And why have perpetual licenses for anything?
So if the host software (CC) is rented, why would anyone want to pay for perpetual licenses for plugins such as RedGiant, VideoCopilot, Camera Tracker etc etc. It's only a matter of time before everything will have to follow suite, possibly including the hardware and the O/S?
Probably also worth noting that ownership=control (and although we don't own perpetual licenses, we are used to pseudo owning them by having that element of control)
This is something that is very well understood by large businesses, Google, Amazon, Apple, Adobe etc etc, which is why they want the control, as they own the software!
Anything that threatens their position of control or domination, say a competitor, will be shutdown one way or another. A moments silence for Discreet Combustion, Apple Shake, Apple Color, etc etc.
The only thing that is currently preventing them having total control is that for some reason, we like to produce our content locally, on our own personal computers, under our control.
Imagine the sell: "No more render times, with your content in the cloud, and access to the power of cloud computing, all your work is realtime and available everywhere. Be a creative professional for just $xxx per month" (requires dumb terminal and internet connection). It's called a dumb terminal for a reason!!
For me though, the really scary prospect is lack of support and the End Of Life of formats and products. I'll give an example. I have many very old Cubase projects from the 90's, some of which were concept projects and have not yet had their chance to shine (or sing!). Funnily enough, even though I have all the original outboard midi devices no current version of Cubase can open any of them. The ideas and concepts lost forever..........but wait, I have perpetually licensed software, so installing that either on my current machine or some suitable older machine (which I still own) means that I can still access it. Hurrah!
Same goes with Discreet Combustion. Autodesk have killed that product completely, yet I can still access previous projects and make the odd tweak if needs must because I have two things, the software on a disk and a perpetual license.
Even more scary would be the prospect that Adobe decide that they no longer want to support a product going forward, like say, no more After Effects, or Illustrator. Of coarse, this is entirely speculation and who is to say that in that event they make make the last version perpetual, but really that is the point, the control will be lost and totally in their hands.
There are many instances where I think it would be a great idea to have a subscription service, but just like a magazine, when I stop subscribing I expect to still be able to access my back catalog.
After Effects CS6/ FCS3 / Canon 7D / Canon XL2 / Reason / Cubase
"it's either binary or it's not"
[Declan Smith] "Even more scary would be the prospect that Adobe decide that they no longer want to support a product going forward, like say, no more After Effects, or Illustrator. Of coarse, this is entirely speculation and who is to say that in that event they make make the last version perpetual, but really that is the point, the control will be lost and totally in their hands. "
I would say this is one of the very legitimate and significant concerns with this system...and I don't know if there is an answer on it as of yet.
Adobe Certified Instructor
In the last 20 years, I've done worked with tape editing, Media 100, Discreet Edit, Vegas, Avid Xpress Pro, Final Cut Pro 7, Final Cut Pro X.
There tends to be a bias towards thinking things will be as they are now and won't change. After a couple decades in this industry, I know that nothing is further from the truth. Also, working for an institution, rather than a post house, I have to ensure I can access all work in the future.
We used to use Avid about 8 years ago. I still have a hard drive that I can boot up Media Composer 3. It's a PITA and takes a lot of time but it's possible. If I didn't have a perpetual license, would I be willing to pay $60/month just to have the access to projects a couple times a year? I don't think so. And what if Avid goes out of business with CC style licensing?
Now I do believe Adobe is in a pretty solid position now. But time has a way of changing things. And the CC licensing severely limits the ability of users to switch products.
[Declan Smith] "That is the point, the control will be lost and totally in their hands. "
I think that Declan points out the biggest issue of the CC cloud. It's that CC takes too much control away from the consumer. It never occurred to me until now how much market share Adobe has. There's not enough competition out there to truly compete with several of Adobe's programs (there are exceptions, but generally it's safe to say Adobe has a large monopoly). This CC model gives them even more monopoly-like power to cut off consumers if they decide they don't want to buy into CC. The consumers only way to say no is to completely leave the software (which leaves many up a river without a paddle-because of the lack of competition). I don't think there's enough "checks and balances" here.
To be fair, I believe Adobe is an awesome company that's listened to their customers, made awesome software, and has done amazing things. I owe much of my career to them. I also don't think they're evil people plotting in the dark. I can see why the constant revenue would be attractive to them and help them update the software constantly. I don't think they're lying about that at all.
But every company acts in their own self-interest (and I don't expect anything else). So to buy into a system where there's no "check" if they start heading in the wrong direction is short-sighted in my opinion. I don't think there's enough competition out there for Adobe for me to feel safe going into CC.
I agree it's naive to think things will never change, but I also think it's naive to think we shouldn't try and have a say in the direction things are going to change.
Honestly, I'm not totally against a cloud subscription or the benefits of it, but I am against it being the only option. I understand it's their software and that it never really belongs to me, but I don't want to paint myself into a corner where a company will take away my tools if I stop paying them.
My personal decision is that I am going to purchase CS6 (currently on CS5.5) and then I'm going to stay there, hoping that Adobe either changes it's policies, or that a competitor rises in time before my software and system become obsolete.
That's my two bits...
[Brandon Davidson] "There's not enough competition out there to truly compete with several of Adobe's programs (there are exceptions, but generally it's safe to say Adobe has a large monopoly). This CC model gives them even more monopoly-like power to cut off consumers if they decide they don't want to buy into CC. The consumers only way to say no is to completely leave the software (which leaves many up a river without a paddle-because of the lack of competition)."
I think that's right. There is actually a fair bit of competition in video editing. But will their monopoly in graphics tempt them to choose a path that makes them more money, but makes their video editing program LESS competitive.
Of course the CC licensing actually makes it hard to leave the product, because you will lose access to your old projects once you switch. Maybe that's by design. The only choice, really, is to plan to pay monthly fees forever or choose not to use Premiere ever.
I think that a large part of the "monopoly" Adobe has on the raster and vector-based markets is due to the fact that Illustrator and Photoshop are the defacto standards which all the other software is judged by. It's not that it's a monopoly, it's that the professional design community looked around years ago, and decided that it was simply the best way to get their jobs done. Ad agencies, corporate art departments, and design firms all use these products, and the fact that they work very well in conjunction with the smaller niche products (AE, Encore, and PPro) has given these products a leg up as far as competing.
I know that when I was art director at a broadcast television station, if the many agencies who dealt with us and had to send in graphics for spot production were ever told that we used GIMP, or an other Photoshop alternative (good as they may be), they would have laughed us out of the room. That said, we used Combustion for quite a while before standardizing on After Effects, but that's essentially gone, unless you want to limp along on an old install of Combustion 4. Was Combustion better than AE? In many ways...the tracker blew it away, the keyer blew it away, and the animated paint blew it away, just to mention a few of the features. It also interacted very will with Edit* and 3DS Max, which was unheard of at the time. Just because it's good, doesn't mean it's going to be around forever, and sometimes the reverse is true, if you can maintain market share. We also used CorelDraw for some time, before standardizing on Illustrator; now the only place you see Corel being used with any regularity is in the sign industry. It's a weird world out there when it comes to software competition...