[panoguy]

Well, it's online now as a "public beta"... but before anyone goes nuts uploading photos to this first big Adobe SAAS experiment, read the "Terms & Conditions" carefully. Especially the part about image rights granted to Adobe (part 8a)!

You have been warned, but give it a shot and compare it to PS Elements or Lightroom ("lite"room?) or more likely flickr, smugmug or pbase with editing - then tell me what you think (but I don't work for Adobe, I'm just curious):

http://www.photoshop.com/express/index.html

This begs the next obvious question that *I know* has been kicking around Adobe for years: would you prefer to "rent" an application like Photoshop if it worked like this Express experiment (the app is online - not on your local drive), but with all the interactivity and features of the full CS4 (or whatever) and was secure? What if it was as high as $5/ month?

Just throwing that out there... since SAAS is something (in general) that I need to have an opinion about for my work, and I don't know where I stand yet.

-Mark

[Cloudy Wizzard]

Matt Kloskowski was pretty enthousiast about it on his blog yesterday (he even has a small tutorial I think and so does Scott Kelby).

I don't know if it's a usefull service though, I mean you probably need a good broadband connection and a powerfull system to use it (maybe not as powerfull as what you need for something like Photoshop CS3 though).

And the problem here is that my ISP (and all others here in Belgium) in their infinite wisdome have decided that for "normal" use about 5GB per month of trafic (up and down) is enough.

I think they recently upgraded the "free download limit" to somethink like 7 or 10GB but that's still not much since more and more serivices are offered online.

I might check it out sometime during the weekend, I don't think my photo's are good enough for Adobe to benefit from having to right to use them (or whatever the license at 8a states).

[JCSullivan]

Yup, Global News talked about yesterday. Would I be interested in SAAS??? NO. By the time you get used to it, you will have paid more than the selling price.

Gmail/Google has the services of server-based applications (document, spreadsheets, etc.) available for FREE. Picassa is decent for the overwhelming majority of "shooters". If you need more than that you're in a different class of user.

[jsherman999]

.


Just tried it - it has an interface to picasaweb, and it was able to pull all my picasaweb album images in. The interface is great, and the subset of PP tools they provide is very fun. Also, I can now link photos directly into threads into this forum - picasaweb didn't support that, I had to always provide a plain link to a picasaweb album or slideshow...

I have to say I'm very impressed.


.

[JCSullivan]

.
Also, I can now link photos directly into threads into this forum - picasaweb didn't support that, I had to always provide a plain link to a picasaweb album or slideshow...

Now you got my curiousity and perhaps I spoke too soon - bad boi.

[panoguy]

Also, I can now link photos directly into threads into this forum

Huh, I missed that at first. I have a flickr account that I use for extra online storage, but it is nice to have an extra 2 GBs of space out there in the cloud.

Yup, Global News talked about yesterday. Would I be interested in SAAS??? NO. By the time you get used to it, you will have paid more than the selling price.

Well, the idea is that you'd probably pay $600 for Photoshop the first time you buy it, plus $129 to upgrade when a new version comes out. So over a couple of years you might pay $729 + any tax, shipping, etc., and even then you can only use it (legally) on one computer [at a time] and cannot resell it if you get tired of it (check the EULA, it's true). If it was $5/month for Photoshop Online, you'd pay $120 for the same two years of use, on any computer, and get upgraded whenever the developers have something ready to add (since it's online and not delivered on a boxed CD), and if Acme Photomonkey comes out and is much better for your needs, you just "cancel" Photoshop Online and switch over (and then switch back).

So, why do I even think Photoshop Online would be as cheap as $5/month? Considering how popular it is (literally millions of copies sell when a new version comes out), and how much each version of an existing software package really costs to code, test, document, localize and put up as SAAS (no physical manufacture or distribution/shipment costs), it would actually be *immensely profitable* to sell Photoshop for $5/month and far less of a headache for Adobe (no old stock laying around, in theory less piracy, easy to bugfix and maintain, etc.).

The downsides I see are: questionable security for the user, huge internet speed and bandwidth demands if files are kept locally, and the fear that the price might go up. However, lots of people are finding iTunes a more than acceptable alternative to buying physical CDs (and now DVDs) even though the price isn't considerably less, the quality is degraded, and the usage is limited - mainly because you can "cherry pick" the songs you want off of the traditional album format and preview even obscure songs before buying.

It was frankly a shock to me when I first really read the End-User License Agreement for an Adobe product and realized that legally I am *already* essentially only "renting" it. Sure, there isn't much recourse for Adobe if rent it forever for that original price, but I'd need to have a computer to run it and honestly most of us like "shiny new." (Although I do know a pro retoucher who was bummed to learn that Photoshop 6 wouldn't run on his new MacPro after his G4 died, and felt "lost" when he upgraded to Photoshop 10 in CS3.)

-Mark

[glanglois]

I may have missed a step someplace, but I understood that Adobe's EULA limits us to using CS2/3 on just one computer at a time. I realize it could be annoying to contact Adobe each time you wanted to switch from laptop to desktop, especially if it occurs to you halfway across the Atlantic and 40Kft aloft, but reportedly we can do it quickly and easily via the Internet or telephone. I've not tried it so this is not an endorsement. I am inately skeptical of "quickly" and "easily" when software is the subject.

Nor is it clear to me yet where the code executes. Could it be that the image never leaves your desktop until it's saved to the cloud?

In any event, it seems they're aiming this at Picasa users rather than CS3 users. A Web experience makes sense in that case. I cannot imagine that serious photographers, a group to which I don't belong, would depend for editing ability on (shudder) retail Internet access.

Anyway, I'm old enough to remember when "Software As A Service" was called "time-sharing" and it did one's payroll. The cycles come, and they go ......

[bymy141]

It stopped working.
I registered yesterday, uploaded 40 or so photos and created a gallery.
Today, since this afternoon, I cannot log on anymore.
Perhaps it is because I identified as being located in the US and they found my IP address to be from Holland? (They've limited service to the US, they could have been Pentax, Pentax limits their gamma and the amount of products and no rebates for Europeans )
Has this happened to anyone else?

- Bert

[panoguy]

I may have missed a step someplace, but I understood that Adobe's EULA limits us to using CS2/3 on just one computer at a time.

Yes, of course you're correct on that. However, getting a new authorization code for a second machine (even though you may have the DVDs to install CS3) is a PITA.

Today, since this afternoon, I cannot log on anymore.
Perhaps it is because I identified as being located in the US and they found my IP address to be from Holland?

What is your gallery address? Are your images still up there?

Hasn't happened to me up here in Canada, and otherwise I get blocked from all kinds of US-only sites like Hulu.com (and even Google repeatedly sends me to Google.ca even when I want US-centric results!). Pretty much all that redirection and blocking is based on IP address (or IP trunk origination). Must suck to be a traveler with a laptop sometimes...

-Mark

[Cloudy Wizzard]

I may have missed a step someplace, but I understood that Adobe's EULA limits us to using CS2/3 on just one computer at a time. I realize it could be annoying to contact Adobe each time you wanted to switch from laptop to desktop, especially if it occurs to you halfway across the Atlantic and 40Kft aloft, but reportedly we can do it quickly and easily via the Internet or telephone. I've not tried it so this is not an endorsement. I am inately skeptical of "quickly" and "easily" when software is the subject.

You can have Photoshop CS3 Activated on 2 systems at the same time (so Desktop AND Laptop) but I guess you are only allowed to be using it at 1 machine at a time.

you only need to deactivate on 1 system and activate on another system if you have a 3rd system that you want to use it on (for example you have a desktop at work and a desktop at home but you go on a trip for work for a few days and you want to take a laptop with CS3 with you, you can then de-activate the home or work machine and activate the laptop for the duration of the trip).

Also AFAIK you don't need to contact Adobe to activate on another system because you can "de-activate" the product from the help menu and then activate it on another system (de-activation doesn't uninstall it and Adobe advises to de-activate before removing it because you will not be able to activate on a new system if you forgot to deactivate first).

I think the information provided by Adobe is pretty minimal on this, I think I even mailed them about this a while ago because I wanted to know the same thing.

[glanglois]

You can have Photoshop CS3 Activated on 2 systems at the same time (so Desktop AND Laptop) but I guess you are only allowed to be using it at 1 machine at a time.

you only need to deactivate on 1 system and activate on another system if you have a 3rd system that you want to use it on (for example you have a desktop at work and a desktop at home but you go on a trip for work for a few days and you want to take a laptop with CS3 with you, you can then de-activate the home or work machine and activate the laptop for the duration of the trip).

Also AFAIK you don't need to contact Adobe to activate on another system because you can "de-activate" the product from the help menu and then activate it on another system (de-activation doesn't uninstall it and Adobe advises to de-activate before removing it because you will not be able to activate on a new system if you forgot to deactivate first).

I think the information provided by Adobe is pretty minimal on this, I think I even mailed them about this a while ago because I wanted to know the same thing.

You're correct about the activation/de-activation. But that function requires some contact with Adobe, even if it's in the background, because the alternative is leaving all of them activated all the time. The activation state for that key has to be maintained somewhere, right?

[Cloudy Wizzard]

You're correct about the activation/de-activation. But that function requires some contact with Adobe, even if it's in the background, because the alternative is leaving all of them activated all the time. The activation state for that key has to be maintained somewhere, right?

True, but I guess it's an automated service that maintains this. I doubt there is a person at Adobe that manually controls this. I guess Photoshop sends some kind of system ID to a central server and then the server sends the activation back. When there are 2 system already activated it will probably deny to activate a 3rd time until you de-activate on one of the 2 other system.

What I do wonder is will this allow to activate CS3 again if you had to re-install after a serious crash (if it keeps the system ID in a DB I guess it would allow this since no hardware would change). Or what when someone steals your Laptop/Desktop ? Then you will need to contact Adobe and ask them if you can activate again.

There might be a "security" feature though that monitors the activations and de-activations and when it "detects" anything suspicious a certain person get's involved.

I've been using OtsDJ for a while now (pure personal use) and they use a similar activation system (only allows you to install on 1 system unless you buy a 2nd or 3rd license) and they keep your system ID on file so you can always re-install and re-activate as long as there are not to many hardware changes that cause the system ID to chance. When you want to install on a new system you can request them to allow you another activation (you will offcourse need to remove it from the "old" system) and they will mostly do this within a few days (they grant you a "temp" license for 7 days in the meantime so you can continue using the product until they sort it out for you.

Maybe Adobe uses a similar system and maybe they don't but I guess it's automated since that would save them a bunch of money because they don't need 1 fulltime (or more) tech. to manually keep track of these activations.

[raz-0]

This begs the next obvious question that *I know* has been kicking around Adobe for years: would you prefer to "rent" an application like Photoshop if it worked like this Express experiment (the app is online - not on your local drive), but with all the interactivity and features of the full CS4 (or whatever) and was secure? What if it was as high as $5/ month?

Just throwing that out there... since SAAS is something (in general) that I need to have an opinion about for my work, and I don't know where I stand yet.

-Mark

No, I would not. But why?

1) Adobe has two choices, do the work on the server, in which case things like history, redo/undo, preview, etc become inefficient and costly in terms of bandwidth. THe other choice is to do the work client side. This means java more than likely (the thing looks very ajax), which isn't likely to require any less horsepower than running the application locally.

2) overselling. They HAVE to oversell the service to make it cost less than having a copy of the software plus a reserved PC available for you at all times. This means that there WILL be peak usage periods, and the whole thing will slow down.

3) More overselling. When a company can chose to degrade service or make less money, which do they usually choose? Perhaps they will quietly resize stuff in the background rather than invest in more infrastructure. Perhaps they will let it slow to a crawl. It WILL be something if it is successful.

4) Consistency. With a server side subscription app, the functionality of the app is at ther providers whim. If I generate scripts to automate something, I'm screwed if they break it. I can always keep my dusty old pc that it DID work on with the old software on it if I choose. They change a feature I like, it is NEVER coming back.

5) Availability. Even if Adboe is great, I'm online at the whim of my ISP. They decide you broke their secret cap on their "unlimited" service usign this app, you go offline. Whoopsies, no work for you today, and you aren't getting your $5 worth anymore.

6) Contract or pay as you go? Odds are a subscription service is there to ensure predictable revenue. It does this by binding you to a SUBSCRIPTION that RUNS OUT. It will NEVER be in your favor unles you buy every update the day it comes out at full price for the standalone software. Why? Because if it was, they would be losing money by selling their product for less than the standalone while paying for the hardware too. Pay as you go would be mildly attractive to people on a budget that can't afford more than a small ammount to jump into the photo editing field, but that's a SMALL portion of the population given what is out there.

7) License terms. With a one time purchase, you jsut have to abide by the EULA at the time you broke the seal. If that, it hasn't exactly been taken to court and proved binding. With the subscription model, there is tons of case law that allows them to slip in that they will change it at will and you agree to all future changes unless you cancel your account. This can include ownership or use rights to the data you provide to them.


What I think this will be is the new ultra cheapie bundled software with low end cameras. Adobe will shave some money off what they bill the manufacturers to bundle it, no more media to produce and distribute, and adobe can try to wrangle naieve users into a long term contract for something that is probably inconvenient to use. this will also mean each copy of photoshop elements makes them more money per copy even if they ship less copies. It also gives them a fighting chance of being able to put software on a console which may open up a whole new market segment to them.

Personally, I don't think photo editing is a good fit to server side applications, ESPECIALLY for professionals. Heck, even for a hobbyist, if you spent $5000 on that vacation, and I needed something on site, I'd trust a $800 laptop to give me abetter experience than the $5 app over whatver connection the internet cafe has.

On the other hand if you let me pay one month at a time with no commitment, Imight sign up before my trip for a month just to have a plan B available.

[panoguy]

It stopped working.
I registered yesterday, uploaded 40 or so photos and created a gallery.
Today, since this afternoon, I cannot log on anymore.
Perhaps it is because I identified as being located in the US and they found my IP address to be from Holland? (They've limited service to the US...

Able to log on again, Bert? From what is written here (John Nack's blog, the Photoshop Product Manager at Adobe), it is "US Only" because of where the servers are located for speed of interaction, not for legal or restrictive reasons. John even says international users are welcome to try it out...
John Nack on Adobe: Photoshop Express off to a rocking start

This would lead me to believe that Adobe isn't blocking anyone by IP, so if you still can't get there it might be your local ISP.

-Mark

[panoguy]

No, I would not. But why?

I clipped your points from this reply, but they are excellent things to consider. I know that *today* the available consumer internet connections in this "tech-backwater" called Toronto, Ontario, Canada are woefully insufficient for doing any serious image-editing online. Heck, even uploading a few JPEGs to Express took longer than processing them in ACR! (I long for the years that I had ADSL in France - 23mbit/sec in 2005! Sigh...)

There are quite a few things to think about regarding the whole "rent it online" for software, but probably the biggest issue you brought up that I hadn't considered was "what if they change their terms?" Especially given all the proprietary file formats, that can be a serious deal-killer for me.

Personally, I don't think photo editing is a good fit to server side applications, ESPECIALLY for professionals. Heck, even for a hobbyist, if you spent $5000 on that vacation, and I needed something on site, I'd trust a $800 laptop to give me abetter experience than the $5 app over whatver connection the internet cafe has.

On the other hand if you let me pay one month at a time with no commitment, Imight sign up before my trip for a month just to have a plan B available.

And when you consider the fact that cameras are now including more of the post-processing functions *inside* the camera (with Pentax leading the way, though I always process my RAWs much later), the sharing and community aspect becomes a bigger deal than the tech of image processing. Kind of like a closet darkroom inside a gallery, as opposed to a giant photo-lab with a few prints hanging in the lobby.

Thanks for the info, as it helps in my day job (at a giant software company that is not Adobe).

-Mark