For now they say Acrobat & Lightroom will be available outside of cloud, for now...

The subscription model for software has been the desire of the software corporate developers for nearly decade. It gives them a real link to a defined revenue stream and the continuity of a loyal customer base. I expect many will follow this channel to the cloud.

But as others do aptly point out, this has serious drawbacks for the hobbyist and the really small business user, who would be hard-pressed to justify the outlay. It's really a lot like the automobile industry in comparison as auto ownership has skyrocketed in costs, the alternative of leasing is the stream of revenue desirable for the fleet holder. The individual consumer is going to get left in the dust.

What is the best alternative to Photoshop? I really, really like Photoshop, but I'm not going to do a subscription. What are my alternatives?

Will the purchased versions you have now cease to work when the cloud model starts?

If not, then what's the problem?

The problem is compatibility issues in the future and new features that become necessary. For now it will not be a big deal. But could you use Vegas 6 in your business considering HD and in the future 4k? As technology advances we need to keep up. Adobe effectively will force everyone into their subscription model or force them to look for alternatives.

Looking at responses on the other forums people are not happy and Adobe may hurt themselves in the long run. I was moving more and more in their direction but this will make me pause and reconsider.

The cost for anyone with a CS3 or later license is $29.90 / month and that's for everything.
Oddly enough Adobe claim the move is based on the unexpected success of their existing cloud based offering which has 500,000 subscribers.

Personally even though based on changes to our taxation rules it would be cheaper for me to lease than buy I really don't like the concept at all and with a vengeance. Many are expressing the same negative sentiment. Adobe could be shooting themselves in the foot with this. Users who have paid for boxed upgrades they rarely if ever used or needed are very unlikely to pay anything per month.

What I'm more concerned about is this lease / rent trend has already extended into hardware. Convergent Design's Odyssey7 has a low cost of entry and then you pay a per day/week/month rental for the codecs you need. Imagine being on a shoot in the wilds that runs a couple of days over plan and then you discover your license has expired.

Bob.

I use Photoshop CS5 regularly. Given this Cloud business, I thought maybe I should upgrade to CS6. As it turns out, upgrades to CS6 for windows are no longer available, so you have to already join the cloud if you want to upgrade. What a bummer!

As an alternative, one might try Corel Photo-Paint. I have an older version that I only use for correction of "crazy" pet eyes--lot easier than Photoshop. Guess I'll just stick with CS5. I really don't want to learn another photo editor just like I really don't want to learn another video editor. Must be my age talking.

wwaag

You can still get an upgrade to CS6 boxed from videoguys. Not cheap though.

Maybe they are content to shed the home/casual user market and plan to concentrate on the frequent user/professional market?

I bought a CS6 suite late last year but can't really use it until my work catches up from CS4. If it turns out that they leapfrog me then I guess they'd have to pay for CS 7+ rentals for me if they want me to work away from the office.

I think for the most part this opens up market opportunities for competitors. In fact probably the main reason Adobe thinks they can do this is that they've already bought most of their competitors.

I use Corel Photo-Paint, but not often. I use Corel-Draw nearly every day. With updates to X6 Corel began moving towards a subscription based model as well. If teh trend continue there may be no practical alternative to Cloudware.

Looking around, my best alternative is probably to scale back to Photoshop Elements.

If you already own PS it will not stop working you realise.

Bob.

I realize that, but my experience is that once software is orphaned (so to speak in this case) you are better off immediately changing to something else. It takes me a while to learn software. Not learn as in grab it and do something simple. That's easy. It takes me a while to learn it to the point where I can do what I want with it easily and quickly. That's where I am with Photoshop right now. Getting to that point on some other platform is going to take me a while. I need to get the process rolling if this is what Adobe is going to do.

I started using CS6 a month or two ago. I started my subscription reluctantly - but not because it was subscription-based, but because I felt I had to learn a new NLE because Vegas Pro had become so unreliable... I digress.

I agree with most of the points raised in objection of this model. I'm the serious hobbyist who isn't generating any direct income from doing photos or video. But, in being a serious hobbyist, I keep up with the latest software versions. I've spent more on Vegas Pro in the last 5 years than I would have spent on my subscriptions to Adobe CS (granted, I pay a lower academic rate, so this might not apply to everyone). I effectively have been on a subscription model.

Also, it dawned on me that this is also a bit of "back to the future", as now we must pay to "develop" our photos and videos. No one would ever do that, would they?

In the end, if there is enough revolt, Adobe will have to change. I suspect the change will come in the form that Laurence has already suggested. Adobe will move the true hobbyist to a differentiated product that will have less support and less useability. I also suspect that the market will offer a solution those who want to do one-off updates of old projects for which they no longer have subscriptions. Alternatively, a workflow will surface to archive projects so that they are open-source or platform-independent, so to speak.

WHEW!! Looks like I got out just in time!
I'd been putting off upgrading to AdobeCS6, because I'm on a 32-bit system and they support only 64bit as of CS6 (like Sony with Vegas12). I have LOTS of software installed on my 32bit system and am resisting going to 64bit and having to spend a couple of weeks updating/reinstalling everything. (Literally did take me 2 weeks to install everything, when I upgraded to Win7 from WinXP.)
ANYWAY... I'm glad I had put off going to CS6. Now I won't do that at all.

May eventually bite the 64bit bullet and go to Vegas12, but I'm staying out of the Cloud just as much as I possibly can. I definitely don't want to be at the mercy of an Internet connection when I have work that I have to get done. So CS5 is as far as I go with Adobe.

I think their plan is ingeniously evil. They’re upping the ante to be considered a “real” player in the world of digital images. What happens after a few upgrade cycles (which could possibly now be weekly) and our clients start sending us Illustrator files that can’t be opened with CS products. We either join the club or lose work and be viewed as amateurs. It will gall me to no end when I have to put my nickels in Adobe’s coin slot, but I already realize it will probably happen – and sooner than I think.
As much as I hate it, I have to admire this devious plan. The only way it could fail is if no one signed up, and now that so many have, Pandora’s Box is flung open. Satan must be a major shareholder in Adobe.

With 500,000 already signed up clearly a lot have taken to the concept.

Doing the maths it isn't financially such a bad idea.
I can have the entire Master Collection for $30 / month. It would take a decade for me to pay off the outright price and that's without upgrades. On top of that I get a lot of cloud storage and it's much easier to collaborate.

Bob.

all well and good unless you have crap*y net / isp......

Remember, the $30 per month is only for the first year. After that, you're "hooked" and have no choice but to pay the regular price of $600 per year.

wwaag

Here's a WSJ link.

[Link=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323826804578466830054806110.html?mod=googlenews_wsj]

wwaag

[I]"Here's a WSJ link."[/I]

Well played :)

Bob.