Adobe foces designers to hit the "F" key on the keyboard to toggle through to full screen mode/ full screen without pallets/ and back to standard screen mode, this is an outrage and way beyond the grasp of of some Appleinsider subscribers, I see a class action looming.
Adobe CC is for professionals who make a living using the products. Adobe does not care about casual users or hobbyists. It has always been that way. A decade ago, every cheapskate had a bootleg copy. Now, with CC, only professionals who can afford the subscription can use the software and for that I am very grateful. We have nine offices worldwide and we are standardized on Adobe CC which facilitates a very efficient work flow for us.
Firstly, thank you for calling me your buddy. Secondly, I don't know anyone who uses the term bud OR baffling in real life. Thirdly, onto the point..
Like I said before, I use photoshop and see how it fits many peoples workflows. I was explaining why SOME people, not myself, will find it upsetting that they can't afford it anymore because the ORIGINAL poster found it "baffling". But I'm becoming increasingly aware that they don't actually find it baffling, instead they just want to complain about people who don't like the price increases and the fact that they no longer own their software.
The Creative Cloud "cheerleaders" here have either chosen to ignore or have forgotten this:
"On October 3, 2013, the company initially revealed that 2.9 million customers' sensitive and personal data was stolen in security breach which included encrypted credit card information.[56][57][58] Adobe later admitted that 38 million active users have been affected and the attackers obtained access to their IDs and encrypted passwords, as well as to many inactive Adobe accounts.[59][60] The company did not make it clear if all the personal information was encrypted, such as email addresses and physical addresses, though data privacy laws in 44 states require this information to be encrypted.[61][62]
A 3.8 GB file stolen from Adobe and containing 152 million usernames, reversibly encrypted passwords and unencrypted password hints was posted on AnonNews.org.[63] LastPass, a password security firm, said that Adobe failed to use best practices for securing the passwords and has not salted them.[64][65] Another security firm, Sophos, showed that Adobe used a weak encryption method permitting the recovery of a lot of information with very little effort.[66] According to an IT expert, Adobe has failed its customers and ‘should hang their heads in shame’.[67]
Many of the credit cards were tied to the Creative Cloud software-by-subscription service.[68] Adobe offered its affected US customers a free membership in a credit monitoring service, but no similar arrangements have been made for non-US customers.[69][70] When a data breach occurs in the US, penalties depend on the state where the victim resides, not where the company is based.[71]"
The Creative Cloud "cheerleaders" here have either chosen to ignore or have forgotten this:
"On October 3, 2013, the company initially revealed that 2.9 million customers' sensitive and personal data was stolen in security breach which included encrypted credit card information.[56][57][58] Adobe later admitted that 38 million active users have been affected and the attackers obtained access to their IDs and encrypted passwords, as well as to many inactive Adobe accounts.[59][60] The company did not make it clear if all the personal information was encrypted, such as email addresses and physical addresses, though data privacy laws in 44 states require this information to be encrypted.[61][62]
A 3.8 GB file stolen from Adobe and containing 152 million usernames, reversibly encrypted passwords and unencrypted password hints was posted on AnonNews.org.[63] LastPass, a password security firm, said that Adobe failed to use best practices for securing the passwords and has not salted them.[64][65] Another security firm, Sophos, showed that Adobe used a weak encryption method permitting the recovery of a lot of information with very little effort.[66] According to an IT expert, Adobe has failed its customers and ‘should hang their heads in shame’.[67]
Many of the credit cards were tied to the Creative Cloud software-by-subscription service.[68] Adobe offered its affected US customers a free membership in a credit monitoring service, but no similar arrangements have been made for non-US customers.[69][70] When a data breach occurs in the US, penalties depend on the state where the victim resides, not where the company is based.[71]"
The Creative Cloud "cheerleaders" here have either chosen to ignore or have forgotten this:
Many of the credit cards were tied to the Creative Cloud software-by-subscription service.
The credit cards weren't stolen as a result of the subscription service. If they didn't have a subscription service, the credit/debit card info that was stolen would have all been for perpetual licenses. The numbers were all encrypted too. When the hack happened, Adobe only had 1m cloud subscribers but 2.9m accounts with card info were stolen (38m accounts total) so far more payment accounts were used for non-cloud payments.
If they take on Apple Pay for subscriptions, it won't be an issue in future as they won't need to keep the cards on record. This is a good reason to put a fingerprint reader on Macs and it would let you pay with a card of your choice at the renewal in case something was wrong with another card. Subscriptions can be sent as notifications to a phone too and paid by touching the reader.
This also saves having to put renewed credit/debit card details into every online account when cards expire. It's not always good to be reminded of subscriptions so maybe Apple Pay can setup automatically repeated billing after the first 2 verifications - 2 verifications ensures the person is aware that something they authorize is a subscription and they could elect to be asked each time. Apple would need an interface to let people cancel automated payments. This can be in their Apple Pay app.
...This is a good reason to put a fingerprint reader on Macs...
Why bother? Simply use the fingerprint reader from your iPhone or iPad and have it parse the authentication to your Mac. A bit like the two-way authentication works now.
Honestly, it would be useful if someone who has downloaded the new software can tell the rest of us if there are any obvious bugs or first-day oddities we should be aware of.
The debate over boxed vs. subscription software is two years old, and moot. I don't like it either, but it's settled. Can't we all just move on and see if this update has fixed any of the long-running bugs (like being unable to successfully log into to the Creative Cloud desktop in order to download program updates like these!).
Honestly, it would be useful if someone who has downloaded the new software can tell the rest of us if there are any obvious bugs or first-day oddities we should be aware of.
The debate over boxed vs. subscription software is two years old, and moot. I don't like it either, but it's settled. Can't we all just move on and see if this update has fixed any of the long-running bugs (like being unable to successfully log into to the Creative Cloud desktop in order to download program updates like these!).
I have managed to do some work in Illustrator CC 2015 and Photoshop CC 2015 today.
I haven't had trouble with the Creative Cloud app in a long time. I remember in the earlier days of the service it was rather flakey, but it's been solid for me lately.
The new Photoshop & Illustrator features I tried work great. I love the option to add multiple layer effects (like Drop Shadows) in Photoshop. The more live effects offered, the better!
The new GPU preview in Illustrator is interesting. There is a plus and minus to using it, which is why I'm happy that there is a simple keystroke and top level menu command to toggle between GPU and CPU (legacy) preview.
Pros of the GPU preview: Live zooming, scrolling, etc. Everything renders super fast. Very fluid and live compared to the traditional Illustrator transforms and scrolls which have always felt choppy and un-intuitive with many transforms requiring you to drag a bounding box and see what the art looks like after releasing the mouse drag.
Cons of the GPU preview: Art that will eventually render sharply pixelated is drawn anti-aliased when blown up, like a blown up texture would appear in a 3D video game. This can visually mask resolution issues that will become apparent in high-resolution output. This doesn't affect vectors as far as I've seen, bit low res bitmaps used in your illustrator files will preview smoothed out in GPU mode, but will output as ugly jumbo pixels.
Adobe CC is for professionals who make a living using the products. Adobe does not care about casual users or hobbyists. It has always been that way. A decade ago, every cheapskate had a bootleg copy. Now, with CC, only professionals who can afford the subscription can use the software and for that I am very grateful. We have nine offices worldwide and we are standardized on Adobe CC which facilitates a very efficient work flow for us.
I feel personally offended (yes, you read that right) by your stance on the matter.
I used to be a pretty loyal Adobe customer, even after they bought Macromedia and killed off FreeHand (hey, that's one of the reasons I really don't have much faith in the US system; either there aren't enough checks and balances against anticompetitive and monopolistic behaviours, or they plainly just don't work)… Call me cheapskate if you will, but I happen to be a rather honest, freelance designer (do you even know what those are?) living on a debt-bound, crisis-laden country from southern Europe (I used to have one fixed job in the private sector, for one year, and another in the public education sector, for two years, but in between I've had and will have to live off of small jobs and pay obscene amounts of taxes), and was happy enough to plunk down €300 on an Adobe CS5 Standard for Education licence, in the hopes I could maybe buy a full upgrade to CS6 (no, Adobe cut us off, on account of its ridiculous CS5.5 scheme – seriously? That was a minor update to InDesign!)…
Then, when I was *still* waiting to buy another education or even full version of CS7, along comes this CC crap. To add insult to injury, now you have CC2013, CC2014, CC2015, CC[n+1]… Which is the same to say “CS7-9”, am I right? So no, you are probably not getting better and faster software updates than you would otherwise be getting if not for the jump into subscriptions. In fact, it's quite the contrary; Adobe, as of now, has NO *internal* incentive to push forward with updates, as they've become the software equivalent of the complacent, pre-Tesla GM (minus the whole bankruptcy ordeal, that is, though I'm ultimately vying for that, as Adobe, right now, is probably as bad, if not worse, than Microsoft during the dark ages of the '90s and early '00s).
As for cost: NO, CC is NOT cheaper than the old princing scheme, and skipping a version is not being a “cheapskate”, it's just exerting some customer freedom and common business and financial sense. Being a cheapskate is, IMHO, outright bootlegging it, and you should be ashamed to even think of lumping both kinds of users in the same category just because they are saving some money in the process… And no amount of that “holier-than-thou” attitude will convince honest people like me that CC was a good idea. It just creates artificial boundaries (yes, even compatibility boundaries) between freelancers and more established design shops, as they operate, financially-wise, on very different terms. And I can assure you, I have more than 12 years of experience as a designer and do pretty high-profile projects, but can't really afford to pay *yet* another monthly bill (or maybe I could, but I'd rather save a bit on unnecessary software that don't make me the least bit more competitive and invest in, say, hardware upgrades, writing supplies, etc.). Oh, and that's all that “being held hostage” thing. No matter how you spin it, owning your software beats renting it any day of the week (with perpetually-licensed software I could still open my old files in their original form and without any conversion shenanigans, say, 10 years from now, using an older machine or an emulator/VM, whereas if I was using a rental-model software I'd have either to risk losing some information on the process or having to resort to piracy).
My money, right now, is figuratively and *literally* on Serif. Watch out for them; there will come a day when your studio may have to buy Affinity licenses just to open files created by “lowly” designers like me, much like I sometimes long for a Mac-compatible Corel version (Affinity will probably come to Windows before Corel gets around to doing the opposite), not to use it for day-to-day work but for that end alone. And even though I personally loathe that and wouldn't generally wish that kind of burden upon anybody, since you started with the elitist attitude, I don't give a rat's a$$ about your feelings on that. Besides, Serif is playing on a much higher level than Corel, Pixelmator, Acorn et. al., so it wouldn't be that farfetched to assume that at least some studios – yours included – would be taken into the fold through that vector, trojan-horse-wise.
Probably, but that doesn't seem to be the main thrust of your rant. You have issues with Adobe and your own misfortune a lot more than you have issues with my elitist attitude.
Just to clarify, I did not call you a cheapskate, that is, unless you were using pirated software. As a small freelancer you should be happy that Adobe CC is nearly impossible to pirate because now honest designers are on a level playing field and not being unfairly competed against by illegal pirates.
Standardizing on CC has been a great experience for us because when exchanging files with others, especially with others in extremely distant timezones we never have incompatibilities. In the past we would experience many delays because the others were on a different incompatible CS version and we wouldn't find out about it until 24 hours later and they wouldn't receive the new files for another 24. That was a nightmare. Now we are all on the same page.
Oh and by the way I personally have Affinity and all the other up and coming Mac graphic design software because I just want to check them out.
...This is a good reason to put a fingerprint reader on Macs...
Why bother? Simply use the fingerprint reader from your iPhone or iPad and have it parse the authentication to your Mac. A bit like the two-way authentication works now.
Sure you could just use an iOS device but a Mac touch id covers people with new Macs but only old iPhones/iPads or non-Apple mobile devices. It saves having the phone nearby too when doing online purchases. If you're spending $1000-3000 on a Mac, it can have the same capability as a $400-650 iPad/iPhone. You also get the benefit of effortless logins and authentication for websites.
No quibble with that but it *is* full screen. Not Appley as you say but there's no other distractions. It does the job.
i think it's a given that the person asking the question meant the OS X-native fullscreen mode. of course apps like LightRoom have had their own implementations. thats besides the point.
My names Joseph, im a creative director, and have been for the last 12 years. My title is recently switched to senior UX designer for a large .com. I run a department of 15 people, and aside from the creative collaboration process (invision) my whole department relies on Adobe creative cloud. Personally I rely on Adobe creative cloud. Prior to creative cloud, I used every single upgraded version of Adobe. I come and read these posts when Adobe does something new here on AI and it just baffles me...
Why? I read them and it sounds like people that don't even know what the hell they're talking about. Like they made up their mind four or six years ago and still would rather complain about the subscription model or lack of features or bugs then use the damn software.
guess what? as an outlier use case (commercial art department), renting your software annually works out pretty well for you. but id argue there are a lot more customers who arent in your position, and for whom a version of Photoshop or Illustrator from several years ago still does the job perfectly. for these people, renting software annually doesnt work out. ive worked w/ plenty of small time operators using older versions of Illustrator. as an amateur photographer i dont need to update my LR annually.
and i still want native OS X fullscreening...so no, not going to cut them a break. this is their job.
If if we need to call one of them sloppy and incapable of incorporating an obviously useful feature, it looks like Apple was late to the party on this one from where I sit.
what on earth are you talking about? you really arent a mac user, are you? apple wasnt late to the party when they implemented a native fullscreen mode for apps... it's not the same as maximizing an app on your windows box. trust us.
Get over it, bud. Do you seriously think Adobe is suddenly going to start pandering to all your kind and go back to the old way?
Adobe is not alone in using a subscription business model. Though it has and will perhaps continue to lose a number of cheapskate "customers" from this, its actual paying productive customers and new ones who have no problem with the new system will continue to grow and leave you people in the dust.
the personal anger & aggression you have over different people working differently having different needs is the only baffling thing im seeing. the unhinged caginess over something so commonplace and reasonable is sign of a possible personality disorder.
Adobe CC is for professionals who make a living using the products. Adobe does not care about casual users or hobbyists. It has always been that way. A decade ago, every cheapskate had a bootleg copy. Now, with CC, only professionals who can afford the subscription can use the software and for that I am very grateful. We have nine offices worldwide and we are standardized on Adobe CC which facilitates a very efficient work flow for us.
if you believe CC will prevent bootlegs, i have a bridge to sell you.
seems clear the CC model is best for those who depend on the latest version for their operation, and the spot-purchase is best for more casual users who do not. i see no reason Adobe couldnt cater to them both.
what on earth are you talking about? you really arent a mac user, are you? apple wasnt late to the party when they implemented a native fullscreen mode for apps... it's not the same as maximizing an app on your windows box. trust us.
I know it's hard for you to believe. Perhaps you haven't been using Photoshop and other adobe applications on mac, or windows for the last 20 years.
There has been a Full Screen (not maximized window) implementation in Photoshop on Mac practically forever. That mean pre-OSX days, as well as OSX.
I'm not sure about the Windows version since I've never owned a PC version of Photoshop. Well, actually, I guess I do now since Creative Cloud is platform adgnostic.
Many of the credit cards were tied to the Creative Cloud software-by-subscription service.[68] Adobe offered its affected US customers a free membership in a credit monitoring service, but no similar arrangements have been made for non-US customers.[69][70] When a data breach occurs in the US, penalties depend on the state where the victim resides, not where the company is based.[71]"
Comments
Adobe CC is for professionals who make a living using the products. Adobe does not care about casual users or hobbyists. It has always been that way. A decade ago, every cheapskate had a bootleg copy. Now, with CC, only professionals who can afford the subscription can use the software and for that I am very grateful. We have nine offices worldwide and we are standardized on Adobe CC which facilitates a very efficient work flow for us.
The Creative Cloud "cheerleaders" here have either chosen to ignore or have forgotten this:
"On October 3, 2013, the company initially revealed that 2.9 million customers' sensitive and personal data was stolen in security breach which included encrypted credit card information.[56][57][58] Adobe later admitted that 38 million active users have been affected and the attackers obtained access to their IDs and encrypted passwords, as well as to many inactive Adobe accounts.[59][60] The company did not make it clear if all the personal information was encrypted, such as email addresses and physical addresses, though data privacy laws in 44 states require this information to be encrypted.[61][62]
A 3.8 GB file stolen from Adobe and containing 152 million usernames, reversibly encrypted passwords and unencrypted password hints was posted on AnonNews.org.[63] LastPass, a password security firm, said that Adobe failed to use best practices for securing the passwords and has not salted them.[64][65] Another security firm, Sophos, showed that Adobe used a weak encryption method permitting the recovery of a lot of information with very little effort.[66] According to an IT expert, Adobe has failed its customers and ‘should hang their heads in shame’.[67]
Many of the credit cards were tied to the Creative Cloud software-by-subscription service.[68] Adobe offered its affected US customers a free membership in a credit monitoring service, but no similar arrangements have been made for non-US customers.[69][70] When a data breach occurs in the US, penalties depend on the state where the victim resides, not where the company is based.[71]"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Systems
The Creative Cloud "cheerleaders" here have either chosen to ignore or have forgotten this:
"On October 3, 2013, the company initially revealed that 2.9 million customers' sensitive and personal data was stolen in security breach which included encrypted credit card information.[56][57][58] Adobe later admitted that 38 million active users have been affected and the attackers obtained access to their IDs and encrypted passwords, as well as to many inactive Adobe accounts.[59][60] The company did not make it clear if all the personal information was encrypted, such as email addresses and physical addresses, though data privacy laws in 44 states require this information to be encrypted.[61][62]
A 3.8 GB file stolen from Adobe and containing 152 million usernames, reversibly encrypted passwords and unencrypted password hints was posted on AnonNews.org.[63] LastPass, a password security firm, said that Adobe failed to use best practices for securing the passwords and has not salted them.[64][65] Another security firm, Sophos, showed that Adobe used a weak encryption method permitting the recovery of a lot of information with very little effort.[66] According to an IT expert, Adobe has failed its customers and ‘should hang their heads in shame’.[67]
Many of the credit cards were tied to the Creative Cloud software-by-subscription service.[68] Adobe offered its affected US customers a free membership in a credit monitoring service, but no similar arrangements have been made for non-US customers.[69][70] When a data breach occurs in the US, penalties depend on the state where the victim resides, not where the company is based.[71]"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Systems
Adobe, Target, Home Depot, a bunch of other large companies...
Sure, it's a black eye.
I got a new credit card number.
Changed my Adobe ID password.
Got on with my life.
Just like what happened after Target, Home depot, etc...
As long as they make it right, I'm not going to hold it against them.
In the mean time, all the people holding out are missing out on the new improved apps.
The credit cards weren't stolen as a result of the subscription service. If they didn't have a subscription service, the credit/debit card info that was stolen would have all been for perpetual licenses. The numbers were all encrypted too. When the hack happened, Adobe only had 1m cloud subscribers but 2.9m accounts with card info were stolen (38m accounts total) so far more payment accounts were used for non-cloud payments.
If they take on Apple Pay for subscriptions, it won't be an issue in future as they won't need to keep the cards on record. This is a good reason to put a fingerprint reader on Macs and it would let you pay with a card of your choice at the renewal in case something was wrong with another card. Subscriptions can be sent as notifications to a phone too and paid by touching the reader.
This also saves having to put renewed credit/debit card details into every online account when cards expire. It's not always good to be reminded of subscriptions so maybe Apple Pay can setup automatically repeated billing after the first 2 verifications - 2 verifications ensures the person is aware that something they authorize is a subscription and they could elect to be asked each time. Apple would need an interface to let people cancel automated payments. This can be in their Apple Pay app.
Why bother? Simply use the fingerprint reader from your iPhone or iPad and have it parse the authentication to your Mac. A bit like the two-way authentication works now.
Honestly, it would be useful if someone who has downloaded the new software can tell the rest of us if there are any obvious bugs or first-day oddities we should be aware of.
The debate over boxed vs. subscription software is two years old, and moot. I don't like it either, but it's settled. Can't we all just move on and see if this update has fixed any of the long-running bugs (like being unable to successfully log into to the Creative Cloud desktop in order to download program updates like these!).
Honestly, it would be useful if someone who has downloaded the new software can tell the rest of us if there are any obvious bugs or first-day oddities we should be aware of.
The debate over boxed vs. subscription software is two years old, and moot. I don't like it either, but it's settled. Can't we all just move on and see if this update has fixed any of the long-running bugs (like being unable to successfully log into to the Creative Cloud desktop in order to download program updates like these!).
I have managed to do some work in Illustrator CC 2015 and Photoshop CC 2015 today.
I haven't had trouble with the Creative Cloud app in a long time. I remember in the earlier days of the service it was rather flakey, but it's been solid for me lately.
The new Photoshop & Illustrator features I tried work great. I love the option to add multiple layer effects (like Drop Shadows) in Photoshop. The more live effects offered, the better!
The new GPU preview in Illustrator is interesting. There is a plus and minus to using it, which is why I'm happy that there is a simple keystroke and top level menu command to toggle between GPU and CPU (legacy) preview.
Pros of the GPU preview: Live zooming, scrolling, etc. Everything renders super fast. Very fluid and live compared to the traditional Illustrator transforms and scrolls which have always felt choppy and un-intuitive with many transforms requiring you to drag a bounding box and see what the art looks like after releasing the mouse drag.
Cons of the GPU preview: Art that will eventually render sharply pixelated is drawn anti-aliased when blown up, like a blown up texture would appear in a 3D video game. This can visually mask resolution issues that will become apparent in high-resolution output. This doesn't affect vectors as far as I've seen, bit low res bitmaps used in your illustrator files will preview smoothed out in GPU mode, but will output as ugly jumbo pixels.
Adobe CC is for professionals who make a living using the products. Adobe does not care about casual users or hobbyists. It has always been that way. A decade ago, every cheapskate had a bootleg copy. Now, with CC, only professionals who can afford the subscription can use the software and for that I am very grateful. We have nine offices worldwide and we are standardized on Adobe CC which facilitates a very efficient work flow for us.
I feel personally offended (yes, you read that right) by your stance on the matter.
I used to be a pretty loyal Adobe customer, even after they bought Macromedia and killed off FreeHand (hey, that's one of the reasons I really don't have much faith in the US system; either there aren't enough checks and balances against anticompetitive and monopolistic behaviours, or they plainly just don't work)… Call me cheapskate if you will, but I happen to be a rather honest, freelance designer (do you even know what those are?) living on a debt-bound, crisis-laden country from southern Europe (I used to have one fixed job in the private sector, for one year, and another in the public education sector, for two years, but in between I've had and will have to live off of small jobs and pay obscene amounts of taxes), and was happy enough to plunk down €300 on an Adobe CS5 Standard for Education licence, in the hopes I could maybe buy a full upgrade to CS6 (no, Adobe cut us off, on account of its ridiculous CS5.5 scheme – seriously? That was a minor update to InDesign!)…
Then, when I was *still* waiting to buy another education or even full version of CS7, along comes this CC crap. To add insult to injury, now you have CC2013, CC2014, CC2015, CC[n+1]… Which is the same to say “CS7-9”, am I right? So no, you are probably not getting better and faster software updates than you would otherwise be getting if not for the jump into subscriptions. In fact, it's quite the contrary; Adobe, as of now, has NO *internal* incentive to push forward with updates, as they've become the software equivalent of the complacent, pre-Tesla GM (minus the whole bankruptcy ordeal, that is, though I'm ultimately vying for that, as Adobe, right now, is probably as bad, if not worse, than Microsoft during the dark ages of the '90s and early '00s).
As for cost: NO, CC is NOT cheaper than the old princing scheme, and skipping a version is not being a “cheapskate”, it's just exerting some customer freedom and common business and financial sense. Being a cheapskate is, IMHO, outright bootlegging it, and you should be ashamed to even think of lumping both kinds of users in the same category just because they are saving some money in the process… And no amount of that “holier-than-thou” attitude will convince honest people like me that CC was a good idea. It just creates artificial boundaries (yes, even compatibility boundaries) between freelancers and more established design shops, as they operate, financially-wise, on very different terms. And I can assure you, I have more than 12 years of experience as a designer and do pretty high-profile projects, but can't really afford to pay *yet* another monthly bill (or maybe I could, but I'd rather save a bit on unnecessary software that don't make me the least bit more competitive and invest in, say, hardware upgrades, writing supplies, etc.). Oh, and that's all that “being held hostage” thing. No matter how you spin it, owning your software beats renting it any day of the week (with perpetually-licensed software I could still open my old files in their original form and without any conversion shenanigans, say, 10 years from now, using an older machine or an emulator/VM, whereas if I was using a rental-model software I'd have either to risk losing some information on the process or having to resort to piracy).
My money, right now, is figuratively and *literally* on Serif. Watch out for them; there will come a day when your studio may have to buy Affinity licenses just to open files created by “lowly” designers like me, much like I sometimes long for a Mac-compatible Corel version (Affinity will probably come to Windows before Corel gets around to doing the opposite), not to use it for day-to-day work but for that end alone. And even though I personally loathe that and wouldn't generally wish that kind of burden upon anybody, since you started with the elitist attitude, I don't give a rat's a$$ about your feelings on that. Besides, Serif is playing on a much higher level than Corel, Pixelmator, Acorn et. al., so it wouldn't be that farfetched to assume that at least some studios – yours included – would be taken into the fold through that vector, trojan-horse-wise.
You sure are one elitist prick, aren't you?
Probably, but that doesn't seem to be the main thrust of your rant. You have issues with Adobe and your own misfortune a lot more than you have issues with my elitist attitude.
Just to clarify, I did not call you a cheapskate, that is, unless you were using pirated software. As a small freelancer you should be happy that Adobe CC is nearly impossible to pirate because now honest designers are on a level playing field and not being unfairly competed against by illegal pirates.
Standardizing on CC has been a great experience for us because when exchanging files with others, especially with others in extremely distant timezones we never have incompatibilities. In the past we would experience many delays because the others were on a different incompatible CS version and we wouldn't find out about it until 24 hours later and they wouldn't receive the new files for another 24. That was a nightmare. Now we are all on the same page.
Oh and by the way I personally have Affinity and all the other up and coming Mac graphic design software because I just want to check them out.
Sure you could just use an iOS device but a Mac touch id covers people with new Macs but only old iPhones/iPads or non-Apple mobile devices. It saves having the phone nearby too when doing online purchases. If you're spending $1000-3000 on a Mac, it can have the same capability as a $400-650 iPad/iPhone. You also get the benefit of effortless logins and authentication for websites.
i think it's a given that the person asking the question meant the OS X-native fullscreen mode. of course apps like LightRoom have had their own implementations. thats besides the point.
guess what? as an outlier use case (commercial art department), renting your software annually works out pretty well for you. but id argue there are a lot more customers who arent in your position, and for whom a version of Photoshop or Illustrator from several years ago still does the job perfectly. for these people, renting software annually doesnt work out. ive worked w/ plenty of small time operators using older versions of Illustrator. as an amateur photographer i dont need to update my LR annually.
and i still want native OS X fullscreening...so no, not going to cut them a break. this is their job.
newsflash: you are not most people. you are a commercial design house.
what on earth are you talking about? you really arent a mac user, are you? apple wasnt late to the party when they implemented a native fullscreen mode for apps... it's not the same as maximizing an app on your windows box. trust us.
the personal anger & aggression you have over different people working differently having different needs is the only baffling thing im seeing. the unhinged caginess over something so commonplace and reasonable is sign of a possible personality disorder.
if you believe CC will prevent bootlegs, i have a bridge to sell you.
seems clear the CC model is best for those who depend on the latest version for their operation, and the spot-purchase is best for more casual users who do not. i see no reason Adobe couldnt cater to them both.
this isnt rocket science...
what on earth are you talking about? you really arent a mac user, are you? apple wasnt late to the party when they implemented a native fullscreen mode for apps... it's not the same as maximizing an app on your windows box. trust us.
I know it's hard for you to believe. Perhaps you haven't been using Photoshop and other adobe applications on mac, or windows for the last 20 years.
There has been a Full Screen (not maximized window) implementation in Photoshop on Mac practically forever. That mean pre-OSX days, as well as OSX.
I'm not sure about the Windows version since I've never owned a PC version of Photoshop. Well, actually, I guess I do now since Creative Cloud is platform adgnostic.
"oops"