If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
Interesting development for anyone who got
suckered into renting Adobe software. The next update, according to a blog post, will apparently only run on Win10 greater than v. 1607: https://theblog.adobe.com/upcoming-c...ndows-and-mac/ In other words, you can keep renting. You just won't get any of the new features you're paying for. And if you quit then don't forget to first back up all your work locally from that famous "free" cloud storage, or you'll lose it. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Mayayana
wrote: Interesting development for anyone who got suckered into renting Adobe software. The next update, according to a blog post, will apparently only run on Win10 greater than v. 1607: the update to 1803 is free and fixes a ****load of problems 1607 and certainly 1511 had. there's no reason not to update. https://theblog.adobe.com/upcoming-c...support-for-wi ndows-and-mac/ In other words, you can keep renting. You just won't get any of the new features you're paying for. nonsense. And if you quit then don't forget to first back up all your work locally from that famous "free" cloud storage, or you'll lose it. also wrong. *all* of your work is stored locally. storing in the cloud is *optional* and is not intended to replace local storage. it would help if you actually understood what you're criticizing. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 8/31/2018 9:43 AM, Mayayana wrote:
Interesting development for anyone who got suckered into renting Adobe software. The next update, according to a blog post, will apparently only run on Win10 greater than v. 1607: https://theblog.adobe.com/upcoming-c...ndows-and-mac/ In other words, you can keep renting. You just won't get any of the new features you're paying for. And if you quit then don't forget to first back up all your work locally from that famous "free" cloud storage, or you'll lose it. Your "analysis" is so wrong in many ways. Adobe CS is aimed at pro users, a group that is unlikely to run outdated OS versions for many reasons beyond Adobe software. Users who have computers that can't be updated for whatever reason can continue to use the CS versions compatible with their systems and it won't surprise them that they don't get new features delivered to them. Users that store their work files solely in anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors of their ways. -- best regards, Neil |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Neil
wrote: Users that store their work files solely in anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors of their ways. more accurately, solely in a single location. however, given a choice, a one copy in the cloud is safer than a one copy on a local hard drive. ideally, always have multiple copies, with at least one offsite. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
"Neil" wrote
| Users who have computers that can't be | updated for whatever reason can continue to use the CS versions | compatible with their systems and it won't surprise them that they don't | get new features delivered to them. | It won't surprise them that they no longer get what they're paying for? Getting regular updates is pretty much the only reason for rental software. And about 1/2 of Windows users -- more business users -- are on Win7. | Users that store their work files solely in | anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors | of their ways. Yes. But why do you protest trying to save them some pain? Do you think they should be punished because they didn't know better? The point is to let people know, in case some don't. Many people using Adobe CC are not "pros" who get their software paid for by someone else. (Visit the digital image/photo groups to meet some. They're mostly hobbyists.) There's also no reason to assume all pros are using the latest versions of all software. Pros know enough to simply use the tool that works. Hobbyists are actually more likely to be the ones who think they always need to buy the latest tools. That's true in any field. The hobbyists are more susceptible to marketing because they don't know as much. People go to kitchen stores and buy the latest, overpriced slicer-dicer. They go to Home Depot and pay ridiculous prices for painter's tape to mask windows.... It's not because pros use those "tools". It's just marketing. To clarify for those who may not know what we're talking about: If you use Adobe CC it defaults to saving your work on their server. If you then quit CC (stop paying rent) you lose access to those files. Thus, anyone using CC should always save copies of work locally, in standard, non-lossy formats like BMP/TIF or whatever RAW format might be used. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 8/31/2018 1:57 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Neil wrote: Users that store their work files solely in anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors of their ways. more accurately, solely in a single location. however, given a choice, a one copy in the cloud is safer than a one copy on a local hard drive. ideally, always have multiple copies, with at least one offsite. Having only one copy where ever it stored is is insane. -- 2018: The year we learn to play the great game of Euchre |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Keith Nuttle
wrote: Users that store their work files solely in anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors of their ways. more accurately, solely in a single location. however, given a choice, a one copy in the cloud is safer than a one copy on a local hard drive. ideally, always have multiple copies, with at least one offsite. Having only one copy where ever it stored is is insane. that's what i said. the difference is that a cloud service isn't a single hard drive, but rather multiple drives in multiple data centers, so the chance of losing something in the cloud is much lower than a single drive in someone's home or office. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | Users who have computers that can't be | updated for whatever reason can continue to use the CS versions | compatible with their systems and it won't surprise them that they don't | get new features delivered to them. | It won't surprise them that they no longer get what they're paying for? Getting regular updates is pretty much the only reason for rental software. another reason is because it's often less expensive, and in some cases, can be bought on demand. some of adobe's plans are month to month. And about 1/2 of Windows users -- more business users -- are on Win7. so what? what matters is what adobe's customers are using, and adobe knows exactly what that is. what also matters is that the features adobe wants to offer can't be done in win7. | Users that store their work files solely in | anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors | of their ways. Yes. But why do you protest trying to save them some pain? Do you think they should be punished because they didn't know better? nobody is being punished. people are free to choose to use or not use the cloud, based on their own needs, not what you think is best for them. many people have one copy on a single hard drive. that's actually worse. The point is to let people know, in case some don't. Many people using Adobe CC are not "pros" who get their software paid for by someone else. (Visit the digital image/photo groups to meet some. They're mostly hobbyists.) hobbyists typically don't need much more beyond photoshop elements (and actually, that is overkill for most people) which is $50ish street price without any ongoing payments. it's also often bundled with a camera or scanner or some other hardware device they bought, which means they got it for free. some users may want additional features beyond what's included in elements, and if so, they can buy more advanced tools. their choice. There's also no reason to assume all pros are using the latest versions of all software. Pros know enough to simply use the tool that works. Hobbyists are actually more likely to be the ones who think they always need to buy the latest tools. That's true in any field. The hobbyists are more susceptible to marketing because they don't know as much. People go to kitchen stores and buy the latest, overpriced slicer-dicer. They go to Home Depot and pay ridiculous prices for painter's tape to mask windows.... It's not because pros use those "tools". It's just marketing. pros get the latest tools for many reasons, including to be more productive as well as being able to produce higher quality work than their competitors. in other words, it pays for itself. To clarify for those who may not know what we're talking about: If you use Adobe CC it defaults to saving your work on their server. If you then quit CC (stop paying rent) you lose access to those files. false. using the cloud is *optional*, something you've been told many, many times. the only way they'd lose anything is if there was *only* one copy in existence, kept is in adobe's cloud, no other copies anywhere else, and couldn't be bothered to download it before canceling payments. in other words, user error. Thus, anyone using CC should always save copies of work locally, surprising as it may seem, that's what normally happens. in standard, non-lossy formats like BMP/TIF or whatever RAW format might be used. better yet, use photoshop's native format, which many non-adobe apps can read (and often write), or use a non-destructive workflow with raw, which is what lightroom does, then export to whatever format is needed. photoshop's format is also published, so anyone can write their own apps to read and write photoshop files, should they be so inclined and have the skills to do so (or the money to hire those who do). |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
"Keith Nuttle" wrote
| ideally, always have multiple copies, with at least one offsite. | | Having only one copy where ever it stored is is insane. | Very common, though. I know a professional photographer who had all of her photos stored only on her Mac. The disk died. She had to pay to have the files salvaged. I think that scenario is far more common than not. (And Adobe know that.) These days a lot of hobbyists use "asset management" software -- basically a "for dummies" manager for the file system. And programs like Adobe's often use "sidecar" files to store file changes to an original copy, referring to edits as metadata. All meant to help and to make things easier, but making file management more challenging in the long run. Even if you know about backup it can get confusing if people don't really know what and where their files are. I have something similar to an asset manager in Paint Shop Pro 16. I think of it as the dip**** tab. I can choose to not open to that window by default, but I can't turn it off. It wants to show me the images I have on the computer. That started with Picasa. Google recognized that many people took photos but that most had no idea where their photos were. So Picasa introduced a GUI that bypassed Explorer and just presented "Look! Here's Your Pictures!" -- a custom file manager that only showed image files from anywhere on the computer. Very handy for beginners, but making it all the more diifficult for them to learn to actually access and manage their own files directly. They not only need to learn how to use Explorer. They have to learn that Explorer, and a file system, exist. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | ideally, always have multiple copies, with at least one offsite. | | Having only one copy where ever it stored is is insane. Very common, though. that is unfortunately, very true. I know a professional photographer who had all of her photos stored only on her Mac. The disk died. She had to pay to have the files salvaged. I think that scenario is far more common than not. (And Adobe know that.) that's what can happen without a backup. had she stored them in the cloud (adobe's or some other service), she would not have lost anything. get a new computer (mac or windows, doesn't matter), log in, and there they are. These days a lot of hobbyists use "asset management" software -- basically a "for dummies" manager for the file system. not only is it *not* for dummies, but it can do many things that are impossible directly via the file system. And programs like Adobe's often use "sidecar" files to store file changes to an original copy, referring to edits as metadata. a major reason is so that the original file is never altered. another is for virtual copies. All meant to help and to make things easier, but making file management more challenging in the long run. Even if you know about backup it can get confusing if people don't really know what and where their files are. nonsense. it doesn't complicate backups at all. there's actually *less* to back up because you don't have dozens of interim versions every step of the way. I have something similar to an asset manager in Paint Shop Pro 16. I think of it as the dip**** tab. you must use it a lot, then. I can choose to not open to that window by default, but I can't turn it off. It wants to show me the images I have on the computer. imagine that! being able to actually see the photos. what will they think of next? |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 15:17:14 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote: "Neil" wrote | Users who have computers that can't be | updated for whatever reason can continue to use the CS versions | compatible with their systems and it won't surprise them that they don't | get new features delivered to them. | It won't surprise them that they no longer get what they're paying for? Getting regular updates is pretty much the only reason for rental software. Not the only reason. With expensive software n o one welcomes the cost of an occasional software update coming out of the blue. Having all the updates at a uniform monthly charge takes away the pain. And it may cost no more on the average. Also, from the vendors point of view, it attracts new users who maybe would never sign up a onetime purchase of several hundred dollars. I found that over a period of time I spent more trying not to buy Photoshop than I actually ended up paying for the monthly rental of Adobe CC. And about 1/2 of Windows users -- more business users -- are on Win7. | Users that store their work files solely in | anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors | of their ways. Yes. But why do you protest trying to save them some pain? Do you think they should be punished because they didn't know better? The point is to let people know, in case some don't. Many people using Adobe CC are not "pros" who get their software paid for by someone else. (Visit the digital image/photo groups to meet some. They're mostly hobbyists.) There's also no reason to assume all pros are using the latest versions of all software. Pros know enough to simply use the tool that works. Hobbyists are actually more likely to be the ones who think they always need to buy the latest tools. That's true in any field. The hobbyists are more susceptible to marketing because they don't know as much. People go to kitchen stores and buy the latest, overpriced slicer-dicer. They go to Home Depot and pay ridiculous prices for painter's tape to mask windows.... It's not because pros use those "tools". It's just marketing. To clarify for those who may not know what we're talking about: If you use Adobe CC it defaults to saving your work on their server. If you then quit CC (stop paying rent) you lose access to those files. Thus, anyone using CC should always save copies of work locally, in standard, non-lossy formats like BMP/TIF or whatever RAW format might be used. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 08/31/2018 12:57 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Neil wrote: Users that store their work files solely in anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors of their ways. more accurately, solely in a single location. however, given a choice, a one copy in the cloud is safer than a one copy on a local hard drive. I'd much rather have a single copy on my working hard drive than a single copy at a remote location that I don't actually have access to access to. ideally, always have multiple copies, with at least one offsite. Yes, and at least one onsite. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ sign at a travel agency "Welcome ... Please Go Away" |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
In article , Mark Lloyd
wrote: Users that store their work files solely in anyone's cloud will eventually learn the errors of their ways. more accurately, solely in a single location. however, given a choice, a one copy in the cloud is safer than a one copy on a local hard drive. I'd much rather have a single copy on my working hard drive than a single copy at a remote location that I don't actually have access to access to. you have access to it. the difference is that a cloud service will have multiple redundant copies in their data centers with multiple redundant data centers. while not impossible (nothing is 100%), the chances that all copies in all data centers are destroyed and the service itself disappears without a trace is much less than the chance of your single hard drive failing, or destroyed to fire or flood, or stolen. ideally, always have multiple copies, with at least one offsite. Yes, and at least one onsite. yes, but again, if there is *only* one copy, it's safer in the cloud. one copy is an incredibly bad idea, but unfortunately, it does happen. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 8/31/2018 3:17 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"Neil" wrote | Users who have computers that can't be | updated for whatever reason can continue to use the CS versions | compatible with their systems and it won't surprise them that they don't | get new features delivered to them. | It won't surprise them that they no longer get what they're paying for? Getting regular updates is pretty much the only reason for rental software. They are *not* paying for the _new features_ of software versions incompatible with their computers. And about 1/2 of Windows users -- more business users -- are on Win7. So what? Pro users of Adobe CC will find it more practical to stay current because of the nature of the graphics business. It has always been that way and I see no reason why it would change. -- best regards, Neil |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Adobe - The writing on the wall comes into view
On 8/31/2018 6:11 PM, nospam wrote:
the difference is that a cloud service will have multiple redundant copies in their data centers with multiple redundant data centers. while not impossible (nothing is 100%), the chances that all copies in all data centers are destroyed and the service itself disappears without a trace is much less than the chance of your single hard drive failing, or destroyed to fire or flood, or stolen. Do you not remember what happened to Megaupload? -- David E. Ross http://www.rossde.com Too often, Twitter is a source of verbal vomit. Examples include Donald Trump, Roseanne Barr, and Elon Musk. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|