Does anyone in /gd/ pay for Creative Cloud? Why don't they

What did you expect? It's the Jewest IT company at the moment. Besides, check this out: https://gist.github.com/roddds/a1f42bae598028ac7809

>>254285
Because they don't make their money from the people buying it for personal use, they can charge whatever they want because businesses need it and will pay whatever they as to get it. People pirating PS for personal use is a drop in the bucket compared to the commercial industry profit they make from it.

what happened to freehand and quarkxpress

>>254327
>freehand and quarkxpress

Quark (who owned the DTP market) died around 1996 (3.3 was the last good version) - nobody told em yet tho, still struggles on. In-between times, they pissed of their entire Mac owner base by not GAF (like, literally), and everyone else by being retarded. Q2015 (or Quark v.11..) runs under a $1k nowadays - off the top of my head, 3.3 cost about $5-$6K, and 'Passport' (same thing, but 'multilingual') managed to run about $8k. This is 10 years ago, mind. S'posed to be halfway usable again, but, Adobe had their lunch since, coincidentally, prob. also around 1996, when they introduced 'Quark file compatability' into what must have been Pagemaker (now InDesign). Don't think even Adobe ever charged $8k for a prog mind.

Freehand, Adobe bought that twice already. Once, when Aldus owned them, Adobe buy Aldus, Feds (Monopolies, etc.) intervened (surprisingly) - told them to give it to someone else. Macromedia bought the someone else (Altsys), Adobe bought Macromedia, no Feds in sight this time around, cheerio Freehand.

Where were we, again? - oh, yeah, Adobe, the cunts.

just pirate CS5 and be happy
those greedy douche-bags won't even care

>>254368

why not pirate cs6?

>>254393
You can even still pirate CC. It has a lot of great new features.

I have a license through work and since it can be installed on two computers I have it at home. But I have a laptop with a pirated version of CC

>>254285
What are you talking about? It's already cheap for a whole suite. You only pay around 50 bucks for a shit ton of programs which will be up to date all the time. The old model was that you payed 600-900 bucks for 1 program which would be 'outdated' the next year round.

Also most people only use photoshop or lightroom and this you already can get for around 10 bucks a month.

>>254427
>I'll take 'what is software upgrade pricing?' for $600, Alex. Unless its $700 next year. Or $1k.

If you really cant see the problem with the subscription model - namely, unless you pay Adobe a variable (ie.- whatever the fuck they feel like they can get away with charging) sum *for the rest of your fucking life* why, then, your ability to use those files you have created will be terminated. With extreme pejudice to the non-paying.

Youve gone from owning a car, an asset with which you could drive, where and whenever you like, resell, leave it in your garage for a year (or two) - still be there and functional - to renting one, where and when you drive shall be in accordance with the owners wishes - your every step in the door shall require their express permission, and, they can take it away, or increase their charges, anytime *they* like.

Quite apart from the CC privacy issues (which are grevious enough of themselves), you cannot correlate ownership and rental model prices as you are doing, not without at least some realisation, your on-paper cost saving (mostly for a shitload of crap you may never use) is actually you being bent over by Adobe, repeatedly. For the rest of your life. For-fucking-ever.

Big Bargain, huh?

>>254456
Can you read? OP was asking why Adobe doesn't lower the the pricing of their subscription fee to have a greater coverage of potential customers. I reply to this saying that it's already pretty cheap and that Adobe basically already reached that price point when it comes to their most used program, Photoshop.

Nowhere did I mention wether or not I approved or disapproved of this payment model. If you have a problem with Adobe's payment methods then that's on you. You don't have to use the software. There are a lot of different programs you can use. But if you use Adobe's software for generating your income then you should pay or look elsewhere.

Besides that you act as if this company has had total control only when the subscription model was introduced. They always had the power to change the price, wether or not you are able to activate your product, and such.

>>254471
>They always had the power to change the price, wether or not you are able to activate your product, and such.
- wut? - for a product previously bought, paid for and legally owned by a customer, Adobe had about as much chance of retroactively 'changing the price' or 'deactivating, if they felt like it' as Trump has of a Nobel Peace Prize. For example, their publicly release of 'permanent serial numbers' after switching off activation servers for CS2 - this was widely regarded as some kind of Adobe fuckup making CS2 free-vend; however, their alternative was running activation servers to infinity, or being sued shitless by a lot of very fucked-off customers, who, as noted, bought and owned permanent (as in, usable forever, or class-action time) CS licenses.

My point was more that you ignored software upgrade pricing entirely in your original post. It did _not_ cost '$600 or $900 every year' for a new version of PS, for example - you owned a license; like a car, you could choose to trade it in for new at a discount, or, you could keep using your old one. Adobe could set prices here, sure - but, if these were too high, or not enough loyalty discount was given, or the new version was sh!te, punters could always say, fuck it, I'm happily sticking with my old one awhile. An option no longer available in the new 'pay Adobe rent, forever' model. However:

>Nowhere did I mention wether or not I approved or disapproved of this payment model..
- fair enough.

>>254393
i can't even tell the difference between CS2 and CS5

they barely add anything of value, but I only do print design

>>254497
If you can't tell the difference you must not use many of the features of the program, which is fair enough, if all you need is the brush tool just use the brush tool, but I use a lot of the newer features when I'm editing.

are there any 3d plugins to make objects for print design like illustrator?

i want to make semi-complex logos in 3d

>>254630
>logo
>complexe
>3d
What year is it? 1998?

>>254642
life is cyclical

>>254285
Both GD jobs I've had have had CC licenses that allowed me to install a second copy at home

I'm now using CC since it's an obligation at my school. I pay around 60 euro a year wich i find a good price!

If i would later in my life want it, it's 60 euro for a month.
Not something i'm willing to pay I think...