Why I'm cancelling my Adobe subscription

[Eric Uberseder]

So, I've got 30 hours aboard a ferry crossing the Mediterranean, stuck on a boat with no internet, absolute best time to edit travel photos, right? I thought so, but Adobe had other ideas!

Thankfully, I had another piece of software to use, one from another vendor that didn't use a subscription model. Still I'm paying Adobe to be inconvenienced?

No, just no.

Affinity Photo....

 

[Overread]

I have issues with online requirements for software, but that's more regarding games where a singleplayer experience requires online connectivity the whole time and thankfully there are not too many of them (though sadly the great Diablo is trapped in that).

Also I do think that in this day and age it is silly to suggest that you have to factor in the cost of internet specifically to use Adobe software. I say that because anyone today is using internet for SO many more other aspects. If you go down that path then you might as well factor in the computer costs as well because you're looking at the whole cost package. Thing is even if you're a hobby user you're likely using email; getting firmwire updates; updates for new features/improved performance; you're getting your photos online to share; you're chatting in photography forums etc.... And that's just rough photo stuff; you can use the net for TV, music, films, games, social media, marketing, information, bank access (heck these days you can do more on your computer than you can at the actual bank).

So if you're only using your internet only for using Photoshop that's an exceptionally extreme situation that is far outside of the normal.


30 hours disconnection is a problem I agree, Photoshop should have work arounds to resolve that though I've never had the experience to have to go and find them. That said its a small time frame and there are often solutions which might prepare a user for the experience next time. It is a problem, don't get me wrong and I dislike having to have software that relies on an internet connection; but at the same time I can't think of the last time I never had internet for months at a time. Sure slow internet; spotty connections; weak signals. All things that would break an online game or such; but nothing that would break a simple authentication check from taking place.

 

[HogPhotog]

I stopped renewing my Adobe subscription last month and have switched to Serif Affinity Photo. $50 and it's yours. No subscription and, in some ways, better than Photoshop.

 

[407370]

I will make a prediction for Adobe products based on the history of Cinema 4D. Started off as a buy once then moved to SAAS pricing model with free updates and currently has this fine offer of paying for upgrades separately.

My paid for version R16 works well and is not tied to any operating system updates. I plan to use it for years to come.

You have been warned!!

 

[Overread]

I think Adobe has too much of a casual market to go for a price model like that. Video is still niche, whilst photography is VERY mainstream and Adobe Photoshop is THE product (they've made it so with their marketing). So I figure that they won't shift to a high one time cost model. They'd get a lot from pros, but they'd lose far more from the loss of basically all the casual and amateur market which they've raked in money from with their subscription model.

 

[weepete]

I cannot imagine what a $400 home built computer is like. I'm not used to that level of performance. It seems that you still have internet cafes where you live, but I don't know of any within 250 miles of me. We do have Wi-Fi in many locations where I live, but I find it kind of inconvenient to lug my 27 pound tower and its 30 lb or so Apple Cinema display into McDonald's . The fact remains quite simply that before we had ownership, and now we are nothing but poor tenants, at the whim of whatever Adobe decides that is good for us. I had Photoshop before I had a computer that could run it efficiently. Way back in the day of the early 1990s computers were a far cry from what they are today. I wish you luck with your $200 tablet. I'm sure that you and the internet cafe and tablet will get along swell in the next decade, which will be here before we know it.

My hope is that the Adobe gets bitten in its corporate ass, and that more people start examining alternatives to paying 10 or 15 or $20 or $60 a month for the right to not own anything, but to merely be a user suspected constantly of being a thief.

As the original poster stated, he had 30 hours without connection to the internet and the software that he thought he had a right to use would not allow him to access his pictures and to work on them. That sounds a lot to me like big brother, and I think there are a lot of features in the newer $49 to $69 software applications which would satisfy a lot of people. My hope is to see Adobe lose its near-monopoly position as a result of their own greed. After the crap that Adobe pulled with Flash, trying to worm its way into everyone's internet all over the world, I lost all respect for Adobe as a corporation. I wish them absolutely no success.

Remember, Adobe initially announced that Photoshop would be $50 a month and that they would be ending sales, and moving to a monthly tax. If everyone of us were bootlickers, we would all be paying $50 a month for the right to be able to edit our photos. But because millions upon millions of people like me said, " NO f****** way!" they were forced to extort us for a lot less and to add in Lightroom to the bundle, with a two-year commitment and a cancellation fee. And anyway you slice it, Adobe causes Millions upon Millions honest citizens to pay far more than $10 a month for the right to work on their files. Comparing Photoshop with AutoCAD is a fool's errand, kind of like comparing a Bentley with a Kia. I mean both are cars, are they not? AutoCAD has a very small number of high-dollar professionals who use it. I would wager that Photoshop is at least 100 times more popular than any AutoCAD software ever designed, and it has a much wider user base. A Bentley and a Kia are both cars, and I think my analogy is quite similar to the comparison you pulled out of the air. AutoCAD software $1,600 per year.... it's kind of like a Bentley.... but when you deliver a $5,000 or $10,000 building plan then it's certainly worth it. But in case you have not noticed the vast majority of Photoshop users are hobbyists who get absolutely no income from taking photos. Photoshop is a Kia, in car terms

Because a Rolex might cost $30,000, then a Timex that costs $10,000 must be great value right? These threads have nothing to do with our grandparents complaining about Rising prices, but about the ability to buy a product and get it to work and keep it working, as opposed to being forced to subscribe for 2 years of service at $10 a month and a $50 cancellation fee for who knows what updates and so-called upgrades... upgrades that one user has reported five or six times have caused his system problems. Adobe cannot possibly verify the compatibility of its constant tinkerings with Hardware that is actually out there in use. Not only have we been reduced to sharecropper status, but we are now beta testers for Adobe.

Yeah, it's more of a Kia than a Bentley but it gets me to the shops and back ok . My point is that there's more than one way of doing it and you don't need a high speed internet connection or a top of the line desktop to use it.

Autodesk is a smaller company than Adobe with just over 4 million subscribers as opposed to to Adobe's 17 odd million, but the make up will be pretty varied with a lot of SMEs using AutoCAD. There's a lot more self employed contractors in the engineering sector than you may think. They are both pretty much industry standard applications and are subscriber based. Both are complex software that can yeild top quality results and IMO the learning curve and tools offered are similar. AutoCAD Civils 3D would more be the thing for building plans, AutoCAD is more geared towards manufacturing parts and takes the place of traditional drafting tools, though building plans have been produced in AutoCAD and it depends a bit on BIM. Anyone with a 3D printer could use AutoCAD to design and manufacture parts. So I think my comparison is not totally off, there are similarities there.

I just really don't see the issue here as long as the subscription is kept reasonably low cost. I do totally appreciate that it's a major PITA to find out you need to log in when you are somewhere without a connection and you were expecting to be able to edit shots and I do think that Adobe needs to make it clearer.

Adobe's net profit this year was around 25% according to the financial reports I read, which is very good in a sector where the average is 18% but it's not totally ridiculous. It does show that prices could be reduced futher to give more value to customers. So I'm probably paying a 7% or so premium to use their products over the competition, but they are the market leader and that's usually for a reason. Don't get me wrong, I have zero loyalty to Adobe and I think some of their buisness practicies in the past have been bad. Either way, I do respect the subscription model is not one you like and that's fine but I just don't see it's that big a deal.

 

[henryb]

I bought the last version of Photoshop before it went "rental". Does everything I need that Lightroom can't. When it doesn't, I'll find a reasonably priced alternative that I can buy, not rent. I won't be addicted to Adobe just because it's the hot item and industry standard. Results that meet my needs are the bar I set. Adobe is moving away from my bar of standards.

 

[Lonnie1212]

So, I've got 30 hours aboard a ferry crossing the Mediterranean, stuck on a boat with no internet, absolute best time to edit travel photos, right? I thought so, but Adobe had other ideas!

Thankfully, I had another piece of software to use, one from another vendor that didn't use a subscription model. Still I'm paying Adobe to be inconvenienced?

No, just no.

Thank you for sharing this information. I am trying to learn about photo editing programs. I would like to purchase photo editing software. But I do not need the headaches. I am glad that you had a backup program.

Lonnie

 

[Lonnie1212]

I would recommend Adobe Photoshop Elements as a stand-alone editing programme........

Hi Jeff,

Is the 'Photoshop Elements' program a different program than Adobe Photoshop? I get the impression that it might be. I have an old Photoshop Elements 5.0 from about 18 years ago. I am looking for a more modern program now that I have a newer computer. I am not a professional photographer and I don't want the headaches like this gentleman just went through.

 

[Lonnie1212]

I bought the last version of Photoshop before it went "rental". Does everything I need that Lightroom can't. When it doesn't, I'll find a reasonably priced alternative that I can buy, not rent. I won't be addicted to Adobe just because it's the hot item and industry standard. Results that meet my needs are the bar I set. Adobe is moving away from my bar of standards.

Excellent response! I would be curious to know how things turned out for you.

 

[floatingby]

Affinity Photo....

Yep, just bought my license today. That and Dxo photolab and I'm all set, can finally do the finger to Adobe.

 

[The_Traveler]

AFAIC, relatively PS and LR are almost free.
I can't think of any ongoing expenditure that is as small and is anywhere near as useful.
Compared to tips for food delivery, getting clothes washed, subscription to any cable. LR & PS are a bargain.
I really can't think of anything I use and spend less on routinely than PS and LR. (perhaps toilet paper)

 

[floatingby]

AFAIC, relatively PS and LR are almost free.
I can't think of any ongoing expenditure that is as small and is anywhere near as useful.
Compared to tips for food delivery, getting clothes washed, subscription to any cable. LR & PS are a bargain.
I really can't think of anything I use and spend less on routinely than PS and LR. (perhaps toilet paper)

Big or small expenditure is relative. What might be small for you might be major for somebody else. It's also relative to what it was before, which for me translate to an increase of annual expenditure by a factor of 4 when compared to the previous perpetual licensing scheme. It's also relative to other product on the market, and in this case there are quite many products that could do the job as well or better for way, way, way cheaper.
But the point of this thread wasn't any of that, it's about Adobe choices, and in this case they chose to appease their shareholders by using a "protection" scheme that might inconvenience their paying customers to the point of cutting them off completely of products they paid for. That might be acceptable to you, or the situation doesn't apply, while for me, and many more, it is totally unacceptable.

 

[The_Traveler]

When I travel, I make certain that I have a phone that works wherever I'm going and that my credit cards or atm cards will be acceptable.
If necessary I use my phone as a hotspot to get/send emails, etc. - or even verify my software.

I try to be prepared for the situations I'll confront.

 

[floatingby]

When I travel, I make certain that I have a phone that works wherever I'm going and that my credit cards or atm cards will be acceptable.
If necessary I use my phone as a hotspot to get/send emails, etc. - or even verify my software.

I try to be prepared for the situations I'll confront.

The situation doesn't apply to you then if you constrict your travel area to where internet connection is an always available option. I would find this restricting personally, but that's me.