Adobe is going to only sell subscription based Photoshop

[Ben Syverson]

The idea of having up-to-date LR, PS, and ID, and Illustrator is great. The notion of being on the hook is less than lovely, but livable.

But here's the rub: for the user who has the machine at the office, one at home, and then an older portable for the odd trip.... and a license is for 2 installs...what to do?

Get the office to pay for a separate CC copy, then use your own license for your two home machines?

[Preston]

But here's the rub: for the user who has the machine at the office, one at home, and then an older portable for the odd trip.... and a license is for 2 installs...what to do?

You could also look into volume licensing if you can't get the office to pony up for a copy.

--P

[Otto Seaman]

You can easily authorize and deauthorize machines so Creative Suite would follow you around to any computer you use, so if you worked from home you could be using the app paid for by work. In this way it could sort of be a perk, provided they didn't track which files you worked on. So you can stop worrying about how many copies and machines you have, it only matters that one person is using it at a time.

Overall, this scheme favors larger companies over individual users.

I bet we'll see some Lightroom enhancements or maybe even an entirely new Adobe app aimed at photographers, as Photoshop has evolved into a much larger app than it needs to be simply to service photographers. That way Adobe can milk both the individual enthusiast market (i.e. you) and the big corporate power users.

[Nathan Potter]

Subscription is the way of the future. We use it for cars (called a lease), apartment rental (an old trick), many services (electricity, water, trash pickup, etc.). I see just recently that Sears will lease (call it subscription) appliances and furniture.

I think I see a grim future for most everything we use being by subscription only. Your DSLR can only be leased from Nikon and Canon. And so on. This makes eminently good sense from a business point of view. A continuous revenue stream from leased items means greater stability for the business. It is a perfect business model especially for items that are indispensable.

Most sophisticated software is now by subscription. So hang on for the coming revolution. You may soon be able to lease a wife!

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Tin Can]

I need a leased wife, my store bought ones never worked.

I need reliability!

Subscription is the way of the future. We use it for cars (called a lease), apartment rental (an old trick), many services (electricity, water, trash pickup, etc.). I see just recently that Sears will lease (call it subscription) appliances and furniture.

I think I see a grim future for most everything we use being by subscription only. Your DSLR can only be leased from Nikon and Canon. And so on. This makes eminently good sense from a business point of view. A continuous revenue stream from leased items means greater stability for the business. It is a perfect business model especially for items that are indispensable.

Most sophisticated software is now by subscription. So hang on for the coming revolution. You may soon be able to lease a wife!

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Matus Kalisky]

I need a leased wife, my store bought ones never worked.

I need reliability!

And updates

[Lenny Eiger]

This sounds like a lot of good-hearted kidding around. I'm not female so I didn't even notice it at first. However, I'm guessing if I was female, this might be a bit uncomfortable. I know most of us here are male. However, I value the input of female members and I don't want this to be just another good-ole-boys club. I don't want to point anyone out or make a big deal, I just want to make sure everyone feels welcome here. I'm not a moderator, I don't presume to speak for anyone but myself. There's a lot of great women photographers, let's make sure they hang out with us.

Lenny

[Tin Can]

My apologies to all. I see it is too late to delete my inappropriate comments.

I am usually a little more PC.

This sounds like a lot of good-hearted kidding around. I'm not female so I didn't even notice it at first. However, I'm guessing if I was female, this might be a bit uncomfortable. I know most of us here are male. However, I value the input of female members and I don't want this to be just another good-ole-boys club. I don't want to point anyone out or make a big deal, I just want to make sure everyone feels welcome here. I'm not a moderator, I don't presume to speak for anyone but myself. There's a lot of great women photographers, let's make sure they hang out with us.

Lenny

[Nathan Potter]

Of course the leasing of husbands is also obvious. Everything, in principle, is open to subscription or lease. I'd be mostly concerned here about DSLRs', lenses, printers, scanners, other hardware etc. I seriously think this is slowly coming. Of course you can already lease a fair bit of equipment.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[barnninny]

Yeah, the reason I'm into photography is that I like buying film and not using it. I've only bought film once, that was a roll of APX25 that I bought back in 1990. So it's been mine for 23 years so far and I only had to pay for it once. I sometimes think that I really should use it but then I realize that if I use it I'll have to buy another roll . . . and if I use that one I'll have to buy another one . . . and another one . . . and another one . . . So I just hold onto that one unexposed roll I've had for 23 years. It's so economical to not have to keep paying for it every month.

I'm not sure why the snide tone was introduced, Brian, but you've missed the point. Once you buy a box of film, you never have to pay for it again; you don't have to pay to keep it. You can sock it in a closet and leave it to your grandchildren if you want, but you can also expose it and develop it, and it will still be yours for as long as you want it. You can put it in the enlarger and make as many prints in as many different styles as you want over the course of your life.

If you want to buy more film, then yes, so stupendously obviously that attributing the opposite view to someone can only be an act of bad faith, you'll have to pay for that film. Once. And then it is yours for as long as you want it.

Your comparison to film is the wrong comparison, anyway. The real analog here is the darkroom. Basically, Adobe is removing the ability to own your own darkroom; you can only rent time in one. Maybe that's good, maybe it's bad, but that's the appropriate comparison. Or, even more accurately, they're saying you can no longer buy their darkroom equipment for your darkroom; you can only lease it.