[Locked] - There will not be a Lightroom 7 perpetual offering . Are you happy about this ?

[bitm07]

"Lightroom 6 is the last stand-alone version of Lightroom that can be purchased outside of a Creative Cloud membership. There will not be a Lightroom 7 perpetual offering. Lightroom 6 will remain for sale for an undetermined amount of time, but will no longer be updated with camera support or bug fixes after the end of 2017. Lightroom 6.13 with support for the Nikon D850 will be released on October 26th, 2017"

Adobe’s new version of Lightroom lets you resume editing anywhere - The Verge

Mod: Post sign a locked in the title

[Guest]

Software rentals are becoming the norm among all the

large software houses.  Even smaller developers are beginning

to adopt this market model.

Eventually see the move to total cloud computing and all you have at

home is nothing more than a fancy terminal.  Going back to the concept

of main frames and terminals of the 60's and 70's. 

It's all about control and continuous revenue.

[Killdevilhill]

This really stinks, Adobe is nothing but a bunch of terrorists  holding users hostage.  For those of us who are not heavy users but use Light-room either has a hobby or for light work as I do in my part time business I feel that I am being raped.  Adobe could care less about us type of users.  Why do I want to pay Adobe what would amount to thousands of dollars when just an upgrade once in a while would be more than satisfactory, and then to give Adobe all my files is just nuts.  I have purchased my last Adobe product that is for sure.

[Guest]

FWIW, I do have the photography subscription but will terminate at

the contract end in December.  I had stuck with this products as

there were not suitable substitutes.

Well now, there are several options many of which are nearly Photoshop

or Lightroom in terms of processing with no ball and chain and cheaper than

any Adobe product ever was (even back at Photoshop 1.0).

The only thing I will miss is library management that is available in Lightroom,

though they say that part will still function even without subscription.

[Killdevilhill]

I was told today from Adobe support that starting tomorrow Adope would be

offering another stand alone upgrade for Lightroom. It seems that a

zillion of us users have been blasting them. I am going to call them again

tomorrow. Leaves me wondering how expensive it will be. Would not put it

past them to price it really high to get you to buy a subscription

instead.

On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:46 AM, woodmeister50 <forums_noreply@adobe.com>

[johnrellis]

I was told today from Adobe support that starting tomorrow Adope would be offering another stand alone upgrade for Lightroom. 

This is the LR 6.13 update, due Oct 26.  It will be free and will include camera updates and bug fixes.  (In Adobe terminology, "update" refers to minor incremental releases -- 6.11, 6.12, 6.13, "upgrade" to major versions -- 5, 6, 7.)  See https://www.lightroomqueen.com/end-of-perpetual-lightroom-licenses/ .

[rrulander]

I assume that the actuaries ran the numbers and figured the net gain was more than the loss of some of us.

I for one, will not be subscribing to any Adobe products. This leaves a bad taste.........

[bitm07]

I'm planning to purchase a perpetual version of LR6 (hopefully at a cut down price on Black Friday) to safe guard against a price hike.  That's what worries me.

[Tanja2014]

rrulander  schrieb

I assume that the actuaries ran the numbers and figured the net gain was more than the loss of some of us.

I for one, will not be subscribing to any Adobe products. This leaves a bad taste.........

especially as adobe promised back when LR5 was released that there will always be a standalone LR version.

also adobe always said that features introduced in LR 6 CC will make it into the standalone version of LR7.

thought i am not surprised that adobe does not honor their promises....

[AxelMatt]

I understand your anger, but you should still be objective. To call Adobe as terrorists is not acceptable. Such statements do not belong in a forum. I ask such statements to be omitted in the future.

Axel

[CPH3]

Adobe bring this on there self with there take it or leave it attitude.

[xLuffyzx]

So disappointed that Adobe kill off their perpetual license user base just like that. As if they wanted to push off their customers to other companies.

Anyone have recommendations of software we could replace it with?

[keith_ledbetter]

I switched to ACDSee Photo Studio Pro 2018 a couple of months ago and have been very happy with it.

[CPH3]

ON1 Photo RAW 2018 That's where I am going. Adobe has turned into a pig headed company that does not care about it's customers.

[Abambo]

Adobe cares about their customers! You can’t get them all. I too wasn’t happy with the subscription model. But after using it now for some time, I have to say that I’m very happy of being able to upgrade when I decide and not the CFO of my company based on ROI numbers. I’ve done the justification. the monthly payement is quite moderate... No questions asked.

[Kamae]

Abambo  schrieb

Adobe cares about their customers! You can’t get them all. I too wasn’t happy with the subscription model. But after using it now for some time, I have to say that I’m very happy of being able to upgrade when I decide and not the CFO of my company based on ROI numbers. I’ve done the justification. the monthly payement is quite moderate... No questions asked.

For me, it would be to short-sighted, baited for the moment with a small fee. Wait a few years, when you want to look back to your previous work/-steps. Product discarded? Maybe your personal preference changes and you only want to use LR once in a while? Not possible or worth the monthly fee.

The subscription is not about cutting a upgrade-to-upgrade-price into small amounts. It's about tied customers.

[CPH3]

It is bull shit to say Adobe cares about it customers. It only cares about profit. If it did care it would have the option of subscription or non subscription. It simple as that.

[JP Hess]

So "IF" sales results over the past few years have shown that the subscription model has proven to be very profitable for the company, and "IF" the standalone perpetual model has proven to be not profitable and has cost the company money, Adobe should be happy to continue to lose money providing a perpetual standalone version just because a few people think it's better for them? How long would YOU sit and burn dollar bills before you realized you were just losing money  even if it was entertaining a bunch of onlookers and making them happy? A rather silly analogy, I realize. But think about it. You criticize Adobe for wanting to make a profit? I don't think you go to work without expecting a paycheck.

[CPH3]

They have not been losing money on standalone or they would not be there now. There are thousand of software company's making money out of standalone software. So why can't Adobe? Because they are greedy. Just give customer the choice standalone or subscription. It is simple as that. 

[tomazj]

JimHess  wrote

So "IF" sales results over the past few years have shown that the subscription model has proven to be very profitable for the company, and "IF" the standalone perpetual model has proven to be not profitable and has cost the company money, Adobe should be happy to continue to lose money providing a perpetual standalone version just because a few people think it's better for them? How long would YOU sit and burn dollar bills before you realized you were just losing money  even if it was entertaining a bunch of onlookers and making them happy? A rather silly analogy, I realize. But think about it. You criticize Adobe for wanting to make a profit? I don't think you go to work without expecting a paycheck.

Do you really believe that they were not making money on perpetual licenses? They were just not making as much as they calculated they can make by forcing enough customers currently still clinging to perpetual licenses to migrate to subscription model. They also calculated that they can afford losing part of this clientele (many of them probably loyal Adobe customers for years, including me) because the extra profit gained from those that do migrate to subscription model will far outweigh the losses. That Adobe, just like any other for-profit company, is in the business of making money, is a given, nobody is criticizing them for making profit. We are criticizing them for dropping their support for a significant (but obviously not significant enough) proportion of their existing customers. That's all.

[jmandry002]

I have PS5.1  and LR6.  Since I know longer shoot professionally, both of these products work very well for me and are more than sufficient.  In addition, I see the market taking advantage of "Subscription" based offerings and the potential customer base who absolutely refuses to go this route.  Affinity for example, is pretty darn good PS competitor for less than $100!  I personally will not be subscribing to CC for the foreseeable future!

[Guest]

Affinity is a good PS substitute and supports many PS plugins.  RAW processing

is good, however, unlike Lightroom it does not save adjustment info either embedded

or in a sidecar.

DXO Optics Pro is a very good RAW editor and does have some rudimentary file

browsing and management.  It does create sidecar files and is not destructive to RAWs.

The combo of these 2 looks to be my future!

Affinity Photo (Mac or Win) $49

DXO Optics Pro (Mac or Win) $129 or $199 (higher cost adds some additional bells and whistles)

    NOTE: Occasionally the $129 version goes on sale $100 or less.

[JohnMBStewart]

Hmm, almost all the photographers I know (hobby rather than professional) use the stand-alone version of LR6, as it simply costs too much here in the UK (£10/month = $13) to subscribe to the perpetual model, especially if you are retired or on a low income and maybe use it once every month or two.

The new Lightroom CC won't work for me as I have over 6TB of photos, and an upload speed of about 400 Kb/s and never need to edit photos away from home.

I was hoping for an upgrade to LR6 stand-alone as I've been a loyal LR customer and bought V1 and upgraded through to v6.

I wonder if it would be possible to have a low-use option for the subscription model - say charge £0.50 per hour of use. You could pre-pay for say £10 worth (=£20 hours), and when you have used that up, then you need to buy more credit.

[Guest]

There is still a Lightroom Classic CC which is the Lightroom we are used

to.  The new Lightroom CC is a watered down version geared to the

gadget generation and isn't much better than iPhoto or Google Photos

but does work across platforms.

The fact that they renamed the "real" desktop version to "Classic" makes me

think Adobe will phase it out in favor of the extremely watered down, selfie

oriented crowd version.

[Abambo]

Lr CC is a dull fledged cloud based version of Lightroom. It’s not a watered down version and it has the great advantage of the cloud computing power. Adobe has here the possibility to implement much more advanced intelligent editing options.

Lr Classic is as you are used to!