Adobe flexing their muscles

Y

yzfmike

Messages
210
Edit My Images
No
Bought Lightroom 6 a couple of years ago - totally legit copy downloaded from their site, paid for, and registered.
Updated regularly - necessary to read D500 raws. Ended up v6.14
Bought new computer a couple of days ago. Logged on to my account on Adobe's site followed instructions to download, including uninstalling from old computer.
Everything seemed OK until I tried to view D500 raws - "no preview available" etc..
Noticed that the downloaded version was v6,0
Attempted to update - reply said up to date version installed..
Googled problem and found that I'm not alone. Adobe have got my money but crippled my version of Lightroom. Update not possible.
Quite unacceptable

What a lovely company!
 
All the links I can find on the above 2 replies seem to lead to Lightroom 6.0 installer.
I've already done this the kosher way via adobe's website using my paid for account.
Still can't find a way to update the original release
Doh!
 
Went to Adobe support and got online help. After a few checks to ensure I was genuine they gave me a link to download LR6.14 and stayed online until I reported success,
Mixed feelings. Disappointed that I had the problem because they really want us all to subscribe to CC, but pleased with the help and attitude from the support person.
Anyway, all's well that ends well.
Thanks to Rupa at Adobe
 
This sort of problem mainly exists because Adobe really, really wants us to sign up to their more profitable CC subscriptions. In the pre-CC era you could easily find documentation, installers and versioned updaters for older products on their website. Support material for these products has now been removed and replaced with generic CC instructions, links to installers are no longer easily discoverable, and the last update for standalone LR was made a secondary function of a Lightroom CC demo installer for no good reason. It's no accident that it's easier just to give up and rent CC than it is to jump through the hoops required to reinstall an older product.
 
Retune said:
This sort of problem mainly exists because Adobe really, really wants us to sign up to their more profitable CC subscriptions. In the pre-CC era you could easily find documentation, installers and versioned updaters for older products on their website. Support material for these products has now been removed and replaced with generic CC instructions, links to installers are no longer easily discoverable, and the last update for standalone LR was made a secondary function of a Lightroom CC demo installer for no good reason. It's no accident that it's easier just to give up and rent CC than it is to jump through the hoops required to reinstall an older product.
Click to expand...

Adobe replaced the old school lightroom standalone with creative cloud in 2013.

It's hardly unexpected that 7 years later that their website is geared towards the current product.

You always have the option of using an alternative product from a different software company.

I wouldn't have thought that too many software companies would still be providing online support for a product that was replaced 7 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Not entirely true - Lightroom 6.0 was available as a standalone product in 2015, with the most recent update to 6.14 in December 2017. You could get Lightroom as part of the CC bundle at the same time.

I'm glad the OP got sorted.

f/2.8 said:
Adobe replaced the old school lightroom standalone with creative cloud in 2013.

It's hardly unexpected that 7 years later that their website is geared towards their current product.

You always have the option of using an alternative product from a different software company.

I wouldn't have thought that too many software companies would still be providing online support for a product that was replaced 7 years ago.
Click to expand...
 
andrewc said:
Not entirely true - Lightroom 6.0 was available as a standalone product in 2015, with the most recent update to 6.14 in December 2017. You could get Lightroom as part of the CC bundle at the same time.

I'm glad the OP got sorted.
Click to expand...

It is entirely true.

Just because they still offered the old out of date product for some additional time after it was superseded by the current product doesn't change the fact that it was replaced.

The only surprising thing is that they still continue to offer support on such an old and outdated product, very few software companies will do that for any length of time after a product is replaced with an alternative.
 
f/2.8 said:
Adobe replaced the old school lightroom standalone with creative cloud in 2013.

It's hardly unexpected that 7 years later that their website is geared towards the current product.

You always have the option of using an alternative product from a different software company.

I wouldn't have thought that too many software companies would still be providing online support for a product that was replaced 7 years ago.
Click to expand...

As Andrew points out, LR6 was updated until 2017 and sold even later, until March 2019, so Adobe were still making money from it last year. Go to the Adobe site this year and there's little evidence it ever existed. Meanwhile, Office 2010 customers can easily download the installers, and MS still offers perpetual licences for Office 2019 if you'd prefer not to rent it. Adobe perpetual licences were always expensive, yet companies whose customers have generally never even paid them for their product (e.g. Ubuntu) happily maintain software archives going back decades. Retaining passive support for pre-CC products (i.e., not nuking the public web pages) would not have killed a company worth hundreds of billions of dollars. In fact, it probably costs them more to field service calls like this one, but this is more than offset by driving more customers to CC.
 
Retune said:
As Andrew points out, LR6 was updated until 2017 and sold even later, until March 2019, so Adobe were still making money from it last year. Go to the Adobe site this year and there's little evidence it ever existed. Meanwhile, Office 2010 customers can easily download the installers, and MS still offers perpetual licences for Office 2019 if you'd prefer not to rent it. Adobe perpetual licences were always expensive, yet companies whose customers have generally never even paid them for their product (e.g. Ubuntu) happily maintain software archives going back decades. Retaining passive support for pre-CC products (i.e., not nuking the public web pages) would not have killed a company worth hundreds of billions of dollars. In fact, it probably costs them more to field service calls like this one, but this is more than offset by driving more customers to CC.
Click to expand...

Adobe stopped selling it in 2015, yes you may have been able to purchase old stock retailers still had laying around after that.

If you want to use old out dated software that is your choice but honestly I think you are being more than a little over the top in your criticism of Adobe about support for a product they replaced 7 years ago and stopped selling 5 years ago. Especially when they did resolve your problem for you.

If you don't like the new Adobe model nobody is forcing to use it, you have the option of using software from many other completely different companies.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
The only surprising thing is that they still continue to offer support on such an old and outdated product, very few software companies will do that for any length of time after a product is replaced with an alternative.
Click to expand...

Companies selling subscription software have rather less of an incentive to maintain backward support.

If you sell perpetual licences then if you say choose not to support Windows 8.1 after a given date you may well end up with a group of customers who have no reason top pay you to upgrade because yuo aren't offering them one.

If you sell subscription licences then they still have to pay the subscription to use the software and by not updating their OS it's effectively their choice not to receive any benefits of new features.

Of course if you have enough 'pro' customers on Windows 7 who pay higher subscriptions and maybe are in a better more negotiable position as a premium customer group - you might well keep support for Windows 7. So even though the subscription shifts the balance of power - that shift is greater for some categoruies of customer than others.
 
f/2.8 said:
If you don't like the new Adobe model nobody is forcing to use it, you have the option of using software from many other completely different companies.
Click to expand...

It becomes difficult for customers to shift - Lightroom is difficult to escape after several years and many images -not just the catalogue but the non-destructive edit system. Putting your data into a software company's cloud will increasingly make it even harder.

This isn't a new problem or one that is caused just by subscription software. But it is convenient to the dominant players as it acts as a barrier to competition.
 
I've just been on my adobe account. There is a download of Lightroom 6 available via my adobe account (plans>order history). I'm not sure if it will be 6.14 version.

Whilst i agree that support shouldn't be provided for eternity it should be available for a reasonable period of time after the company last SOLD the product (which in this case was up to March 2019- 1 year ago). To be fair to Adobe they have come up trumps for the OP in this case.
 
f/2.8 said:
Adobe stopped selling it in 2015, yes you may have been able to purchase old stock retailers still had laying around after that.

If you want to use old out dated software that is your choice but honestly I think you are being more than a little over the top in your criticism of Adobe about support for a product they replaced 7 years ago and stopped selling 5 years ago. Especially when they did resolve your problem for you.

If you don't like the new Adobe model nobody is forcing to use it, you have the option of using software from many other completely different companies.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean by 'stopped selling'. LR6 was available in parallel with CC, both as a download and as a boxed product from major retailers until 2019. In the case of the download, there was no stock to be lying around. Adobe had originally said the standalone version would be available 'indefinitely', but those of us who remember what happened to CS6 knew what that meant.

As a CS6 user, I don't really see anything outdated about it, though it was released 8 years ago. It's a modern set of applications that works without a hitch on Windows 10. CC has more features, but nothing I particularly care about. From Adobe's point of view, customers like me who rarely bothered upgrading to get things we didn't need must have made the rental model look very attractive. And judging by their soaring share price it's been a wildly sucessful strategy.

There are indeed other products from other companies, though as Adobe knew perfectly well when they switched to subscriptions, they had a near monopoly on professional level image editing tools and the degree of lock-in that Andrew mentions. With healthier competition, they might have taken a different route. At work, where image editing is something I need to do only sporadically, I would normally buy the current version of CS when I got a new computer or a new job. If CS6 were still available in its current form I would buy that. Since it isn't, and a subscription isn't justifiable (a single year of CC All Apps costs about as much as the old perpetual licence for CS6 Design Standard with institutional pricing) my current PC has the Affinity suite.
 
I've just been on my adobe account. There is a download of Lightroom 6 available via my adobe account (plans>order history). I'm not sure if it will be 6.14 version.
Click to expand...
Trust me - it downloads LR 6.0
 
andrewc said:
save it locally just in case.
Click to expand...

^ This. It applies to all software / standalone versions. Sooner or later they disappear from all original places and even the dodgy sites eventually.

This somewhat reminds me of a situation where a lab appliance only runs on certain antiquated PC hardware and software is only on that disk... You have a problem with any of it, you have a very big problem, or more precisely a very big hole in the pocket.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
^ This. It applies to all software / standalone versions. Sooner or later they disappear from all original places and even the dodgy sites eventually.
Click to expand...
Sometimes even that isn't enough, e.g. when updates have been delivered via the software's own update function, or installation needs to use an activation server that has gone away. One nice thing I can say about Adobe is that they made versions of CS2 and CS3 available for download that didn't require activation when they killed the servers.

LongLensPhotography said:
This somewhat reminds me of a situation where a lab appliance only runs on certain antiquated PC hardware and software is only on that disk... You have a problem with any of it, you have a very big problem, or more precisely a very big hole in the pocket.
Click to expand...

That's how they sell you the expensive service contract that spreads the pain over 3 years...
 
To put this into perspective, another popular package, Photomechanic version 5 (bought late 2017) is totally useless and won't even run on current versions of OSX as it's a 32 bit application, so you need to buy the upgrade to version 6 (released early 2019). Considering OSX has had the ability to run 64 bit applications since 2005, they were probably a bit sneeky in selling a 32 bit only application as late as 2017 (after apple had told developers they would move to 64 bit only and bearing in mind it's not obvious to the purchaser) so the photomechanic team were somewhat late to the party :)

I understand their reasons, but it does show that Adobe has been somewhat flexible in support for older versions of the app!

and yes, I am bitter! :)
 
The perfect Capitalist success story, really. Create a product in an emergent market; make it the best product by so much, there is no effective competition. Ensure legal protection for as many aspects of your product's design as possible, so competitors cannot create anything remotely similar. . Thereby creating an effective monopoly. Make everyone more or less dependent on your products, and set whatever price you like; whatever the market will bear. Constantly look for new ways to ensure revenue and profits. Switch to an even more efficient subscription service. Make even more profit.

It's a bit like drug dealing; get 'em hooked, eliminate the competition, then you have total control and power over your market.

Adobe used to charge ridiculous sums for its products, then 90% of users just downloaded/stole hooky copies or used a 'work' version at home, etc. Then Adobe effectively ended that by switching to a subscription service. I mean, you have to admire them for their tactics really.


Ubuntu? But, but that's COMMUNISM! Surely??!
 
AZ6 said:
Adobe used to charge ridiculous sums for its products, then 90% of users just downloaded/stole hooky copies or used a 'work' version at home, etc. Then Adobe effectively ended that by switching to a subscription service. I mean, you have to admire them for their tactics really.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
Why shouldn't they protect their product?
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Absolutely.
Why shouldn't they protect their product?
Click to expand...

Of course. I suppose they got fed up of everyone just using hooky copies. But I always wondered; if they'd charged a reasonable price, say £40 or so, would they not have had loads more sales? Like, 10x £40 is the £400 or whatever they did charge. Chuck in a good manual with it, bosh. I knew hardly anyone who had a legit copy, and I'm talking about proper design agencies, the lot! Many such businesses would have one legit licence, but use it on a lot more machines.

Can we talk about Adobe's tax dealings? Can we? Pleeeaase??!
 
I'm sure it cannot be the case that 90% of Adobe users stole or "borrowed" their software. Do you have any evidence for that percentage?

"I can't wait for the fuss that will be created when Adobe decide to turn off the activation servers for LR6 as they are doing with older versions of their software. "

What would that entail for users?
 
Last edited:
The standard CS licence explicitly allowed a second installation on a laptop or home computer. With PS7 and earlier (pre CS) there were no technical measures to limit the number of copies that could be installed with a single licence key. Online activation was introduced with the first version of CS in 2003, which limited the number of installations.

Has Adobe turned off the activation servers for any product without providing a workaround? For CS2 and CS3 they made special versions available that didn't need activation.

The move to CC hasn't stopped piracy. A quick Google search will show that CC is still being cracked, just as CS was.
 
jerry12953 said:
I'm sure it cannot be the case that 90% of Adobe users stole or "borrowed" their software. Do you have any evidence for that percentage?
Click to expand...

No, but it is scientific fact. No I don't know; it was a LOT. I mean, one copy in an agency with 20, 30 people all using it, and running off copies to use at home/give to mates/flog down the pub etc, that's a lot of 'illegitimate' users...
 
jerry12953 said:
What would that entail for users?
Click to expand...

Just as today without internet connection your legally paid for software would refuse to load and run. Supper annoying once it happens and I complained to Adobe many times.


AZ6 said:
Ubuntu? But, but that's COMMUNISM! Surely??!
Click to expand...

Slightly ott but no. Where is the tyrant and where is the KGB? There isn't - all is done by free will, participation and share of knowledge. Your local library probably isn't communist either.
I can name you many other things that are communist. Facebook and Google for example.
 
AZ6 said:
Of course. I suppose they got fed up of everyone just using hooky copies. But I always wondered; if they'd charged a reasonable price, say £40 or so, would they not have had loads more sales? Like, 10x £40 is the £400 or whatever they did charge. Chuck in a good manual with it, bosh. I knew hardly anyone who had a legit copy, and I'm talking about proper design agencies, the lot! Many such businesses would have one legit licence, but use it on a lot more machines.

Can we talk about Adobe's tax dealings? Can we? Pleeeaase??!
Click to expand...
The problem is there subscription model has one price. £10 a month seems fantastic value for a business user but less so for a hobbyist who probably didn’t upgrade every version.
 
AZ6 said:
No, but it is scientific fact. No I don't know; it was a LOT. I mean, one copy in an agency with 20, 30 people all using it, and running off copies to use at home/give to mates/flog down the pub etc, that's a lot of 'illegitimate' users...
Click to expand...

My guess it was mostly kids trying it out or simply having it for the sake of it, and all just for fun but profit. I doubt most businesses users tool that risk.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
I doubt most businesses users tool that risk.
Click to expand...

You'd be amazed, what businesses get up to...

There was no way to police the use of such software. How were Adobe ever going to find out? 1x£400 or whatever, or 20-30 times £400? In my experience, it was fairly commonplace. Certainly in smaller agencies. And definitely amongst freelancers.


rob-nikon said:
The problem is there subscription model has one price. £10 a month seems fantastic value for a business user but less so for a hobbyist who probably didn’t upgrade every version.
Click to expand...

I'm looking to upgrade my computer in a few months; it'll be a relatively large purchase. £10 a month doesn't seem so much, but then add that up and it's £120 a year, £600 over 5 years, and so on (assuming prices stay the same, which they won't). I've been on LR 5.6 for years now, and it's fine. I'd even be happy to pay £600 and have done with it, not 'upgrade' or anything. The full CS suite is currently £30.34 a month until 28 May, then it's £50 a month. That is a big outlay. I'd have to cut down on my beer intake...
 
AZ6 said:
No, but it is scientific fact. No I don't know; it was a LOT. I mean, one copy in an agency with 20, 30 people all using it, and running off copies to use at home/give to mates/flog down the pub etc, that's a lot of 'illegitimate' users...
Click to expand...
That would have needed a cracked copy after 2003 - legitimate copies had limited online activations.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Just as today without internet connection your legally paid for software would refuse to load and run. Supper annoying once it happens and I complained to Adobe many times.
Click to expand...
LR6 would still run, but you wouldn't be able to re-install it. Hopefully Adobe would do the decent thing and release an activation-free version as they did with CS2 & CS3.
 
Retune said:
That would have needed a cracked copy after 2003 - legitimate copies had limited online activations.
Click to expand...

Very easy to get round that. Apparently. So I've been told...

But the thing is; if I want to continue to use Adobe products from now, I'd have to pay a subscription. I have no choice. This is a very good marketing ploy; I'd be 'locked in'. I need to see if it's going to actually be worth it for my needs; I'm not earning money from using it, so it's purely for 'hobby' purposes. I'm going to shortly be looking into the possibility of running my old apps on a new machine. It may involve the use of a virtual machine. I doubt I can just install the apps on a new Mac, and have them run fine. But for LR, I may just buy an alternative; there are at least a few on the market. For PS, I can possibly live with running a VM for when I need it. That's fine for my purposes. Then there's always GIMP...
 
Last edited:
AZ6 said:
I'm looking to upgrade my computer in a few months; it'll be a relatively large purchase. £10 a month doesn't seem so much, but then add that up and it's £120 a year, £600 over 5 years, and so on (assuming prices stay the same, which they won't). I've been on LR 5.6 for years now, and it's fine. I'd even be happy to pay £600 and have done with it, not 'upgrade' or anything. The full CS suite is currently £30.34 a month until 28 May, then it's £50 a month. That is a big outlay. I'd have to cut down on my beer intake...
Click to expand...
The photography plan is hard to compare against a stand-alone version like LR5 if you’ve used it for years without upgrading. To be fair Adobe you get more than just lightroom as there is photoshop, lightroom mobile and a website through adobe portfolio. whether it’s good value depends on your use, for a professional it’s a steal but for some hobbyists it doesn’t make as much sense. There are other options such as affinity which has both desktop and mobile versions.
 
rob-nikon said:
The photography plan is hard to compare against a stand-alone version like LR5 if you’ve used it for years without upgrading. To be fair Adobe you get more than just lightroom as there is photoshop, lightroom mobile and a website through adobe portfolio. whether it’s good value depends on your use, for a professional it’s a steal but for some hobbyists it doesn’t make as much sense. There are other options such as affinity which has both desktop and mobile versions.
Click to expand...

Yeah thanks; I've downloaded Affinity and I'll have a play with it on the PC. Looks ok from what I've seen. It may well be that it's absolutely fine for my needs. It's a tad cheaper than a year's Adobe sub. I am seeing how a Brave New Adobe Free World might look. Looking at spending a fair chunk on a new Mac, so I need to know that it'll be an 'upgrade' on my current machine. No good buying one only to find out it's not going to do what I want, without spending loads more money. My current Mac is 14 years old, and tbh, it's only really in the video capabilities, that it's lacking.

Photoshop Express would probably do me, I mean why can't they just do a version of that? Looks like there's a chance Adobe might not be getting any money out of me, and that's down to their business model. Some serious competition for them is long overdue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top