free photoshop

[devonwoody]

That's a good point Dickm. Had train simulator Micky , those that had a pirate copy lost nothing . I lost my money when I also went to W 7.

And anyway with ps. You are not downloading a copy, Adobe are giving it to you.

 

[BearTricks]

I'm still running a copy of CS4 that I got legitimately when I worked in education. Prior to that, and after, I'd probably never consider buying it unless I was using it enough in my job for it to pay for itself.

I understand where they're coming from with the cost in terms of development, but it's so ubiquitous that they can pump up the price even more simply because people rely on it, it has the potential to generate a lot of money for people who use it, and the competitors aren't as good. I've been using it for ten years through various channels, and I've been lucky because at a few points in my life I really couldn't have afforded it.

I'm ambivalent about the current subscription model because the prices seem reasonable, but at the same time I've been using the same version for a number of years without issue and if I'd been subscribing for that time then I'd have ended up paying far above and beyond the price of a single license.

 

[Rhossydd]

Adobe are giving it to you.

No they're not.

 

[Benchwayze]

I'll be judgy!

If someone walks into your house and walks out with your TV you're going to think that its not right. How is stealing software any different? Sure the physical box of a TV is tangible but most of what you're paying for is for the time to develop a product, to make it and market it, the actual physical components are pretty minimal cost. So why is steeling software any different?

I find it particularly annoying with things like Photoshop as they offer a cut down version for home users and they offer a pretty reasonably monthly subscription offer.

If you want something then you should buy it and pay for it.

There are plenty of free image editing tools around as well, none as good as photoshop, but that what you're paying for.

I know I've got on my high horse about this but if everyone stole copies then Adobe would go bust and then there would be no photoshop. The same is true of illegally downloading music and films if everyone did it then nobody would make any money and the artist / industry would die. Most of us like to be paid for our work!

I thought just like you Stu. I bought two legal copies of Microsoft Office for my two PCs.
When I had to have a new motherboard I couldn't put Microsoft Office onto the 'new' PC. Microsoft said I would need to buy a new copy, and at the going rate would you believe! I told them to shove it in as many words, and downloaded Open Office..

How would it be if we had to buy new CDs every time we bought a new Hi-Fi system? It's the same principle isn't it? An audio CD isn't the exact same thing I know, but the means of putting information onto the discs is the same, as is the means of retrieving that information. In the early days, I believe Microsoft hoodwinked the copyright moguls into believing that computers were somehow mysterious, and thus needed different legislation; designed to make them money! You can loan out a Dire Straits CD, you can play it on any private Hi-Fi system, and you can even copy it for private use. You can't do any of those things with a Windows Disc. Microsoft decided that we could buy just the licence to use the discs. No wonder he is one of the worlds richest men.

I always bought the OS licence, and legal copies of software, (or use free-stuff) but it still annoyed me. One reason I went over to Mac. Although the restrictions are the same, at least Gates isn't having any of my cash any more, :evil:

 

[devonwoody]

Reading the above post and quote again.

Perhaps it would be a good thing if adobe went bust and nobody purchased any further software until things were more balanced for the consumer besides the vendor.

(Although they would still be rich men and most probably would not care anyway)

 

[DiscoStu]

The HiFi analogy is interesting and I think it proves my point.

I buy a new DVD player, it doesn't play VHS. My iPod won't play CD's. However let's not get confused between content and applications. Content is the stuff that gets created ie the photo out of Photoshop and you'd expect that to not become out of date. The application is wha this used to create it. That changes with time, technology and market forces. So you buy a product and use it on your device. You change your device to a newer model and expect that your product will still work. I get that desire but in IT that's a big assumption given how fast technologies move. 2 years in IT is probably the same as 40 years of development in tools. If you want to be annoyed with anyone shouldn't you be annoyed with Microsoft? Why should Adobe pay to develop an old product for a new OS. You can still use it on the old OS. Microsoft are the ones who have "forced" you to upgrade. Only actually they haven't, if you own a MS licence you'll find you can still use that licence with older OS.(I'd need to check that "fact" was true for an Oem licence but it's certainly true open licences that I buy.

The simple fact is Adobe develop to the latest OS (as do all software manufacturers). If you don't like it don't buy their product. Most companies are moving to subscription models now so you will always be up to date. Until you find your hardware is out of date and then people will moan that they are forced to upgrade to get the newest photoshop. Basically you have hardware, operating system and applications- they've all developing and changing and at some point one element isn't going to be compatible with another. If you don't like or can't accept that then don't use technology because you will never be happy.

I agree that it's a shame when companies stop developing a product that you like but they don't do it because they want to upset you, they do it because it's not commercially viable.

I still wish channel 4 and RDF were making scrap heap challenge but they're not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DiscoStu]

I know I've waffled on but just going back to the point about buying CD's and that with Microsoft you're buying a licence. I wish DVD's etc was like buying a licence. Then when I bought a DVD player I could have paid a nominal fee for the media (not the licence) for the same content on DVD and then the same would apply with Bluray and 4K etc.

I don't know what people have against Bill Gates, he's made a load of money by being smart and now he's giving most of it away to good causes. Nobody was ever forced to buy Microsoft or Apple products!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Harbo]

In the past when I've upgraded my machine I've rung Microsoft, explained the problem (IE "I'm upgrading my machine etc") and they've always given me a new access/licence code.
When I upgraded from Win 7 to 10, all my old software still worked including Adobe CS5 which I'd bought legitimately.
One advantage with the Mac is that it comes bundled with lots of "free" software and upgrades are mostly free so your stuff never gets out of date ( this assumes that your machine can still cope?).
Their professional stuff is also keenly priced - Final Cut ProX is £229, whereas Adobe Premiere Pro can only be rented at £17/month.

Rod