(Updated) A petition is being put forward asking Adobe to “eliminate the mandatory ‘creative cloud’ subscription model”. It’s already been signed by over 12,000 people. More on Change.org. Also of note, some competing companies are already taking advantage of the backlash caused by Adobe’s change of policy. Read the recent blog posts by Corel and Pixelmator.
In a move that continues Adobe’s path of increasing the frequency of update cycles, reducing the possibility of choosing when to upgrade and implementing a subscription-based model, the company is now discontinuing the choice of purchasing perpetual licenses of future versions of its software and moving to a subscription-based only model.
Customers who do not want the entire Creative Cloud suite will be able to subscribe to single programs for a lower price. Due to Adobe’s policy of offering different prices according to geographic regions, the cost of the Creative Cloud subscription can vary greatly in different countries. Adobe will continue to sell and support Creative Suite 6 applications, and will provide bug fixes and security updates.
The move has predictably stirred controversy, as can be read in comments and reactions in various publications. More information can be found on MacWorld, CNET and The Next Web.
No perpetual licenses, pay or lose it policy awesome! That’s the way to run a business, reward lackluster updates, so-so “new” features, occasional bug patches… I was growing tired of giving them money anyway.
Thanks goodness my lively hood doesn’t depend on anything new they have put out in the last 8 years.
One app for $20 a month really isn’t all that bad, if you have three you might as well pay for the whole cloud, honestly though who want to drop $600 a year on something you may or may not use. I suppose the only bright side you can get a single month license.
it’s £46.88 per month “now”…let’s revisit the pricing next summer or in 2015…Autodesk put up subscription pricing by 51% in between summer 2012 and match 2013 that’s less than 9 months.
I, too, really dislike this trend. I want to be able to buy a product and own it. Then if the next update is worth it, decide whether or not I want it. Some gaming publishers are trying to do the same thing and I am not buying into it, I hope most people won’t either.
welcome to the future… get used to it !
F**k the future.
If people go along with this, then they’ve only got themselves to blame.
I’ll be sticking with CS6.
That’s a really rigid, enslaving plan which may look nice on paper when pitched but will most certainly not add up. Customers should have a choice to buy it out, upgrade(1-3 versions with different price each) as well as subscription/rent(which this essentially is) not a single financial enslavement. Personally I would not even mind paying a bit more to buy it out considering the quality of the program as well as the price vs other composting packages. Hope they get their act together.
Well I’m sticking with my CS 5.5 (just Photoshop and AfterEffects). There’s no new features in the latest version that I need. By the time they switch off the registration servers I’ll have found something else (non Adobe).
‘Pay as you use it’ seems to be a pretty decent model. People seem to love no-contract, month-to-month phone plans more than ever. What’s the difference here? Only problem I can see is if they end up charging users more over the year than they would have with a one-time purchase. But for studios/people who use a certain app for half of the year, they might end up saving money. Plus for some it might be better to offset the cost over the span of a year than an upfront drop. And increasing update frequency, this encourages them to innovate more often than they are now.
So what problems does this change present?
“And increasing update frequency, this encourages them to innovate more often than they are now.”
On the contrary. Currently they need to excite you with features and improvements in order for you to drop dough on an upgrade. If you’re paying them anyway, they have no motivation to improve their product.
It’s a lack of choice.
If you decide that an upgrade is not worth it, you don’t get the option to hold back your money on a subscription model and still use the current version.
Or if Adobe jack up the price per month more than you think is reasonable, your only option is to pay what they ask or lose the ability to use software you may have already paid the equivalent of the full RRP for.
If someone said to you, you can only hire a car, never buy, or only rent accommodation, never buy, what would your reaction be?
The last couple of releases have been fairly mediocre, their 3D engine is poor compared to Element, the tracker inferior to the Foundry’s.
I’d also be concerned that a constant cycle of *fixing* features is just asking for them to release features that don’t work properly.
I’ve read comments from Adobe about members being ‘cranky’ – well sorry Adobe, but we do have the option to not play ball, it’s our money.
“If you’re paying them anyway, they have no motivation to improve their product.”
That is exactly what I was about to post. People should stick with CS6 as long as possible. Maybe they will rethink their business model.
“People seem to love no-contract, month-to-month phone plans more than ever. What’s the difference here? ”
The difference here is that you can choose to do a no contract or you can choose to get a better rate with a contract, or you can get an unlocked phone and go anywhere you want with whomever has the best pricing/plan.
In the case of Adobe you have no choice other than how many apps you want to pay for. For instance the typical full version release cycle for Photoshop is approx 2.0 years. An upgrade used to cost $350US for that full version upgrade. NOW 2 years, 24 months @ 20 per month that same upgrade now costs you $480. SO what if there is absolutely nothing new in the latest and greatest that you use? You just spent $500 bucks on what could have gotten you well $500 of something.
Now amplify these costs across all other pieces of non-adobe software you use and you are easily looking at a months+ salary just to stay on subscriptions.
I understand the “costs” of doing business and I will gladly pay developers when you see positive forward thinking updates/fixes/features, Adobe on the other hand has 15+ mature applications and they are just trying to bleed there cash cow for another pint of milk.
Any bets Autodesk is next to do this with their suites?
Haha, well I no longer care what Autodesk do.
Ah, I understand. Sticking with CS6 shouldn’t be a problem, at least for the next 2-3 years. I can’t think of any new features could they could release that would merit the buy-in. But it’s only a matter of time before Autodesk does the same. I just don’t see why they wouldn’t.
New file format standard “impossible to implement into cs6.. for creative reasons”.. in 3…2…1… 😉
Foolish move by Adobe. I use all Adobe software in their master suite. However, I’ll now look to Nuke, instead of After Effects, Autodesk also has post production and video editing software and there are alternatives for photo and image editing. Foolish move by Adobe. They just opened up the market for their competition.
What are people thinking– that we can’t ever get over their products?
@ RogerBB
Nuke? Only a license of Nuke? For USD 4200,- ? Plus USD 1155 maintenance annually?
I am not sure if this sounds like a good business plan – alone the maintenance is more expensive then the Adobe whole Suite rent. Don’t want to advertise for Adobe here, i just wanted to point to the absurdity of comparison: Adobe Suite (Photoshop, Indesign, AE, Premiere etc) against a single expensive post production video FX product.
It is a quite bold move by Adobe, but i urge not to lose head now and start purchasing in panic some stuff just to show defiance. 🙂
I agree with you Roger BB and I’m thinking exactly the same thing.
Probably I can find an alternative to AE, like you said maybe Nuke, even though I believe at the end they’re meant for different kind of works.
Anyway, I don’t see alternatives for Photoshop.
Yeah, I’ve never understood the use Nuke argument.
It’s phenomenally expensive (and overkill for most people)
I could never justify spending that amount of money.
Not sure either, I have used nuke a little, I have used Fusion more, I like them both but Fusion is cheaper by quite a bit.
I was really hope AME to get their shit together and at least do a mild resource dump on solidifying Composite, which we all get for free.
Photoshop, heh unless you removing wrinkles from sagging buttocks and cloning people in/out of images in one click or a swipe you can use any version of Photoshop after 7.
There is always corel too, which are more than happy to to give you upgrades for cheap and even free products. I chatted with a chap in the corel booth a bunch of years ago, he sent me a huge box full of commercial goodies Painter, Graphics Suite, Word perfect Office Suite, close to a $1000 bucks worth of stuff for nothing. In I called them up a while back and asked about an upgrade for the Painter license, not only did the rep give me an upgrade for Painter 8 to ver. 12, he gave me a 30% discount on it too. THAT is how you run a company! Some of the nicest people I have ever dealt with.