5 Replies Latest reply on Jun 17, 2015 11:22 PM by john beardsworth

    Has become the standalone LR version purchasing clients a second class ones?

    bogdan1970 Level 1

      I am not very clear, what Adobe policy is, for it's software , also don't want to get a deep understanding about, will not help my purpose to get more for the money I have payed for LR.

      Now it seems, that the standalone version has become the second grade with the promise to just keep it alive, as now some of us already payed for and perhaps to just see how it goes, but so far the future will belong to CC only .

      I use alternatively Capture One and DXO, and this is one of the reasons why I have purchased the standalone version and not the CC one.Now after the latest update, for someone like me, Adobe will push the balance toward the competitors by keeping some features only for the CC version.

      I won't argue about the Adobe policy, I still have the mind to decide where to spend my money and not to hang with one of them, just to keep some habits,I am ready to learn new ways if the results are appropriate, so for me, if from Adobe side the LR standalone version will become the forgotten child, will also become this way in my computer, giving place to the alternatives.

        • 1. Re: Has become the standalone LR version purchasing clients a second class ones?
          Jao vdL Adobe Community Professional & MVP

          Read the "legal stuff" in this post: http://lightroom-blog.com/2015/06/17/creative-cloud-2015-updates/

          Apparently a strange US law makes it illegal for companies to add new features that haven't been advertised for free to their products. There is no such restriction on rented software. Annoying indeed. Don't know if this is really the rationale though. Although I am a CC subscriber I feel your pain.

          • 2. Re: Has become the standalone LR version purchasing clients a second class ones?
            bogdan1970 Level 1

            Thanks for your reply, I just read that statement, it's also state that:

            " If you want this changed and you’re a US citizen, then start lobbying your politicians. While people will use this a vehicle to imply greed on the part of Adobe, it’s simply Adobe complying with a law they have no say over. It doesn’t apply to the subscription model because you’re renting the software."

            Like to say, we Adobe we are the good guys, go out on the streets and fight the bad politicians to get the "dehaze" feature on the standalone version.

            I am trying to stay serious here, but this one is too laughable for me, first because Adobe does not sell it's products on the US only, the money come from everywhere, second there is a bunch of jurists as in any big company which could find the way to bring this up - this is their product not the politicians product.

            All I get is the final product and following the common sense, others  doesn't really matter to me, it's not my business but Adobe's one.

            I still think a big company like Adobe could do better then just stay behind a small (and good enough) excuse.

            Bad bad bad politicians does not let us Adobe to shine.......

            • 3. Re: Has become the standalone LR version purchasing clients a second class ones?
              john beardsworth Adobe Community Professional & MVP

              Jao vdL wrote:

               

              Read the "legal stuff" in this post: http://lightroom-blog.com/2015/06/17/creative-cloud-2015-updates/

              Apparently a strange US law makes it illegal for companies to add new features that haven't been advertised for free to their products. There is no such restriction on rented software. Annoying indeed. Don't know if this is really the rationale though. Although I am a CC subscriber I feel your pain.

              Sean's explanation is wrong, Jao, but he's not a qualified accountant who has done Sarbanes Oxley compliance consulting. There is no "strange US law makes it illegal for companies to add new features that haven't been advertised for free to their products". In fact it would be perfectly legal to add features to purchased software - provided the revenue on those product sales was properly spread over the related financial reporting periods. The brief way I would describe the situation is that Adobe don't add features to purchased software because of their own procedures to comply with a range of accounting principles and laws.

              • 4. Re: Has become the standalone LR version purchasing clients a second class ones?
                Jao vdL Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                Yeah I tried to keep it simple. I know this is about revenue accounting, not feature addition per sé and I am sure the whole thing is incredibly complex. I can't imagine the headaches that go into accounting revenue at a company Adobe's size. I am sure they could change the way they do their books to get around it as many other companies have done. But then the move at Adobe is clearly to a CC/rental model instead of purchased software.

                 

                I have played with the dehaze thing a bit and I doubt this would get a use in more than 1 in a thousand images. Perhaps I would use it more for adding fog rather than removing it. As is it is just a different take on clarity really. Useful perhaps as a creative tool but of limited utility.

                • 5. Re: Has become the standalone LR version purchasing clients a second class ones?
                  john beardsworth Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                  Complance with revenue recognition procedures is about as simple as one can go. And if you've not got professional experience in the area, it's best not to venture beyond that.