This answer (even true) is not acceptable. I paid a one time license (quite expensive for me) for using a software and it looks like Adobe removed a feature to push people to buy (or better term: rent indefinitely) the new version.
I am not happy at all to see that behaviour from a software publisher.
At least they should keep a version of the maps like OpenStreetMap which is totally license free and not relying on Google license terms. (honestly I do not really need satellite view in lightroom, a single map like OpenStreetMap would be enough.)
If a corrective patch would not be published soon to restore that feature (without google maps), I would probably look for another solution to develop my RAWS and totally abandon the Adobe products forever...
A disappointed user.
2 people found this helpful
If you want Adobe product developers to see your feedback, please post in the official Adobe feedback forum, where Adobe wants all product feedback: Lightroom Classic CC | Photoshop Family Customer Community . They read everything posted there but rarely participate in this forum, which is primarily user-to-user.
2 people found this helpful
It's a scandel. I bought a Lightroom 6 licence 8 month ago. I understand that Adobe wants his customers to migrate to Lightroom Classic CC 8.0. But this is not the way to do this. Really outrageous!
This may be allowed according to the license, but that is not how you deal with paying customers.
I decide when I am about to go to a new version, and I will not force myself in this way. I also understand that you have to step over once, but this is like scam.
I am going to orient myself on DxO Photolab, Luminar, On1 and Affinity Photo. Sure I can find a good alternative in that.
I am going to say goodbye to all Abobe products that I have been paying for for years.
Holy $&!£. Adobe really are taking the mickey and making it impossible to actually buy their software, and have become totally disgustingly greedy, enforcing customers to rent it instead.
I'm not yet 40, assuming i live for another 40 years (and there is no interest), I would have to pay £10 a month, 12 months a year, for 40 years which comes to an eye watering £4,800 to continue to use Lightroom, for which I already have a perfectly good licence which I paid for 5 years ago.
Totally disgusted that you think this is acceptable. Just utterly sickening.
1 person found this helpful
Same here - I bought Lightroom 6 less than three months ago to manage my 125K+ photos, one main reason for the purchase being the geo-tagging of photos based on my GPS tracks. Suddenly during the weekend Lightroom's map interface refused to work and Adobe's webpage was very frank wrt their plans: force customers to move to monthly plans.
The Austrian customer protection association's answer is definite: Lightroom's map integration is an advertised feature and its explicit removal by Adobe is a case covered by the mandatory 6-month product warranty in accordance with European customer protection laws. It does NOT matter that the integration is implemented using an external (Google) API: Adobe produces and sells the software and is responsible for providing the advertised service - it could in theory replace the existing API by an equivalent (for instance OpenStreetMaps API or an own map service implementation).
The only solution left is to ask the dealer from whom I purchased the Lightroom license in written for (a) either re-enabling the maps functionality in Lightroom within the next 14 days or (b) full refund. Backed by the customer protection association, the dealer will/must finally agree to solution (b). Unless Adobe's product management team realizes that they're sawing away the branch upon which they sit and provide an alternative solution (I truly wish that they do wake up and that it's not too late for them).
Adobe also made it publicly known (back in October of 2017) that Lightroom 6.14 will never be updated. I assume that is considered part of the advertising.
The main reason I avoided CC products was that I wasn't sure I could trust Adobe to not hold me to ransom as my collection grew. They have now proven beyond a doubt that they cannot be trusted, so committing to a monthly plan where they can sabotage me at any time is now NEVER going to happen.
My 0.02 ...
- Adobe did not change a thing, Google did.
- Photo software is a very important part of a digital photo workflow. I bet, the monthly cost for the Photography subscription is about the cheapest part of a workflow, compared to yearly spent money for other parts of the equipment.
The main reason I avoided CC products was that I wasn't sure I could trust Adobe to not hold me to ransom as my collection grew.
This is utter nonsense. If you terminate your Lightroom subscription, all of your photos and all of your edits and all of your user-provided metadata and all of your work is still available to you, they take none of this away from you upon termination of the subscription.