Adobe kills Creative Suite

"Adobe had been expected to demo Creative Suite 7 at its MAX conference down in smoky Los Angeles on Monday, but instead announced there'll be no more versions of its boxed software and that the Creative Suite brand will cease to exist. All CS apps updates will only be added to its Creative Cloud suite, and Adobe showed off some new tools to tempt its software stick-in-the-muds online.

"We believe that we're now collectively hitting a tipping point where the web is now ready for a generation of tools and services that help build the future of HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript web," said David Wadhwani, general manager of Adobe's digital media business unit, at the MAX keynote.

The current system of duplicating changes made in the Creative Suite and Creative Cloud products was wasteful and unproductive, he explained, and while existing boxed-software owners will still be supported, they won't be getting any more upgrades from Adobe.

The dropping of boxed software wasn't unexpected, as El Reg warned in March – but the speed of the shift will take some by surprise. Creative Cloud was launched barely a year ago, and while its growth has been impressive it still has only half a million paying users. The move to cloud runs the risk of alienating users who've been with the company for a long time and don't want or need a cloud service."

LINK

So. Ablowme has effectively killed photoshop. are you going to upload your clearly IP infringing artwork to Ablowme's cloud servers for inspection? Are you willing to login to your photoshop to see what Ablowme will let you do today?

Subscription based cloud software. Any user dumb enough to buy into this gets an auto-win in the Darwinian Awards.

 

It's the way everything is going.
And let's face it, has anyone here actually paid for photoshop or CS? I'm pretty sure we all get it for free. And if we do, we can't complain.

I still use CS3 and if I had to lose it I wouldn't be able to use any new version as it is out of my price range.

 

I don't have the money for any version

 

I hate all this cloud-based stuff we have nowadays. I'll be sticking with CS3 (Which I bought). It has everything I need.

 

yeah, I'm not going higher then cs6 if there won't be a "real" program. I'm pretty sure that others like gimp is gonna gain popularity from this

 

Imsure there will be a lot of people running older copies, hell, I liked PS6 a lot better than CS2

ps prices have traditionally kept 90% of it's users from bothering to pay for it.

cloud computing is just the new thin-client subscription crap software companies have been trying to foist on us for 20 years. You do the work, they own the data. It's like free beta testing, honest politics, anything marked "value added", or fair taxes; only a complete moron buys into it.

Ablome has managed to get 2 of it's minions into key spots in the gimp, and they're fucking it up as fast as possible. Ablome really HAS to slow down gimp, just like 3dsmax is going to HAVE to slow down blender.

BTW, have you read about Ablome's bid to wipe out tiy Ninite the auto-updating software?
LINK

"Sysadmin blog: Adobe wants the ability to easily roll out Flash updates removed from Ninite, the sysadmin Swiss army knife. I'm going to explain why this is a terrible thing."

http://ninite.com/

What it really means is that by using a non-Ablome delivery method, Ablome's first line of access to stealing your data is being threatened. If you know anything about app security, you know that Flash is among the worst offenders violating user systems. The reason it's still the worst after a 10 year period is that Ablome uses it to suck all the nfo they want from any users system that has it installed. It' in the EULA if you're lawyer enough to drag it out. (same clauses are in both Apple and Microsoft's EULA's, and dont even look towards google).

 

How will this work with people rendering large video files in premiere?

 

You mean those 38 gigabyte manipulation files? My guess is Adobe is a first adopter to the new remote graphics appliances nvidia is pushing this year.

The work is done on the servers and all the user sees is just the picture. Actually, a whole lotta users can see the picture in realtime while the server does the grunt work.

[youtube]DFE5KU3AiIU[/youtube]

 

as far as i'm aware, the term Cloud for the new adobe suite is a bit misleading, the applications will still be installed locally, and files are still saved locally (with the option to save to some cloud space you are given as part of your subscription). it's not what you'd expect from the term cloud computing, it's more like an app installed on a smart phone. it's all installed locally and it just pulls updates from a central connection to adobe.

from Adobe FAQ

Q: Do I need ongoing Internet access to use my Creative Cloud desktop applications?

A: No. Your Creative Cloud desktop applications (such as Photoshop and Illustrator) are installed directly on your computer, so you won't need an ongoing Internet connection to use them on a daily basis.

 

It's all background synched whenever you ARE online.

http://blogs.adobe.com/creativecloud/
http://www.macstories.net/tag/creative-cloud/

So, at the moment it's hybridized. Yes you can work offline, but when you are online it synchs all files that adobe wants, which means, when you cancel your subscription after a grace period of time (adobes discretion) your apps will brick.

This isnt new folks, Oracle did this with their online dbase functions about 2002.

No matter what else it does, thin client ALWAYS fucks the user.

ALWAYS.

That's the real point of thin client, to give ease of control to the admins.

 

What do you mean by this? I'm not really sure what's so bad about it but you really don't like the idea. Why are they fucking us?

 

Probably because I've already been a network admin for many years and Ive watched how user freedoms and controls have been whittled away a little more each year. Ive lived both as a user and as an admin on thin client systems. From personal experience I know for a universal truth, you never ever want to go from administering your own system to being at the mercy of someone else administering/controlling your system. And most assuredly not your data.

How do you regain your data or control of your system once it's gone?

You dont.

And that means you're at the mercy of total admin bastards like me. Or worse, IT managers. Just imagine all your system being subject to periodic audits by the IP bean counters.

In a thin client world it will be, and you'll be responsible to pay what they decide you will. Either that or every once in a while all your data will go poof.

Mainly because they dont give a shit.

 

I still don't get what you mean. That's very vague. I'm asking what exactly is bad about what Adobe is doing? What will b worse on a day to day basis for users? Why will users lose control of any content they have created? And why do you think Adobe have any legal right to audit my system?

 

No, it's not vague. It's quite plainly stated. In technology, whoever manages the data owns it.

If that's you on your system, you have control, you own it. If your applications, your collaborative data, your archival backups, are stored "in the cloud" and you merely "synch" to keep your local content viable until you can "synch" again you dont own, or manage it. The cloud servers do. That means Adobe does. And that means anything they feel like doing with it is what will be done.

http://www.cloudways.com/blog/cloud-failures-disasters-of-2011/

 

I agree 100% with Cy!. Even if you don't notice any changes when you first switch, they are waiting down the line. They wouldn't be stupid enough to go hard ass before everyone has adopted the technology and become dependent on it. The key here is that they are trying to force everyone to depend on their middleman services more and more often, not just every time a new version number comes out. It's purely about control. Why else would they be doing this? What incentives do they have if not for more profit or more control? I fail to see how this thin client crap is any different from installing the regular version beyond the having to pay a monthly or yearly subscription and having to connect to adobe's servers either once a month or once a year. I mean, as it currently is, the program can do updates in the background. All this does is give them more leverage over you and your data and (maybe) tamp down on piracy. Funny thing is that the software crackers will likely have a de-clouded version of Photoshop where they can completely circumvent the monthly checkups and only the honest paying customers will suffer will this crippled crap.

 

Im using Gimp...and MS Picture It (another discontinued program)....i tried CS4 but Gimp does basically the same!So if you're telling me its going online...i dont see the point in getting it anymore!
Its going to be like this??? http://pixlr.com/editor/

 

No, everything will still look and act exactly the same. The differences will be your control over the application and resulting data.

Think of it as a picture editor itunes.

 

Cy, are you saying that adobe will have legal rights to all media created with the services people pay for? I can't see how an intellectual property becomes the right of a third party simply because you are using technology developed by them. Especially as it is not ad driven but fee driven.

Do you really think people will use a product with which their creative works can be given access to or control over by a third party without their consent? No. Because it is both illegal to do so and adobe is smart enough to realise that it would kill it's own product in one generation of it's release.

I think you are over-reacting to this.

 

Do you ever use photos from the web that arent licensed to you? Do you get permission to cap movies? License clips? Own the fonts you use in artwork? Do you have unlicensed plugins? 3rd party external apps that extend an Adobe product? Do you routinely use scans of mag pics without publisher permission?

Of course you do. 5/6 of the graphics companies in the world do too. With cloud based apps and storage all those things are open to Adobe's management services. They can and will filter content by license, just like apple does with mp3's and if you dont have the proper DRM the very BEST you can hope for is to have your content deleted from the cloud SANS, at worst you could be held liable/fined for breaking IP law. Just like the do with music/movie piracy. Make no mistake, the worlds businesses are catching up with the online marketing world at last, and their answer to the internet chaos/public freedom is to move content to their control/management. The "cloud" is exactly what that will do. They claim it's to make things better, but what that really means is it will be "better" for them. Right now, you know what you have, microsoft knows what you have or apple knows what you have and if you have an adobe product they know what you have. Right now, with you having the data locally, it isnt cost effective/possible for them to litigate against 99% of the worlds population. But what if you have your apps and data stored/accessed from their servers? Look at Office 365. It's subscription based office productivity. For about $50 a month you get to USE office. That means you're spending $600 A YEAR PER SEAT to use the same Office you used to have for $500 permanently. Whats more, all your fonts, are monitored and have to be approved, you cant use those old office 97 plugins anymore (buy our new ones) and your content is filter checked by M$ on every synch for possible DRM issues. Do you think Adobe will be different/better than microsoft? Let's not even consider the draconian measures that apple has routinely used to safeguard their OS and apps. Anybody that uses apple has a lease so far up their ass when they fart they taste it. Think I'm nuts? read up on the "bonjour service" that comes with any apple software or appliance. It's pure grade-A DRM, baby, yeah.

Think it's bullshit?

Read this :LINK from a few years ago, where sony did EXACTLY what I'm talking about.

If you use Apple OS later than 9x or Microsoft Windows later than XP youre fucked. Vista had teredo (non tcp based network phone home) but it was broken, so did OS 10.1 which was better but not too good. (remember all those spinning beachballs of death?)

The truth is, neither windows nor osx have really made even reasonable strides in usability in the last 10 years. But they made GIGANTIC strides in control, management, DRM, and IP sec. Yes, things have gotten better from a user standpoint, at least things do usually work reasonably quickly now, but not remotely as good as if development had been focused on user performance over DRM and user management controls. Just imagine how fast your mega system (unbelievably powerful by standards 5 years ago) would be if you could have an OS that just did it's job of translating hardware to software interactions with really well developed UI's and application space processing!

Imagine if youre system didnt spend 15-20% of it's processing power constantly running DRM based services playing tattle tale for everything you do. Whether it's DRM, IP sec, consumer profiling or .gov monitoring, your computer spends a good bit of time telling other people about your personal habits.

*Any cloud increases this by an order of magnitude at least.*

http://www.techhive.com/article/230515/So_Youre_Being_Sued_for_Piracy.html

It's real, it's here, and the cloud makes it so simple even middle managers named Lumburgh can do it.

Here's the new "fuck the users" legislation that will make it all legal for MS, Apple and yes, Adobe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_Intelligence_Sharing_and_Protection_Act

It sounds bad, but if you think it through, it looks a whole lot fucking worse as far as that leash up your ass goes.

 

I use cloud technology right now for my writing, which means I can write anywhere. To this day not one of my pieces has shown up anywhere other than my own equipment. It's as secure as needed.

Cloud technology is here and staying. We all have to learn to use it or no longer be able to work with what we want. Adobe isn't stupid enough to allow people access to people intellectual properties, especially when so many professionals use their products and rely on it to make serious money. It would only take a handful of lawsuits from a few large clients who lost their work to cripple adobe.

Your work will be fine. My work will be fine. And let's face it, neither of us are doing anything with adobe that would warrant an emotional meltdown should we lose it. A few signatures, a wallpaper or edit? Please.