Hacker News Reader

Comment by mtgx | Hacker News Reader

I guess it's to rub it in the faces of Adobe and everyone else who supported this move "because it would help against piracy", when in reality they've just made it worse for normal customers, and also more expensive (which was probably what they really wanted anyway, and the anti-piracy thing was just the public excuse for doing it).

View on HN

In this case, piracy is in Adobe's interest. It allows people to learn their tools, which they'll then buy once they're working.

Creative Cloud is all about forced upgrades, not cutting piracy.

This is it. It's common for design shops to stop on a version of Adobe that is mature and works for them. After a couple of years, you're spending less than $50 per month.

InDesign .indd compatibility has consistently broken with each new CS version; with this new system, you're either going to have to subscribe or not be able to interchange files in their original, (easily) editable format with clients, other designers, etc.

That's always been my theory too. It's best for the industry in general if someone can learn industry-grade tools whilst messing around as a teenager, it means less training is required and it's a form of vendor lock-in for the software makers.

I don't really buy the 'more expensive' line. Previously the suite was a prohibitively expensive for me, whereas now I pay $50 a month. Spread over two years (approx range between CS updates), I still come ahead by about $1000.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com