Adobe and America go from an ownership to a rental economy

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, May 8, 2013.

  1. RichA

    Mayayana Guest

    | Adobe is going to put its software in the Cloud and charge you a user
    | fee to "rent" its use.

    I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but I just came
    across it at TheRegister:

    "One colleague has indeed checked with Adobe and been told that if you allow
    your subscription to drop then you'll not actually be able to open your old
    files."

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/13/adobe_cloud_pricing/

    As I understand it, the subscription version is also not
    "in the cloud". It gets installed locally. Which makes sense.
    Editing giant photos over the Internet would be a slow
    process. All taken together, Adobe's move can be seen
    as not only a step toward rental rather than sale, but also
    a move to define any work done with the tool as a part of
    their service, just as webmail companies claim co-copyright
    on all content.

    The Register article doesn't say how Adobe would prevent
    accessing one's files -- whether they just mean that one's
    online storage would be locked down or whether they intend
    to start using some sort of custom, proprietary file type that
    only Photoshop can open.
     
    Mayayana, May 13, 2013
    #61
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <kmqrb8$9gt$>, Mayayana
    <> wrote:

    > | Adobe is going to put its software in the Cloud and charge you a user
    > | fee to "rent" its use.
    >
    > I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but I just came
    > across it at TheRegister:
    >
    > "One colleague has indeed checked with Adobe and been told that if you allow
    > your subscription to drop then you'll not actually be able to open your old
    > files."
    >
    > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/13/adobe_cloud_pricing/


    with an article titled

    Adobe price hike: Your money or your files, frappuccino sippers

    you know it's going to be completely objective.

    not surprisingly, they get a lot wrong.

    the way it works is if you let your adobe creative cloud subscription
    lapse, you can't use adobe creative cloud apps anymore. that's all. no
    real surprise there.

    your files are still on your hard drive and can be opened by *other*
    apps that can read/write those formats. you just can't use the apps you
    are no longer paying for.

    for photoshop users, that means you can use photoshop elements, apple
    preview and many others. the photoshop .psd format is documented, so
    there can't ever be a lockout.

    photoshop users can also save in tiff, jpg, png, pdf, etc., which can
    be opened with pretty much anything.

    > As I understand it, the subscription version is also not
    > "in the cloud". It gets installed locally. Which makes sense.
    > Editing giant photos over the Internet would be a slow
    > process. All taken together, Adobe's move can be seen
    > as not only a step toward rental rather than sale, but also
    > a move to define any work done with the tool as a part of
    > their service, just as webmail companies claim co-copyright
    > on all content.


    more misinformation. google and yahoo mail do not and i highly doubt
    anyone else does.

    > The Register article doesn't say how Adobe would prevent
    > accessing one's files -- whether they just mean that one's
    > online storage would be locked down or whether they intend
    > to start using some sort of custom, proprietary file type that
    > only Photoshop can open.


    of course they don't say how, because it's complete bullshit.

    there is no custom proprietary type or copy protection or other tinfoil
    hat nonsense. the files are *yours* to do whatever the hell you want
    with them.

    adobe doesn't prevent anything other than not using the apps you aren't
    paying for. you are more than welcome to use any other apps that
    read/write the formats.
     
    nospam, May 13, 2013
    #62
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, J. Clarke
    <> wrote:

    > > > I'll jes buy a used intuos 3 fer $150 and run it on my linux desktop,
    > > > thank you very much.

    > >
    > > I'm not selling it. It's there if you need/want it. Some folks pay
    > > premium for tools that make them more productive.

    >
    > The argument presented was that Macs have lots of functionality that PCs
    > lack.


    no it wasn't. the issue is apple doesn't make products in every product
    category. they aren't interested in making a pen-enabled laptop. it
    never sold well and the market is tiny. it's a niche product that
    they're happy to leave to someone else. instead, apple has the ipad
    which is vastly more successful, so much so that everyone is trying to
    copy it.

    > I pointed out an example where they don't.


    there are always niche products.

    > You pointed out that
    > a third party kluges Macs to provide a keyboardless tablet, voiding the
    > Apple warranty in the process.


    modbook provides their own warranty in place of apple's.

    > If you are willing to go with something
    > that is hacked up by a third party and unsupported by Apple, then I can
    > just put OSX on my Thinkpad and end up with a more satisfactory result.


    os x on a thinkpad isn't the same as a modbook.
     
    nospam, May 13, 2013
    #63
  4. RichA

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <2013051308265516807-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
    savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com says...
    >
    > On 2013-05-13 06:58:37 -0700, "Mayayana" <> said:
    >
    > > | Adobe is going to put its software in the Cloud and charge you a user
    > > | fee to "rent" its use.
    > >
    > > I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but I just came
    > > across it at TheRegister:
    > >
    > > "One colleague has indeed checked with Adobe and been told that if you allow
    > > your subscription to drop then you'll not actually be able to open your old
    > > files."

    >
    > That seems strange, and probably only applies to processed files stored
    > in Adobe's "cloud" since once the files are processed and saved
    > (preferably to a HDD archive as well as the "Creative Cloud") There are
    > plenty of graphics editors which will even open current Adobe
    > proprietary file formats.
    > I also suspect that the Creative Suite users who migrate to the
    > "Creative Cloud" are still going to have a hard installation of the CS6
    > Suite on at least one work station.


    All users will have hard installations. The software will request a
    monthly check-in and will die only if three months go by without a
    successful check-in. I don't think that Adobe has any desire to
    maintain enough server capacity and bandwidth to let people run Premiere
    over the net on servers operated by Adobe.

    > Those who will be at the mercy of
    > Adobe will be those new to the game and those involved in part time
    > design work. I would recommend those part time designers and students
    > sitting at "Creative Cloud" work stations, also store their work on a
    > portable drive, or Dropbox.
    >
    > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/13/adobe_cloud_pricing/
    > >
    > > As I understand it, the subscription version is also not
    > > "in the cloud". It gets installed locally. Which makes sense.
    > > Editing giant photos over the Internet would be a slow
    > > process. All taken together, Adobe's move can be seen
    > > as not only a step toward rental rather than sale, but also
    > > a move to define any work done with the tool as a part of
    > > their service, just as webmail companies claim co-copyright
    > > on all content.
    > >
    > > The Register article doesn't say how Adobe would prevent
    > > accessing one's files -- whether they just mean that one's
    > > online storage would be locked down or whether they intend
    > > to start using some sort of custom, proprietary file type that
    > > only Photoshop can open.

    >
    > I believe it means preventing access to files stored in the "cloud".


    Adobe has clearly stated their policies on this. Your local files will
    remain local files--if you have a non-Adobe application that will open
    them it will still open them. Files stored in the cloud will be
    acceesible for a grace period whose duration I forget. Once that grace
    period has elapsed they will still grant you something like 2 gig of
    free storage in the cloud--they did not state how they would determine
    which 2 gig of your cloud-stored content they would make available to
    you if you had more than 2 gig stored when the grace period expired.
     
    J. Clarke, May 13, 2013
    #64
  5. RichA

    android Guest

    In article <>,
    "J. Clarke" <> wrote:

    > In article <>, says...
    > >
    > > In article <>,
    > > notbob <> wrote:
    > >
    > > > On 2013-05-12, android <> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >> In article <>, says...
    > > >
    > > > >> > http://www.modbook.com/
    > > >
    > > > >> Which is not made by Apple.
    > > >
    > > > > Nooo... It''s a third party modification of an Apple product...
    > > >
    > > > ....and it's a damn sight far away from being affordable!
    > > >
    > > > <http://www.powerbookmedic.com/Modbook-Pro-23GHZ-Core-i5-120GB-SSD-4GB-RAM
    > > > -p-2
    > > > 5898.html>
    > > >
    > > > I'll jes buy a used intuos 3 fer $150 and run it on my linux desktop,
    > > > thank you very much.
    > > >
    > > > nb

    > >
    > > I'm not selling it. It's there if you need/want it. Some folks pay
    > > premium for tools that make them more productive.

    >
    > The argument presented was that Macs have lots of functionality that PCs
    > lack. I pointed out an example where they don't. You pointed out that
    > a third party kluges Macs to provide a keyboardless tablet, voiding the
    > Apple warranty in the process. If you are willing to go with something
    > that is hacked up by a third party and unsupported by Apple, then I can
    > just put OSX on my Thinkpad and end up with a more satisfactory result.


    Well, OSX on a Thinkpad tablet wouldn't be very hardware optimized at
    all, would it. Whatever... I'm sure some Hackintosh site would be happy
    happy to post your howto...
    --
    teleportation kills
     
    android, May 13, 2013
    #65
  6. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, J. Clarke
    <> wrote:

    > > > I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but I just came
    > > > across it at TheRegister:
    > > >
    > > > "One colleague has indeed checked with Adobe and been told that if you
    > > > allow your subscription to drop then you'll not actually be able to open your
    > > > old files."

    > >
    > > That seems strange, and probably only applies to processed files stored
    > > in Adobe's "cloud" since once the files are processed and saved
    > > (preferably to a HDD archive as well as the "Creative Cloud") There are
    > > plenty of graphics editors which will even open current Adobe
    > > proprietary file formats.
    > > I also suspect that the Creative Suite users who migrate to the
    > > "Creative Cloud" are still going to have a hard installation of the CS6
    > > Suite on at least one work station.

    >
    > All users will have hard installations. The software will request a
    > monthly check-in and will die only if three months go by without a
    > successful check-in.


    creative cloud checks approximately every 3 months for annual customers
    and every 1 month for monthly customers.

    however, he's saying that creative cloud users might *also* maintain a
    non-cloud version of cs6, just in case.
     
    nospam, May 13, 2013
    #66
  7. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Alfred
    Molon <> wrote:

    > > Last November I was looking for a new lightweight computer.
    > > At the Apple store they advised me that their was no Apple product that
    > > would meet my needs. I wound up with my Lenovo.

    >
    > I was looking for an upgrade for my Lenovo X200 and found the X230.
    > Almost ok, if it were not for the fact that it only takes HDDs with a
    > 7mm height. These come in a maximum size of 500GB.


    that will change. there was a time when 500g was the maximum for 9mm
    drives.

    > Already now the 1TB
    > drive in my X200 is almost full. After I discovering that I was tempted
    > for a while to write Lenovo a letter full of insults. What a bunch of
    > clowns. They make a business notebook, but downgrade the max. HDD size.


    people want thin and light, not huge amounts of storage.

    do you really need 1 tb of stuff everywhere you go?

    put some stuff on an external drive (even a flash drive) or a server.

    > Oh, by the way, also all those ultrabooks are out of scope. You can't
    > change the battery


    the battery typically lasts 8+ hours per charge so there's almost never
    a need to change it. the batteries also have an expected lifetime of
    3-5 years, which is likely longer than the useful life of the laptop.

    should the battery prematurely fail, replace it. it's just a few
    screws. not a big deal. if it's under warranty, you won't need to do a
    thing (other than take it somewhere to be fixed).

    > and they do not take large HDDs.


    500g is large.

    > At the moment the only Lenovo unit which might be sort of suitable would
    > be the X200, which however Lenovo have discontinued.


    i just found a review for it, and it cost $1800?? wow.
     
    nospam, May 13, 2013
    #67
  8. RichA

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Mon, 13 May 2013 05:29:33 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    <> wrote:

    >> >> And what, pray tell, do you think determines price tiers? And who
    >> >> determines what they will offer?

    >>
    >> >features do, not the logo on the box.

    >>
    >> Bizarre. Who determines what the features will be if not the people
    >>
    >> in the company whose logo it is? Features don't make any decisions.
    >>
    >> They are the result of decisions.

    >
    >What features can be offered is determined by price.


    That's a chicken-or-the-egg question. What features can be offered is
    determined by the price, or, what price can be offered is determined
    by the features.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, May 13, 2013
    #68
  9. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/12/2013 10:24 PM, J. Clarke wrote:


    <>snip>
    >
    > Not really the same. I have an Intuos 3 and while it does tricks that a
    > Wacom tablet won't, the feedback is different. The tablet is more like
    > a baby Cintiq.
    >


    I use an Intuos IV, and wouldn't be without it. Aside from the touch
    screen, what advantage would there be to using a Cintiq. Wacom just came
    out with a small one for about $999.


    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, May 14, 2013
    #69
  10. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/13/2013 9:08 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
    > On Sunday, May 12, 2013 4:51:27 PM UTC+1, PeterN wrote:
    >> On 5/12/2013 11:31 AM, nospam wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>

    >>
    >>> pick the best tool for the job.

    >>
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Yup!
    >>
    >> Last November I was looking for a new lightweight computer.
    >>
    >> At the Apple store they advised me that their was no Apple product that
    >>
    >> would meet my needs.

    >
    > You wanted it to keep crashing and get infrected by viruses on a regular basis?, well what did you expect ;-)
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Which one did you get and were they any other requirments that an Apple product couldn't meet which you required ?
    >
    > I've had a quick look and you're right going by the reviews thre's no way Apple could compete.
    >
    > http://shop.lenovo.com/gb/en/laptops/ideapad/u-series/u310/?sb=:000001D4:0001BEEE:#reviews
    >
    > --------------------------
    > Disappointment
    > Date: Dec 30, 2012
    > cons (3) Wireless card,Support,poor connectivity
    >
    > Considerably dissatisfied because of very poor wireless connection; wouldn't be such any issue had Lenovo been able to resolve. Unable to recommend the U310 and would discourage friends and family from purchasing.
    > --------------------------------
    >
    > http://shop.lenovo.com/gb/en/laptop...t|z1D630|s#/?facet-5=2&page-index=1&facet-2=3
    >
    > Tried to get a review of their top end £1,500 thinkpad X1 carbon
    >
    > Cons Screen size, resolution, display performance and price
    > And a months delivery, buyer sent it back in the end.
    >
    > I guess you're right the's no way Apple could compete with this :)
    >
    >>
    >> I wound up with my Lenovo.

    >
    > Are you sure you don;t mean you were wound up by your Lenovo.
    >


    My prior laptop was a Lenovo. for me the important features were a matte
    display screen, longer battery life and reasonably priced home service.
    I was able to customize my order to get only the features I wanted. I
    did have some issues with WiFi connectivity, which were solved through a
    software re-configuration.
    BTW I had previously reported that my machine shipped without one of the
    features I ordered. IBM service has agreed to correct the problem and is
    sending a service person to my home to do the install. for me this is a
    better solution than sending me a new machine.

    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, May 14, 2013
    #70
  11. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/13/2013 1:44 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <518fba73$0$10768$-secrets.com>, PeterN
    > says...
    >> Last November I was looking for a new lightweight computer.
    >> At the Apple store they advised me that their was no Apple product that
    >> would meet my needs.
    >> I wound up with my Lenovo.

    >
    > I was looking for an upgrade for my Lenovo X200 and found the X230.
    > Almost ok, if it were not for the fact that it only takes HDDs with a
    > 7mm height. These come in a maximum size of 500GB. Already now the 1TB
    > drive in my X200 is almost full. After I discovering that I was tempted
    > for a while to write Lenovo a letter full of insults. What a bunch of
    > clowns. They make a business notebook, but downgrade the max. HDD size.
    >
    > Oh, by the way, also all those ultrabooks are out of scope. You can't
    > change the battery and they do not take large HDDs.
    >
    > At the moment the only Lenovo unit which might be sort of suitable would
    > be the X200, which however Lenovo have discontinued.
    >


    I agree with you about the Ultrabook. i have a T430. This internal drive
    is large enough, since it is not my main machine. For travelling a carry
    two portable iT drives, with USB3. That configuration is fast enough to
    allow be to do rough editing on the road, and get a pretty good idea
    which images are not keepers.

    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, May 14, 2013
    #71
  12. RichA

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>, says...
    >
    > In article <>,
    > "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    >
    > > In article <>, says...
    > > >
    > > > In article <>,
    > > > notbob <> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > On 2013-05-12, android <> wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > "J. Clarke" <> wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > >> In article <>, says...
    > > > >
    > > > > >> > http://www.modbook.com/
    > > > >
    > > > > >> Which is not made by Apple.
    > > > >
    > > > > > Nooo... It''s a third party modification of an Apple product...
    > > > >
    > > > > ....and it's a damn sight far away from being affordable!
    > > > >
    > > > > <http://www.powerbookmedic.com/Modbook-Pro-23GHZ-Core-i5-120GB-SSD-4GB-RAM
    > > > > -p-2
    > > > > 5898.html>
    > > > >
    > > > > I'll jes buy a used intuos 3 fer $150 and run it on my linux desktop,
    > > > > thank you very much.
    > > > >
    > > > > nb
    > > >
    > > > I'm not selling it. It's there if you need/want it. Some folks pay
    > > > premium for tools that make them more productive.

    > >
    > > The argument presented was that Macs have lots of functionality that PCs
    > > lack. I pointed out an example where they don't. You pointed out that
    > > a third party kluges Macs to provide a keyboardless tablet, voiding the
    > > Apple warranty in the process. If you are willing to go with something
    > > that is hacked up by a third party and unsupported by Apple, then I can
    > > just put OSX on my Thinkpad and end up with a more satisfactory result.

    >
    > Well, OSX on a Thinkpad tablet wouldn't be very hardware optimized at
    > all, would it.


    Why not, it's the same processor and chipest that Apple uses.

    > Whatever... I'm sure some Hackintosh site would be happy
    > happy to post your howto...


    Don't need to post a howto. My machine is one of the ideal Hackintosh
    targets and the howto has been there for years.
     
    J. Clarke, May 14, 2013
    #72
  13. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Monday, May 13, 2013 10:04:44 PM UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > On Mon, 13 May 2013 05:29:33 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    >
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >> >> And what, pray tell, do you think determines price tiers? And who

    >
    > >> >> determines what they will offer?

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> >features do, not the logo on the box.

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> Bizarre. Who determines what the features will be if not the people

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> in the company whose logo it is? Features don't make any decisions.

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> They are the result of decisions.

    >
    > >

    >
    > >What features can be offered is determined by price.

    >
    >
    >
    > That's a chicken-or-the-egg question.


    And we all know the egg came first because it's breakfast.

    > What features can be offered is
    >
    > determined by the price, or, what price can be offered is determined
    >
    > by the features.


    But Apple know what features they can provide at a particular price point, as the costs come down the features increase and the price stays pretty much the same. Hard drive and memeory capacitys increase as their prices drop for both Mac and PC shifters.
     
    Whisky-dave, May 14, 2013
    #73
  14. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Mon, 13 May 2013 09:58:37 -0400, "Mayayana" <>
    wrote:
    : | Adobe is going to put its software in the Cloud and charge you a user
    : | fee to "rent" its use.
    :
    : I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but I just came
    : across it at TheRegister:
    :
    : "One colleague has indeed checked with Adobe and been told that if you allow
    : your subscription to drop then you'll not actually be able to open your old
    : files."
    :
    : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/13/adobe_cloud_pricing/
    :
    : As I understand it, the subscription version is also not
    : "in the cloud". It gets installed locally. Which makes sense.
    : Editing giant photos over the Internet would be a slow
    : process. All taken together, Adobe's move can be seen
    : as not only a step toward rental rather than sale, but also
    : a move to define any work done with the tool as a part of
    : their service, just as webmail companies claim co-copyright
    : on all content.
    :
    : The Register article doesn't say how Adobe would prevent
    : accessing one's files -- whether they just mean that one's
    : online storage would be locked down or whether they intend
    : to start using some sort of custom, proprietary file type that
    : only Photoshop can open.

    At least that's one question I'll never have to answer. The probability that
    I'll ever use any piece of Adobe photo editing software is now as near zero as
    real-world probabilities ever get.

    Sorry if I offend you, nospam, but that's how it is.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, May 16, 2013
    #74
  15. RichA

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Wed, 15 May 2013 20:30:19 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Mon, 13 May 2013 09:58:37 -0400, "Mayayana" <>
    >wrote:
    >: | Adobe is going to put its software in the Cloud and charge you a user
    >: | fee to "rent" its use.
    >:
    >: I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but I just came
    >: across it at TheRegister:
    >:
    >: "One colleague has indeed checked with Adobe and been told that if you allow
    >: your subscription to drop then you'll not actually be able to open your old
    >: files."
    >:
    >: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/13/adobe_cloud_pricing/
    >:
    >: As I understand it, the subscription version is also not
    >: "in the cloud". It gets installed locally. Which makes sense.
    >: Editing giant photos over the Internet would be a slow
    >: process. All taken together, Adobe's move can be seen
    >: as not only a step toward rental rather than sale, but also
    >: a move to define any work done with the tool as a part of
    >: their service, just as webmail companies claim co-copyright
    >: on all content.
    >:
    >: The Register article doesn't say how Adobe would prevent
    >: accessing one's files -- whether they just mean that one's
    >: online storage would be locked down or whether they intend
    >: to start using some sort of custom, proprietary file type that
    >: only Photoshop can open.
    >
    >At least that's one question I'll never have to answer. The probability that
    >I'll ever use any piece of Adobe photo editing software is now as near zero as
    >real-world probabilities ever get.
    >
    >Sorry if I offend you, nospam, but that's how it is.
    >


    I have no intention to subscribe, but I would still recommend Elements
    to anyone interested in a powerful but inexpensive photo editing
    program. For all but a few amateur photographers, it is as powerful a
    program as the CS versions. The features in CS, but not in Elements,
    are features that almost all amateurs can forego without loss.

    Unlike nospam, I can't infallibly predict the future offerings of
    Adobe, but I think that Adobe will continue to add features to
    Elements. In fact, I think we might be able to get some future
    version of Elements with a decent organizer module similar to
    Lightroom's "Library" without the "Develop" module.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, May 16, 2013
    #75
  16. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Robert Coe
    <> wrote:

    > At least that's one question I'll never have to answer. The probability that
    > I'll ever use any piece of Adobe photo editing software is now as near zero as
    > real-world probabilities ever get.
    >
    > Sorry if I offend you, nospam, but that's how it is.


    it doesn't offend me in the least.

    use whatever you want.
     
    nospam, May 16, 2013
    #76
  17. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > I have no intention to subscribe, but I would still recommend Elements
    > to anyone interested in a powerful but inexpensive photo editing
    > program. For all but a few amateur photographers, it is as powerful a
    > program as the CS versions. The features in CS, but not in Elements,
    > are features that almost all amateurs can forego without loss.


    that's adobe's strategy. creative cloud for pros and elements for the
    enthusiasts/hobbyist market.

    > Unlike nospam, I can't infallibly predict the future offerings of
    > Adobe,


    more twisting from you.

    i'm not predicting what they'll do nor am i infallible.

    i'm simply stating they aren't going to add ads to paid software.
    again, the idea is ludicrous.

    not surprisingly you twist this into something else.

    > but I think that Adobe will continue to add features to
    > Elements.


    of course they will add new features to elements, just as they will add
    new features to the rest of their apps.

    the only one that won't be getting new features is cs6. it is at the
    end of the road. the only changes will be bugfixes and security fixes.

    > In fact, I think we might be able to get some future
    > version of Elements with a decent organizer module similar to
    > Lightroom's "Library" without the "Develop" module.


    what for, when lightroom already exists?

    a more likely path is add a lot of elements functionality to lightroom,
    minimizing the need for a second app.
     
    nospam, May 16, 2013
    #77
  18. RichA

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Wed, 15 May 2013 23:40:41 -0400, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, Tony Cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> I have no intention to subscribe, but I would still recommend Elements
    >> to anyone interested in a powerful but inexpensive photo editing
    >> program. For all but a few amateur photographers, it is as powerful a
    >> program as the CS versions. The features in CS, but not in Elements,
    >> are features that almost all amateurs can forego without loss.

    >
    >that's adobe's strategy. creative cloud for pros and elements for the
    >enthusiasts/hobbyist market.
    >
    >> Unlike nospam, I can't infallibly predict the future offerings of
    >> Adobe,

    >
    >more twisting from you.
    >
    >i'm not predicting what they'll do nor am i infallible.


    N.S.,S.

    >
    >i'm simply stating they aren't going to add ads to paid software.
    >again, the idea is ludicrous.


    You don't predict, but you state that they will not - in the future -
    add ads.
    >
    >not surprisingly you twist this into something else.


    You would make more sense if I *would* twist your words. It's
    repeating what you say, as you said it, that makes you look foolish.

    >
    >> but I think that Adobe will continue to add features to
    >> Elements.

    >
    >of course they will add new features to elements, just as they will add
    >new features to the rest of their apps.
    >
    >the only one that won't be getting new features is cs6. it is at the
    >end of the road. the only changes will be bugfixes and security fixes.
    >
    >> In fact, I think we might be able to get some future
    >> version of Elements with a decent organizer module similar to
    >> Lightroom's "Library" without the "Develop" module.

    >
    >what for, when lightroom already exists?


    Because there are people who like the method of editing offered by
    Elements who would like a better image cataloging/keywording system
    than Organizer provides without using, and buying, two separate
    programs.

    >a more likely path is add a lot of elements functionality to lightroom,
    >minimizing the need for a second app.


    That would, essentially, accomplish the same thing: combining the
    Elements style of editing with the Lightroom cataloging/keywording
    system. Whether they put layers and layer masking, for example, in
    Lightroom or Library in Elements, it's same thing.

    But, who am I to predict? Obviously, you should be the one to tell us
    what Adobe will and will not do.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, May 16, 2013
    #78
  19. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >i'm simply stating they aren't going to add ads to paid software.
    > >again, the idea is ludicrous.

    >
    > You don't predict, but you state that they will not - in the future -
    > add ads.


    they're not going to put ads in paid software. the idea is ludicrous.
    the backlash would be huge. this is common sense, which you seem to
    lack.

    > >not surprisingly you twist this into something else.

    >
    > You would make more sense if I *would* twist your words. It's
    > repeating what you say, as you said it, that makes you look foolish.


    you aren't repeating what i say. you are repeating what you wish i said
    so you can argue. you even come up with some crazy shit like talking to
    dead people, which makes *you* look foolish.

    > >> In fact, I think we might be able to get some future
    > >> version of Elements with a decent organizer module similar to
    > >> Lightroom's "Library" without the "Develop" module.

    > >
    > >what for, when lightroom already exists?

    >
    > Because there are people who like the method of editing offered by
    > Elements who would like a better image cataloging/keywording system
    > than Organizer provides without using, and buying, two separate
    > programs.
    >
    > >a more likely path is add a lot of elements functionality to lightroom,
    > >minimizing the need for a second app.

    >
    > That would, essentially, accomplish the same thing: combining the
    > Elements style of editing with the Lightroom cataloging/keywording
    > system. Whether they put layers and layer masking, for example, in
    > Lightroom or Library in Elements, it's same thing.
    >
    > But, who am I to predict? Obviously, you should be the one to tell us
    > what Adobe will and will not do.


    there you go twisting things again, which you said you don't do. that
    means you lied.
     
    nospam, May 16, 2013
    #79
  20. RichA

    Sandman Guest

    In article <160520130145457541%>,
    nospam <> wrote:

    > > >i'm simply stating they aren't going to add ads to paid software.
    > > >again, the idea is ludicrous.

    > >
    > > You don't predict, but you state that they will not - in the future -
    > > add ads.

    >
    > they're not going to put ads in paid software.


    Prediction one.

    > the idea is ludicrous.


    Subjective opinion.

    > the backlash would be huge.


    Prediction two.

    > this is common sense, which you seem to lack.


    Personal attack.

    > > But, who am I to predict? Obviously, you should be the one to tell us
    > > what Adobe will and will not do.

    >
    > there you go twisting things again, which you said you don't do. that
    > means you lied.


    Only, you *are* predicting what they are doing - regardless of whether
    you think the options to your predictions are "ludicrous" or not.
    Explicitly stating what will happen is by definition a prediction. Even
    if that prediction is something your personally feel is obvious and
    logical.



    --
    Sandman[.net]
     
    Sandman, May 16, 2013
    #80
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Zogby
    Replies:
    188
    Views:
    3,076
    Rowdy Yates
    Aug 15, 2004
  2. One-Shot Scot

    Rental DVDs: "Rental Only - Not For Resale."

    One-Shot Scot, Sep 11, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,573
    One-Shot Scot
    Sep 11, 2004
  3. Mikhail
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    395
    Stephen
    Jul 28, 2009
  4. RichA
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    195
    Sandman
    Sep 2, 2013
  5. RichA

    Apple's foray into the "service/rental economy"

    RichA, Jun 3, 2014, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    59
    Views:
    827
    Whisky-dave
    Jun 17, 2014
Loading...

Share This Page