[Oakland Rob]

I guess I would say that if you are someone who always upgrades to the most recent software, then the CC subscription probably works for you. The thing is that Adobe is trying to milk the rest of us for 120 dollars a year (which is probably more than I spend on coffee). I usually am running software that is a couple of generations old. Currently I have Lightroom 5 and Elements 12. And I am not really in a hurry to upgrade from those. They do what I need them to do. I suppose that I will need LIghtroom 6 when I get a new camera down the road, since it won't have RAW files supported anymore, but I just don't feel the need to upgrade every little bit.

Adobe is really bothered by people who don't upgrade enough. I am sure if they could figure out a way to have your program shut itself off after four years and cease to work, they would do it just to get your money.

I'm sure they'd love your money, but considering they're still supporting CS6 and even further back, and since many business licensees hold off on upgrades as you do, I don't think they take it too personally that you don't like their new stuff. You can even get support pretty far back, and download upgrades to Lr 1 from their website. Contrast with Apple: you can even download Aperture anymore or get updates. And the fact that they still offer Lr as a perpetual license is, in part, a recognition of that.

And as far as your program "shutting itself off" that happens anyway. Sooner or later your version of any software will quit working, unless perhaps you've still got VisiCalc running on an Apple II. And it's not just versions; the whole product can reach EOL: Apple, of course, did kick Aperture users to the curb and some of them will be hung out to dry if they don't adapt. Happened to me with Canvas, Appleworks, Capture One Express, WordPerfect, and I dunno how many others. Getting four years out of a version is pretty good. Even for hardware, given how demanding digital media becomes year after year. You gotta plan for obsolesence, which is functionally the same as planning to bail on software for cost reasons.

I tell people who are getting into photography these days it is only partly about buying a camera. Or lenses. Or filters. An integral part of that is your computer hardware and software, because digital cameras are rather useless without them. I've seen people plonk $3k on a camera and lens and then complain their 1999 computer and ancient software is slow or can't do the RAW. Amazing to me. OTOH, if you are somebody who doesn't wanna leap onto each new camera technology, or computer/software technology, your strategy is a good one. Lr may go away in the sense that the terms of the license are unacceptable, but unlike some data, your photos, and even tons of the metadata, can be stored in a format that is as universal as it gets. So you can always move on to something else with just a little preplanning, which includes never assuming your software solution will be permanent.

[bdery]

people were saying things like, “I’m happy with what I have, I don’t see the need to ever buy another one again.”

innovate better and faster for our customers

If people are happy, they are not asking you to drive your innovation faster.

get people to want to buy from us more regularly

So, plain and simple : they went to CC so they can get more money out of their customer's pockets. Not because they offer more value.

That's a good way to antagonize your customers (which they did). And it forces you to add perceived value to the more expensive option. so your new "innovations" must only be offered to CC clients.

This then drives (in this case) third-party plug-ins makers to offer products duplicating your "innovations" so they also work on non-CC versions. So your antagonized customer's money is going to someone else, not your own business.

Way to go.

[wildman]

Subscription - A regular payment given for continuing access to a service
New World Dictionary.

I.e. - one side is always paying and the other side always taking.

[reeftool]

As a Lightroom user, they will eventually be making a little more from me than they were with me buying the updates every 1 1/2 to 2 years but I think I'm coming out ahead with Photoshop because I could never justify the $600 + price tag. While some may not like it, I consider the $9.99 subscription a good deal. It's something I use a lot and the subscription makes it affordable to a lot of people who could never justify spending more on PP software than they paid for their camera body. I blow a lot more money on junk food and coffee every month.

[magkelly]

I figured it out and paying a subscription over three years is a lot more than what I'd pay for Photoshop when I was just upgrading every other version. Yeah, you have upgrades more often but you're paying a lot more for it if you're like me and I gather too many people were hence the subscription plan thing. To me this is like using Rent-A-Center and taking a year and paying $1000 for a $300 TV. It's convenient, sure, small payments always are, but I'm forever in debt to Adobe.

[Rondec]

I'm sure they'd love your money, but considering they're still supporting CS6 and even further back, and since many business licensees hold off on upgrades as you do, I don't think they take it too personally that you don't like their new stuff. You can even get support pretty far back, and download upgrades to Lr 1 from their website. Contrast with Apple: you can even download Aperture anymore or get updates. And the fact that they still offer Lr as a perpetual license is, in part, a recognition of that.

And as far as your program "shutting itself off" that happens anyway. Sooner or later your version of any software will quit working, unless perhaps you've still got VisiCalc running on an Apple II. And it's not just versions; the whole product can reach EOL: Apple, of course, did kick Aperture users to the curb and some of them will be hung out to dry if they don't adapt. Happened to me with Canvas, Appleworks, Capture One Express, WordPerfect, and I dunno how many others. Getting four years out of a version is pretty good. Even for hardware, given how demanding digital media becomes year after year. You gotta plan for obsolesence, which is functionally the same as planning to bail on software for cost reasons.

I tell people who are getting into photography these days it is only partly about buying a camera. Or lenses. Or filters. An integral part of that is your computer hardware and software, because digital cameras are rather useless without them. I've seen people plonk $3k on a camera and lens and then complain their 1999 computer and ancient software is slow or can't do the RAW. Amazing to me. OTOH, if you are somebody who doesn't wanna leap onto each new camera technology, or computer/software technology, your strategy is a good one. Lr may go away in the sense that the terms of the license are unacceptable, but unlike some data, your photos, and even tons of the metadata, can be stored in a format that is as universal as it gets. So you can always move on to something else with just a little preplanning, which includes never assuming your software solution will be permanent.

I think the bigger thing is that Adobe was running out of new ideas and knew that they would have a hard time releasing new products with features that drive consumers to purchase them. I have looked at Lightroom 6 and as far as I can tell, it doesn't really offer that much more than what Lightroom 5 does, but it runs slower and is a little buggier at the present. That sure doesn't inspire me to upgrade.

Cameras don't change that much. I made sure when I purchased my computer that I got a top of the line processor and 16 GB of memory. Other than needing new hard drives for storage, I don't think I would have a problem, even if I got a 645Z.

[wildman]

I think the bigger thing is that Adobe,,,,

I think that it was pirating.

Photoshop is the most pirated software in the world and Adobe management seen their future when they looked at the music and film industry.
They were hemorrhaging revenue and there wasn't a damn thing they could do about it so long as PS was free standing code.
Trying to limit software use through a legal agreement alone is like Pentax trying to tell me I can only take landscapes photos with my K5 - how do you, practically, enforce such a "property right"?
"Intellectual property rights" is, in the real digital world, a unenforceable legal fiction.

[magkelly]

If that's what they were trying to accomplish they failed miserably. It's been hacked and it's all over the internet, the complete suite, latest versions. They release an updated one and a week later it shows up on the pirate sites. They're well aware it's happening. There's never been a version of anything Adobe every made I don't think that hasn't been.

[wildman]

They're well aware it's happening.

I don't doubt it.

I'm cynical about such things - management has to at least pretend they have a way to protect shareholder's property.
Managements primary concern has always been their own self interest. Not the company not the shareholder and certainly not their customers.

[Oakland Rob]

I get that some people are Adobe haters; fine. You can hold that opinion.

But the fact is that subscription has been very successful for Adobe and their shareholders. I guess folks here don't pay much attention to the business pages, but see this for just one example: Adobe's transition to the cloud shows early signs of success - Fortune

Like Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, Phase One, Olympus, Nikon, etc they are in this to make money. And competing with lots of others. And they are doing pretty well at it. Expect to see other software with subscriptions, and even if they offer perpetual licenses, expect those to be inferior to the sub product. MS is going that direction, Phase One, etc. Why a subscription model could be the future for all businesses | TechRadar The trend will increase as device software integrates more with cloud services. But that can also drive innovation; check out Mylio as an example.

Among Adobe's non-business customers (probably a smallish part of their customer base), lots of us like do it. I keep my software up to date, and went from perpetual to sub because it only costs me less, and I use Lr Mobile. Lr 6 is faster on my Mac than 5, and offers a couple of features I appreciate that weren't in 5. I say this to emphasize that not everyone's experience is the same, and anecdotal evidence isn't always the best. I can afford $10/mo, but I also realize that some here apparently can't. As a business expense it's trivial; we probably paid more per seat for printer paper.

I also disagree about cameras changing much. They're computers too. Pentax makes DNGs, so you are rather insulated from RAW processing issues. But if you switch to a new Fuji, Sony, Oly, Panny, etc etc you may find yourself needing to upgrade software to use the RAW, or being stuck with whatever freebie the manufacturer gives you. And video, especially 4k, can make an existing computer setup seem quite lame, even if it's just a coupla years old. And since everyone is now viewing your online photos in retina or the equivalent, suddenly even high end displays of a few years ago have fallen behind the curve. Sure, you can muddle through with work-arounds and older monitors, but it isn't optimal. Probably OK for hobbyists, but if you're selling stuff you wanna be sure those wedding proofs look their best on your client's Galaxy Tab or iPad.

[Rondec]

I'm not an adobe hater, I just know how much I typically spend every two to three years on editing software. I got Lightroom 5 upgrade 2 years ago for 70 dollars and 3 years ago got my copy of Elements for 60 dollars. If I had purchased Photoshop then it would be a different story, perhaps. Anyway, as long as Lightroom and Elements are able to be purchased without the subscription, I'm OK with them offering the other things on subscription only.

[bdery]

But the fact is that subscription has been very successful for Adobe and their shareholders. I guess folks here don't pay much attention to the business pages, but see this for just one example: Adobe's transition to the cloud shows early signs of success - Fortune

Success for the business doesn't equal better products for the customer. As a customer, if I had to pay more, I'd expect more value. The only "value" they've added with CC is cloud storage, but they do it more poorly than Smugmug (my web host) or even google.

Like Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, Phase One, Olympus, Nikon, etc they are in this to make money.

Yes. And when people pay more for, say, an Apple product, they do so because they think the company has added value for which they are willing to pay. With CC there is no added value.

lots of us like do it

I do like how Lightroom works. I do not like Adobe as a company, nor its business model.

went from perpetual to sub because it only costs me less

I fail to see how that's possible, except if you also purchased the whole suite of product yearly. The point of the discussion was (re-read the interview) that people in general did NOT purchase new soft every year, and Adobe wanted their customers to spend more. It's in plain white text. No added value for the customers, only added revenue for the corporation.

I can afford $10/mo, but I also realize that some here apparently can't.

That's not the point. 10$ per month isn't that big a deal, but the total cost of ownership of a valid Lightroom license (which one could use for several year) has increased a lot. Say you keep your version of lightroom 3 years. Instead of 100$, you now have paid 360$.

[Quicksand]

I do like how Lightroom works. I do not like Adobe as a company, nor its business model.

Yes. This is exactly it for me. I'm a photographer and customer, not a shareholder. And for me, personally, it stinks.

I'm using LR because it has good camera support and because many of its features work well for me. I'd drop it in an instant if I found something as good -- or even close.

I had a very difficult time upgrading to Lightroom 6.1. LR 6.0 was working fine for me but doesn't support the K-3 II. Every time I tried to use the in-app upgrade system it gave me an error ("error 49") without any kind of helpful explanation. I uninstalled and reinstalled, and it failed repeatedly as part of the 6.0->6.1 patch.

So I contacted support chat, they couldn't help -- it took them 20 minutes of basically twiddling their thumbs before they gave up. They bumped me to Level 2 support which, after two weeks, closed my ticket because they only support "download, installation, and activation." I opened another ticket and restated that my specific problem is with, precisely, "download and installation." This one was closed by Adobe after a few days without even the courtesy of an email notification.

I get it. I'm persona non grata with them.

I'm actively testing alternatives now.

(I should mention: I did eventually get 6.1 installed, no thanks to anyone at Adobe. Complete customer support fail.)

[dcumpian]

Yes. This is exactly it for me. I'm a photographer and customer, not a shareholder. And for me, personally, it stinks.

I'm using LR because it has good camera support and because many of its features work well for me. I'd drop it in an instant if I found something as good -- or even close.

I had a very difficult time upgrading to Lightroom 6.1. LR 6.0 was working fine for me but doesn't support the K-3 II. Every time I tried to use the in-app upgrade system it gave me an error ("error 49") without any kind of helpful explanation. I uninstalled and reinstalled, and it failed repeatedly as part of the 6.0->6.1 patch.

So I contacted support chat, they couldn't help -- it took them 20 minutes of basically twiddling their thumbs before they gave up. They bumped me to Level 2 support which, after two weeks, closed my ticket because they only support "download, installation, and activation." I opened another ticket and restated that my specific problem is with, precisely, "download and installation." This one was closed by Adobe after a few days without even the courtesy of an email notification.

I get it. I'm persona non grata with them.

I'm actively testing alternatives now.

(I should mention: I did eventually get 6.1 installed, no thanks to anyone at Adobe. Complete customer support fail.)

And if you find any good alternatives, list them. I am still working through whether I will stick with LR or not. I'm sure others here would be interested as well.

So far, I haven't found anything as easy to use as LR for RAW conversion, but RawTherapee is pretty powerful. So is Capture One, but it is very pricey and caters to a different market (Nikon/Canon tethered shooters).

Regards,
Dan

[amoringello]

I had a very difficult time upgrading to Lightroom 6.1. LR 6.0 was working fine for me but doesn't support the K-3 II. Every time I tried to use the in-app upgrade system it gave me an error ("error 49") without any kind of helpful explanation. I uninstalled and reinstalled, and it failed repeatedly as part of the 6.0->6.1 patch.

So I contacted support chat, they couldn't help -- it took them 20 minutes of basically twiddling their thumbs before they gave up. They bumped me to Level 2 support which, after two weeks, closed my ticket because they only support "download, installation, and activation." I opened another ticket and restated that my specific problem is with, precisely, "download and installation." This one was closed by Adobe after a few days without even the courtesy of an email notification.

FYI, its a long thread but if anyone else is having problems with LR6.1, the following Adobe forum post has a few solutions.
Different thinks do/do not work for different installations.
https://forums.adobe.com/message/7767262

I got someone nice enough to help early on, but since it wasn't strictly their department they told me they could not write it up or send the info to another department. So basically the next person who calls will just have to start over.
Adobe support sucks dung nuggets.

I don't like Affinitiy's UI (I am too used to Photoshop), but I paid for it anyway in hopes they will develop it more and someday be real competition.
That and I won't buy another CC subscription for my wife for the few times she needs to do some photo editing, so maybe she can learn to use Affinity.