Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

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

  1. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:07:27 -0400, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, Tony Cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> >> 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.
    >> >

    >> I agree with you about the value of the software's "support" team. If
    >> I have a problem, I'll research the problem on the web and try to find
    >> the answer from some user group. The only time I've gone direct to
    >> the source was calling Norton to find out how to completely eradicate
    >> Norton from my system. That required going up several levels of
    >> "support".

    >
    >except for that other time you went direct to the vendor, corel.


    You are correct. I did contact Corel by email. I called Norton.

    >there no doubt were other times you aren't disclosing either.


    No, I really haven't had reason to call a vendor. Any minor problems
    have been solved by reading forums and such.

    >here's what you said in the other post:
    >> I went through this with Corel and WordPerfect. I had a perfectly
    >> usable version that did everything I wanted it to do...until something
    >> went wrong. Corel declined support unless I upgraded to a newer
    >> version with features that I don't need or want. The software was on
    >> my computer, but unusable. That, I think, qualifies as "affects".

    >
    >and by the way, i needed to remove norton on a machine a couple of
    >years ago and found the norton uninstall utility with a google search.
    >no need to call them at all.


    Well aren't you the clever boy! I'll try to arrange a gold star for
    you.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> I agree with you about the value of the software's "support" team. If
    > >> I have a problem, I'll research the problem on the web and try to find
    > >> the answer from some user group. The only time I've gone direct to
    > >> the source was calling Norton to find out how to completely eradicate
    > >> Norton from my system. That required going up several levels of
    > >> "support".

    > >
    > >except for that other time you went direct to the vendor, corel.

    >
    > You are correct. I did contact Corel by email. I called Norton.


    doesn't matter how you contacted them. you contacted support twice.

    > >there no doubt were other times you aren't disclosing either.

    >
    > No, I really haven't had reason to call a vendor. Any minor problems
    > have been solved by reading forums and such.


    which means if a vendor discontinues support, it won't matter.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:09:27 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2013-06-14 17:50:35 -0700, peternew <> said:
    >
    >>
    >> If a publisher discontinues support, the usability of that software
    >> will be very much affected.

    >
    >Not really. Not everybody chases the latest, and greatest, or even
    >needs that support.


    That really isn't the point, Duck. If some users are affected, then
    the usability is affected. If there is some affect, then there's
    affect.

    Most owners of Ford Pintos in 1978 didn't have any problems with
    exploding gas tanks. The Ulrich family did, and that affected the
    usability of the model.

    When we say the usability is affected, it's a given that some will not
    be concerned, but that some will.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
  4. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 23:59:38 -0400, "J. Clarke"
    <> wrote:

    >In article <>, tonycooper214
    >@gmail.com says...
    >>
    >> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:57:20 -0400, 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.

    >>
    >> Nothing was "wrong" in what Peter said, and that's what you replied
    >> to.
    >>
    >> >> >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.

    >>
    >> Why, then, write "wrong" in reply to Peter's post in which he said
    >> *nothing* about software removal? Talk about not keeping up.
    >>
    >> You whine and carry on when you feel something you said was "twisted",
    >> but you twist other people's comments. Just admit that you made an
    >> error and replied to the wrong post.
    >> >
    >> >> I don't know what "support" Peter is thinking of unless it's updates.
    >> >
    >> >doesn't matter. adobe isn't going to remove software.

    >>
    >> Well, they can't. It's not that they aren't going to, it's that they
    >> can't. They might if they could. What they can do is deactivate it.

    >
    >If they deactivate licenses software absent a clear TOS violation then
    >they leave themselves open for a whopping huge lawsuit.


    I'm sure failure to pay the subscription amount is a violation of
    Adobe's TOS.

    >> >> 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.

    >>
    >> It is if I bring it up. I did.
    >>
    >> >> 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.

    >>
    >> I would say the full program is a trial version if the version can be
    >> crippled in 30 days if I don't buy it and enter a key or whatever the
    >> source requires me to do to keep in active.

    >
    >If you have the source code then you simply remove the provision that
    >checks for a key.
    >

    Uhhh...you may. I consider that theft of services.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
  5. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> I would say the full program is a trial version if the version can be
    > >> crippled in 30 days if I don't buy it and enter a key or whatever the
    > >> source requires me to do to keep in active.

    > >
    > >If you have the source code then you simply remove the provision that
    > >checks for a key.
    > >

    > Uhhh...you may. I consider that theft of services.


    then you'd be wrong.

    if you have the source code you can modify it. that's the whole point.

    besides, nobody would put in a timeout and then release the source code
    anyway.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
  6. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 00:04:29 -0400, "J. Clarke"
    <> wrote:

    >In article <>, tonycooper214
    >@gmail.com says...
    >>
    >> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 20:57:05 -0400, "J. Clarke"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >> >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.

    >>
    >> Actually, he later posted that he meant that Adobe would not remove
    >> software and he was contradicting Whisky Dave, not Peter. It's not a
    >> good idea to guess what nospam means. He twists and turns and says
    >> "the discussion is about" only what *he* would like the discussion to
    >> be about.
    >>
    >> Besides, it's not really accurate to say that discontinuing support
    >> doesn't affect older software in any way. The software remains on the
    >> system and remains usable...until there's a problem.

    >
    >Then you figure out what changed and unchange it.
    >
    >> I went through this with Corel and WordPerfect. I had a perfectly
    >> usable version that did everything I wanted it to do...until something
    >> went wrong. Corel declined support unless I upgraded to a newer
    >> version with features that I don't need or want. The software was on
    >> my computer, but unusable. That, I think, qualifies as "affects".

    >
    >So why did you not just roll back the system to the working state?
    >
    >> >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.

    >>
    >> "Other than" is the affect. (Yes, you wrote "other that", but I
    >> assume you mean "other than".) What might happen in the future
    >> certainly affects the program. If you can't use it, you've been
    >> affected.

    >
    >So you're saying that if you can't use CS6 on the computers that are
    >being made 100 years from now you expect Adobe to at no charge upgrade
    >it for you? I'm sorry, but their support has never included that kind
    >of upgrade. Even if they continued full support for it forever they
    >would not provide you that kind of patch.


    I didn't say or imply anything like that. I said the users may be
    affected. Being affected by a problem doesn't mean you have or should
    have recourse. It doesn't mean you can do anything about it. It
    simply means that something has transpired that has some affect on
    you.

    When I purchased my present computer there are programs that I
    purchased in the past that will not work on this system. I have the
    disks, but the program can't be installed. I am affected by this
    because I can no longer use the programs. I have no recourse, and
    don't expect any. I was still affected.

    "Affect" is not really a very difficult word to understand.







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

    >>
    >> It most certainly can be. That's how trials work. You download the
    >> trial, use it for 30 days, and - if you purchase the program - enter a
    >> key that stops it from crippling itself.

    >
    >What is your point?
    >

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
  7. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 00:24:14 -0400, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, Tony Cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> >> I agree with you about the value of the software's "support" team. If
    >> >> I have a problem, I'll research the problem on the web and try to find
    >> >> the answer from some user group. The only time I've gone direct to
    >> >> the source was calling Norton to find out how to completely eradicate
    >> >> Norton from my system. That required going up several levels of
    >> >> "support".
    >> >
    >> >except for that other time you went direct to the vendor, corel.

    >>
    >> You are correct. I did contact Corel by email. I called Norton.

    >
    >doesn't matter how you contacted them. you contacted support twice.
    >
    >> >there no doubt were other times you aren't disclosing either.

    >>
    >> No, I really haven't had reason to call a vendor. Any minor problems
    >> have been solved by reading forums and such.

    >
    >which means if a vendor discontinues support, it won't matter.


    Not to me, perhaps, but I am not as arrogant as you and understand
    that not everyone would do it the way I would. As long as there are
    people who would contact support, it matters.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
  8. Paul Ciszek

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>, tonycooper214
    @gmail.com says...
    >
    > On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 23:59:38 -0400, "J. Clarke"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >In article <>, tonycooper214
    > >@gmail.com says...
    > >>
    > >> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:57:20 -0400, 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.
    > >>
    > >> Nothing was "wrong" in what Peter said, and that's what you replied
    > >> to.
    > >>
    > >> >> >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.
    > >>
    > >> Why, then, write "wrong" in reply to Peter's post in which he said
    > >> *nothing* about software removal? Talk about not keeping up.
    > >>
    > >> You whine and carry on when you feel something you said was "twisted",
    > >> but you twist other people's comments. Just admit that you made an
    > >> error and replied to the wrong post.
    > >> >
    > >> >> I don't know what "support" Peter is thinking of unless it's updates.
    > >> >
    > >> >doesn't matter. adobe isn't going to remove software.
    > >>
    > >> Well, they can't. It's not that they aren't going to, it's that they
    > >> can't. They might if they could. What they can do is deactivate it.

    > >
    > >If they deactivate licenses software absent a clear TOS violation then
    > >they leave themselves open for a whopping huge lawsuit.

    >
    > I'm sure failure to pay the subscription amount is a violation of
    > Adobe's TOS.


    Show us where in the license for CS6 there is a requirement to pay a
    "subscription amount".

    > >> >> 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.
    > >>
    > >> It is if I bring it up. I did.
    > >>
    > >> >> 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.
    > >>
    > >> I would say the full program is a trial version if the version can be
    > >> crippled in 30 days if I don't buy it and enter a key or whatever the
    > >> source requires me to do to keep in active.

    > >
    > >If you have the source code then you simply remove the provision that
    > >checks for a key.
    > >

    > Uhhh...you may. I consider that theft of services.


    If there was any software out there that required activation and
    provides sourcce code you might have a point.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 15, 2013
  9. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 01:01:25 -0400, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, Tony Cooper
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> >> I would say the full program is a trial version if the version can be
    >> >> crippled in 30 days if I don't buy it and enter a key or whatever the
    >> >> source requires me to do to keep in active.
    >> >
    >> >If you have the source code then you simply remove the provision that
    >> >checks for a key.
    >> >

    >> Uhhh...you may. I consider that theft of services.

    >
    >then you'd be wrong.
    >
    >if you have the source code you can modify it. that's the whole point.
    >
    >besides, nobody would put in a timeout and then release the source code
    >anyway.


    Then why was it brought up?

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
  10. Paul Ciszek

    J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>, tonycooper214
    @gmail.com says...
    >
    > On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 00:04:29 -0400, "J. Clarke"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >In article <>, tonycooper214
    > >@gmail.com says...
    > >>
    > >> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 20:57:05 -0400, "J. Clarke"
    > >> <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >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.
    > >>
    > >> Actually, he later posted that he meant that Adobe would not remove
    > >> software and he was contradicting Whisky Dave, not Peter. It's not a
    > >> good idea to guess what nospam means. He twists and turns and says
    > >> "the discussion is about" only what *he* would like the discussion to
    > >> be about.
    > >>
    > >> Besides, it's not really accurate to say that discontinuing support
    > >> doesn't affect older software in any way. The software remains on the
    > >> system and remains usable...until there's a problem.

    > >
    > >Then you figure out what changed and unchange it.
    > >
    > >> I went through this with Corel and WordPerfect. I had a perfectly
    > >> usable version that did everything I wanted it to do...until something
    > >> went wrong. Corel declined support unless I upgraded to a newer
    > >> version with features that I don't need or want. The software was on
    > >> my computer, but unusable. That, I think, qualifies as "affects".

    > >
    > >So why did you not just roll back the system to the working state?
    > >
    > >> >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.
    > >>
    > >> "Other than" is the affect. (Yes, you wrote "other that", but I
    > >> assume you mean "other than".) What might happen in the future
    > >> certainly affects the program. If you can't use it, you've been
    > >> affected.

    > >
    > >So you're saying that if you can't use CS6 on the computers that are
    > >being made 100 years from now you expect Adobe to at no charge upgrade
    > >it for you? I'm sorry, but their support has never included that kind
    > >of upgrade. Even if they continued full support for it forever they
    > >would not provide you that kind of patch.

    >
    > I didn't say or imply anything like that. I said the users may be
    > affected. Being affected by a problem doesn't mean you have or should
    > have recourse. It doesn't mean you can do anything about it. It
    > simply means that something has transpired that has some affect on
    > you.


    But if Adobe drops support or does not drop support, the outcome is the
    same, so why does dropping support affect those users?

    > When I purchased my present computer there are programs that I
    > purchased in the past that will not work on this system. I have the
    > disks, but the program can't be installed. I am affected by this
    > because I can no longer use the programs. I have no recourse, and
    > don't expect any. I was still affected.


    Affected by what? If the software publisher would have provided you
    with upgraded versions gratis if they had continued "support" then you
    have a point, if they would not then your software, even with full
    support, would still not run.

    > "Affect" is not really a very difficult word to understand.


    The cases you have mentioned do not demonstrate that discontinuing
    support affects the user in any manner whatsoever.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 15, 2013
  11. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:07:25 -0400, 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?
    >> >>
    >> >> 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.

    >>
    >> Actually, he later posted that he meant that Adobe would not remove
    >> software and he was contradicting Whisky Dave, not Peter. It's not a
    >> good idea to guess what nospam means. He twists and turns and says
    >> "the discussion is about" only what *he* would like the discussion to
    >> be about.

    >
    >i didn't later post anything. in my *initial* reply to whisky dave, i
    >said it won't be removed, and it wasn't a contradiction either. why do
    >you insist on lying about what i say and do?


    Of course you did. You replied to Peter saying he was wrong when he
    wasn't, and then you made another post saying you were replying to
    Whisky Dave even though it was a reply to Peter's post.

    >
    >> Besides, it's not really accurate to say that discontinuing support
    >> doesn't affect older software in any way. The software remains on the
    >> system and remains usable...until there's a problem.

    >
    >it's very accurate. discontinuing support does not affect anything on
    >anyone's computer.


    I knew you'd weasel. No one said anything about affecting anything
    *on* the computer if support is dropped. It is the user that is
    affected. You're twisting and lying again.

    >it keeps working exactly as it always has.


    If it's working, you don't need support. You need support when it
    isn't working.

    >
    >it only affects calling the vendor with a question, but there are many
    >other ways to get answers, most of which are more effective.


    It doesn't affect calling the vendor. Phones are not disabled. It
    affects the person calling the vendor and is denied assistance by the
    vendor.

    >> I went through this with Corel and WordPerfect. I had a perfectly
    >> usable version that did everything I wanted it to do...until something
    >> went wrong. Corel declined support unless I upgraded to a newer
    >> version with features that I don't need or want. The software was on
    >> my computer, but unusable. That, I think, qualifies as "affects".

    >
    >you gave up to easy. you probably weren't the first person to encounter
    >that so there is likely a solution somewhere online, or you can ask in
    >a forum and get an answer.


    I did solve it. Easily. I switched to Open Office.







    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
  12. Paul Ciszek

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:07:23 -0400, 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.

    >>
    >> Nothing was "wrong" in what Peter said, and that's what you replied
    >> to.

    >
    >it was completely 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.

    >>
    >> Why, then, write "wrong" in reply to Peter's post in which he said
    >> *nothing* about software removal? Talk about not keeping up.

    >
    >the discussion was about software removal. i said it won't be removed,
    >then peter said 'until they discontinue support'.


    It's a bit chancy to outright lie when the message is still there. It
    was written that "older software...is not affected in any way" and
    Peter replied "Until Adobe decides to discontinue support".

    It's right there above. You can read it. Peter didn't mention
    software removal.

    You made a mistake. Just admit it.

    I love the way you attempt to control the discussion and dictate about
    what it's about, and then you veer off the area that *you* insist is
    the subject and rattle on about source code. (I'll cut that nonsense
    because this discussion - according to you - is only about the removal
    of subscription Adobe products.)

    Further, the original post creating this thread, by Gamer, said
    nothing at all about "software removal". It was a rambling diatribe
    about Adobe's "Gestapo" tactics and bitching about not being able to
    upgrade from CS3.

    The "discussion" has progressed from there touching on several
    different but related subjects including deviation from the original
    post's subject by you. There is no single "the discussion was about".

    You don't seem to understand that a usenet discussion goes wherever
    the participants want it to go. Peter chose to mention the possible
    discontinuance of support. He can do that. You are not in control.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jun 15, 2013
  13. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > When I purchased my present computer there are programs that I
    > purchased in the past that will not work on this system. I have the
    > disks, but the program can't be installed. I am affected by this
    > because I can no longer use the programs. I have no recourse, and
    > don't expect any. I was still affected.


    there are ways to continue using them with little to no performance
    impact.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
  14. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> No, I really haven't had reason to call a vendor. Any minor problems
    > >> have been solved by reading forums and such.

    > >
    > >which means if a vendor discontinues support, it won't matter.

    >
    > Not to me, perhaps, but I am not as arrogant as you and understand
    > that not everyone would do it the way I would. As long as there are
    > people who would contact support, it matters.


    back to insults again, i see.

    as i said before, there's a wealth of support available from places
    other than the vendor, often much better than anything the vendor
    offers.

    official support may be gone, but there's plenty more elsewhere.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
  15. Paul Ciszek

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Tony Cooper
    <> wrote:

    > >> >> I would say the full program is a trial version if the version can be
    > >> >> crippled in 30 days if I don't buy it and enter a key or whatever the
    > >> >> source requires me to do to keep in active.
    > >> >
    > >> >If you have the source code then you simply remove the provision that
    > >> >checks for a key.
    > >> >
    > >> Uhhh...you may. I consider that theft of services.

    > >
    > >then you'd be wrong.
    > >
    > >if you have the source code you can modify it. that's the whole point.
    > >
    > >besides, nobody would put in a timeout and then release the source code
    > >anyway.

    >
    > Then why was it brought up?


    you mentioned source, so ask yourself that question.

    you improperly used a term and now are trying to weasel out of it.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
  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?
    > >> >>
    > >> >> 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.
    > >>
    > >> Actually, he later posted that he meant that Adobe would not remove
    > >> software and he was contradicting Whisky Dave, not Peter. It's not a
    > >> good idea to guess what nospam means. He twists and turns and says
    > >> "the discussion is about" only what *he* would like the discussion to
    > >> be about.

    > >
    > >i didn't later post anything. in my *initial* reply to whisky dave, i
    > >said it won't be removed, and it wasn't a contradiction either. why do
    > >you insist on lying about what i say and do?

    >
    > Of course you did. You replied to Peter saying he was wrong when he
    > wasn't,


    he was wrong, as are you.

    > and then you made another post saying you were replying to
    > Whisky Dave even though it was a reply to Peter's post.


    i was initially replying to whisky dave when peter made his comment, so
    my next reply was to peter.

    why are you having so much trouble keeping track of who said what and
    to whom?

    > >> Besides, it's not really accurate to say that discontinuing support
    > >> doesn't affect older software in any way. The software remains on the
    > >> system and remains usable...until there's a problem.

    > >
    > >it's very accurate. discontinuing support does not affect anything on
    > >anyone's computer.

    >
    > I knew you'd weasel. No one said anything about affecting anything
    > *on* the computer if support is dropped. It is the user that is
    > affected. You're twisting and lying again.


    talking about yourself, i see, and wrong, as usual.

    whisky dave asked about deleting. in other words, he was asking about
    what happens *on* the computer.

    > >it keeps working exactly as it always has.

    >
    > If it's working, you don't need support. You need support when it
    > isn't working.


    since it was working before support was dropped, it will continue to
    work after.

    > >it only affects calling the vendor with a question, but there are many
    > >other ways to get answers, most of which are more effective.

    >
    > It doesn't affect calling the vendor. Phones are not disabled. It
    > affects the person calling the vendor and is denied assistance by the
    > vendor.


    the point of the call is to get assistance. if that's denied then
    there's no point in making the call in the first place. sure, they can
    make the call as many times as they want, but what for?

    you're just playing word games, desperately grasping at straws.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
  17. 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.
    > >>
    > >> Nothing was "wrong" in what Peter said, and that's what you replied
    > >> to.

    > >
    > >it was completely 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.
    > >>
    > >> Why, then, write "wrong" in reply to Peter's post in which he said
    > >> *nothing* about software removal? Talk about not keeping up.

    > >
    > >the discussion was about software removal. i said it won't be removed,
    > >then peter said 'until they discontinue support'.

    >
    > It's a bit chancy to outright lie when the message is still there. It
    > was written that "older software...is not affected in any way" and
    > Peter replied "Until Adobe decides to discontinue support".
    >
    > It's right there above. You can read it. Peter didn't mention
    > software removal.


    whisky dave mentioned removal, and i was replying to him when peter
    butted in.

    once again:
    > >> >> >> > does that mean they'll remove my old CS from my
    > >> >> >> > computer because they don;t want to support it


    i said they won't remove support, they'll just deactivate subscription
    based software, while earlier software is unaffected whether you
    continue to pay the subscription fees or not.

    this is 100% correct, no matter how hard you try to claim otherwise.

    > You made a mistake. Just admit it.


    i'm not the one who made a mistake. you did, and are going to great
    lengths to avoid admitting your mistake. you also completely failed at
    reading comprehension.

    > I love the way you attempt to control the discussion and dictate about
    > what it's about, and then you veer off the area that *you* insist is
    > the subject and rattle on about source code. (I'll cut that nonsense
    > because this discussion - according to you - is only about the removal
    > of subscription Adobe products.)


    i'm not attempting to control anything. whisky dave asked a question
    and i replied to it.

    > Further, the original post creating this thread, by Gamer, said
    > nothing at all about "software removal". It was a rambling diatribe
    > about Adobe's "Gestapo" tactics and bitching about not being able to
    > upgrade from CS3.


    doesn't matter what the original post was.

    whisky dave asked a question and i answered.

    > The "discussion" has progressed from there touching on several
    > different but related subjects including deviation from the original
    > post's subject by you. There is no single "the discussion was about".


    yes there is. when someone asks a question and another person answers
    it, it's about that particular question.

    > You don't seem to understand that a usenet discussion goes wherever
    > the participants want it to go. Peter chose to mention the possible
    > discontinuance of support. He can do that. You are not in control.


    you don't seem to understand how usenet works.

    you see, when someone asks a question, one or more people may answer
    it. whisky dave asked a question and i replied.

    i'm not controlling a thing. more lies from you.
     
    nospam, Jun 15, 2013
  18. Paul Ciszek

    peternew Guest

    On 6/14/2013 10:07 PM, nospam wrote:> In article
    <51bbc1ad$0$8312$-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.

    >>
    >> Your quoted sentence did not say that.

    >
    > the post to which i replied was about removal. this entire subthread is
    > about removal.


    Our statement, written in clear English was incorrect, as shown earlier.


    >
    > anyone who was following the discussion would see that. j.clarke could
    > see that.



    >
    >>> 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.

    >>
    >> You have just described the effect on usability.

    >
    > what effect? everything keeps working just like it always has.


    Whoosh!


    >
    >>> nothing stops anyone from keeping an older computer around to run
    >>> older software.

    >>
    >> Your quoted sentence, to which I responded, said something other than
    >> what you ar saying now.

    >
    > not in the least. you misunderstood and are trying to blame it on
    > others.
    >

    Sorry. I forgot you rarely say what you mean!


    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 15, 2013
  19. Paul Ciszek

    peternew Guest

    On 6/15/2013 12:24 AM, nospam wrote:
    <>snip>
    >
    > which means if a vendor discontinues support, it won't matter.
    >


    If you don't includes patches and compatibility upgrades as part of support.


    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 15, 2013
  20. Paul Ciszek

    peternew Guest

    On 6/14/2013 10:07 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 is not the statement to which I responded. I responded to a
    specific sentence, and explained why. Your quoting is disgustingly
    selective.





    --
    PeterN
     
    peternew, Jun 15, 2013
    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:
    197
    nospam
    Jun 4, 2013
  2. nospam

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    nospam, Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    222
    luxitman
    Jul 3, 2013
  3. philo 

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    philo , Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    281
    nospam
    Jun 5, 2013
  4. nospam

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    nospam, Jun 4, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    289
    PeterN
    Jun 7, 2013
  5. PeterN

    Re: Adobe - Photoshop and their "Subscriptions"

    PeterN, Jun 5, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    203
    PeterN
    Jun 5, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page