - It sure won't work in our corporate environment and alternatives are already being discussed. It's probably an eye opener for a lot of people here, as loads of the Photoshop users here don't actually need Photoshop. It'll certainly save us money in the long run.

[Saracen]

Well given the chat at work today (we have hundreds of licences with them) - It sure won't work in our corporate environment and alternatives are already being discussed. It's probably an eye opener for a lot of people here, as loads of the Photoshop users here don't actually need Photoshop. It'll certainly save us money in the long run.

Can you comment on what alternatives?

I'm thinking Elements 11 (or whatever version it is when I feel the need to upgrade, which may well be years yet), or even looking again at ACDSee etc, which I used to use as a photo manager/viewer, but haven't for many years.

[Rork]

I work in education, so mainly dabble with different elements of the Creative Suite (usually DW/FW/Flash and a little InDesign). I've even bought CS6 (Huzzah for education licensing) to keep ahead of the curve (we use CS3) and also to teach myself PS for fun.

I can see Adobe products dying a death in schools as there will be little justification for a subscription service that's going to be under-utilised across 100+ computers. I've always considered it useful to bring in Adobe's tools as they've been a design industry standard in the same way Word or Excel is...I guess those days are over.

[Butcher]

I've got to wonder, given the cost, what proportion of amateurs using Photoshop have a licensed version?

I do, but if I wasn't eligible for student pricing I doubt I would have.

[kalniel]

I do, but if I wasn't eligible for student pricing I doubt I would have.

But you'd still use photoshop?

[Bobster]

there are a lot ways to get hold of a student edition..