•  Previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3(current)
  • 4
  • 5
  • ...
  • 9
  • Next 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
And we got there (no more Lightroom standalone)
#21
On second and third thoughts: I should not act harsh if someone just sounds arrogant and basically not helpful.

 

This thread already IS about possible destinations to move on because Adobe will not change their behaviour else. So, if you have to contribute anything to alternatives, shoot on. If not - because you only know the Adobe cosmos - then it's fine to understand your message "stay where you are and pay the fee for a lot of not needed features, I don't find it that bad" has arrived.

 

A couple of people already explained why they are not happy with this money making model, their reasons to seek alternatives are as good as yours to accept Adobe's conditions. At some point "it's good to have alternatives" becomes more than only nice to have - we don't have them really.

 

Obviously no other manufacturer cares anymore about making a DAM worth to use ist and rely on. Interesting. Some RAW converter alternatives are just one- or few men shows and manage often to deliver updated RAW engines before Adobe wakes up.

#22
I don't understand what you are on about.

 

Adobe does not force anyone to buy their products on subscription or on those that are subscription-free. 

 

In fact, you went to them. 

 

They do not steal your files and you can still do basically everything in LR except for Develop (and I think Maps) if you were on a subscription and then decide to cancel.

 

So, you can still organise, retrieve, view, export and share. Heck, you can still even print. Forever and for free!

 

What more do you want?

 

Look, if you are serious about photography then whatever edits you have made are already near perfect. And presumably you have saved these out.

 

Now you go to a new program and do what you want to or need to do.

 

I just don't get what the problem is. 

#23
Quote:The cause of just about every major conflict on the planet is because of this attitude.

 

Some people think that if they buy a piece of land then they own it and can do whatever they like with it. For example, if they dig a hole and find oil they actually think that it's theirs.

 

I was once shooting late at night on a field which was about 500m from the nearest house. 

 

The farmer came screaming down in his car and asked what I was doing on “his land”. I told him I was photographing the stars. Maybe he thinks that the stars above “his land” are his.

 

You don't own any of Adobe's software. You just have the right to use it - on their terms.

 

If you don't like their terms go somewhere else. It's very simple.

 

We pay some 130€ per month on internet connection, internet TV and mobile calls/SMS package. I don't watch much TV, and the only person I call is my wife. Lightroom CC is less than 10% of this. It is really cheap for what I get.

 

Like I said, it's the cost of a cup of coffee once a week. Principle or not, if you have a problem with this then you really have a problem.
 Rent or buy?

 

We seem to have.......... Oh. such a different attitude to life...... I can feel it so strongly!

 

  It is true however that we are just the "custodians" of our temporary usage of the planet earth and all that we have on it......but the law still acts in a  fashion to protect our "ownership" of property....and has accommodations for the passing of our hard owned gains to our chosen ones!

   

 The situation can be applied to renting a house or buying one.....it's no state secret that people rent property in order to gain money, most (in these ever more difficult times of housing) who have the wherewithal will buy........why? ......well it's not easy at first but overall and in the course of time buying is the cheapest and best route!

 

   Is there a hidden message in there somewhere, that can be applied to other spheres of life? 

 

  

   Are you the owner (lifetime custodianship) of a car or do you just ring for a taxi! 

Dave's clichés
#24
Quote: Rent or buy?

 

We seem to have.......... Oh. such a different attitude to life...... I can feel it so strongly!

 
 

Or you can be like the mayor of our municipal who has been renting a cafe by the Lake (for next to nothing, btw) and now says that he should be the “owner”.

 

Yes, that's right. There are people who think that if you rent something long enough then it's yours.

 

I don't understand why not just Torrent Lightroom CC. This way, there would be no need to discuss any further on this thread.

 

Actually, I know why. Adobe has had enough of these leeches and finally put and end to it.
#25
  For those who wish to to delve into Adobes financial accounts can find their 2016 figures here:

 

 

           http://news.adobe.com/press-release/corp...-revenue-1

 

   With a 5.85 billion dollar turnover in 2016, up from 4.8 billion, this shows that their philosophy of inscription is far and away more profitable than the older buying .

 

   Personally, I have more sympathy with photographic companies that produce hard goods,  Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Olympus, Pentax, etc.all of which that are feeling the pinch and have somewhat uncertain future.

 

  So unless something changes in my life, like my custodian agreement with the Lord is terminated, I will continue to "benefit" from the investment I made many years back.........here it's business as usual!
Dave's clichés
#26
  For those who wish to to delve into Adobes financial accounts can find their 2016 figures here:

 

 

           http://news.adobe.com/press-release/corp...-revenue-1

 

   With a 5.85 billion dollar turnover in 2016, up from 4.8 billion, this shows that their philosophy of inscription is far and away more profitable than the older buying .

 

   Personally, I have more sympathy with photographic companies that produce hard goods,  Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Olympus, Pentax, etc.all of which that are feeling the pinch and have somewhat uncertain future.

 

  So unless something changes in my life, like my custodian agreement with the Lord is terminated, I will continue to "benefit" from the investment I made many years back.........here it's business as usual!

 

 BTW. Studor, you wrote:

 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">I don't understand what you are on about?

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">Adobe does not force anyone to buy their products on subscription or on those that are subscription-free. 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">..................................................................................................................................................................................................................

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">    You seem to forget many "purchased their LR/PS"  with promises of ongoing updates, only to find a few years later that Adobe pulled the rug from under their feet.

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">   The fact that you don't understand is disconcerting!
Dave's clichés
#27
Quote: 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">  You seem to forget many "purchased their LR/PS"  with promises of ongoing updates, only to find a few years later that Adobe pulled the rug from under their feet.

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"> 

<p style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">   The fact that you don't understand is disconcerting!
 

I seriously wouldn't go so far as saying “disconcerting”. However,...

 

I don't think Adobe ever made this promise regarding ongoing updates for LR6. Perhaps I am mistaken in which case Adobe would have a case to answer for.

 

But my understanding was that only LR CC would be continually updated.

 

You would need to provide a link to backup your claims. Otherwise it is more fake news, like how LR CC becomes useless the day you cancel your subscription.
#28
@studor13

 

I didn't say that if I own a camera I can do everything I like with it. For instance, I know that I can't throw it on the head of somebody.

 

What I said is that I own that camera and, normally, nobody can stop me from owning it - I mean they can't take it away from me. If I am forced to rent a camera, the day can come that the renter refuses to service me - for whichever reason, which can be even good in his own perspective, and note that I'm not contesting the idea that he can have the right not to service me. Simply, I don't want to put myself in that situation.

 

PS The farmer has got the right to prevent you from entering in his land. He doesn't own the air and the sky above the land, but you're on his land. If you can hover over his land, fine.

 

For instance, in Italy there is an old law that allows hunters to enter in somebody's private property for hunting, without asking for permission. Note that game is not owned by the farmer even though it's on his land, but according to the law is a sort of public property. I'm not particularly against hunting, but if somebody wants to prevent hunting from happening on his land, for good or bad reasons, he's got the right to do that: game might be of public property, but land is owned by the farmer; he's got the right to fence it and prevent access, or grant it only under permission.

 

PS2 This law dates back to Mussolini, that wanted to push hunting to prepare italians to war...

stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm Æ’/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm Æ’/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm Æ’/2.8, Samyang 8mm Æ’/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm Æ’/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.
#29
Quote:I don't understand what you are on about.

 

Adobe does not force anyone to buy their products on subscription or on those that are subscription-free. 

 

In fact, you went to them. 

 

They do not steal your files and you can still do basically everything in LR except for Develop (and I think Maps) if you were on a subscription and then decide to cancel.

 

So, you can still organise, retrieve, view, export and share. Heck, you can still even print. Forever and for free!

 

What more do you want?

 

Look, if you are serious about photography then whatever edits you have made are already near perfect. And presumably you have saved these out.

 

Now you go to a new program and do what you want to or need to do.

 

I just don't get what the problem is. 
 

 

No, I did not went to them. I went away from them at home and I use their products, when I'm paid to bother about them.

 

So far, I had not a single positive experience with their support. I see how widepsread Adobe's application demand space in a lot of surprising spaces in my OS, making it difficult to get rid of them - it was quite a procedure to get rid of that Flash crap.

 

They do not steal my pictures, because I never gave it tot them or others. But I see the risk, if the payments stop they lock in the pictures in their cloud, at least the ones one uploaded to it. Then it's a server in America, this brings up a big set of legal questions like others stealing your pictures because you didn't watermark them.

 

Anyway, long story short: My Mac stays Adobe free.
#30
N

Dave's clichés
  
  •  Previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3(current)
  • 4
  • 5
  • ...
  • 9
  • Next 


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)