Author Topic: Adobe drops the gauntlet - going forward it's cloud - or nothing. (Read 33480 times)

40hz · « **on:** May 06, 2013, 05:39 PM »

Well, I was wondering when one of the big players was going to tell its customer base to either join them up in the cloud, or find something else to use.

And today it happened. Adobe has announced that, going forward, the Adobe CS will be exclusively a cloud-based offering. The boxed retail set is to be no more. This from The Register:

Adobe kills Creative Suite – all future features online only

Demos hardware magic wand and Project Napoleon

By Iain Thomson in San Francisco •

Posted in Cloud, 6th May 2013 19:55 GMT

Adobe had been expected to demo Creative Suite 7 at its MAX conference down in smoky Los Angeles on Monday, but instead announced there'll be no more versions of its boxed software and that the Creative Suite brand will cease to exist. All CS apps updates will only be added to its Creative Cloud suite, and Adobe showed off some new tools to tempt its software stick-in-the-muds online.

"We believe that we're now collectively hitting a tipping point where the web is now ready for a generation of tools and services that help build the future of HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript web," said David Wadhwani, general manager of Adobe's digital media business unit, at the MAX keynote.

The current system of duplicating changes made in the Creative Suite and Creative Cloud products was wasteful and unproductive, he explained, and while existing boxed-software owners will still be supported, they won't be getting any more upgrades from Adobe.

<more>

It will be interesting to see how long it takes before Microsoft follows suit with Office.

Quoting Adobe later in the article, The Register provided these two very telling sentences:

"We believe that Creative Cloud will have a larger impact on the creative world than anything else we've done over the past three decades," Adobe said in a letter to customers. "It is our single highest priority to enable deep integration between our tools and services"

Yeah. They sure got that part right.

Hmm...their highest priority is to enable deep integration between our tools and services huh?

Isn't that just a fancy way of saying the true goal is to switch away from a classic 'product' and over to a subscription-based business model?

Oh well. On the bright side it will no longer require a convoluted license to establish exactly who really owns the software you're using if you're an Adobe CS customer. That much will be obvious to even the most ~~clueless~~ optimistic of Adobe users going forward.
$:-\$

rgdot · « **Reply #1 on:** May 06, 2013, 05:43 PM »

No Photoshop in boxed, physical format? If I were the alternatives I would be partying till the unshopped sun rises

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #2 on:** May 06, 2013, 07:07 PM »

No Photoshop in boxed, physical format? If I were the alternatives I would be partying till the unshopped sun rises
-rgdot (May 06, 2013, 05:43 PM)

Unshopped but otherwise edited!?

These kinds of aggressive moves have a weird feel to them, kinda like double or nothing betting.

app103 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 06, 2013, 07:13 PM »

No Photoshop in boxed, physical format? If I were the alternatives I would be partying till the unshopped sun rises
-rgdot (May 06, 2013, 05:43 PM)

Who exactly are the alternatives besides Corel, who are too busy dismembering their products to appreciate this?

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #4 on:** May 06, 2013, 08:16 PM »

No Photoshop in boxed, physical format? If I were the alternatives I would be partying till the unshopped sun rises
-rgdot (May 06, 2013, 05:43 PM)

Who exactly are the alternatives besides Corel, who are too busy dismembering their products to appreciate this?
-app103 (May 06, 2013, 07:13 PM)

Last I knew the poster "non-alternative" is GIMP. I hear it's just too different and missing important things.

app103 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 06, 2013, 09:37 PM »

No Photoshop in boxed, physical format? If I were the alternatives I would be partying till the unshopped sun rises
-rgdot (May 06, 2013, 05:43 PM)

Who exactly are the alternatives besides Corel, who are too busy dismembering their products to appreciate this?
-app103 (May 06, 2013, 07:13 PM)

Last I knew the poster "non-alternative" is GIMP. I hear it's just too different and missing important things.
-TaoPhoenix (May 06, 2013, 08:16 PM)

Since when is GIMP in a boxed physical format?

I mentioned Corel, because I know they still sell boxed versions of Paintshop Pro, which while not exactly Photoshop and/or Illustrator, it could accomplish pretty much what both of those could do, at a fraction of the price. Just too bad Corel has been destroying it, ever since they bought it from Jasc, like they have a pattern of doing to everything they acquire, instead of improving it in ways that could put it at the level of being a real alternative to Photoshop and Illustrator.

Giving it better PSD support for one, and being able to open/save vectors in a format that is acceptable for professional use, being another, instead of concentrating on useless eye candy, features that just waste screen space and system resources, and only offering proprietary formats that do not conform to industry standards. Try going to a printer and ask him to print you a sign using your vector contained in a .psp file. Not going to happen and you can't convert the file to another usable format!

Jasc had the sense to add Photoshop compatible plugin and brush support, but Corel didn't have the sense to keep up with it after acquiring it, so it is stuck with the same old Photoshop v7 level of support that Jasc added before they sold it. Nobody uses those plugins any more, mainly because Corel bought up and killed off most of the good ones, leaving not many options for plugins that still work.

Corel has had years to fix the issues that set it back and instead they have concentrated on pissing off the long time users of Paintshop Pro, driving them to seek affordable alternatives, that just don't really exist. If they had done what they should have, right now they would be the ones throwing a huge party at Adobe's expense.

cranioscopical · « **Reply #6 on:** May 06, 2013, 09:52 PM »

I was looking aghast at the El Reg article earlier.

If that Adobe policy is solid, it hurts. Like many others I have thousands invested in Creative Suite, don't want to use the cloud for sensitive material, and couldn't even if I wished.

That said, when Adobe started the subscription thing a year or so ago the sky-writing was on the cloud.

f0dder · « **Reply #7 on:** May 07, 2013, 12:45 AM »

This is how it begins...

IainB · « **Reply #8 on:** May 07, 2013, 01:16 AM »

Take a trip back in time, to when the producers dictated to their customers. (Did they ever stop trying to do that?)
Archaic, and arguably exactly what you would expect from a good corporate psychopath.
Anyone could guess that this sort of thing was likely to happen. Google are doing it by default now. Another example is Microsoft's Office 365, but that's not dictating terms to anyone, yet.
Throwing down the gauntlet is a challenge to fight. This seems to be nothing like that. It is arguably anti-trust, oligopolistic or monopolistic practice. They don't expect a fight.

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #9 on:** May 07, 2013, 01:25 AM »

Since when is GIMP in a boxed physical format?
-app103 (May 06, 2013, 09:37 PM)

Hehe it's missing important things like ... a box!

But I meant it in the spirit of a stand-alone program, rather than the Scam-As-A-Service under discussion.

vlastimil · « **Reply #10 on:** May 07, 2013, 02:54 AM »

... and being able to open/save vectors in a format that is acceptable for professional use ...
-app103 (May 06, 2013, 09:37 PM)

I assume you mean .pdf or .ps ? Or am I wrong?

tomos · « **Reply #11 on:** May 07, 2013, 03:09 AM »

... and being able to open/save vectors in a format that is acceptable for professional use ...
-app103 (May 06, 2013, 09:37 PM)

I assume you mean .pdf or .ps ? Or am I wrong?
-vlastimil (May 07, 2013, 02:54 AM)

I could well be wrong as I havent used more recent versions, but I thought that Photoshop only exported paths to illustrator, i.e. in .ai/illustrator format.
I guess like the doc format for word-processors, any serious graphic software has to be able to open that though $:-\$

app103 · « **Reply #12 on:** May 07, 2013, 04:57 AM »

... and being able to open/save vectors in a format that is acceptable for professional use ...
-app103 (May 06, 2013, 09:37 PM)

I assume you mean .pdf or .ps ? Or am I wrong?
-vlastimil (May 07, 2013, 02:54 AM)

I could well be wrong as I havent used more recent versions, but I thought that Photoshop only exported paths to illustrator, i.e. in .ai/illustrator format.
I guess like the doc format for word-processors, any serious graphic software has to be able to open that though $:-\$
-tomos (May 07, 2013, 03:09 AM)

ai, eps, pdf (the ones the printers will accept)

Illustrator does export in those formats, and there are a few other apps that do, as well, but Paintshop's .eps support is awful, and the .ai & .pdf support is nonexistent. For the most part, all you get that works well, and doesn't mess up your artwork is .psp, and the printers won't accept that.

tomos · « **Reply #13 on:** May 07, 2013, 06:26 AM »

^ah okay, I thought ye were comparing with Photoshop (just in case not clear: I was talking about Photoshop's capabilities when exporting *paths* - not pixels).

I havent heard much positive about Corel unfortunately over the years. I do know of people who were using it professionally but not for publication.

FWIW when creating PDF's, I've also had trouble *with certain fills* with the supposedly dream combination Illustrator and Acrobat/distiller (CS4 & CS3 respectively). My solution was to (successfully) use the free PDFCreator (which is also unfortunately included in the "Contest" - The most difficult Opt Out screens on installs!? thread).

I dont often get stuff published/offset-printed but have had no problems with the PDFCreator PDF's.

app103 · « **Reply #14 on:** May 07, 2013, 07:26 AM »

^ah okay, I thought ye were comparing with Photoshop (just in case not clear: I was talking about Photoshop's capabilities when exporting *paths* - not pixels).

I havent heard much positive about Corel unfortunately over the years. I do know of people who were using it professionally but not for publication.

FWIW when creating PDF's, I've also had trouble *with certain fills* with the supposedly dream combination Illustrator and Acrobat/distiller (CS4 & CS3 respectively). My solution was to (successfully) use the free PDFCreator (which is also unfortunately included in the "Contest" - The most difficult Opt Out screens on installs!? thread).

I dont often get stuff published/offset-printed but have had no problems with the PDFCreator PDF's.
-tomos (May 07, 2013, 06:26 AM)

Not trying to solve a problem here, trying to point one out...and the problem is Corel, as a company, makes a habit of dropping the ball and destroying previously great applications by not developing them in a way that allows them to become even better. If they had, then Paintshop Pro would be next in line to become the industry standard, behind Photoshop and Illustrator, a real alternative for those looking to migrate away from Adobe, their cloud crap, and still be able to have a boxed product.

My complaints about file formats was just an example of one of the many ways they failed to improve the product and bring it up to the level a professional would require. Instead they wasted developer resources on rather useless stuff. Corel really missed the boat, this time, and I hope they are kicking themselves...hard.

And I don't see PDFCreator as a good substitute, since it's not likely you can use it to draw stuff like this, from scratch.

tomos · « **Reply #15 on:** May 07, 2013, 07:52 AM »

^ah okay, I thought ye were comparing with Photoshop (just in case not clear: I was talking about Photoshop's capabilities when exporting *paths* - not pixels).

I havent heard much positive about Corel unfortunately over the years. I do know of people who were using it professionally but not for publication.

FWIW when creating PDF's, I've also had trouble *with certain fills* with the supposedly dream combination Illustrator and Acrobat/distiller (CS4 & CS3 respectively). My solution was to (successfully) use the free PDFCreator (which is also unfortunately included in the "Contest" - The most difficult Opt Out screens on installs!? thread).

I dont often get stuff published/offset-printed but have had no problems with the PDFCreator PDF's.
-tomos (May 07, 2013, 06:26 AM)

Not trying to solve a problem here, trying to point one out...and the problem is Corel, as a company, makes a habit of dropping the ball and destroying previously great applications by not developing them in a way that allows them to become even better. If they had, then Paintshop Pro would be next in line to become the industry standard, behind Photoshop and Illustrator, a real alternative for those looking to migrate away from Adobe, their cloud crap, and still be able to have a boxed product.

My complaints about file formats was just an example of one of the many ways they failed to improve the product and bring it up to the level a professional would require. Instead they wasted developer resources on rather useless stuff. Corel really missed the boat, this time, and I hope they are kicking themselves...hard.

And I don't see PDFCreator as a good substitute, since it's not likely you can use it to draw stuff like this, from scratch.
-app103 (May 07, 2013, 07:26 AM)

app
I hear/d what you're saying - and as I said, I've heard it from many others over the years.

But what with the thread theme being dissatisfaction with adobe, I included comments on the adobe dream combination (also related to your comment about formats for publication) - and alternatives.

PDFCreator is a PDF printer, I was suggesting it as an alternative for the Adobe Acrobat/Distiller printer driver. I didnt make any suggestions for an illustrator alternative - unfortunately there's very few serious aternatives to adobe illustrator, but hopefully adobe's move to the cloud will give those alternatives a good boost.

superboyac · « **Reply #16 on:** May 07, 2013, 09:31 AM »

I'm sure alternatives will eventually take off. Recently I've been playing around with Smith Micro's Anime Studio and Motion Artist.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #17 on:** May 07, 2013, 09:50 AM »

Strange I posted a reply this morning but it seems to have disappeared into the ether ...

There hasn't been a hugely compelling reason to upgrade PhotoShop wince version 7 (except to keep compatible with Windows). It will be interesting to see how quickly CS products on disk become unusable on Windows platforms (? collusion between MS and Adobe to push the cloud agenda).

For now I use CS3 and I don't really see any reason to upgrade to a later version and certainly won't be paying a large monthly subscription.

Two things will happen: hackers will have a field day (and the growth in use of cracked software will grow) and third party developers (if they have any sense) will cash in by making plugins for CS3, 4 and 5 to fill in the gaps with the new releases.

Lutz_ · « **Reply #18 on:** May 07, 2013, 09:58 AM »

... and hopefully great alternatives ( e.g. PhotoLine for photoshop, Corel Draw & Serif Draw & Inkscape for illustrator; there is an endless number of worthy acrobat alternatives ) will get more visibility.

rgdot · « **Reply #19 on:** May 07, 2013, 11:30 AM »

Sorry for the confusion app. I meant that if/when Photoshop doesn't exist in physical format it aids all alternatives, whatever their format.

Even not counting GIMP and other famous image editors/organizers, over the years I have come across many freeware and shareware that feature a significant subset of PS's capabilities. I think PS is a 'if your job requires it' kind of deal and in that case may be your employer is paying for it, really not much use for average users in my opinion.

app103 · « **Reply #20 on:** May 07, 2013, 12:42 PM »

really not much use for average users in my opinion.
-rgdot (May 07, 2013, 11:30 AM)

I agree! I have gotten along my entire life without it, done plenty of photo editing, created tons of art, and saved more money than I can shake a stick at.

vlastimil · « **Reply #21 on:** May 07, 2013, 03:50 PM »

Well, let's hope that this move of Adobe will make the photo-retouching and image-editing segment less monotonous. It should be easier for Adobe competitors to convince people to switch when they can argue with saved money. Up until now, it was almost impossible to convince a Photoshop owner to switch, because he or she has already invested hundreds of dollars into Photoshop and switching meant more expenses. So,

Adobe likely realizes this, but they are either very self-confident or they see other benefits this change may bring them. Like lock-in in their cloud or much lower maintenance expenses. It must be a nightmare to support multiple versions of their software. After the switch, everyone is either using the latest version (or can be told to upgrade to fix a problem) or they are not a paying customer and not eligible to receive support.

40hz · « **Reply #22 on:** May 07, 2013, 04:01 PM »

I'm hoping, that since a monthly subscription fee will now be feeding their coffers, that there will finally be a stop to endless "feature updates" and other useless nonsense. Maybe without the need to create faux "new" versions of products in order to encourage existing customers to part with additional money (for what can only be called "fully mature" products) we'll finally get some relief from feature bloat. And "breakthrough productivity innovations" like ribbon interfaces.

It's good to have a dream... $:-\$

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #23 on:** May 07, 2013, 05:59 PM »

Actually in the long term this might be a big boost for Linux - for me one of the big draws of Windows platforms is Adobe's products - if (as is likely - either by design or by accident) the hard copy versions cease to function at some point there is no incentive for me to stay with Windows. MS Office is already looking pretty dead to me in the long term so why do I need to stay with Windows?

Shades · « **Reply #24 on:** May 07, 2013, 06:07 PM »

Why would I pay for subscription if no new features were to be added? That would diminish my incentive to get a subscription.

Don't get me wrong, for a lot of (types of) software a subscription model would be beneficial for both user and company. Custom made software would be a good example.

For my intents, purposes and interests the Adobe products do not.

Not that long ago they did a nice thing with their CS2 (or was it 3?) product give-away and now they do this. Ah well, lets hope this move will make them see how the bottom of their "war chest" looks like.