First off I "sort of" agree with you. We wanted to buy 5 new machines for our office and we wanted them all to use PS CS.
We already had 5 liscenses for 7.0, so we in essence wanted to upgrade this liscenes (hey, we had some upgrade money we needed to use) and I was shocked how much this upgrade was going to cost.
It was going to cost about 1,200. Luckily for us the guys at <
http://www.CustomPerfection.com> (who built our computers) cut the price of the machines down some to help us off set the massive cost of this order.
(The upgrade was costing about the same as the entire graphic work station computer) See here: <
http://www.customperfect.com/Base-Models/GraphicDesigner/cle arcase/>
My idea for you is to run CS on two machines, and 7.0 on your other machines, although I am not sure if that is legal. I know the license might say it’s not, but if you are only using one machine at a time you have a legitamite argument. Of course they (and I) would have to wonder why one would need 5 machines if only 1 were going to be used at a time.
As for the Piracy theory, it’s just BS. It’s easily proved by the software game market. PC Games cost much less than console games, despite the fact that PC games are MUCH MUCH MUCH more pirated than console games. Anyone can pirate a PC game, while only people who modify the hardware of their console machines (very few) can pirate console games.
Oh my. I meant to spell check that last message… My spelling was terrible (on purpose) as I typed that message in very fast.
Oh well…. I guess everyone will need to suffer as I slaughter the english language with poor typing.
Adobe Illustrator 4.1 and MS Word 4 both cost $49. MS sent Windows 1.03 and MASM 6.01 upgrades to registered users free of charge. MS Access 1.0, complete with three big books, was $30. The Windows 3.1 upgrade was $10.
Of course, back then, people bought every upgrade that was offered… now they often skip versions.
(No mention of anti-piracy measures allowing lower prices.)
DrJohnD,
You shuld have clamed poetic liscense, but I gess that wuld not be legitamite 🙂 🙂
George
Your five installs is one of the reasons for activation. So for all of you anti-activation zealots out there, here’s a target for you.
As for the price, PS 7.0 was actually lowered from the 199.00 of 6.0. The $99.00 was after a rebate that was offered by Amazon. The actual price was $149.00. So if you want to complain about price, why not send Amazon an e-mail?
Bob
Bob_Levine wrote in
news::
Your five installs is one of the reasons for activation.
Come now, Bob. If he was pirating, he would have used the rather easily obtainable activation crack.
Activation on Photoshop is nothing more than annoying and insulting for the loyal customer.
I am guessing though that no everyone can find "activation cracks".
The theory I’ve heard most about anti-piracy measures being taken revolves around keeping the average end user from allowing his buddy copy his software.
In this case though, it would appear that 2 installs are allowed by the activation, so it wouldn’t stop this.
What I really hate is when software (like XP) refuses to run when you make too many changes (upgrades) to your own computer. That is insanity.
"MS sent Windows 1.03 to registered users free of charge."
It was either that or pay the customers to take it…………
Actually, I never said I had PS 7 installed on five computers.
In reality I only have it on 3 computers – 1 laptop, 2 desktop computers. So in reality I am only "one toke over the line" to coin a phrase. My point was to emphasize the arbitrariness of these convoluted schemes (2 computers okay, 3 computers bad) that become invasive in how a consumer uses a product they have paid for and supposedly own – although I am aware no customer actually owns their software, they are only using it at the pleasure of the publisher. I wonder how well these EULAs would truly survive in a sustained court battle? I’m not threatening. I am just wondering out loud.
Anyway, my final point is how unimaginative the software industry is in working with customers to legal/morally obtain/use their products. People who actually try are usually the fools while the morally ambiguous happily crack/pirate to their hearts content. I think publishers like Adobe (I don’t mean to single them out) are very unresponsive to such views and I guess they view it as a cost of doing business to write people like me off.
I have always paid for software I use. I have receipts for software going back to the mid 80’s. I’ve played by the rules all this time. I’m just a bit miffed that it looks like I’m a loser when companies arbitrarily change the rules and don’t offer accommodations to paying customers.
-CB
<Bob_Levine> wrote in message
Your five installs is one of the reasons for activation. So for all of you anti-activation zealots out there, here’s a target for you.
As for the price, PS 7.0 was actually lowered from the 199.00 of 6.0. The $99.00 was after a rebate that was offered by Amazon. The actual price was $149.00. So if you want to complain about price, why not send Amazon an e-mail?
Bob
ctbarker32,
Don’t like the criteria?. Don’t buy it! Adobe are losing $7 Billion a year through piracy and the like. Do you think they’ll notice?
Licences are the way to go. If you can afford to run 5 machines in/and a business, it’s buttons compared to the profits you’re going to make.
Get over it <
http://www.smileyworld.com/toolbar/>
Regards
Mark
Here’s a quote from Jerry Pournelle who has written eloquently about this topic since the dawn of personal computers:
Well, I have long argued that software licenses ought to be "just like a book" and I helped Philippe Kahn write the first Turbo Pascal license: just like a book. You can lend it, you can use it, you can put it on other machines, but one copy and one only ought to be in use at the same time.
I don’t know how to accomplish that with DRM, and perhaps it is impossible, but surely it is worth trying?
Make things sufficiently inconvenient for customers and you will lose your customers. It doesn’t follow that you don’t have the right to be pigheaded. In the early days it was clear that copy protected software never got popular: that was particularly true of word processors. People wanted to use them before buying. They often then bought them, in part to get the manuals — you got real manuals, printed on real paper in them there days — and in part to get the support and updates and such like. Microsoft for a very long time had no protection whatever on products, then went to those goofy keys but still did not insist on activation and the like. Interestingly, I am forever tearing down and rebuilding computers here, and I have yet to have an activation problem with Microsoft. As to Contribute2, the only such software I have is for a Mac and I have only one Mac so it’s not much of an issue.
I have long argued against most forms of DRM and still do, and I am not at all convinced it’s possible in any event, but I have talked with enough programmers to wonder now.
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/mail315.html#DRM7 -CB
wrote in message
As a preface, I will state that Adobe can conduct their business however they want. But, if they are interested in a customer’s views I offer them "free of charge".
Adobe are losing $7 Billion a year through piracy and the like. Do you think they’ll notice?
So, with Activation, their bottom-line is up by $7 billion! Wow!
Oh wait, just Photoshop has Activation, let’s call it 10% of overall sales. That’s $700 million they’ve gained! Wow!
My guess is you really didn’t read my message?
If you did, you will notice I specifically said I am home user. No business involved. I also said at the very beginning of my post that I respect Adobe’s right to run their business anyway they want. No matter if it confounds their customers. I would have thought this statement made it obvious I could just walk away. Also, that it was obvious I was just pebble in their shoe and my questions would most likely fall on deaf ears. I thought I would just throw caution to the wind and ask a few questions about the how and why of Adobe’s software activation scheme.
Sometimes in the course of business customers speak up about issues they may have with a company’s product. Sometimes a company responds to customers to address these issues. Instead of assuming things, I thought I would give Adobe a chance to offer reasonable solutions.
I don’t have anything to get over. I am trying to make an informed purchase so as to avoid disappointment.
Thanks for your insightful commentary. 😉
-CB
wrote in message
ctbarker32,
Don’t like the criteria?. Don’t buy it! Adobe are losing $7 Billion a year
through piracy and the like. Do you think they’ll notice?
Licences are the way to go. If you can afford to run 5 machines in/and a
business, it’s buttons compared to the profits you’re going to make.
Get over it <http://www.smileyworld.com/toolbar/>
Regards
Mark
Dave, stock price doesn’t necessarily mean that sales are up. Here’s the quote from your link:
LOS ANGELES (CBS.MW) — Adobe Systems shares rose nearly 6 percent Tuesday after the company boosted its outlook for the third quarter on strong sales of Photoshop and software used to share documents electronically. … After the close of Monday’s session, Adobe increased its outlook for third-quarter sales to $380 million to $400 million, saying demand is solid across all its major geographic markets. Previously, the company had put sales at $360 million to $380 million for the three-month period ending Sept. 3.
Presumably that document sharing thing means Acrobat, which is doing well in corporations. There’s no indication anywhere that they have made $7 billion because piracy has been stopped by product Activation, or that they might have lost long-time customers only to gain new business licenses, just that the business is trending up.
Dave, stock price doesn’t necessarily mean that sales are up.
true, but stockholders say "whatever you’re doing, don’t change it", when the news is good… also bloomburg financial today was talking about the document busienss as well as an overall boost in sales being a driving factor in the correction.
In reality I only have it on 3 computers
Still a violation of the EULA.
Bob
Installed on 2 computers I am wonderful customer. Installed on 3 computers I am a criminal? Only one owner/user in household. Seems pretty arbitrary. Even DVDs which have draconian encryption mechanisms and region coding don’t try to tell me which of the half dozen dvd players I have in the house I can play them on.
Why can’t Adobe license to the actual individual user instead of playing these semantic games?
I wasn’t expecting much but no one has really tried to answer my core questions. I guess no one really cares. Oh well.
Still a violation of the EULA.
Should I do a citizen’s arrest on myself?
-CB
<Bob_Levine> wrote in message
In reality I only have it on 3 computers
Still a violation of the EULA.
Bob
Should I do a citizen’s arrest on myself?
Just wait on your front porch. Someone will be around to help you, shortly.
this whole user vs. machine licensing has been gone over pretty well. there were many "debates" on it right after cs came out (10/2003). a forum search on activation will turn up many hits. the windup was that some people at adobe agreed it was worth looking at user licensing vs. machine (at least as far as letting you "deactivate" a copy automatically so you can go to your other machine in house and "reactivate" that one to use.) and also look at improving the activation mechinism itself as far as it repeatedly prompting some users for reactivation, especially when doing system restores.
they’ve said that activation isn’t going away, but I hope they either fix it so it’s unobtrusive (like xp’s – gasp – i can’t believe i just typed that) or remove it entirely.
In the process of hard-line enforcment of licensing changes, this Forum lost one of the best User-to-User people (YrbkMgr).
they’ve said that activation isn’t going away
Which cost this Forum some more faithful, long-time customers, and up&coming User-to-User people.
sadly nodding… hi tony, if you’re lurking!
Maybe in the future M$ will issue everyone on the planet a special number. It will be your PID. (Personal Identification Number) and they will create a licensing scheme that they’ll license to developers that will work like this:
All software will be easily obtainable online over high speed internet access. Your home computer will be your terminal, and your PID number will be required to allow you to use the software.
IE: if you paid for PS CS, they will enable your PID number. Then you could use PS CS on any machine on the planet, assuming that it was connected to the internet.
Dang, I am in the wrong line of work. That idea alone should be worth millions.
M$, look me up. I have lots of better ideas than this one!
;^)
"Should I do a citizen’s arrest on myself?"
Deputy Pyle’s dulcet tones are ringing in my head…
"All software will be easily obtainable online over high speed internet access"
Incredible though it may seem, most of the rest of the world does not have such access.
Fred,
Actually, incredible though it may seem, the U.S. does not lead the world in high speed internet.
<
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/2004-01-19-broadba nd_x.htm>
Lets just say that the countries that have the money, have high speed access. Heck, even some who don’t have much money (like South Korea) are blazing ahead in high speed access.
You’re missing the point – at the moment all anyone needs is a phone to activate and use Photoshop, XP et al. You do not even need an internet connection.
Your scheme would limit such software only to those people who have high-speed internet access. Iniquitous, to say the least.
I believe posts such as these are based on a lack of perspective to the true value of Adobe’s apps and the $billions and hassles saved in the imaging industry since computers took over. I’ll give you a run down.
Because of Adobe:
No more working in caustic chemicals, dark rooms that strain the eyes and induce fatique, no art file systems taking up entire buildings. No more production houses requiring huge staffs and square footage-(about 5 production people at around $25K a year each reduced to one workstation worker and that saves one company at least $100K a year as a conservative estimate).
Most think Adobe’s apps are just used for pagination publishing and photographers. Consider: Screen printers for t-shirts, caps, bumper stickers, pens and a myriad of other durable goods products with huge mark-ups for retail-(I use to work in this industry and saw the changes "SAVINGS" first hand). Include packaging, wide format printing posters, billboards and banners. The list goes on and on and we’re not even talking about the corporate biz world, medical, the internet and entertainment industry.
Adobe wrote Photoshop as a tool with many different nobs to accommodate all the different workflow scenarios that arise in the industries mentioned above in a GUI language everyone could understand.
Each upgrade is an improvement and/or an addition to not just one workflow but many that others aren’t aware of thus the lack of perspective on the true value of this amazing app.
Equating the impact of Adobe’s attempts at piracy protection policies on the retail side to the gaming industry’s attempts is a huge stretch of biz logic when you consider one generates well paid skilled jobs on a mass scale and the other only entertains.
$170 is cheap considering all this.
ctbarker32, you are kind of all over the place with your argument.
It seems like you are upset both because you can’t get a below retail price on your upgrade and because you won’t be able to pop the disk in more than two machines and use it this time…
The only thing that has really changed for most of the free world as far as how many systems you can run it on is their ability to better enforce the two system install with CS than they were able to with 7.
You are right about the arbitrary nature of the two system install. Why two systems and not three? Well if three systems, why not 5?
A single system is all they really would *need* to offer at the base price but I would assume that the second system is allowed as a curtesy… So how are the teeth looking on that gift horse?
As for the upgrade price and the price of the product in general, Adobe is marketing this product to professionals. I don’t think they have ever tried to hide that and quite honestly, for most professionals, the cost of learning how to most efficiently use the latest version both in terms cost for books and/or classes as well as time is far above the cost of the actual upgrade.
I know that I could have bought at least three upgrades for the cost of the books on my shelf with the names "Photoshop" and "CS" in the title…
The fact that you are a single, non-professional user who wants to upgrade three systems in their home for which there will be no financial return is unfortunate but you aren’t really who Adobe is marketing this product to, are you? The customers that I’m pretty sure they are targeting should be able to cover the costs of this upgrade the first time they use it for a client.
You know, when I was a kid, I worked at a McD’s where we had a $250 tomato slicer. It wasn’t electric or anything – just two sets of blades and a handle for the most part… It sliced tomatoes quickly and evenly and for that restaurant where every penny was profit or loss and where teenaged kids couldn’t be trusted to get a consistent size cut, it was ideal… I’m not much of a cook but in the days since, when I had to slice tomatoes having that slicer around might have been handy but not (in my opinion) for $250…
A lot of consumers don’t seem to see the distinction between consumer level and commercial software. They hear Photoshop is the best so that is what they decide they want without a lot of consideration as to who it is the best for and why it is the best for them. Cost is very much as much of a consideration as skill and ability. There are a lot of musically talented people who can’t afford grand pianos and if they aren’t making a living with it, there isn’t much justifiable reason for many of them to go through the expense of buying and keeping one. In a lot of ways, software like Photoshop is sort of the same story, IMHO.
I know this isn’t what you want to hear and I’m sorry but Adobe has come a long way with their consumer level offering which might be worth consideration during the next upgrade cycle.
Fred,
No my friend, it is you who are missing the point. I said "In The Future" and you my friend are busy thinking about how this idea would not work "today".
I am sure that newspaper columist said the same thing about nightly news broadcasts going out over a thing called the television. It will never work because so few people have these blasted televisions.
In the very near future (next 10 years) over 90% of the citizens of the worlds industrialized nations will have high speed internet access.
Television shows will be shown over the internet and a slow merge between what’s seen on TV and what’s shown on the computer will take place. Even the hardware as we know it will change. The TV and PC will merge into one unit.
I might add that I personaly am not very happy about it, but it’s where things are headed nonetheless.
Just looked Amazon’s site for an Office 2003 upgrade – it’s $270 for a $430 program. Photoshop’s upgrade is $160 for a $590 program – seems cheap to me.
—
Rick Moore
Barnes Gromatzky Kosarek Architects
www.bgkarchitects.com
Thanks for the extended response. I voiced my opinion and got a lot of opinions. Unfortunately none really directly addressed some of the examples I gave in any kind of logical fashion but instead offered subjective opinion about why I’m all wet.
Specifically, I gave specific examples of how other companies deal with licensing and limitations of multi machine installs. I mentioned Sonic Foundry as an example that deals more flexibly with this. I also offered an example where a "home" mult-pack license could be sold to cover these situations. I believe Apple for example offers some kind of break on mult installs in a home environment.
To be blunt you chose not to address any of my suggestions but chose to lecture me about how I’m probably just not the "right kind of person" to be allowed into the exulted Adobe Photoshop Guild. I really shouldn’t be trying to play in the big boys swimming pool and should just shut up and make do with other tools that are more geared for my limited intelligence and skill level. What a crock of elitist sludge. How do you know what my skills are? I may be the next Bert Monroy? I bet you didn’t think someone of my limited intelligence even knew who he was?
My original post fairly concisely pointed out some flaws I found in Adobe’s current licensing plan. I think I have some limited right to make a comment. I also acknowledged that it’s Adobe business to as they please. But I offered some sensible alternatives that other companies are using. I also wanted to illustrate that I was being asked to pay more for an upgrade with less functionality than I had before? I just wanted to get a few simple direct answers which I still have not gotten.
If Adobe doesn’t value my business that’s fine. As an existing customer I thought I had a right to ask a few questions?
-CB
Aspiring supplicant to the exulted Guild of Professional Adobe Photoshop users.
wrote in message
ctbarker32, you are kind of all over the place with your argument.
It seems like you are upset both because you can’t get a below retail
price on your upgrade and because you won’t be able to pop the disk in more than two machines and use it this time…
The only thing that has really changed for most of the free world as far
as how many systems you can run it on is their ability to better enforce the two system install with CS than they were able to with 7.
You are right about the arbitrary nature of the two system install. Why
two systems and not three? Well if three systems, why not 5?
A single system is all they really would *need* to offer at the base price
but I would assume that the second system is allowed as a curtesy… So how are the teeth looking on that gift horse?
no one here is officially speaking for adobe. this is a user to user forum. btw, i agree with you.
Look bud, Im sorry if you have an inferiority complex over a piece of software.
Lord knows, if I had to pass and IQ test to use Photoshop, Id probably be doing all of my work on an Etch-A-Sketch.
If you consider me in the "big boys’ pool" (or think I consider myself to be swimming there) you are welcome to swim next to me all you like as long as you pay the posted admission price – cause that is what it is about. A talented hobbiest can use it just as easily as a stupid professional.
Some of your concerns may be valid but I think they are probably a much lesser issue to most of the legitimate (and Im not saying you arent legitimate in this comment) users of this product in the world than you would probably like them to be due to the fact that (Im guessing) for most of us, this is a business expense.
I guess the short answer that I should have given to the original toppic is:
No, I think the product is very well priced for what it offers. Perhaps if I wasnt making the bulk of my income off of the use of Photoshop and other Adobe products, Id think differently but then if I werent, I probably wouldnt be using these products from Adobe
Id probably be using whatever came bundled with my computer or whatever looked interesting and relatively cheap at Best Buy because from a consumer perspective, the initial $700 or so that it costs to get into the Photoshop game in the first place (or more if you want to combine it with Illustrator, Indesign and so on) is a lot more than Id shell out for a piece of software like this just for fun.
BTW, congratulations on knowing the name Bert Monroy and knowing he is an artist that uses Photoshop. That means you have either been through one of his classes, seen him at a similar… or looked through the computer section of a book store or watched the Screen Savers on cable or done a google search for Photoshop guru
I dont exactly know what you were trying to prove with that statement but congratulations, just the same.
Clearly, from this response you are a lot smarter than I am. It also seems like you have more disposable income (and youre probably better looking) than me, too so Ill kindly bow out of this little bladder relief contest and let you continue exercising your right to voicing your opinion without my opinions getting in the way any further. Thanks.
BTW, if you havent, you might want to take a look at some of the PDFs available for free at the Adobe Evangelists site:
www.adobeevangelists.com/
It might give you a tiny bit more perspective into the range of people using the software and why some might have found more to love in CS than you did and if you still have version seven running on that 3rd computer, you might even find a free tip or two that will somehow benefit you on that version as well.
Adobe lose nothing from software piracy!
Those who buy pirate copies do so because they cannot afford to by the product, 9 out of ten give up anyway because without full support adobe CS is money down the drain.
OK there may be a few businesses who take the risk. Most large corporates do not use individual installations and have copies of the software that does not require activation (This may not apply to Photoshop) so that they can set up PC’s with a standard disk image containing all the distributed applications. I know one or two that did crack copy protection to do this on some software but they still bought unlimited global licenses.
Even corporates distribute shareware now as desktop standards and even if Adobe is standard for the graphics design department, say 40 licenses and 50,000 licenses of Paintshop Pro for everyone else. Now if Photoshop was say $59 instead of say $500 (corporate), Adobe would have had a chance to make $3million instead of $20,000 in that example.
Interesting to note that in the company I used in the example (amounts and quantities adjusted) several illegal copies of PS did exist and of course, most of the graphics staff took a copy for use at home. The illegal copies got purged in automated checks every month, but each month would see a similar number of illegal copies purged. These copies were made by people who needed to do more than Paintshop could do but as they were not a graphics department were not allowed to have a legal copy of Photoshop.
If anything, copy protection only encourages piracy as most cracked software is available from one supplier who may not bother to carry software with no copy protection.
Finding cracked software is easy, at least one spam per day contains links to a supplier. As long as we have spam, cracked software is as easy to obtain as 123. One supplier even offers a free Photoshop book and the deal was only $69! The spam claimed to have 200+ titles of leading software at these prices.
I should add that the amount quoted as lost due to piracy might be more accurately described as the amount of potential license income from pirated copies. As the users would not buy a legitimate copy the income remains ‘potential’.
Adobe can benefit from these users as they may ask their employers to buy a copy for use at work. Same principle as is used to justify ‘educational’ licenses.
That argument has been used over and over and I’m not buying into it. Piracy is piracy. If you can’t afford it or don’t want to pay the price, don’t buy it.
Bob
Finding cracked software is easy, at least one spam per day contains links to a supplier. As long as we have spam, cracked software is as easy to obtain as 123. One supplier even offers a free Photoshop book and the deal was only $69! The spam claimed to have 200+ titles of leading software at these prices.
Ah, so you are the half a percent who actually buys from these things. I want to thank you personally for helping to make my inbox hell to manage.
You know, a lot of us make a living by making and selling our own copyright protected materials so as crazy as it may seem you could say we sort of have a soft spot for intellectual property rights. It doesnt really matter if they can afford the loss or if it hurts them or not. They own the rights, they call the shots and neither you nor I are the supreme leaders of any socialistic government that has the right to determine who should be subsidized with free software or when a company or individual has made enough money selling something they created and no longer has a right to sell it for anything below what we think we should have to pay.
As much as I dont think he sees the sides of the major players involved and therefore dont agree with his opinions, at least ctbarker32 is looking for a way to be a legal, honest and legitimate user of the software.
Ah, but Piracy is such a romantic notion, echoes of Errol Flynn and more recently Johnny Depp.
The only way to stop piracy is to remove temptation. Many youngsters cut there teeth on sophisticated software that they could only get via piracy and these are Adobe’s future customers.
Enough said.
What would liven the industry up a bit would be be to oblige software suppliers to pay customers compensation for time lost through buggy software. This would encourage better quality software and justify high price tags. The trend, instead, seems to be to penalise customers by charging for support and offloading free support to forums like this. Why not give those who answer questions and solve a users problem, a $5 gift voucher against future Adobe products?
Photoshop is a pretty good piece of software and reliable. It could do with better documentation though.
You cannot say the same for all of the Creative Suite though, see GoLive forum.
v6 of Acrobat Reader is the first version of that software to suffer bugs – mostly patched now and Acrobat CS is inclined to fail from time to time too.
E Segan,
No I don’t buy from spam, but someone earlier remarked that finding cracks was not easy I was just pointing out that it is easy.
I also make my living from my IP so do not approve of it being stolen. I get about 100 spam a day though only 1 or 2 ever get to my inbox, I have an ISP that diverts spam so I do not even need to download it.
I can’t think of many more tired arguments than this one, with the possible exceptions of our current, maddening Bush/Kerry punch-out, and the timeless Mac vs. Windows donnybrook.
Nobody engaged in these will ever convert the mindsets of those who don’t think the same way that they do. This leads me to believe that people just like to argue to hear their own opinions and to polish their debating skills.
Smell ya later, suckers. Don’t wear out your keyboards.
Can I donate to the "send slistress back to school for an economics class" fund?
yes… send all contibutions to "dave milbut" care of the "care for dave milbut foundation" …
Those most likely reading this thread are already using PS CS, but in case someone isn’t and if they live near a Fry’s Electronics, I saw the ad for this past Friday showed the PS CS upgrade available for $139…the best price I’ve seen yet, and much more palatable.
