Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Paul Ciszek, Jun 5, 2013.

  1. Paul Ciszek

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <2013061310430875249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
    savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com says...
    >
    > On 2013-06-13 10:04:11 -0700, "J. Clarke" <> said:
    >
    > > In article <>, tonycooper214
    > > @gmail.com says...

    >
    > >> That Adobe is the "standard" indicates the demand factor of the
    > >> market. The market demands Adobe because Adobe offers the features
    > >> that the market wants. Competitors are not barred in any way from
    > >> developing similar features.

    > >
    > > Well, if one of the features desired is "open a .psd file" then they are
    > > barred. Microsoft at least saw the writing on the wall with that one
    > > and opened up their document formats.

    >
    > Strange. PSD files open just fine in Apple's "Preview" & "Aperture",
    > just as they open in Lemke's "GraphicConvertor", "Acorn", or
    > "Pixelmator".


    And will continue to do so until Adobe modifies the format so that they
    don't work anymore, or chooses to sue them into submission.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 14, 2013
    #61
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Ciszek

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>, tonycooper214
    @gmail.com says...
    >
    > On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:04:11 -0400, "J. Clarke"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >In article <>, tonycooper214
    > >@gmail.com says...
    > >>
    > >> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 11:30:29 -0400, "Mayayana"
    > >> <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >| > Personally I think we're long overdue for regulation to
    > >> >| >rein in these monopolies and recognize that software has
    > >> >| >become a utility product.
    > >> >|
    > >> >| Adobe is no monopoly. To be a monopoly, a company has to be the sole
    > >> >| supplier of a product, and the product has to be one in which there is
    > >> >| a lack of viable substitute products.
    > >> >|
    > >> >
    > >> > That's technically true, but it works out like a
    > >> >monopoly. Adobe sets their prices with no serious
    > >> >competition because they're industry standard.
    > >>
    > >> You're confusing two economic conditions: monopoly and supply/demand.
    > >> A company that can set prices that are significantly higher than the
    > >> competition can do so because of the merits of the products and the
    > >> demand for the product.
    > >>
    > >> >As
    > >> >a result their prices are multiple times higher than
    > >> >any competitor. The software industry has long set
    > >> >prices based on what the product is worth to
    > >> >business rather than based on cost to produce
    > >> >+ profit. Since PS is the standard, Adobe can charge
    > >> >whatever they like.
    > >>
    > >> That Adobe is the "standard" indicates the demand factor of the
    > >> market. The market demands Adobe because Adobe offers the features
    > >> that the market wants. Competitors are not barred in any way from
    > >> developing similar features.

    > >
    > >Well, if one of the features desired is "open a .psd file" then they are
    > >barred. Microsoft at least saw the writing on the wall with that one
    > >and opened up their document formats.

    >
    > I'm not aware of any prohibition that disallows any software developer
    > from designing a program that opens .psd files. As I understand it,
    > some extant programs other than Adobe's do just that. GIMP, for
    > example.


    For a while they were requiring that one sign one's life away to get the
    documentation--apparently that policy has changed because I see it up on
    their site with no protection now.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 14, 2013
    #62
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

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

    > > >> That Adobe is the "standard" indicates the demand factor of the
    > > >> market. The market demands Adobe because Adobe offers the features
    > > >> that the market wants. Competitors are not barred in any way from
    > > >> developing similar features.
    > > >
    > > >Well, if one of the features desired is "open a .psd file" then they are
    > > >barred. Microsoft at least saw the writing on the wall with that one
    > > >and opened up their document formats.

    > >
    > > I'm not aware of any prohibition that disallows any software developer
    > > from designing a program that opens .psd files. As I understand it,
    > > some extant programs other than Adobe's do just that. GIMP, for
    > > example.

    >
    > For a while they were requiring that one sign one's life away to get the
    > documentation--apparently that policy has changed because I see it up on
    > their site with no protection now.


    not even remotely close to true. all they wanted back then was an adobe
    id, which takes less than a minute to sign up. no big deal.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #63
  4. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

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

    > > >> That Adobe is the "standard" indicates the demand factor of the
    > > >> market. The market demands Adobe because Adobe offers the features
    > > >> that the market wants. Competitors are not barred in any way from
    > > >> developing similar features.
    > > >
    > > > Well, if one of the features desired is "open a .psd file" then they are
    > > > barred. Microsoft at least saw the writing on the wall with that one
    > > > and opened up their document formats.

    > >
    > > Strange. PSD files open just fine in Apple's "Preview" & "Aperture",
    > > just as they open in Lemke's "GraphicConvertor", "Acorn", or
    > > "Pixelmator".

    >
    > And will continue to do so until Adobe modifies the format so that they
    > don't work anymore, or chooses to sue them into submission.


    except the format is documented and has been for a long time (at least
    ten years, likely much longer) and they've never sued anyone for using
    it. in fact, they're encouraging people to write apps that support psd.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #64
  5. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>,
    Whisky-dave <> wrote:

    > But If anyone supcribes to whatever CS verions they'll have, if a person
    > decides to stick with that version and NOT upgrade to the lastest OS and
    > adopbe decide to support only current OS's does that mean they'll remove my
    > old CS from my computer because they don;t want to support it but will
    > continue to charge me a subscription to adobe software what I can't use.


    nothing is removed from your computer, however, you will need to pay to
    keep it active.

    older software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #65
  6. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest


    > I'd hope that if you had a disk crash that you could just download the
    > sotware again if you're paying a sub.


    download it again or restore from a backup.

    > It's not too unlike the music industry was they'll sell you a CD but you only
    > have a license to the music, so if the CD gets destroyed you have to buy a
    > new one, rather than download a free copy of the music you've already paid
    > for.


    amazon and itunes let you re-download music you've already bought.
    their library is in effect, your cloud storage.

    amazon even lets you download a digital copy of cds you bought from
    them.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #66
  7. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>,
    Whisky-dave <> wrote:

    > > it requires internet access about once a month to validate that you are
    > > actually paying for it.

    >
    > Why can;t they use the the direct debit or whatever system you use to pay to
    > check you've paid ?


    because a given installation has to validate itself to confirm that
    it's not pirated.

    > > other than that, no internet access is
    > > required.

    >
    > it's just that I know someone on a boat who has difficulty getting internt
    > access, he searhces out lone places to work, he likes the peace and quite and
    > will typically dispear for 1-3 months on projects.


    that's an edge case.

    the vast majority of users, especially adobe's target market (graphics
    professionals) have full time internet access.

    > I don;t think you should need interntet acdcess to prove you are paying what
    > adobe are doing is checking in case someone installs it and doesnl;t pay, so
    > in effect making the life of genuine uses more difficult, not that they
    > havent; doen this before.....have they ?


    how else would they confirm it?

    > See the license server situation. I guess some geniune users still want to be
    > able to use CS2 despite adobe only wanting to support the laters CS's.


    they can keep using cs2 as long as they want and as long as they have a
    system on which it runs.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #67
  8. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <kpcm2d$qa2$>, Mayayana
    <> wrote:

    > |> The whole idea of cloud/subscription developed because
    > |> software was getting cheaper and better.
    >
    > | I thought it was because Adobe were losign millions to downloaders.
    >
    > That might be part of it, but the market as a whole was
    > making money hand over fist for years. Adobe and others
    > did their best to catch cheaters, but they still had a virtually
    > guaranteed sell every time they could manage to crank out
    > a new version. And they had little competition.


    there's plenty of competition.

    however, none of it as as good as what adobe offers, which is why
    photoshop is one of the most pirated apps, if not the most pirated app.

    > Catching
    > cheaters was just gravy. And most businesses wouldn't
    > take a chance with cheating.


    almost no business is going to take a chance pirating software.

    > So Adobe and others had
    > a dependable "cash cow". How absurd it is that Bill Gates
    > has become the richest man in the world just selling utility
    > software. The profit margins for these companies have been
    > crazy. But those days are fading.


    he became rich by predatory business tactics.

    > Theft is the claimed reason for product activation, rental,
    > etc. Security is another big excuse. As is convenience.
    > There's some truth in all of that.


    that's why there is product activation.

    > But I think the overall
    > picture is bigger than that. These companies are amoral.
    > They go where the money is.


    that's why they're in business, to make money.

    > Bill Gates once famously said
    > that if the Chinese are going to steal their software then
    > he wanted them to at least steal MS software. Then MS
    > could figure out later how to get paid.


    there's some truth to that.

    > Subscriptions on
    > restricted devices that require an online connection
    > essentially convert software to a broadcast service,
    > regardless of how it's working under the surface. They
    > convert software to a form that could keep the cash cow
    > alive.


    not everything is subscription based.

    furthermore, adobe creative cloud runs on unrestricted systems.

    > (As with the youtube example and the Web as a whole: Most
    > people have no idea that their browser is actually downloading
    > files and assembling a page and/or playing a video from them.
    > People already think of the Web as an interactive broadcast
    > medium.)


    so what? most people don't know how to change the oil in their car
    either, or if they do, they aren't interested.

    why should someone have to poke through cache files when they can just
    run an app to download a youtube video in whatever resolution they
    want? there are browser plugins to make it even easier.

    not to mention that most youtube videos aren't worth keeping anyway.

    > Personally I think we're long overdue for regulation to
    > rein in these monopolies and recognize that software has
    > become a utility product. Just as Bell had to be reined in
    > when phones became ubiquitous. (In the 70s in the US
    > people were forced to rent phones from Bell. If one
    > managed to install a second phone secretly then Bell would
    > charge for it. They could tell it was there by the voltage
    > draw used by the bell in the ringer.)


    there is no monopoly (other than maybe microsoft, but that's no longer
    the case).

    adobe is just one out of many software companies, and happens to be
    very successful because their products are very good.

    if you think adobe is the only option, then go write your own
    'photoshop killer'.

    > > ...Windows itself into an online service and shopping. The bad
    > > news for MS is that no one is buying the Metro tile apps. But
    > > that's where they believe the future lies -- not in selling software
    > > but rather in using software to be a commerce middleman.

    >
    > | it's a risky stratergy, Apple seem to have a beter one, let
    > | others write the software then appove it and make ~30%
    > | off the sales, just for listing it in the app store.
    >
    > Yes, that's what MS is doing. I didn't mean to imply that
    > they were capable of original thinking. :) Microsoft is trying
    > to get people to write Metro apps, with MS tools, to be sold
    > through the MS online store, where MS will take a cut similar
    > to what Apple takes. MS is copying Apple. The main difference
    > is simply that they don't have a market and therefore can't
    > attract developers to risk their time.


    they're playing catch-up to apple and google, and they're desperate.

    microsoft sees the industry moving forward, without them.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #68
  9. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <kpco9t$8b4$>, Mayayana
    <> wrote:

    > | > Personally I think we're long overdue for regulation to
    > | >rein in these monopolies and recognize that software has
    > | >become a utility product.
    > |
    > | Adobe is no monopoly. To be a monopoly, a company has to be the sole
    > | supplier of a product, and the product has to be one in which there is
    > | a lack of viable substitute products.
    > |
    >
    > That's technically true, but it works out like a
    > monopoly. Adobe sets their prices with no serious
    > competition because they're industry standard. As
    > a result their prices are multiple times higher than
    > any competitor. The software industry has long set
    > prices based on what the product is worth to
    > business rather than based on cost to produce
    > + profit. Since PS is the standard, Adobe can charge
    > whatever they like.


    they price it for what the market will bear, same as any other product.

    for pros who actually need what creative suite offers, it's cheap. it
    pays for itself in short order.

    for non-pros, adobe offers elements, which easily fits into their
    budget.

    software is not priced based on cost to produce, or we'd all be paying
    a few bucks for the cd/dvd (when it shipped that way) or the bandwidth
    to download.

    > Microsoft is not a monopoly either.


    the courts said otherwise. not only was microsoft found to have a
    monopoly, but they abused it, which got them into trouble.

    > There's
    > Apple, Linux, BSD, etc. But MS still has over 90%
    > of the market, and they're extorting payments
    > from Linux-using companies based on threats to sue
    > over *unspecified* patents.


    they're trying to license systems that *can* run windows (including
    macs) even when they don't have windows on them at all, which is a bit
    of a stretch. i don't think they've succeeded with that strategy.

    and also keep in mind that the 90% number ignores mobile.

    > Samsung and Apple are at each other's throats with
    > patent lawsuits. The industry is operating by factors
    > like lawsuits, patent and copyright threats, incompatibility
    > by design, etc. That was OK when it was all new, but
    > now computers and common software are commodities.
    > Personally I don't think these companies have any right
    > to claim design patents, nor to make excessive profits.


    there are a lot of lawsuits but there's also a lot of copying each
    other.

    companies need to innovate on their own, not steal from each other.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #69
  10. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <kpcqp4$mr2$>, Mayayana
    <> wrote:

    > My only experience with Adobe was through my
    > brother. He had received PS4 with a scanner, back in
    > the old days when it was little more than shareware.


    photoshop was *never* anything close to shareware.

    you didn't get photoshop 4 either. you got either photoshop le or
    photoshop elements, depending on how far back this was.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #70
  11. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <kpd306$7qd$>, Mayayana
    <> wrote:

    > |> The main difference
    > | > is simply that they don't have a market and therefore can't
    > | > attract developers to risk their time.
    > |
    > | However there's a lot of Windows out there and a lot of kids out there
    > | and the Microsoft entry-level tools are free and quite good.
    >
    > The Metro apps are different. They can be
    > written with javascript, C++, or .Net, but
    > however it's done they're not Windows software,
    > in the sense that they can't run in Windows
    > itself -- only in the Metro tile UI of Windows,
    > on Windows RT (which is Windows in name only),
    > and on Windows phones. (As I understand it those
    > various tile UIs don't take exactly the same
    > software, but it's mainly port-able between
    > the platforms.) So anyone who wants to write
    > tile apps will need to learn a new system and
    > buy tile UI products to test on. Meanwhile, MS
    > needs to have all popular apps ported if they
    > want to sell phones. It's not enough getting
    > kids to write lots of silly diversion apps.


    porting windows apps to phones & tablets without rethinking them is not
    going to make them sell. that's what microsoft tried ten years ago and
    it failed then and will fail again now.

    tablets are a new paradigm and require new software with a new
    interface, which means there's a new api.

    microsoft's problem is having one operating system work on both, which
    is an interesting idea in theory but it's not working out that well.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #71
  12. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> That Adobe is the "standard" indicates the demand factor of the
    > >> market. The market demands Adobe because Adobe offers the features
    > >> that the market wants. Competitors are not barred in any way from
    > >> developing similar features.

    > >
    > >Well, if one of the features desired is "open a .psd file" then they are
    > >barred. Microsoft at least saw the writing on the wall with that one
    > >and opened up their document formats.

    >
    > I'm not aware of any prohibition that disallows any software developer
    > from designing a program that opens .psd files. As I understand it,
    > some extant programs other than Adobe's do just that. GIMP, for
    > example.


    gimp tries. it works for older psd files, but like everything about the
    gimp, it's behind the times and doesn't support recent psd files.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #72
  13. Paul Ciszek

    peternew Guest

    In article <>,
    Whisky-dave <> wrote:

    > But If anyone supcribes to whatever CS verions they'll have, if a person
    > decides to stick with that version and NOT upgrade to the lastest OS and
    > adopbe decide to support only current OS's does that mean they'll remove my
    > old CS from my computer because they don;t want to support it but will
    > continue to charge me a subscription to adobe software what I can't use.


    nothing is removed from your computer, however, you will need to pay to
    keep it active.

    older software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way.

    Until Adobe decides to discontinue support.
     
    peternew, Jun 14, 2013
    #73
  14. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <51bb9a42$0$8368$-secrets.com>, peternew
    <> wrote:

    > > But If anyone supcribes to whatever CS verions they'll have, if a person
    > > decides to stick with that version and NOT upgrade to the lastest OS and
    > > adopbe decide to support only current OS's does that mean they'll remove my
    > > old CS from my computer because they don;t want to support it but will
    > > continue to charge me a subscription to adobe software what I can't use.

    >
    > nothing is removed from your computer, however, you will need to pay to
    > keep it active.
    >
    > older software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way.


    ..........
    > Until Adobe decides to discontinue support.


    wrong.

    support has absolutely nothing to do with it. the software is *never*
    removed from a computer unless the user explicitly deletes it.

    subscription based software stops working until the subscription is
    renewed. that's all.
     
    nospam, Jun 14, 2013
    #74
  15. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 18:55:46 -0400, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <51bb9a42$0$8368$-secrets.com>, peternew
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> > But If anyone supcribes to whatever CS verions they'll have, if a person
    >> > decides to stick with that version and NOT upgrade to the lastest OS and
    >> > adopbe decide to support only current OS's does that mean they'll remove my
    >> > old CS from my computer because they don;t want to support it but will
    >> > continue to charge me a subscription to adobe software what I can't use.

    >>
    >> nothing is removed from your computer, however, you will need to pay to
    >> keep it active.
    >>
    >> older software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way.

    >
    >.........
    >> Until Adobe decides to discontinue support.

    >
    >wrong.


    What is "wrong" about Peter's statement?

    Do you just automatically write "wrong" when replying to anything?

    >support has absolutely nothing to do with it. the software is *never*
    >removed from a computer unless the user explicitly deletes it.


    There's no mention of removing software by Peter.

    I don't know what "support" Peter is thinking of unless it's updates.
    Adobe may very well discontinue update support of older versions of
    CS. That's common in the industry.

    I have programs on my computer that the source has made inactive. They
    are 30 day trial versions that I never purchased and have never
    bothered to delete.

    >subscription based software stops working until the subscription is
    >renewed. that's all.


    Gee, it's *so* good to have an expert on tap.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
    #75
  16. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> > But If anyone supcribes to whatever CS verions they'll have, if a person
    > >> > decides to stick with that version and NOT upgrade to the lastest OS and
    > >> > adopbe decide to support only current OS's does that mean they'll remove
    > >> > my old CS from my computer because they don;t want to support it but will
    > >> > continue to charge me a subscription to adobe software what I can't use.
    > >>
    > >> nothing is removed from your computer, however, you will need to pay to
    > >> keep it active.
    > >>
    > >> older software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way.

    > >
    > >.........
    > >> Until Adobe decides to discontinue support.

    > >
    > >wrong.

    >
    > What is "wrong" about Peter's statement?


    the discussion was about adobe removing software. i said that won't
    happen, then peter said it will happen when adobe discontinues support.


    that's completely wrong.

    subscription based software will stop working when the user stops
    paying. no surprise there. however, it won't be deleted, nor will
    anything else on the computer.

    where do people come up with these crazy ideas anyway?

    > Do you just automatically write "wrong" when replying to anything?


    only when it's wrong.

    > >support has absolutely nothing to do with it. the software is *never*
    > >removed from a computer unless the user explicitly deletes it.

    >
    > There's no mention of removing software by Peter.


    there was by whisky dave, which began the sub-thread.

    try to keep up.

    > I don't know what "support" Peter is thinking of unless it's updates.


    doesn't matter. adobe isn't going to remove software. end of story.

    > Adobe may very well discontinue update support of older versions of
    > CS. That's common in the industry.


    they might, except that's not what this is about.

    > I have programs on my computer that the source has made inactive. They
    > are 30 day trial versions that I never purchased and have never
    > bothered to delete.


    there is no such thing as a trial version if you have the source code.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
    #76
  17. Paul Ciszek

    peternew Guest

    On 6/14/2013 7:57 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <>, Tony Cooper
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>>>> But If anyone supcribes to whatever CS verions they'll have, if a person
    >>>>> decides to stick with that version and NOT upgrade to the lastest OS and
    >>>>> adopbe decide to support only current OS's does that mean they'll remove
    >>>>> my old CS from my computer because they don;t want to support it but will
    >>>>> continue to charge me a subscription to adobe software what I can't use.
    >>>>
    >>>> nothing is removed from your computer, however, you will need to pay to
    >>>> keep it active.
    >>>>
    >>>> older software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way.
    >>>
    >>> .........
    >>>> Until Adobe decides to discontinue support.
    >>>
    >>> wrong.

    >>
    >> What is "wrong" about Peter's statement?

    >
    > the discussion was about adobe removing software. i said that won't
    > happen, then peter said it will happen when adobe discontinues support.
    >
    >
    > that's completely wrong.
    >
    > subscription based software will stop working when the user stops
    > paying. no surprise there. however, it won't be deleted, nor will
    > anything else on the computer.
    >
    > where do people come up with these crazy ideas anyway?
    >
    >> Do you just automatically write "wrong" when replying to anything?

    >
    > only when it's wrong.
    >
    >>> support has absolutely nothing to do with it. the software is *never*
    >>> removed from a computer unless the user explicitly deletes it.

    >>
    >> There's no mention of removing software by Peter.

    >
    > there was by whisky dave, which began the sub-thread.
    >
    > try to keep up.
    >
    >> I don't know what "support" Peter is thinking of unless it's updates.

    >
    > doesn't matter. adobe isn't going to remove software. end of story.
    >
    >> Adobe may very well discontinue update support of older versions of
    >> CS. That's common in the industry.

    >
    > they might, except that's not what this is about.
    >
    >> I have programs on my computer that the source has made inactive. They
    >> are 30 day trial versions that I never purchased and have never
    >> bothered to delete.

    >
    > there is no such thing as a trial version if you have the source code.
    >


    You have a knee jerk reaction. Your statement, in plain English " older
    software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way." That is one
    complete sentence. had you meant what you now say you meant, you wold
    have me a complete statement like: 'older software (cs6 and earlier)
    will not be deactivated, or removed from your computer.' If that was
    what you meant, you certainly did not say it.

    If a publisher discontinues support, the usability of that software will
    be very much affected.


    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 15, 2013
    #77
  18. Paul Ciszek

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>, tonycooper214
    @gmail.com says...
    >
    > On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 18:55:46 -0400, nospam <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >In article <51bb9a42$0$8368$-secrets.com>, peternew
    > ><> wrote:
    > >
    > >> > But If anyone supcribes to whatever CS verions they'll have, if a person
    > >> > decides to stick with that version and NOT upgrade to the lastest OS and
    > >> > adopbe decide to support only current OS's does that mean they'll remove my
    > >> > old CS from my computer because they don;t want to support it but will
    > >> > continue to charge me a subscription to adobe software what I can't use.
    > >>
    > >> nothing is removed from your computer, however, you will need to pay to
    > >> keep it active.
    > >>
    > >> older software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way.

    > >
    > >.........
    > >> Until Adobe decides to discontinue support.

    > >
    > >wrong.

    >
    > What is "wrong" about Peter's statement?
    >
    > Do you just automatically write "wrong" when replying to anything?


    No, he's saying that the statment that Adobe discontinuing support will
    not affect older software in any way. Novell has long since
    discontinued support on Netware 2.0. It still runs fine if you have
    hardware old enough that it is supported by the included drivers. IBM
    long ago dropped support on OS/2. My PS/2 Model 77 still runs fine.
    Microsoft long since dropped support on Windows 2000. My old Thinkpad
    still boots up any time I want to play with it.

    Peter's statement is wrong because discontinuing support does not have
    any effect on the installed base of software other that if you have a
    problem with it the manufacturer isn't going to help you.

    > >support has absolutely nothing to do with it. the software is *never*
    > >removed from a computer unless the user explicitly deletes it.

    >
    > There's no mention of removing software by Peter.
    >
    > I don't know what "support" Peter is thinking of unless it's updates.
    > Adobe may very well discontinue update support of older versions of
    > CS. That's common in the industry.


    Which does not affect the installed software in any way.

    > I have programs on my computer that the source has made inactive. They
    > are 30 day trial versions that I never purchased and have never
    > bothered to delete.


    So? The installed base of CS is not "30 day trial versions.

    > >subscription based software stops working until the subscription is
    > >renewed. that's all.

    >
    > Gee, it's *so* good to have an expert on tap.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 15, 2013
    #78
  19. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <51bbba5c$0$8313$-secrets.com>, peternew
    <> wrote:

    > You have a knee jerk reaction. Your statement, in plain English " older
    > software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way." That is one
    > complete sentence. had you meant what you now say you meant, you wold
    > have me a complete statement like: 'older software (cs6 and earlier)
    > will not be deactivated, or removed from your computer.' If that was
    > what you meant, you certainly did not say it.


    the discussion was about software removal by someone other than the
    user.

    regardless, older software is unaffected by anything adobe or anyone
    else could do, removal or otherwise. it's fully paid for and continues
    to work as it always has.

    > If a publisher discontinues support, the usability of that software will
    > be very much affected.


    wrong again. it continues to work exactly the same as it always has.

    if they stop supporting it, there won't be any tech support, bug fixes
    or feature updates and compatibility with future hardware or operating
    systems. that's all. it won't suddenly stop working when adobe decides
    to stop supporting it.

    nothing stops anyone from keeping an older computer around to run older
    software.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
    #79
  20. Paul Ciszek

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <51bbba5c$0$8313$-secrets.com>,
    says...
    >
    > On 6/14/2013 7:57 PM, nospam wrote:
    > > In article <>, Tony Cooper
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >>>>> But If anyone supcribes to whatever CS verions they'll have, if a person
    > >>>>> decides to stick with that version and NOT upgrade to the lastest OS and
    > >>>>> adopbe decide to support only current OS's does that mean they'll remove
    > >>>>> my old CS from my computer because they don;t want to support it but will
    > >>>>> continue to charge me a subscription to adobe software what I can't use.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> nothing is removed from your computer, however, you will need to pay to
    > >>>> keep it active.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> older software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way.
    > >>>
    > >>> .........
    > >>>> Until Adobe decides to discontinue support.
    > >>>
    > >>> wrong.
    > >>
    > >> What is "wrong" about Peter's statement?

    > >
    > > the discussion was about adobe removing software. i said that won't
    > > happen, then peter said it will happen when adobe discontinues support.
    > >
    > >
    > > that's completely wrong.
    > >
    > > subscription based software will stop working when the user stops
    > > paying. no surprise there. however, it won't be deleted, nor will
    > > anything else on the computer.
    > >
    > > where do people come up with these crazy ideas anyway?
    > >
    > >> Do you just automatically write "wrong" when replying to anything?

    > >
    > > only when it's wrong.
    > >
    > >>> support has absolutely nothing to do with it. the software is *never*
    > >>> removed from a computer unless the user explicitly deletes it.
    > >>
    > >> There's no mention of removing software by Peter.

    > >
    > > there was by whisky dave, which began the sub-thread.
    > >
    > > try to keep up.
    > >
    > >> I don't know what "support" Peter is thinking of unless it's updates.

    > >
    > > doesn't matter. adobe isn't going to remove software. end of story.
    > >
    > >> Adobe may very well discontinue update support of older versions of
    > >> CS. That's common in the industry.

    > >
    > > they might, except that's not what this is about.
    > >
    > >> I have programs on my computer that the source has made inactive. They
    > >> are 30 day trial versions that I never purchased and have never
    > >> bothered to delete.

    > >
    > > there is no such thing as a trial version if you have the source code.
    > >

    >
    > You have a knee jerk reaction. Your statement, in plain English " older
    > software (cs6 and earlier) is not affected in any way." That is one
    > complete sentence. had you meant what you now say you meant, you wold
    > have me a complete statement like: 'older software (cs6 and earlier)
    > will not be deactivated, or removed from your computer.' If that was
    > what you meant, you certainly did not say it.
    >
    > If a publisher discontinues support, the usability of that software will
    > be very much affected.


    Only to those who need support from the manufacturer. Personally the
    one time I've talked to a software publisher about support some manager
    at my end forced me to do it and the phone call, which went for 12
    hours, simply got in the way of my working the problem, which I finally
    resolved independently of what the "support" weenie on the other end was
    telling me. If I hadn't had that "support" forced on me I would have
    had the job done in half the time.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 15, 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. nospam

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    nospam, Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    179
    nospam
    Jun 4, 2013
  2. nospam

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    nospam, Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    209
    luxitman
    Jul 3, 2013
  3. philo 

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    philo , Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    262
    nospam
    Jun 5, 2013
  4. nospam

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    nospam, Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    275
    PeterN
    Jun 7, 2013
  5. PeterN

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    PeterN, Jun 5, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    188
    PeterN
    Jun 5, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page