Adobe are SCUM

[Destin]

It’s software, not a gym membership. If I don’t want/need the latest and greatest version, no other company FORCES me to make that choice. Being forced to rent software is offensive to me (and others). I happily use a 10-year old word processor. Haven’t had to spend a penny on that software in that time. My needs are perfectly met. I would have spent $1,200 at 10/mo under a rental.

I do use and pay Adobe but I don’t have to like it!

Adobe do not "FORCE" you to pay for Photoshop. I do not pay for it and am unlikely to ever do so - partly because I do not want it and partly I do not like the idea of renting software. I have Lightroom which I paid a one-off fee for and I have Photoshop Elements which, again, I paid a one-off fee for. I know what I have paid for and would know the same if I was daft enough to rent software.

Actually they just started “forcing” people to pay for it monthly.

They’re discontinuing future camera updates for all legacy editions of Lightroom. So any future cameras that get released won’t be compatible with non-subscription versions of adobe software.

 

[john.margetts]

That is not forcing you to do anything. There are plenty of alternatives out there, and Adobe's free DNG converter if you really must stick with older, non-rental versions of software.

 

[ronlane]

What scares the hell out of me is their push to get me to basically put my images and editing on their server.

They may be wanting to do this but from my understanding the LR CC file management isn't there yet. Figure if they try to force us to the cloud without that, they will loose a bunch of subscribers.

 

[smoke665]

They may be wanting to do this but from my understanding the LR CC file management isn't there yet. Figure if they try to force us to the cloud without that, they will loose a bunch of subscribers.

That and not everyone has truly high speed internet.

 

[benhasajeep]

At first I was absolutely against the online model. I have had Photoshop since 6.0. Starting with 7.0 I upgraded every other eddition. CS4 was my latest version. I also started with LR, then 2, then 4, and finally 5.

The upgrade for PS was $349 if I remember right. And LR was around $100 to 125 for new addition. So if you were an upgrader like me skipping a version. That would be 3-4 years between upgrades. So, I did the math and well it works out to about the same amount of money upgrading every other version to paying the $10 a month (I pay yearly). If you include the cost of lightroom then your are actually saving money with the $120 a year plan!

Now if you only use Lightroom and not photoshop. $10 a month is not a good deal!

 

[SCraig]

For now I really don't mind the monthly "rental" for Bridge, LR and PS. Think about it, CS5 I think sold for around $700, and for LR add another $149. that's $849 total without Bridge. at roughly $120/yr, I'd have to be a subscriber for a minimum of just over 7 years to break even. And, "if" during that time I upgraded either, then much longer. I look at it as a pay me now, or pay me later approach.

What scares the hell out of me is their push to get me to basically put my images and editing on their server.

Right before Adobe started this "Software As A Service" garbage they allowed their resellers to unload their existing stock of Photoshop. I bought a copy of Photoshop CS6 for $250 and Lightroom for $80, just because. I seldom used either and when I got a new computer last spring I never installed them on it.

I agree, I will not rent software. Their loss of my business isn't going to hurt them but I don't like their software so it isn't going to hurt me either. And, I wouldn't put any of my files, photos or otherwise, on the so-called "Cloud" if they paid me.

 

[Overread]

The cloud is optional - chances are they'll keep pushing it as a feature, but they won't disable local storage of photos ever; that would be total madness. The Classic Lightroom mess is mostly because they tried to be smart and call the local version of Lightroom classic - which is a term reserved typically for software that's old and no longer updated.

As for exit clauses a full 50% sounds rather steep a charge; but yes as said earlier many hire contracts or rentals have an exit charge if you terminate within the contract period. Essentially when you sign up you agree to a years payments in advance so when you exit you are liable for the amount still owed. It's nasty to find it out and can be a shock if you're not expecting it; but its there - most of your billed contacts at home will have them - insurance is littered with them.

 

[smoke665]

I will not rent software.

Before we sold out in 2007 I was already seeing the rental model in transportation software. The cost of integrated dispatch and accounting packages were fast growing out reach of everyone but the largest of companies. The rental option was a popular way to have what you couldn't afford otherwise.

 

[Overread]

I will not rent software.

Before we sold out in 2007 I was already seeing the rental model in transportation software. The cost of integrated dispatch and accounting packages were fast growing out reach of everyone but the largest of companies. The rental option was a popular way to have what you couldn't afford otherwise.

Also a lot of companies would use old software because it worked and didn't require retraining on top of new software costs. Even if the old wasn't working great many would limp on. Plus legacy software puts a bigger strain on developer support costs.

The rental model does make sense - I agree that I dislike it and I don't want to head to full cloud computing; but I can see it as a sane approach for many developers releasing software.


Heck before the change I was using elements and wasn't looking to upgrade - the cost was big enough that I'd rather buy other things with that much money saved.

 

[astroNikon]

You guys should read some of your software agreements. You don't have any rights, they can revoke your usage of software at any time. I haven't read the adobe online stuff but it probably contains that same stuff.

Many companies prefer the "subscription" model as it generates a consistent monthly income. Which is much more sustainable for a company to budget and provide feedback to the investors. I think Adobe was one of the first "PC companies" to start moving to that model years back, mimicking the large software companies who may have monthly or annual maintenance fees (SAP, etc).

I don't like contracts myself. So I try to avoid them at all costs unless I read the agreement in detail. When I bought my house, they had to send me a copy of the agreement a few days before hand as I told them I was going to read every line before signing. And they didn't want a delay like that going through the signing process. I used to read all the contracts for an auto company too for the mgt reviews.

 

[Derrel]

how is this an "adobe" thing?
most cell phone plans do this, cable contracts, internet, satellite, gym memberships....
not a new concept by any means.

i mean, come on guys....you sign a contract, but have no idea of what it actually entails?
this is not an "adobe" issue, its a user error.
i dont care for contracts much either, but I make sure I know what im getting into beforehand, and the ramifications if i decide to leave.

would you hold a photography client liable to pay a bill they signed a contract for, or would you let them out of the remaining 50% because they decided they wanted to get pictures reshot somewhere else even after you shot and produced great pictures?

Just HAD to use a "Disagree" on your comment...the 48th time I have used it, in multiple years.


16,650 LIKES given by me...48 Disagrees given by me...

I stopped by the ADOBE site about 3 minutes ago...their terms of service are deceptive; if it were a fricking RADIO or TV commercial, they'd have government regulations forcing them to disclose that the "monthly plan" includes a HEFTY discontinuance charge.

I lost all respect for Adobe as a company when they tried to force a $50 a MONTH charge onto their millions and millions of Photoshop users; the hue and cry was soooooooooo extreme, from millions of users, that they cut their ransom demand from $50 a month for Photoshop...down to $9.95 a month for Lightroom and Photoshop.

From my POV, the bottom line? Try to rip off your entire customer base, then get shot down, and cut the cost FIVE fold and throw in another software product? Unconscionable. Highway robbery attempt.

SORRY...but , "Prepare to bend over and lube up!!" is the way Adobe treated all of its paying customers. Many of us will never forgive that sort of rude treatment. Ever.

 

[AlanKlein]

Derrel +1.

It all started with Windows locking you in, Apple does it. I updated to Windows 10, well, because I had too. Adobe's just continuing with the tradition of forever annuities for themselves without having to do too much. If you're in business, you write it off as part of doing business. But for average people, it stinks when you feel you're getting ripped off with huge on-going costs for a mature product that offers little in extras. It's like paying monthly alimony.

 

[TreeofLifeStairs]

I purchased cs5 and lr5 right before they went to their subscription model. Everything has worked great for me for years now but I went and had to buy a new camera and screw everything up. As has been mentioned already, they no longer support those older versions so now when I shoot raw I need to use their dng converter. :/ This is the first I’ve been effected by the whole thing. I knew the day would come but I was hoping it would have been a few more years still.

Now to the op’s point; I understand having a contract for the first year so that the company can be ensured a certain amount of profitability from a customer but generally after that the customer is charged month to month since the contract is fulfilled. I think most contracts are this way...cell phones, gym memberships, alarm companies and so on. I don’t think it’s a stretch for the op to have been led to believe that his/her membership with adobe would be any different. Yes, you are right, that the fine print should be read, but I completely understand his/her position on the matter. I’m also with Derrel in thinking that Adobe’s reason for this system is purely motivated by greed.

I’m wondering, now that you’ve canceled and have been charged the 50% of the remaining time. Do you get to use the software for 1/2 the time between now and your anniversary date?


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Tomasko]

Derrel +1.

It all started with Windows locking you in, Apple does it. I updated to Windows 10, well, because I had too. Adobe's just continuing with the tradition of forever annuities for themselves without having to do too much. If you're in business, you write it off as part of doing business. But for average people, it stinks when you feel you're getting ripped off with huge on-going costs for a mature product that offers little in extras. It's like paying monthly alimony.

Windows and Photoshop/Lightroom have VERY different business models. One is one-time payment while the other asks money from you constantly every single month.
Also, Microsoft did it because it's not realistic to provide updates and fixes for xx old software. It's very unrealistic and it's actually good MS prefers to have a single version and update that instead of having multiple versions.

 

[pixmedic]

how is this an "adobe" thing?
most cell phone plans do this, cable contracts, internet, satellite, gym memberships....
not a new concept by any means.

i mean, come on guys....you sign a contract, but have no idea of what it actually entails?
this is not an "adobe" issue, its a user error.
i dont care for contracts much either, but I make sure I know what im getting into beforehand, and the ramifications if i decide to leave.

would you hold a photography client liable to pay a bill they signed a contract for, or would you let them out of the remaining 50% because they decided they wanted to get pictures reshot somewhere else even after you shot and produced great pictures?

Just HAD to use a "Disagree" on your comment...the 48th time I have used it, in multiple years.


16,650 LIKES given by me...48 Disagrees given by me...

I stopped by the ADOBE site about 3 minutes ago...their terms of service are deceptive; if it were a fricking RADIO or TV commercial, they'd have government regulations forcing them to disclose that the "monthly plan" includes a HEFTY discontinuance charge.

I lost all respect for Adobe as a company when they tried to force a $50 a MONTH charge onto their millions and millions of Photoshop users; the hue and cry was soooooooooo extreme, from millions of users, that they cut their ransom demand from $50 a month for Photoshop...down to $9.95 a month for Lightroom and Photoshop.

From my POV, the bottom line? Try to rip off your entire customer base, then get shot down, and cut the cost FIVE fold and throw in another software product? Unconscionable. Highway robbery attempt.

SORRY...but , "Prepare to bend over and lube up!!" is the way Adobe treated all of its paying customers. Many of us will never forgive that sort of rude treatment. Ever.

So how does that make my statement wrong? If you don't like Adobe's practices, don't use them. You disagree with people needing to read contracts before they sign them? You disagree with people choosing not to use a service they don't agree with? You disagree with adobe not being the only company in the world to do this?
Well, if that's how you feel, so be it.
But the fact remains that for many many peopke, adobe cc is the best deal around.


Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk