Lupin wrote:
I bet at least part of the reason for Adobe moving to a cloud-based system was to cut down on piracy. I seem to recall a few years ago a spokesman for Adobe saying that they estimated that about three out of five copies of Photoshop in use were unlicensed. Certainly, if you ever visited Moscow six or seven years ago, many a street corner would have a stall selling pirated copies of the latest version of Photoshop (and many other items of expensive software) for the equivalent of about £4 or £5 - complete with a "crack" to allow the program to be installed and run independently of a legal licence, and without the need to log-in to the Adobe website. At a time when the most comprehensive licensed versions of Photoshop were selling for several hundred pounds each, the loss of revenue for Adobe must have been massive. Almost every adolescent seemed to have a pirated copy of Photoshop installed on his/her PC. Who can blame Adobe for switching to a more secure system of licensing their products?
I bet at least part of the reason for Adobe moving... (
show quote)
The pirated copies far from costing adobe money established them in the industry leading position they are in now. What Piracy did do was crush Adobe's competitors. How many adolescents trained themselves with adobe products and those that entered the industry got legal copies?
The subscription model seems to be supporting and breathing life into its competitors, do i want to pay x now for this and free updates (for as long as it lasts) or do I want to pay so much a month for the rest of my life...
The Rental system is pretty much the only way to keep making money from a mature product the important stuff is built in already.
For example I have Adobe lightroom 5 i bought that when 6 was out because 6 wouldn't run on the version of osx I was using. I have very little incentive to upgrade to Lightroom 6 it would cost me $79 approximately. Lightroom 6 brings me pet red eye and the haze filter. I don't use flash around my pets and affinity photo has a haze filter built in. My camera's are all supported and so are the operating systems i use.
For Adobe to get my money now there would have to be no Lightroom 5, they are not competing with their competitors but with themselves.
I would hazard a guess most of us have some form of Microsoft Word , mac users maybe use Pages instead but ...
Ok so who is using the 2016 version of Word and who is using an older version there is a pretty good chance the 2016 users are in a minority. Why isn't everyone using 2016 pretty much because the older versions work and it would cost to go to the 2016 version of Word.
Thats another mature product.
What happens if i sign up to CC so i get the latest bestest lightroom I get a monthly bill and the ability to upset my animals with a flash gun and be able to rescue the shot, whoop and if i stop paying, I get limited functionality :(
So far i haven't seen a fully functional replacement for lightroom, so I will stick with lightroom for now, why not I paid for it.
Software is an interesting product once developed it has a marginal distribution cost and thats when people are buying it from you. Pirated software has its own distribution channels. Burke photo said a software developer has to eat or words to that effect, Adobe made over 5 Billion Dollars profit last year! Just what are those fella's eating?
Quote:
Deep on the internet was a discussion of Adobe insiders. It explained that Photoshop's complex innards made keeping separate leased and licensed versions increasingly expensive.
Are you aware that you can get pirated CC versions today now, they are identical to the ones you are renting apart from the license module has been patched so the software doesn't fail the licensing check. The fella's who patched it probably did it for free. now keeping two very similar product lines being developed where one gets the latest features and the other doesn't that could be expensive.