Photoshop: Creative Cloud: New Camera Shake Tool

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think there are plenty of things they could do to move forward.

 

But the point I'm making is whether this is a step forward, or even needed. Of course I could imagine dozens of other tweaks and changes, but that's beside the point.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Guest tanks]

Planned (or unplanned) obsolescence is a requirement for any business selling a product if they want to stay in business.

 

In a lot of cases it is the tail wagging the dog. Software pushes the envelope on computers, faster more capable computers are produced, then software is upgraded to take advantage of the advanced capabilities of the computers, so on and on.

 

Same thought applies in camera technology as well. The M improved the M9 quite a bit in ergonomics, larger battery life, resolution of the sensor, DR, resolution of the LCD (which should have been improved to start with) etc., etc.

 

The features might not have been needed or desired of those that are happy with their M9s, but there is a whole market segment there that wanted/needed the features.

[Jeff S]

Never mind.

 

Jeff

[01af]

If all, I mean ALL, current Photoshop users would decline Photoshop CC and keep using whatever they're using right now for one year ... what would Adobe do?

[jaapv]

I don't know I do not know the ratio of photographers vs design etc. professionals.

[Jeff S]

MR's take from LuLa today.

 

Jeff

[sanyasi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If all, I mean ALL, current Photoshop users would decline Photoshop CC and keep using whatever they're using right now for one year ... what would Adobe do?

Anyone is free to boycott Photoshop, but Adobe most likely doesn't care given its business strategy. This is a bet-the-compnay move. And the focus is not on users of single products, as the following pdf provided to financial analysts on May 6, 2013 demonstrates. http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/investor-relations/PDFs/AdobeMAXFABriefingSlides6May2013.pdf

 

Interestingly, as far as I can tell, Adobe doesn't break out revenue by specific software. I have been unable to find Photoshop revenue in the 10K or other documents that Adobe makes available on the web. I am sure someone like Gardner Research has the data, but I haven't found it.

 

One thing is clear: The strategy isn't some side project launched by some nerds in the bowels of Adobe. I have little doubt that this was discussed extensively in the boardroom.

[adan]

I love the (yet another) screaming Hitler parody from Der UnterGang regarding Adobe CC (see link at bottom of LuLa commentary linked in #26).

 

Anyway - time will tell whether this business model actually works. There's always "disruptive technology" waiting around the corner when a company gets too sure of itself.

[wattsy]

I've been a subscriber to Creative Cloud since last summer and I find it a cost effective way of maintaining up to date versions of the applications that I use to make my living (Photoshop has been central to my work since 1996 but I also use Illustrator, Dreamweaver, Flash, InDesign and, less frequently, Acrobat) but the new announcement has brought home to me how much Adobe have me over a barrel. For mainstream graphic design, Adobe essentially hold a monopoly in the marketplace and it is not obvious to me what suitable alternatives exist nowadays if (hypothetically) Adobe ceased to exist tomorrow or raised subscription prices beyond what I could afford. I could easily make do without Dreamweaver (which I use mainly in code view and there are numerous suitable replacements including TextEdit) and InDesign (I could go back to Quark without any difficulty) and I only use Flash to update older legacy work but the alternatives to Photoshop and Illustrator seem much less obvious to me (on a Mac). Does anyone remember Macromedia xRes? I remember trying that briefly as an alternative to PS back in the 1990s but I can't recall any other mainstream competitor to PS since. At one time I might have expected Apple to step in with their take on PS but they no longer seem very interested in software or the professional markets.

 

Incidentally, I'm not sure that buying CS6 and using it until it no longer works offers much of a long term alternative to the subscription route. I don't mind being behind on software features (most of which I don't use) but I prefer to stay reasonably up to date when it comes to hardware and OS and, in my experience, it is changes here that tend to break older versions of CS. A new Mac somewhere down the line will inevitably mean having to acquire a new version of CS.

 

Interesting times.

[sanyasi]

I agree that Adobe has us over a barrel, but as I said elsewhere, one of the reasons that they do is because their products (at least Photoshop, Lightroom, and Acrobat, which is all I use) are so good. More particularly, they don't seem to sit on their hands. Each edition of Photoshop and LR bring significant improvements, new features, and an effort to improve the interface.

[archi4]

Paraphrasing the title of this thread, I am hesitating between going along with what at first looks like Adobe's "New Shakedown Tool" or just making do with my current CS6 and Lightroom 4.4/5beta.

I suspect if enough of us do that, they will move LR into the cloud too.

BUT, I started using Photoshop just after it came out many years ago, fully paid during the years. However the number of persons I know of who could easily afford the software but are using hacked licenses instead keeps me from blaming Adobe for trying to protect their intellectual property.

[jaapv]

As I understand it, it is very doubtful that this move will stop the less than honest part of the Internet community breaking Adobe's system of distribution for more than a few weeks to maximally months.