I guess that if they wanted to charge extra for the AI features then people wouldn't want to pay them for it. So instead of buying a perpetual licence with 3 years of updates included, and having to pay extra for AI features, they decided to just kill the software in 3 years.
I wonder how the justification for all this will go when people will have enough NPU processing power in their computers to do these operations and not need to have the work done on a server?
There won't be any justification. The on-device computations probably won't consume credits, but that's the only future change anyone could hope for. Adobe won't be letting go of their subscriptions unless something major happens.
Not a fan of ownership changing to rent, but it's almost inevitable that these kind of products will turn into AI cloud services now. All that server power is not cheap.
I'd still prefer a fixed perpetual license with a usage based fee for AI features though.
> Not a fan of ownership changing to rent, but it's almost inevitable that these kind of products will turn into AI cloud services now. All that server power is not cheap.
I don't agree at all. Just because you want to push a specific feature and charge a subscription for it, that doesn't mean the seller is entitled to defraud it's paying customers.
If their feature is so good, wouldn't you be seeing paying customers form a line for it?
It's like the opposite of the disney perpetual copyright. Every few years, their copyright that is about to expire gets extended, so in effect it's actually perpetual (yes, i know some of it has recently managed to be expired...)
I was trying to get this to Front page multiple times but didn't work. We are going full force into subscription model without a monthly or yearly payment. And I imagine many other companies will follow the same path.
I guess they have some data when all their other products became subscription-only to see how many people actually walk away. Perhaps it's not many. And I'm not sure how large a business that part actually is.
I got quite annoyed earlier this year that Lightroom 6 couldn't be installed anymore. Have been using it for many years but now it cannot be activated anymore and thus won't work. I'm not happy to pay a subscription for a hobby I only manage to do a few times a year anymore, though. Overall I guess they won't care, as they have a large part of the professional market willing to pay monthly.
Not many walking away short term I can believe, sadly. But there will be grumbling, and perhaps a greater inclination to try other options, even at the cost of a temporary productivity drop for training etc.
If GIMP and Krita would just offer really smooth user interfaces in addition to capable backends, maybe now could be the time...
My big problem with Krita is just the plugins. Photoshop aggregated plugins to export to a ton of incidental file formats, and the plugins were all platform agnostic. Krita however, there's no way of telling if you can export to a given format such as .exif, .dds, or .dpx, and if there is whether that export plugin is supported by your operating system. I've had an issue before where a plugin only worked with Windows 10 prior to a certain update and didn't work in Linux because there was an issue where the AppImage was trying to load something via WINE outside of the container and failing because AppImages can't load Windows native libraries without some setup. It's just small things like that which prevent less dedicated people from leaving the abusive grasp of Adobe.
I just today moved from windows and lightroom to debian and darktable for photography. To be fair I’ve been using linux for programming for years and have tried darktable for a few days now.
There are many challenges but its so worth it for me.
I moved to Ansel after the author's blog post on Dark table's development and project management issues was on here and while it's still v0.0.0 it works fine for the most part and does a number of things better than LR. But it still takes a while to figure out what to fiddle with since many things are (as typical of open source projects) just algorithms implemented from papers with expressive parameters names like k and sigma without much thought towards a product and what the end user wants to use. But changing a workflow you're used to for almost a decade is never fun.
Darktable is great for people who want to screw around with code and not photography. Or as one of the (former) devs put it, darktable is:
a Vim editor for image processing, truly usable only from (broken) keyboard
shortcuts known only by the hardcore geeks that made them
One of the stated goals for his fork (Ansel) is:
to make the general UI nicer to people who don't have a master's in computer
science and more efficient to use for people actually interested in photography.
The catch is, of course, Aurélien ripped a bunch of stuff out in Ansel that you may actually want like styles/presets or macos support. If Aurélien can keep up the momentum I think Ansel could be quite promising for photo processing on Linux.
OTOH with the way that the devs condescend to its users darktable looks doomed to be a basket case. Seriously. Try clicking on or scrolling over whitespace and watch as you send random widgets off into a tizzy.
Large organizations can get Lightroom with a perpetual license. For me though, Adobe's and C1's rent seeking and the pathetic state of open source alternatives really sucked the fun out of photography.
With some effort you can get Lightroom running if you've still got an activated installation somewhere. It's not just activation, but apparently a time-limited license on the facial recognition software Adobe used. On MacOS the remaining 32-bit code sprinkled about (beyond just the installer) means it won't run on 64-bit only operating systems.
The map view also tended to break after two years or so due to a Google maps API key lapsing. It was noticeable for a whole that the subscription variant got a lot more love and effort (but maybe that languished similarly).
I guess that if they wanted to charge extra for the AI features then people wouldn't want to pay them for it. So instead of buying a perpetual licence with 3 years of updates included, and having to pay extra for AI features, they decided to just kill the software in 3 years.
I wonder how the justification for all this will go when people will have enough NPU processing power in their computers to do these operations and not need to have the work done on a server?
There won't be any justification. The on-device computations probably won't consume credits, but that's the only future change anyone could hope for. Adobe won't be letting go of their subscriptions unless something major happens.
The same as all businesses which sell software to other businesses. It's subscriptions all the way down.
Not a fan of ownership changing to rent, but it's almost inevitable that these kind of products will turn into AI cloud services now. All that server power is not cheap.
I'd still prefer a fixed perpetual license with a usage based fee for AI features though.
> Not a fan of ownership changing to rent, but it's almost inevitable that these kind of products will turn into AI cloud services now. All that server power is not cheap.
I don't agree at all. Just because you want to push a specific feature and charge a subscription for it, that doesn't mean the seller is entitled to defraud it's paying customers.
If their feature is so good, wouldn't you be seeing paying customers form a line for it?
It's like the opposite of the disney perpetual copyright. Every few years, their copyright that is about to expire gets extended, so in effect it's actually perpetual (yes, i know some of it has recently managed to be expired...)
I was trying to get this to Front page multiple times but didn't work. We are going full force into subscription model without a monthly or yearly payment. And I imagine many other companies will follow the same path.
I am sure they made their calculations, but I think that this will cut into Adobe's business.
I guess they have some data when all their other products became subscription-only to see how many people actually walk away. Perhaps it's not many. And I'm not sure how large a business that part actually is.
I got quite annoyed earlier this year that Lightroom 6 couldn't be installed anymore. Have been using it for many years but now it cannot be activated anymore and thus won't work. I'm not happy to pay a subscription for a hobby I only manage to do a few times a year anymore, though. Overall I guess they won't care, as they have a large part of the professional market willing to pay monthly.
Not many walking away short term I can believe, sadly. But there will be grumbling, and perhaps a greater inclination to try other options, even at the cost of a temporary productivity drop for training etc.
If GIMP and Krita would just offer really smooth user interfaces in addition to capable backends, maybe now could be the time...
My big problem with Krita is just the plugins. Photoshop aggregated plugins to export to a ton of incidental file formats, and the plugins were all platform agnostic. Krita however, there's no way of telling if you can export to a given format such as .exif, .dds, or .dpx, and if there is whether that export plugin is supported by your operating system. I've had an issue before where a plugin only worked with Windows 10 prior to a certain update and didn't work in Linux because there was an issue where the AppImage was trying to load something via WINE outside of the container and failing because AppImages can't load Windows native libraries without some setup. It's just small things like that which prevent less dedicated people from leaving the abusive grasp of Adobe.
I just today moved from windows and lightroom to debian and darktable for photography. To be fair I’ve been using linux for programming for years and have tried darktable for a few days now. There are many challenges but its so worth it for me.
I moved to Ansel after the author's blog post on Dark table's development and project management issues was on here and while it's still v0.0.0 it works fine for the most part and does a number of things better than LR. But it still takes a while to figure out what to fiddle with since many things are (as typical of open source projects) just algorithms implemented from papers with expressive parameters names like k and sigma without much thought towards a product and what the end user wants to use. But changing a workflow you're used to for almost a decade is never fun.
Darktable is great for people who want to screw around with code and not photography. Or as one of the (former) devs put it, darktable is:
One of the stated goals for his fork (Ansel) is: The catch is, of course, Aurélien ripped a bunch of stuff out in Ansel that you may actually want like styles/presets or macos support. If Aurélien can keep up the momentum I think Ansel could be quite promising for photo processing on Linux.OTOH with the way that the devs condescend to its users darktable looks doomed to be a basket case. Seriously. Try clicking on or scrolling over whitespace and watch as you send random widgets off into a tizzy.
Large organizations can get Lightroom with a perpetual license. For me though, Adobe's and C1's rent seeking and the pathetic state of open source alternatives really sucked the fun out of photography.
With some effort you can get Lightroom running if you've still got an activated installation somewhere. It's not just activation, but apparently a time-limited license on the facial recognition software Adobe used. On MacOS the remaining 32-bit code sprinkled about (beyond just the installer) means it won't run on 64-bit only operating systems.
The map view also tended to break after two years or so due to a Google maps API key lapsing. It was noticeable for a whole that the subscription variant got a lot more love and effort (but maybe that languished similarly).