Thanks for the heads-up.
And aren’t we all curious how this will play out?
So long as there are non-subscription offerings, I see it as probably being a good thing for Adobe, over time. For some users, where multiple licenses for non-Creative Cloud can be expensive, the Creative Cloud option probably offers those shops a billing alternative, that might be a better deal for them.
When/if Adobe goes ALL Creative Cloud, I will probably just die with my old, non-Cloud versions.
Thanks to Curt for that info.
I share Bill's concern that companies like Adobe don't decide to eliminate traditional perpetual licenses.
Currently with the 18month product cycle (or whatever the timeline is), new versions are driven by selling traditional licenses not cloud licenses.
Removing the version upgrade as a reason for purchasing a license only leaves the need to keep up with the competition.... and that would be who?
It would take the company more than four years to collect as much from a subscriber as it generates from a single sale of the desktop version of the top- end Master Collection software package, which includes applications like Photoshop and Illustrator.
This assumes new purchases not upgrades. If the market is indeed saturated then the cloud would continue to get revenue from the people who typically skip versions.
Adobe might want to look into further resection of its Photoshop product into specialty versions. PS for amateur photographers (basically Elements), Photoshop for web, PS for print, PS for retouch, PS for RAW, PS for artists,similarly for Illustrator.
It seems like they're pricing themselves out of the consumer market now.
That may be one of those "be careful what you wish for" scenarios, it's possible that a pro-version of PS would have an even higher price tag if the pro-market becomes too small relative to the overall user base. Currently the consumer is subsidizing the cost. For example look at some of the 3d apps and costs for subscriptions.
I do not share your opinion on:
pricing themselves out of the consumer market now.
Adobe has both Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements (video editing program, a pretty big step down, in both features and price from Premiere Pro). Those are aimed squarely at the consumer market.
As for breaking things apart for particular diciplines, well Adobe does that with their various suites, that contain Photoshop. Usually, one can upgrade to one of the lesser suites (below Master Collection), for not much more, than if buying just Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, etc.. If one is upgrading TO a suite, the pricing gets even better.
Going back to the release of CS (the first Creative Suite), I looked at upgrading both my Photoshop and Illustrator versions, and found that I could get the entire Creative Suite, for less than it would cost to upgrade both PS and AI, and I got an upgrade for Acrobat, plus InDesign (had PageMaker back then). To me, it was a no-brainer.
Sorry, but I think that with the suites and the Elements programs, Adobe has a lot of bases covered already.
Just my way of thinking,
I agree that you did the right thing for your purpose. Isn't Photoshop the largest by far of the Suite apps? It's too big and expensive for almost everyone, I think, because of the various purposes today. You can get Corel apps for under 100 that do what you need in most cases.
Yes, PS is probably the most well-represented of all Adobe programs, in the various suites - heck, it's Adobe's "flagship."
As for Corel products (I have several, and have for many years), one can pick up Photoshop Elements for about US $70, and for US $100, get the bundle with Premiere Elements, from certified resellers.
While there ARE differences between PS and PSE, the two biggest are that PS can work in CMYK and can create Layer Sets. PSE cannot (unless the Layer Set creation has been added - it CAN, however edit Layer Sets).
If you are looking for a "stripped down" version of PS, I strongly suggest that you look closely at PSE. You might find that it is not "stripped down," as much as many assume.
Bill Hunt wrote:
Naïvely hoping that might be the case, about four years ago I bought a Windows version of Ps Elements to run on a cheap Toshiba laptop while I kept the full version of Photoshop on my Mac desktop.
Within a couple of weeks I became so frustrated with Ps Elements that I successfully demanded my money back from Adobe.
Ps Elements is not nearly a substitute for the real thing. As a matter of fact, I thought it was overpriced by about $80. I could not in good conscience recommend it to anyone. Ever.
Message was edited by: station_two
Please note that I edited my previous post to restore the missing second paragraph:
Within a couple of weeks I became so frustrated with Elements that I successfully demanded my money back from Adobe.
I agree that PSElements is not for everyone. I doubt that I could enjoy using it, as I have been on PS for decades, starting on the first day, that it was released for the PC (Version 2.5, IIRC).
PSE is a "Big Button" program, and I really like having all of the control, even if it means a bit more "hand-work."
OTOH, many do find that it suits their needs perfectly.
PS - I feel the same way about Premiere Pro, and Premiere Elements. I have both programs, but really prefer the "manual" PrPro, over the "automated" PrE.