Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!
Macromedia just added activation to their MX 2004 line of products. It is fairly flexible and allows for product "deactivation" so you can install it on a new computer. It also allows you to activate it on your desktop and also on a laptop, with the caveat that you can only run one copy of the software at the same time. Hopefully Adobe does the same thing. — Rob
Will there be any provision to allow me to move (not copy) Photoshop from my present computer to a new one when I replace it?
Yes! Why not try reading the info they provide on Activation?
Your license will allow TWO (2) copies to be installed and activated (but not used) at the same time. So far as replacing hardware is concerned – yes that to is covered as is hard drive replacement. For the most part activation is easy and totally painless. It is also anonymous!
But people like YrbkMgr (Tony) will be severely restricted. In addition, it doesn’t support Windows98.
There is no activation in the Mac version. It looks like aging hardware, increased software requirements, and expensive upgrades, will force some to reconsider Macintosh.
For starters the activation scheme will be introduced to the Mac sooner or later. And any half decent Win98/ME box can be reformatted and upgraded to WinXP or Win 2K for a a lot less than buying a new Mac.
activation scheme will be introduced to the Mac sooner or later.
Adobe hasn’t added it in other markets. Mac is <35% of Adobe’s customer base, and there are fewer 1337 d00dz on the Mac. PS Windows is one of the most pirated applications.
And any half decent Win98/ME box can be reformatted and upgraded to WinXP or Win 2K for a a lot less than buying a new Mac.
Windows 98 boxes haven’t shipped in years. These are old computers. It’s not worth upgrading most of them. It’ll be cheaper to buy new, in the long run.
Some people don’t want to submit to WindowsXP activation, and of course MS is trying to get people to quit using Win2K.
Adobe has already said it would happen. And a lot the later Win 98 boxes are quite capable of running XP. Anything faster than a PIII 500 should be just fine as long as it’s got plenty or RAM. The difference in stability is quite noticable.
We have been told many times of the ‘tax’ we have paid because of piracy, in the form of higher prices. Now we have activation *and* higher prices. If the prices of future versions don’t come down, should we assume the ‘Piracy makes for higher prices’ was a lie? Adobe loses money far more often at the hands of people and pirates abusing Volume Licensing than the person who buys a retail box. Why are individual users the ones they choose to lean on?
Until I am assured that re-activation is as painless as activation, I am disinterested in the product. I am tired of being suspiciously eyed every time I replace my hard drive. I have no wish to be policed after paying hundreds of dollars for software, first by Microsoft, and now by Adobe. I am actively looking for alternatives to ‘Corporate-ware’, and perhaps I will find it before I am forced to upgrade to XP and PhotoShop CS.
Regardless of my eventual decision, the Adobe ‘brand’ has been harmed, and I am far more receptive to alternatives today than I was yesterday. Business 101, anyone?
Ian Lyons said "Your license will allow TWO (2) copies to be installed and activated (but not used) at the same time."
How can you police the use of simultaneous use without requiring an internet connection? How will they know if both copies are running? Will we now be required to have an internet connection to use Photoshop? Surely not. That would be the death-knell for any future Adobe purchase from me.
"I’m sure that they will allow telephonic activation… "
Yes, if you look at the presented demo, they do. That wasn’t my question. The above post states that simultaneous *use* will be restricted. If this is enforced by activation, will we have to handshake with Adobe via the internet when we use Photoshop. I can see no other way that a second copy will be prevented from being used.
I don’t think they’ll try to keep you from using it simultaneously. Way too difficult to manage. IMO, they’ll allow two activations and trust you not to use them both at the same time.
How can you police the use of simultaneous use without requiring an internet connection?
They don’t watch diddly – you don’t need an internet connection
How will they know if both copies are running?
They don’t! I told you what the license says – YOU either honor it or don’t. If you don’t then YOU and folk like you are to blame for bringing activation down on those who do.
Will we now be required to have an internet connection to use Photoshop?
No!
Surely not. That would be the death-knell for any future Adobe purchase from me.
Then why did you ask those question?
If you don’t like the concept of activation they skip CS and find an alternative.
If you install it on more than two machines, you need more than two activation events – it’s as simple as that. They don’t have to monitor it. All machines need a machine hash to get activated. After your desktop and your laptop, then you have to explain to someone why you need another.
Like… let’s say you own photoshop at home. You decide to put it on the company laptop so you can do some work while out of town. Then you get fired (or quit), and get a new job. Then you want to install it on another laptop – you’ll need some kind of approval. Someone will have to determine if you’re lying or not.
I’m not saying I agree nor disagree, rather, the way activation works, as I understand it, is the machine hash is what is used to issue an activation code. After two, you may be asked to call Adobe for permission since you may not be issued that "third" activation code.
How can you police the use of simultaneous use without requiring an internet connection? How will they know if both copies are running? Will we now be required to have an internet connection to use Photoshop? Surely not. That would be the death-knell for any future Adobe purchase from me.
Activation as implemented in Windows Photoshop CS allows installation on no more than two separate computers. That’s all it does. It has no enforcements or tracking of when those two installed versions are used. The EULA that has covered Photoshop for many years and many versions has always allowed this form of use. Activation simply enforces that allowance.
"If you don’t like the concept of activation they skip CS and find an alternative."
That sounds like a good plan. Photoshop 7 is a mature app, and its quality doesn’t beg the wary eye of product activation by upgrading. In the past, upgrades have been a reflex action for me. This time, and probably henceforth, I opt not to rush into an upgrade until I absolutely have to. Until then, I will also be actively looking for ‘alternatives’.
Thanks again to Ian Lyons for the sound advice. Since most people ‘don’t like the concept of activation’, most should logically consider voting with their dollars, or the withholding thereof.
Since most people ‘don’t like the concept of activation’
According to whom? Doesn’t bother me one bit. I’ll be upgrading as soon as I figure out which retailer has the best deal. Amazon usually has rebates for big upgrades like this.
Would you folks rather that Adobe require a hardware dongle? They could, if they liked, do just that. (Come to think of it, it might be a better idea…)
Activation ticks me off. This is the very reason I left Quickens Turbo Tax for TaxCut. Quicken had a huge revolt because of their activation policy and I am going to guess there are going to be a LOT of unhappy Photoshop users who may opt for less expensive and about as good photo manipulation software for digital images. This is just a way of squeezing money from their users.
As a photographer I have habitually used a home computer and a laptop that I take on the road with me. Adobes web site states the following:
Does activation change the licensing terms? Q: Does product activation represent a change in licensing terms? A: No. Activation is an interactive extension of existing licensing terms and as such represents the spirit of Adobe’s Product License Agreement. Q: What about customers who have more than one computer at home? Will Adobe be offering a "family license"? A: Adobe is committed to offering the most flexible user options. Product activation opens the door for Adobe to offer more tailored terms to our customers, and we will be evaluating all possibilities going forward.
Where does the authorized 2 computers come from and how in the world can one not run two simultaneously? More importantly, a lot of people go through a hardware change before a new product release. How will an upgrade work along with using two computers? Besides, I love the line: it represents the spirit of Adobes Product License Agreement. OR how about and we will be evaluating all possibilities going forward That means they are going to figure out another way to soak it to us.
I just don’t see any of this as being a problem. I purchased Flash 5 over the web on Macromedia’s site and got the electronic download version of it. 2 YEARs later I had lost the machine it was installed on, the download period had exprired, I lost the login name needed to download it, lost the serial number … a quick call to Macromedia support got me all set up with a new download and install. This was an extreme case.
My guess is Adobe will be the same, meaning, if you need to install it a 3rd or 4th time a quick call will get you up and running. But it will require a call, and you’re for sure not going to be able to activate 10 times on day one.
They’re taking steps to reduce piracy but people undoubtly WILL have situations like this, and Adobe will have acceptable, fast solutions for them. I feel pretty confindent in that.
Disclaimer: this is all just my best guess at what Adobe will do; I have no insider (or outsider!) knowledge.
Earl wrote: Where does the authorized 2 computers come from and how in the world can one not run two simultaneously?
Because you agreed to the license agreement when you installed PS
I run PS at my home the other computer is in a Mini Storage from where I pick it up when I go to work doing special events. This machine has nothing else but PS, Power Point and Foto Station 4.5 to run slide shows. It runs on Win 2000 pro never ever a hickup in 2 years working almost every day with temperatures from 20 to 100F.
They never can work at the same time. Others may work in their offices and at home.
2.4. Portable Computer Use. The primary user of the Computer on which the Software is installed may also make a second copy for his or her exclusive use on a portable Computer provided the Software on the portable Computer is not being used at the same time the Software on the primary computer is being used.
AS for RAID, I doubt that will matter is Adobe Activation is anything like Windows XP. As long as the hardware in andof itself doesn’t change significantly, Windows XP activation doesn’t care which drive you install the OS to as long as it is a bootable partition. If you change the drives in your RAID system enough times it is possible, though not guaranteed, that the activation process will kick in and require you to either reactivate via the internet or contact Adobe Support whereby you will give then an explanation of the situation and I’ll bet dollars to donuts that you will have PS up and running in no time.
Adobe has been using activation on Photoshop for quite some time already as a test in the Austrailian market. My guess is that it went well or they wouldn’t be doing it all over.
First of all, where does it say that Photoshop CS is allowed to be installed on 2 computers? Where specifically?
Probably in the EULA, just like version 7. If you have a copy of version 7, have a look in the Legal sub-folder for a text version.
My reading of Adobe’s information page indicates that basic hardware changes like a hard drive are acceptable.
The Adobe activation process supports installation on a primary and secondary PC as well as most system upgrades (e.g. operating system, motherboard, memory or processor). In most cases, customers can change computing environments without needing to contact Adobe Customer Support or needing to re-activate any installed Adobe software.
There is a link to ask any questions about activation. Trouble is after I filled out the form, the next page was a dead end Twice. In case anyone has answers…
Do I understand, then, that if I install Photoshop to my desktop and laptop, when I buy a new desktop (late this year or early next year) I am at the mercy of whoever answers the phone as to whether I still get to use the program?
I formatted and re-installed my programs several times this year. Either because the registry was so clogged it slowed everything down intolerably, or because my system got messed up by a bad installation — last time it was Drive Image — and I couldn’t figure out how to fix it. (W2K)
How does activation work when you have to do complete re-installs?
It isn’t activation I mind, or even having to call the company. But if I can’t use my legitimate copy of Photoshop, I can’t afford to buy another just because of activation limitations.
And Peg, it is situations just like yours that make activation risky. I have similar circumstances.
Only time will tell – one of two things will happen; Adobe will have to be more lax on "approvals" for issuing more activations, or you’ll have to face that fact that once a computer you own "meets it’s maker" you have to buy a new license.
Most of the discussions are academic. Microsoft, I don’t trust. Adobe I do; but I still don’t like the idea of having someone else approve my work flow.
Look people, this is not the Gestapo. Even with Microsoft, all it takes is a simple phone call. If your story seems remotely legit then you’re on your way. I once exceeded the activation limit for Office 2000 (I was using the academic version which was, along with the AU version, being used to test activation). I called the number provided with the warning dialog, and in five minutes I was up and running with no problems. They removed the activation on a laptop that I no longer used and I was able to install Office 2000 on a second desktop system with no problems. If Microsoft was that easy then Adobe will be twice as easy (if that’s even possible).
Playing chicken little won’t solve anything. We have a saying in Boston, you could be hit by a big yellow bus tomorrow and there’s not a thing you can do about it. Activation is here to stay. You either work with it or you purchase another product, it’s that simple. If there were any major problems with the activation beta test in AU (AU seems to get to be the guinea pg for all this stuff don’t they?) then I’m sure Adobe would not be putting it in their flagship application, instead reserving it for a secondary app like Acrobat. If you have a legitimate gripe after using activation then by all means, post it here. If you’re just speculating and spouting wild hypotheticals that have as much likelihood of coming to pass as me winning the lottery than keep them to your selves.
Complaining about activation is like complaining about taxes – only where taxes are concerned, we all agree, you can complain.
There’s nothing anyone can do about it so keep your mouth shut and follow the rest of us.
Activation is here to stay, so get used to it (I wonder why Intuit pulled it then?)
instead reserving it for a secondary app like Acrobat
You may be surprised to learn that Acrobat accounts for more revenue and profitability than Photoshop.
wild hypotheticals
Perhaps. Shall I base my business workflow and strategy on your say so?
You don’t have an inkling of what the issues are – just because activation don’t affect you, and you think issues stated are a stretch you discredit them. I guess we should just consult Stuart for our automation strategy – maybe the bank will give us more money then.
And Carol,
It is unfair to characterize those who are opposed to product activation as pirates – I resent that. It is analogous to saying "if you have nothing to hide, then let us search your residence".
You will have the option to uninstall and either leave the activation coding in place on your system (i.e. when you re-install, you will not have to activate again) or you can choose to uninstall the activation codes at the same time (eg if you are selling your computer to a third party and don’t wish the 3rd party to install a pirated copy that uses your activation). —
Where did Carol characterize anyone as a pirate? She simply pointed out that IF one were to copy the disk and install it on several machines–which is software piracy–that would now be a lot more difficult to do.
Please understand that I do feel for you and others in your situation. You have a legitimate concern about your workflow. This is quite a bit different than some of the others here who are crying about privacy concerns.
"Perhaps. Shall I base my business workflow and strategy on your say so?"
No, you should base it on the simple and plain fact that no activation scheme has brought about the demise of privacy and the ability to use one’s computer as they see fit. It worked for Microsoft with Windows XP, Office 2000 and Office XP and it is working for Macromedia so far. If you want to bury your head in the sand and ignore these facts then by all means, go right ahead. If you want to argue that activation doesn’t work then you had best get your facts in order.
or you can choose to uninstall the activation codes at the same time (eg if you are selling your computer to a third party and don’t wish the 3rd party to install a pirated copy that uses your activation) <
Would this also inform Adobe the product was de-activated on that PC hence freeing up one of your activations? Just thinking of the situation where you had upgraded the PC either to a brand new PC or you were reinstalling the operating system, upgrading the OS with a clean install; adding a new disk etc.?
Would the procedure be;-
1. Uninstall/De-activate 2. Make system changes 3. Reinstall and re-activate.
I do have privacy concerns (whatever that makes me).
I am concerned about the drift toward subscription software (no, activation isn’t it, but it could be a step on the way).
But the main thing for me is that I want my software shopping to be a matter of simple, one-time transactions. Once I go home with the CD and the serial number, I want that to be it. I don’t want to have any further phone-home requirements — not the first time I install a program, not after I buy a new machine, not after I have the disastrous crash that forces me to rebuild everything.
If that world is dead for Photoshop, then Adobe has lost a supporter here.
2 activations? WOW. At the rate I upgrade my machines, that will last about 6 months. How many of us keep the same computer for more than a year?
I like the idea that the price should be reduced by, let’s say, 90% of what Adobe figures it is going to recover from the anti-piracy measures. (most of us would probably be content with 75%)
But then, maybe the solution is to just ship our old hard drives to Adobe to prove that we are no longer using a specific copy of the program. Maybe something could be set up along the lines of what printer companies do with exausted printer cartriges. How about it, Adobe, want to send out some prepaid shipping boxes for old hard drives?
Well, in all fairness, Stuart and Carol are right in principle. For most users, this is going to be nothing.
Personally, I don’t like the disturbing trend to enforce machine specific licensing v. user licensing.
In order for it to work, Adobe, or whomever implements activation, will have to be reasonable – based on history, I can’t see them NOT being reasonable.
The real question is what happens when an inarticulate person calls customer service to explain thier situation on why they need to activate again, and due to their inability to articulate it well, they are "marked" as having to buy another license.
There are lots of legitimate issues that creep up for users. My father in law doesn’t use photoshop, but he changes machines in his office more than most people change underwear. Microsoft product activation is quite forgiving, in reality. You can have up to 8 (some say 11) activations over a specified period. So that’s workable.
What I have a distaste for is passing control over to another company for deciding whether or not a particular machine change is legit. Then there’s the issue of the appeal process – can you appeal a decision if you can demonstrate your issue as being sound and within the terms of the license?
All I really care about, is, can I get my work done unencumbered – the rest is academic.
Activation is a method by which Adobe is taking advantage of their customer base by squeezing more money from them and not stopping pirating.
Secondly, its going to be increasing hard to manage an individuals system. Earlier, in this forum, I s asked what would happen on a RAID system, more specifically, if it had to be reinstalled on a different drive. The response I got back was with a simple RAID, there would be no problems, however, If you change the drives in your RAID system enough times it is possible, though not guaranteed, that the activation process will kick in and require you to either reactivate via the internet or contact Adobe Support whereby you will give then an explanation of the situation and I’ll bet dollars to donuts that you will have PS up and running in no time.
The problem with digital photographers is that we HAVE to operate on backup systems with the large amount of images on hard drives. I have already had one drive fail with a revamping of my system hardware. In the FUTURE YOU ARE GOING TO BE LINKED TO THE SUPPORT GROUP for changing hardware and restoring failed drives. The ability to get your system working again is going to depend upon the timely response of their support group and we all know how easy it is to get a hold of them. Try calling Microsoft on a support question about their software. As companies get squeezed for profitability, what gets short changed is their staffing of support groups. Like Mictrosoft, they will farm it out to contractors.
Lastly, as digital files increase, digital photographers will look for bigger and faster machines to handle these large files. Since PS now supports 16 bit files, it is probable for photographers to be working with, a 16 mb file (D1H), 36 mb file (D100) to a 98 mb file (Kodak 645M). One could guess what the new D2H raw file will be in 16 bits or the yet to be released Nikon full frame digital camera, or how about the new Leaf Valeo with a 126 mb 16bit file. If anyone works with panoramic images, these file seizes just get larger. All of this means that photographers will be constantly migrating machines and hard drives at about the same speed as camera makers expand their CCDs. Activation of software through hardware migration is going to be a PAIN IN THE REAR.
Once everyone stops the unnecessary complaining and moaning on this subject, and discovers the existence of Norton Ghost and/or PowerQuest Drive Image, my guess is that it will not be Adobe´s revenue heavily increasing ….
z070tso, take a careful look at Drive Image. PowerQuest has implemented machine-based activation for some of its products. That may be one. Don’t know about Norton.
If you upgrade to CS from an earlier version of PS and for whatever reasons things go wrong and you have to speak to Adobe to get re-activation and they are not convinced, do you have to buy a complete wholly new version of PSCS?
Is the activation policy going to apply to European or Asian versions of the software?
If not, concerned users might want to upgrade using one of those versions.
Activation does seem to pose issues about long-term use of the product. We have seen any number of once-proud software producers fall into dust or be assimilated by other entities. Even mighty Adobe could fall victim to this fate. What assurance do we have that we will continue to be able to re-activate the license going forward? Is there any verbiage in the EULA about this?
If not, it seems that the value of the product is degraded by activation.
As long as I have a computer capable of running it, I will always be able to run PS 7. What promise do we have of this sort of longevity with PSCS?
I support the idea of piracy protection and enforcement of the EULA, but without assurance that activation will not eventually render the license useless to even legitimate users – or a guarantee that this license allows law-abiding users the same access to the product as the former version – the product is not worth as much as the older version, and should be sold at discount.
At the moment I have a PS7 which I can install on my new PC when I get it (maybe a year to eighteen months) without any worry about activation. Once I upgrade, activation will be with me from then onwards. I will probably wait now to upgrade PS until I have new hardware. I have already done this with MS Office. Also I have five mainstream Adobe products. If they all need to be activated this will give me five times the hassle of just PS.
We are told that piracy costs us, the legit users, money. Somehow I doubt that we will benefit if activation reduces piracy. Thus I might rather pay the ‘piracy levy’ than deal with activation of all the products.
If you don’t like activation the only way to protest is to delay upgrading.
I don’t think there will be much of a financial benefit to Adobe from activation. I see a lot of casual PS users, and would assume that many of them have borrowed it from a friend, or downloaded pirated versions. To think they will now spend $650 is silly, many of them don’t even know what a layer is, or its purpose. It’s a toy to them, and they only use it becaause they got it free.
So activation will disallow those users…but that won’t bring any money in, they’ll use old versions or use something else. Hard core "pirates" often do it for the challenge, and will no doubt find a way around the activation…they have with MS products, and look at DVD’s elaborate anti-copy measures, yet they failed too. They’re not going to be forking over any money either, most don’t need PS, they just enjoy the challenge.
So Adobe will get the satisfaction of knowing that these people who have no real use for PS anyway, won’t be able to use it, mostly. No cash though.
I imagine there are some graphics pros around who will have to buy who didn’t before, but the folks I know who use it on a higher plane, all have paid for it. For me, 2 activations would be a potential problem. I use my in-home machine much of the time, and have an office in back for when I need quiet or privacy. That’s two machines (only one used at a time), so if and when I get a laptop for when I’m traveling, I’d have to buy another $650 copy. I won’t do it, so there’s no money in that for Adobe either. Yes, there are workarounds such as use the laptop in the office, but that’s just a hassle, much as reaactivating would be when upgrading or switching machines, which I do quite often.
And what if your hard drive buys the farm, and you can’t deactivate? This is a real possibility, it will happen to some.
Anyway, I don’t yet see why I would spend the high upgrade price on this one; activation doesn’t bother me much, it’s been pretty easy with MS products. But I think it’s really just a bunch of techies playing games with each other, one side saying "you can’t" the other saying "yes I can", and the bottom line to Adobe won’t be any different.
In fact, it could worsen. There are many people who have begun with pirated or borrowed versions, fallen in love with the program, and finally bought it. A 30-day trial will not be enough to establish this, so possibly it will even hurt sales. Just my opinion.
You don’t have to ‘phone home’ it will activate via a 2 or 3 second connection online (although it might be slightly longer than that with the first wave) —
Activation is a method by which Adobe is taking advantage of their
customer base by squeezing more money from them and not stopping pirating.<
Let me repeat what I said earlier:- Quote: Huh??? Presumeably you would have paid for your update anyway – so in what way is it going to ‘squeeze’ more money out of you.
OTOH, if you were planning on using a pirated version and simply not paying for it, then this is why Adobe is being forced to go down this route. They are not squeezing more money out of you – you can stick with PS7 and use that for another 10 or 20 years if you so wish. Activation will *not* stop your old copy of PS7 from working. If, on the other hand, you wish to avail yourself of all the new features in Photoshop CS, then you would have happily paid for the update to Photoshop CS – whether it contained activation or not. So Adobe would have received your money anyway.
Really, what is so difficult to understand about that. —
I presume you have registered your previous version(s) of Photoshop with Adobe – it will be extremely easy for them to look up your registration details and come to the extremely swift conclusion that you are a bona fide user – so that would present absolutely no problems.
If you haven’t registered your previous copy, then I would question your sanity <g> – who would purchase a $600 program and not register it?? For instance say your dog chewed up the original disk and you had to re-install, Adobe would be pleased to help out with a replacement disk if you were a registered user, but if you were Adobe would you send out a disk to *anybody* who just happened to phone in and say they had lost their disk and serial number – I sincerely doubt it. —
I use my in-home machine much of the time, and have an office in back for when I need quiet or privacy. That’s two machines (only one used at a time), so if and when I get a laptop for when I’m traveling, I’d have to buy another $650 copy.
The EULA hasn’t changed – two machines before and two machines now. Whether you like it or not the reality is that by installing on more than two computers at the same time you are in fact in breach of the EULA. I’m not accusing you of anything; just stating a simple fact. WE (plural) can all make a case for having more than two installations but how many more is justified … 3, 4, 5?
Will activation stop pirating?
No!
Will activation increase sales of Photoshop CS?
Probably not as much as Adobe would like.
So why bother annoying folk with a PITA process that will likely prove nothing more than a minor inconvenience to the die hard pirate?
Because those of us who paid over hard earned money for the privilege of owning and using Photoshop deserve more than a shrug of the shoulders and "what can we do?".
What assurance do we have that we will continue to be able to
re-activate the license going forward?<
Can I turn that question on its head and ask, would any software company who assimilated Adobe turn down the income from upgrades by doing something like you have suggested. No way, not ever – they would kill their business stone dead for nobody would upgrade and the assimilating company would have paid out a substantial sum of money for nothing. —
Just as a sidebar to the discussion – this piece of shareware has an interesting way of dealing with licensing that a friend pointed out. Check out: http://www.zuggsoft.com/zmud/elicense.htm
It is an interesting alternative, and it seems to work well….
I presume you have registered your previous version(s) of Photoshop with Adobe – it will be extremely easy for them to look up your registration details and come to the extremely swift conclusion that you are a bona fide user – so that would present absolutely no problems.
Whilst you are correct about the benefits of registration you should NOT link it to Activation.
Product activation is separate and distinct from product registration. Product registration is a voluntary process during which you provide Adobe with certain personal and non-personal information such as your name, mailing address, e-mail address and product serial number. All information provided to Adobe during the registration process is stored separately from information provided to Adobe during activation.
In fact those with real privacy concerns (in my view unfounded) would probably be better not registering. That way they can feel safe in the knowledge that Adobe will have no way of knowing who they are.
Activation provides Adobe with two numbers – the first is your serial number and the second a machine specific number which is generated at time of installation. A third number is returned and depending upon your method of activation is either automatically embedded on your computer or manually inserted in the appropriate section of the activation dialog.
You’re right. I just read an article about another company that phoned home every week. Then their servers went down and … boom, no one could use the software.
I think the message here for Adobe is that they are antagonizing many of their previously loyal users. Many of us were (emphasis on ‘were’) in the habit of defending Adobe because they made the best software (this is especially true in the case of PhotoShop and After Effects). Adobe has made a lot of bonehead moves lately in my opinion (no upgrade price to existing Adobe owners for the Video Collection, elimination of printed manuals with CS, and now the aggravation of product activation). What’s next? Adobe defenders will say Adobe has the right to do all of these things in the interests of the bottom line … no matter what. And they are right; Adobe does have that right. They DO have obligations to shareholders to make a profit and I guess that is their motivation. However, they risk losing the good will and loyalty of many users who bristle at these new policies. Just because Microsoft does it, or Intuit, or Macromedia does not make it good policy. If they lose a sizable number of users who used to upgrade the minute a new version came out (some users will do that no matter what, for any price), where is the value to shareholders then? Where is the breakeven point between upgraders and potential new users vs the cost of piracy?
Just as an aside: I wonder how many people started with Adobe software that was copied for them by a friend (pirated, bootlegged)who later upgraded so they could get the printed manual and be eligible for future upgrades? Or just wanted to be honest. Yes, I was one of those (go ahead, throw the first stone). When I first started with computers I also had illegal copies of Norton Utilities and several others as well. Admittedly, this was before you could download functioning demos to try before you buy. However, once I realized how great these programs were and how much they were worth to me, I went ahead, got honest, and paid full price for the real version and have been upgrading ever since. The junk programs I just threw out. Now, you don’t get a printed manual anymore (just take the PDF to Kinko’s), you have to pay for tech support (except for limited situations), and you now have to ‘activate’ your copy, and we know it is only a question of time until someone breaks the activation scheme, where will Adobe be? I don’t think they are seeing the forest for the trees.
you have to pay for tech support (except for limited situations),
"On October 24, 2003, Adobe will change its policy for complimentary support. Customers who’ve registered a current version of an Adobe desktop product will receive unlimited person-to-person supportat no chargefor issues related to installation and product defects, including crashes and errors. Support for workflow, interoperability, and product usage will continue to be covered by our fee-based Adobe Expert Support programs."
for issues related to installation and product defects, including crashes and errors
how many times have you seen here "That’s not a bug, it’s your machine." What happens then? Do they hang up? Or do they ask for a charge card up front "just in case"?
say your dog chewed up the original disk and you had to re-install, Adobe would be pleased to help out with a replacement disk if you were a registered user
If that ever happens to me I would have to hope Adobe wouldnt ask my dogs name
Sorry we cant help you because your registered software got Pirated.
(Note to self; Quit using Photoshop disk to play Frisbee with the dog.)
Actually all my software is registered via the Adobe USA site. As I am in the UK I did have a tech query with InDesign a few months ago. The UK office for some reason could not verify that I had registered the products and I had to re-do it over the phone. So that concerned me a bit, and a bit more now that activation is over the horizon.
I am pleased that you can have, say 8, activations over a period of time, if that is the case it probably wont worry me.
If Adobe goes bust or gets taken over and prods are discontinued it is inevitable that eventually because of activation someone somehwere will end up with unusuable software.
The one activated product I have is WinXP. Activation was so easy, and when I get new hardware I will get a new WinXP or whatever. That perhaps is the difference between the op system and an application.
By the way WinXP is fantastically stable op system. I love it.
To all those who are shouting "Truuuuuuuuust Adobe, it’s easy, there’s nothing to worry about, nothing can go wrong":
Let me tell you, something ALWAYS goes wrong. I already have several apps that require authorisation/ activation of some sort, and not one of them, NOT ONE, has been as straight-forward as the manufacturer claims (and not one of them is any more difficult to pirate, incedentally). Each time they go wrong they cost me time, which costs me or my employer money.
Do I blame Adobe for trying to protect themselves? No.
Am I angry that Adobe are introducing activation? Yes I am.
Will I be upgrading? On reflection, no. Not until there is a crack available that I can fall back on in the event that a legitimate activation request is delayed for whatever reason.
Will I be upgrading? On reflection, no. Not until there is a crack available that I can fall back on in the event that a legitimate activation request is delayed for whatever reason.
As I stated on another threat, the activation system change the nature of the license in its core. It keeps the control of the software use in the hand of the seller, thus it is changing a sale into a rent.
It is obviously a trend of the software industry to tend towards renting system. One can agree or not. To accept renting or not.
But there is one thing sure :
It is that if Adobe is willing to turn PSP to a rented software, it must be said loud and clearly, instead of disguising it behind an "anti-piracy measure".
As far as I am concerned I don’t agree to rent PSP and I will not upgrade. I will turn to normal licensed softwares or to opensource.
"It keeps the control of the software use in the hand of the seller, thus it is changing a sale into a rent."
How so? When Photoshop CS2 comes out I will still be able to continue to use Photoshop CS much like I can still use Photoshop 7 or even 5.5 today if I so choose. Adobe cannot force you to upgrade if you don’t want to. Only you can choose to use the feature set of the new version if you want to.
It keeps the control of the software use in the hand of the seller, thus it is changing a sale into a rent.
You obviously have no knowlege of software licensing. You have never purchased software. The seller, in this case Adobe, owns the software. All you buy from them is the right to use it. This doesn’t change one bit with activation.
Get your facts straight before you post nonsense like this.
You obviously have no knowlege of software licensing. You have never purchased software.
Not only are you argumentatively jumping to offensive conclusions, but I believe it’s you who needs to get his facts right.
The seller, in this case Adobe, owns the software. All you buy from them is the right to use it. This doesn’t change one bit with activation.
It most certainly does change "one bit". You will no longer have the ability to move it between machines without asking Adobe’s permission. It is no longer licensed to "you", but to a specific machine. Exercising your "license to use" the software in certain, perfectly EULA-legal, ways (such as temorarily moving the software for whatever reason) will change from being a 2 minute job to taking far longer, probably involving a phone call where you have to justify yourself to an Adobe employee.
No, it may well not be the end of the world, but has the potatial to be an enormous pain in the a$$, and as this PITA will affect only those of us who are honest enough to actually buy the damn software I think we have every right to complain about it.
Anything other than ‘minor hardware changes’ require reactivation, according to Adobe:
"The process allows minor hardware configuration changes without requiring reactivation"
If all software producers continue down this dreadful route, changing a motherboard will require begging dozens of organisations for permission to continue using the software for which one has lawfully paid! A nightmare.
So far as replacing hardware is concerned – yes that to is covered as is
It most certainly does change "one bit". You will no longer have the ability to move it between machines without asking Adobe’s permission. It is no longer licensed to "you", but to a specific machine. Exercising your "license to use" the software in certain, perfectly EULA-legal, ways (such as temorarily moving the software for whatever reason) will change from being a 2 minute job to taking far longer, probably involving a phone call where you have to justify yourself to an Adobe employee.
Since you can have two concurrent activations I don’t see this as that big a problem. If you have special circumstances that require more, I’d be interested in hearing them.
No, it may well not be the end of the world, but has the potatial to be an enormous pain in the a$$, and as this PITA will affect only those of us who are honest enough to actually buy the damn software I think we have every right to complain about it.
Yes, you have a right to complain. But all you’re doing is getting worked up over a PITA that you haven’t even experienced yet. Why not wait and see?
As a registered user of a legal copy of Photoshop, I would definitely have upgraded from Adobe Photoshop 7 if it were not for Activation. Now I cannot see it happening.
I have, maybe, a hundred programs on my PC. If they all needed to be reactivated after a motherboard replacement, the process would be horrific! No thanks.
This is a development to resist. I’ll avoid software producers who show such lack of consideration for their customers..
Since you can have two concurrent activations I don’t see this as that big a problem.
No, you can have one activation on a desktop and one on a laptop. That’s different. And no, maybe you don’t see it as a problem, but that doesn’t mean others wont.
If you have special circumstances that require more, I’d be interested in hearing them.
Not that its any of your business…
I have three desktop PCs at home (laptops are worthless to me). One is a new workstation, the others are older renderslaves. My apps are split between them. I often have to move PS between them depending on what else I am doing (rendering et al), but since there is only one of me (me being the only person who has access to my PCs, which are in my house) and I only have one monitor on my desk, it is litteraly impossible for me to break my EULA by using the license on more than one PC at a time. Whether or not I uninstall each version that I am not using is irrelevant (although in point of fact I do, my two slaves have small-ish HDs so I often need the swap-space for big renders).
At present it takes me 2 minutes to move PS, in the future I’ll have to make a phone call and justify myself to someone at Adobe.
That is unacceptable, and that is why I won’t be upgrading until I find a way to crack software I will be paying for anyway.
The fact that machine specific licensing has always been a part of the license is irrelevent because it didn’t affect users. Either the licensing has to change or activation has to change. Now they are enforcing machine specific licensing.
It’s like renting a video that you can only play on the VCR you registered with. If you bring it over to your girlfriends house, it doesn’t play because it was only registered on your VCR.
The difference is that in general, machine specific licensing is fundamentally different than user licensing.
Oh, and by the way, the license says a desktop and a laptop. So what happens when or if they are able to determine that you have two desktop installations? Everyone casually says "you can have two installations" – only if one of them is a laptop. They can enforce the license because one of your machines is not a laptop.
Is this the spirit of Adobe’s license? Or are these issues simply "acceptable casualties"?
Please stop negating real issues for honest folk. If we were dishonest, it wouldn’t BE an issue.
Adobe must have noticed quite high occurances of duplicate serial numbers being registered before taking this step sop yes, these are acceptable casualties to eliminate or at least lessen this problem. Some people will be caught in the crossfire but you should be directing yor ire towards these morons instead of Adobe.
As for the spirit of the license, there is no such thing. Licenses are clear in this regard. The fact that Adobe was a little more lenient in the past was merely due to the limited ability to enforce their license. Adobe NEVER allowed two machines in the letter of the license, only ONE desktop and ONE laptop. If you didn’t have a laptop then you were not allowed to install the software in another desktop. Never have, never will. There is no such thing as the spirit of the license, that just a fabrication of anti-copyright slashbots who look for ANY loophole or means to legitimize their illegal violation of copyright and licenses.
that just a fabrication of anti-copyright slashbots who look for ANY loophole or means to legitimize their illegal violation of copyright and licenses.
I’m not an anti-copyright slashbot. And your outright name-calling personal attacks, and lack of compassion for the inability of a written document to cover all possible scenarios, is quite irritating.
Further, your contention that there is no "spirit" is totally inaccurate. That isn’t to justify my actions or inaction (for not physically removing from one machine to the other while I was the one using it), rather, all agreements are created with a spirit. That’s basically what feeds lawyers.
Your paranoid ramblings are even more irritating. If you have proof that these things will come then share it with the rest of us. And as long as you’re handing out future predictions would you give me next week’s winning lottery numbers?
At first blush, I thought activation would be a good idea, but now see that there are some clear difficulties for me as a user. From all this discussion, the conclusion I come to is that the product now has less value to me as a user than it did before, because it is less configurable to my workspace.
Less value, yet more expense – as I will need to purchase two licenses to be able to do what I could formerly do with one license. I did not realize that it was not permitted to install on two desktops. That seems to me an unreasonable limitation, since using Photoshop on a laptop is pointless. The display is not capable of being calibrated, making a laptop worthless in a color-managed environment.
I have come around in my thinking, and oppose the imposition of activation as it is currently configured – not so much because I oppose activation per se, but because I disagree with the terms of the License Agreement.
I will not upgrade so long as Adobe maintains activation in its current configuration. I suspect others will do likewise, and I hope enough of us vote with our feet to make a difference to Adobe.
Please read the following extracts from the NEW EULA:
"Permitted Number" means one (1) unless otherwise indicated under a valid licence (e.g., volume licence) granted by Adobe.
2.1 General Use. You may install and use one copy of the Software on up to the Permitted Number of your compatible Computers; or
2.4 Portable or Home. The primary user of the Computer on which the Software is installed may install a second copy of the Software for his or her exclusive use on either a portable Computer or a Computer located at his or her home, provided the Software on the portable or home Computer is not used at the same time as the Software on the primary Computer.
2.4 Portable or Home. The primary user of the Computer on which the Software is installed may install a second copy of the Software for his or her exclusive use on either a portable Computer or a Computer located at his or her home, provided the Software on the portable or home Computer is not used at the same time as the Software on the primary Computer.
IOW, the second machine does not have to be a laptop.
How many more need to come down before you’re happy?
Write them down in legible form along with your reasons:
1.
2.
3.
BTW: if multiple "installs" at the same time is included then you might want to consider the volume license – that way you don’t have to concern yourself with activation. From memory there is a 5 license option.
How many more need to come down before you’re happy?
You’re right Ian, that one does it. I’ve been an ass through the whole thing. I apologize to all whom may have been confused by my diatribe. I don’t know what I was thinking.
I had refused to migrate to XP even though it is a more stable operating system than the one that I use now (win98) for the simple fact that I had protested Activation as a principle – I took the hit for it in terms of performance.
Now that Adobe has incorporated Activation I felt compelled to register my protest. And that probably wasn’t the right thing to do.
It has been well argued by proponents of Activation as well as those who agree with the upgrade suite v. individual components, that there is nothing to worry about. This step is little more than a fly in the ointment and I shouldn’t worry about what’s becoming of the software industry. Indeed, the argument for Activation is sound, well reasoned and should be supported so that we can continue to enjoy earning a living from the tools provided by Microsoft, Adobe, and others who follow suit.
I formally retract all protest to product activation, especially as it relates to the non-regulation of licensing and the ability of companies, whomever they may be, to enforce licensing. Should the day ever come that I am told by a software vendor, that a mission critical application will not operate if a competing product is on the system, I will accept it as the way that it is.
Further, I also retract my protest for machine licensing v. user licensing. I see now that the venture was pure folly.
Who was it that said "the needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few"? It seems that my position was selfish, and I’m sorry.
I mean, after all, the point of it is to be quiet and go along, isn’t it?
Now that I’m in agreement with all the proponents of this move, I hope to regain my credibility as a reaonably intelligent individual. If that doesn’t come to pass, I will work very hard to make sure that I fully agree with the crowd so as to not be called a moron again.
If you didn’t have a laptop then you were not allowed to install the
software in another desktop.<
I *think* you might be mistaken there – Adobe has always allowed you to use the software on two machines (such as your workstation at your place of employment and another copy on your home computer). —
The quoted section of the EULA (was that in this thread or the other one?) seems to envision two scenarios, both of which are allowed:
1. Corporate user who wants to install the program on a home computer, too.
2. Desktop user who wants to install the program on a laptop, too.
It doesn’t take account of users like me who have a personal copy of the software and multiple desktop computers. Or corporate users who roam to various working spaces and need to use the program in different places at different times.
as well as those who agree with the upgrade suite v. individual components
You can’t lump them together with the activation argument. It’s completely different. I’m not very big on the suite upgrade myself. I wouldn’t want to be tied to future suite upgrades.
I’m going to upgrade PS and ID. I’ll consider Illustrator after I’ve done a bit more research. There’s no way I want to be committed to future suite upgrades. I want to consider each app on its own merit.
As I read Ian Lyons’ post, he makes it clear that in your circumstance, you need to buy more licenses.
In the past, it was required by the license that you uninstall before installing it to a new machine. In order to enforce those terms, product Activation requires that you get each machine you wish to work on approved by the software author. Functionally, like it or not, the current activation scheme transforms Adobe licensing (and most other software authors) to authorize a machine, and not a user.
Now, you must not only uninstall it, but as a verification, you must get each machine approved.
So to reiterate the point, you (and I) need more licenses to continue the way we work, or we must change the way we work. It’s that simple.
Unfortunately, Tony, you are one of the honest people who will suffer. But I really think a call to Adobe is in order for you. Talk to them and see if you can work this out. They may be willing to give you an extra activation code. It can’t hurt to ask.
Do NOT confuse the issue – the quote I gave is for the individual retail version for Windows (Photoshop CS). This version allows ONE (1) primary and ONE (1) home or laptop install. Technically two computers within the same work environment should be separately licensed. However, as has already been stated there is no mechanism within the product to prevent both computers being in use at the same time even on the same network. It is down to your honesty.
So far as I understand things corporate versions are Volume License which do NOT require activation – they are however also bound by the EULA conditions.
Not trying to confuse the issue. Just laying out what the EULA language seems to say when I read it.
So am I understanding your post right? You seem to suggest that the EULA could mean:
* Primary computer might be a home desktop computer. * Secondary computer might be another home desktop or might be a laptop.
I suppose that’s possible. IANAL, and I won’t pretend to interpret that deeply.
As I read the text, there’s no reason to specify "home" for the secondary computer unless you’re distinguishing it from a primary computer that’s not a home computer. But lawyers move in mysterious ways.
"based on history, I can’t see them NOT being reasonable."
I sure hope you’re right. But based on history, I recall that Adobe is a member of the SBA (Software Business Alliance), a group which uses its power, scare tactics, threats, etc., on the premise that all customers are guilty until proven innocent. That doesn’t encourage me to think of them as reasonable.
I had planned on buying a copy of Illustrator 10 yesterday, because it’s the last one that’ll run on my main computer, and because it’ll get me a $15 upgrade to Illustrator CS–for either Windows or Mac. Then I realized that there is no guarantee that Illustrator 10 will be a better experience than 9.
Finally, I decided against getting Illustrator 10 because of product activation! No, neither Illustrator 10 nor 11 has it now, but if activation is not a total, horrifying, stinking failure, from a sales point of view, it will be added to Illustrator–probably during the CS.0.1 upgrade. Even though I’ve used Illustrator since 4.0, I didn’t want to commit to lock-in. I’ll do something else–anything else.
What "lock in" are you referring to? Adobe doesn’t require you to upgrade any application – and as you mention, AI *doesn’t* include Activation.
From post #121:
…neither Illustrator 10 nor 11 has it now, but if activation is not a total, horrifying, stinking failure, from a sales point of view, it will be added to Illustrator–probably during the CS.0.1 upgrade.
Yes, viol8ion, you are right. My mental translator kicked in. All of my computers have ports, does that make them portable? Why do they even put that in, if not to trip someone? Where’s this new EULA? The activation page pointed to the v.7 one, which is the same one I’ve got in my "legal" folder, which makes no mention of home v. office, but does mention portables.
Another question, which I haven’t seen considered: when CS2 comes out,and assuming that it still has activation, will one have to unregister at least one of the two CS1 copies to activate the new version?
Tim
PS. Just checking, "viol8ion" passes this spell check, but "EULA" doesn’t !?
| Activation as implemented in Windows Photoshop CS allows installation | on no more than two separate computers. That’s all it does. It has no | enforcements or tracking of when those two installed versions are used.
If your notebook is stolen – you get a replacement and try to re-activate on the new system? I can see problems with Adobe thinking you already have 2 installations and not allow authorization.
If your notebook is stolen – you get a replacement and try to re-activate on the new system? I can see problems with Adobe thinking you already have 2 installations and not allow authorization.
In the real world, I would think, that you call Adobe and tell them. They will issue a new activation number. The old one will still work, because AFAIK, they can’t "de-activate" it, since there’s not a continual Phone Home. Which is a good thing.
BUT… if they don’t believe you, you will have to buy a new seat.
When won’t they believe you?
When you have tried to activate 8 times in some time period (a year?).
Or.. when they just think you’re lying. It’s really up to them, and how well you can sell your story.
Then when the patch is released (there’s always one right?), it will only work on the systems that have current activation. The stolen laptop, in the example above will still work, but the patch can’t be applied because it’s been "retired" in the Adobe database.
I don’t think they wouldn’t believe you – not the first time. But if you start calling up with incident after incident, it would (and probably should) be flagged.
So I think if you call them and say: "My laptop died. I bought a new one." They’ll say "okay, here’s your number". I don’t think they’d be ridiculous about it. Some companies would, though.
I expect I will upgrade to CS, but at least I have learnt one thing from all this It is worth reading the EULA. I was planning on buying a laptop expecting to have to buy a second copy of Office XP for the laptop but I see I can now legally install the copy I bought for the desktop
I a commercial environment I dont see why everybody is so surprised all our software at work (CAD, design simulation etc.) is one seat = one license, you require N copies on N PCs you buy N licenses and for some of this software we are talking £20k+ per seat.
Hello all: I just wanted to let you know that we at Adobe have taken note of your activation comments and value your feedback.
We have done extensive research, including a broad market test, that indicates activation can be an effective method to curb the most common forms of piracy. We have worked hard over the past year to ensure that we can implement activation with minimal inconvenience to our customers.
The following addresses some of the questions Ive seen here:
Number of Activations: Our End User License Agreement still allows you to install Adobe software on two machines. The activation system permits these two installs.
Flexibility: The system has been built by taking our customer’s common usage patterns into account. The activation strategy has been designed to accommodate replacing machines, reconfiguring hardware, uninstalling and reinstalling an application, and many other situations that do not require the need to call or notify Adobe.
In addition, there is a 30-day grace period allowing full use of the software for up to 30-days before activation is required. This helps ensure activation does not get in the way of getting work done.
Customer Service: Our customer service reps have been thoroughly trained on activation. They are well-equipped to handle customer inquiries, answer questions about the terms of the End User License Agreement, and solve activation-related problems.
Thanks again for the feedback. Your input is important.
It would mean a whole lot more if it weren’t almost exactly the same message Discreet uses to justify its own bug-ridden, unstable, intrusive copy-protection system (which comes from Macrovision… who list Adobe as a customer on their website)…
which comes from Macrovision… who list Adobe as a customer on their website
No kidding? Sigh. And I was SO hopeful that they would do the reponsible thing. If it is a non-custom implementation of Macrovision, they’re making a mistake.
On the upside, I posted in the lounge, Adobe’s a big company and it’s not often that a Director level individual comes in and says "calm down folks, wait and see." It does NOT lack sincerity IMO – it may be naive (and I’m not saying that it is) but it’s not insincere either. At least that’s my take on it.
Also, we have the early adopters to tell us what’s what. I’m counting on them more than anything.
True John, but at the end of the day, why do we even care about activation at all? The principle? I’ve thought about this a lot. So here’s me, and it’s just me…
I’ll set the playing field, from my perspective.
We all agree that the authors deserve their money for producing the product. We all agree that it’s wrong to steal it – even though some still steal and think it’s pretty harmless (witness Winona Ryder), we know it’s wrong.
We also know that pirating benefits companies in tangible ways. Not all pirating, but casual copying, benefits companies. It gives folks a chance to use the product that would otherwise not have used it. We KNOW that a 30 day trial is "okay", but it really sux. You take a program like Photoshop, as complex as it is, and in 30 days have to evaluate whether or not it’s "for you". That isn’t enough time – it just isn’t.
So casual copying does have a benefit in that it allows folks to try the program, on their own time, with their own learning curve. If you got a copy of Photoshop 5.5 from your cousin, and you really need Photoshop, or think it is the cats meow, eventually, you will buy it. It becomes important, much like many of the products in the MS Office Suite. If you stole MS Word 95, eventually, you’ll have to buy 97, 2000, or whatever.
On the other hand, there are many businesses that buy a single seat and outfit a department with it. They have a skewed idea of where to cut costs. So they rob companies of their rightful revenues.
So in principle an activation mechanism is not the worst idea. I make a product and I know people steal it. I’ve elected to avoid anti-copy techniques because they all, well, suck. But it really isn’t fair for a flagship product like MS Office or Photoshop to be outright stolen, day after day. Something has to be done.
The casualty is the revenue generated from casual copying. We may have to just live with that.
That’s the playing field. Here’s the game though, and where I think companies need to be careful. I will be extreme in my examples ONLY to illustrate a point, hoping that the reader can imagine the less clear-cut scenarios that lie in between.
The "game" is: It is fair to enforce licensing ONLY when licensing is fair. Think about that for a minute.
There are two aspects of this. First, software companies like the idea of "per use" rental. It is a way to feed Wall Street (our real nemesis). Electronic enforcement of licensing is a way to begin the trend, to set market expectations, so that one day, when you need to use Photoshop (or more likely Microsoft Word), you will have to log onto the internet and give your credit card number to pay to use the program. Maybe in 10 years, but this is one way to do it. A gradual shift in the paradigm (I know Chris hates that word) of the market. I don’t know if it can ever come to pass, but you can bet that it’s being talked about – seriously.
But the other aspect, and the one that hits home today, that, IMO, we must be VERY VERY careful of, is fair licensing.
Right now, the general consensus is, unless a license violates a specific state or federal law, software companies can do whatever they like, write whatever they like, and the courts side with them because you will have agreed to usage terms. The argument is, not reading the license is no excuse, and you read the terms and agreed. That’s really powerful.
There is no "watchdog" that sides with the consumer in terms of ensuring fair licensing. If you read what is happening, legal battles are being won by the authors, not the consumers, where licensing is concerned.
So, in theory, Darth Vader (who lives in Redmond by the way) can create a license that defines what software you must use in concert with the software you’ve licensed. They could come out with just about any restriction they like, and because there is no watchdog group, they have, virtually, free reign. Impossible? Hardly. You need a class action suit brought against them to even have your side heard. Will you abandon the software? Doubtful, because the idea is to gain acceptance as a standard, then make it too painful to change. Oh, no one’s forcing you, by the way, to succumb.
In Adobe’s case, and more to the heart of the issue is, their license needs revision, IMO. Then, activation issues really, go away.
The license needs to be flexible as well as binding. With activation, the argument is, "Well, we are enforcing the terms of the license you agreed to – it’s the same license that you agreed to for every other version". Fine. Then make your license fairer. Because Activation, that is, the way enforcement of the license restriction of "work computer and home/portable computer", in essence, transforms the license from a "USER" license to a "MACHINE" license. The gray areas of the license were virtually ignored because first, it’s too hard to define them, and second, it is too hard to enforce.
But with Activation, you start drawing black and white lines – okay, fine. But then it must follow that the license needs to go further in defining what is black and what is white. What is a portable/Home computer?
An example: Why shouldn’t a user be allowed to port his copy of Photoshop to ANY machine he wishes? The answer? Because Adobe cannot be sure that his use will be for good and not evil – that’s the only reason. So to "protect" themselves against the potential evil, they, in essence, decide what machines are allowed, and when.
This is Machine Licensing, not User Licensing.
In practice then, rather than redefine a license that technology is challenged to enforce 100%, they create "exception rules". These exception rules lessen the effectiveness of the technology used to verify adherence to the license, and activation, in essence, serves as a "gatekeeper" so to speak, so as to alert Adobe to potential abuses. They train customer service reps to listen to the "pitch" that they hear on the phone, and someone makes a decision as to whether or not you must buy an additional seat.
But the criteria for that seat, is no longer user eligibility, it is machine eligibility. This is fundamentally, the domain of the license, and why *I* think that the license needs severe revision.
As a closing comment (and I’m sorry for such a long post), I ask again: Why shouldn’t a user be able to use Photoshop, or any software that he/she has licensed, on any machine that they wish? With activation, historical acceptance of the agreement does not apply.
I think of many metaphors for the licensing situation but they all fall apart somewhere.
One that sticks with me is likening my Photoshop to my table saw. I need a table saw in my shop, but I also need one on my job site. I purchased two table saws, I did not expect Delta to give me the second one because I needed it in another location. But this is a poor example as I could also say that, if I need a special blade for my table saw, I’m free to use it on either machine as I choose.
Software is different. It’s not a hammer, it’s not a saw. Those things cannot be cloned as easily as software can. One reason "casual" piracy thrives is that its theft has little effect on the one who purchased the rights. If you steal my hammer, it’s gone, I can’t drive nails. If you copy my software, I carry on as usual, having lost nothing. Those who allow copying would scream bloody murder if you uninstalled their applications and made off with their disks.
I’m very much opposed to piracy. Enough so that when I went to my local shipper last week with a boxed edition of Photoshop 7 and heard the man behind the counter tell me that he had a pirated copy of PS 6, I bought a shipping box and turned around and left and used the USPS instead because I didn’t want to give him the chance to make himself an upgrade from my disk. I don’t know the bounds of my ethics. I see a real need for the right to install a second copy on my portable, and I did so four years ago before I knew it was an allowed use under the EULA. No one else uses my Adobe software. No one in my family cared about it in the least. I offered my son a legitimate set of disks and he turned them down!
Now I live and work alone and there is no way anyone else could use my PS even if it was on four machines. But two’s the limit. Is that flawlessly logical? Maybe not, but it’s as close as the company can come to exercising some reasonable control over the distribution of its products.
My take on activation is that it is potentially intrusive and the technology can be abused. But it brings no change whatsoever to the expectations that Adobe has of its customers. The difference now is that you may have to meet those expectations.
The difference now is that you may have to meet those expectations.
True. Which goes to my point of ensuring licensing is to the user and not the machine by revising the license.
There is no good argument as to why photoshop, or any other software I am licensed to use, should not be able to follow me, the user, instead of the machine. Or is there?
And by the way, no one prevents you from moving your saw from building to building, whenever you want.
Dirck, there are those that find it more reasonable to put their table saw in the truck and take it with them. There is a technology that has been used for years to enforce a per-user license, a dongle. Someone can pick up the product in the store, carry it home, and feel like they really bought something, so they have the illusion of ownership; in fact, they do own something, the dongle.
The downside here is that it prevents electronic distribution of a product, and also costs something to produce (though I wonder if it would cost any more than the administration of an activation scheme). Dongles can also be hacked, but I think that there’s parity here – every scheme that I’ve seen, including diskette keys, have been.
I’m a bit too familiar with data mining to be comfortable giving a company any more information than is necessary for me to use their product, whatever the policy is today can be changed in six months, and you may be forced to accept it – if you need that patch, you’ll need to agree.
And by the way, no one prevents you from moving your saw from building to building, whenever you want.
And nobody is stopping you from deactivating and reactivating the software. It’s just a high and mighty pain in the butt. Kinda like trying to move a table saw from one place to another.
The real truth probably lies in between the two argument extremes. As Tony stated, and probably all of us would agree, Adobe has a legitimate reason for trying to protect its property and ensuring a good return for its shareholders. And, yes, there are certainly blatant instances of pirating of software. Someone mentioned the company that buys one copy but uses it throughout the company on all their machines. This is blatant piracy and I’m sure it costs Adobe (and other software companies) many thousands if not millions of dollars. There are also the overseas pirates (Hong Kong, China, etc.) where software is duplicated and copies sold for a few dollars apiece on the street. I’m sure there are places right here in the USA where the same thing is happening. This too is obvious piracy and is costing the software companies a lot of money. I think these are the people Adobe and others should be going after. These wholesale pirates have no problem cracking any copy protection or activation scheme and do it with alacrity. So, unless you catch them redhanded, there is little that can be done. But, and this is a big but, this is where the real money is being lost.
There are also the people who ‘share’ a copy with a friend or two. This too is piracy. The question, though, is how much does this casual copying or ‘sharing’ really costing Adobe? I’ve stated before that I have had copies of software from friends. I suspect many people here have done the same at some point. Some of it I liked and some of it was junk. So, once familiar with the software and knowing that I would use it (and need the manual and access to technical support), I bought it at full price. Some companies even had amnesty programs (Xtree comes to mind) for the casual pirates. The junk? I threw it away. The point here is that we actually purchased the software once we had a chance to ‘try it out’. The ready availablity of 30-day demos does somewhat negates this nowadays.
Activation schemes like Adobe is doing with Photoshop will only antagonize the honest people who would never steal software in the first place. Yes, there will always be the casual thieves as described above but how much are they really costing Adobe? The mass-market thieves and the dishonest companies are the ones who are really costing Adobe money but those are the ones who have no problem breaking any activation or licensing schemes.
So what has Adobe accomplished? They have not appreciably limited wholesale piracy but have managed to irritate the individual users who are usually eager (frothing at the mouth?) to buy the latest and greatest. Activation, and other bonehead moves like not including printed manuals, will cause many of us to forego buying the latest and greatest. This is especially true when the latest and greatest is really just a relatively minor evolution of the software. Others will be driven to the competition.
I seriously doubt if the savings from reduced piracy (if any) will ever be offset by the losses from people abandoning ship or just not upgrading. So, we have to respect Adobe’s right to try it. Let’s just hope they will see, with time, that it is more trouble than it is worth.
Bob, if they made de-reactivation too easy, someone would find a way to hijack activations. A dongle is more like the keys to your car/home/office, except that there aren’t ligitimate locksmiths that can make you a copy to tuck away in the false rock.
If CDs were more robust, I wouldn’t mind so much carrying the program around that way… except for the speed of loading, except that operating systems mostly won’t allow that. How about the entire program on a USB device? Slot in the ones that you need at the moment. Software companies seem to want to move as much of the pain as possible onto the user, download the software, and if you want a secure copy, burn it yourself. If you want a printed manual, you get to buy the paper and ink or toner and bind it yourself.
Dirck, as you said, your analogy was flawed. I suppose that I could build my two monitors and one computer, keyboard, mouse, tablet, scanners, speakers, printers into a cabinet on wheels, which would then rival your saw. r_harvey’s representation is how we would like software to be, but software companies prefer your analogy.
After reading the comments here, I have come to a couple of conclusions.
Although stated as the reason for activation Adobe is not really addressing the primary source of piracy, large scale copying, both foreign and domestic, for the purpose of resale. Also, according to the Business Software Alliance (BSA), the rate of piracy is declining, not increasing. (below)
As stated earlier in this thread, companies that purchase PS-CS under a volume agreement are not required to activate. Why?? Why are they less likely to steal than the small business person? It would seem to me that if Adobe was serious about piracy, it would require activation across the board.
So why are the individual users and small installation shops the ones being targeted for activation when they are not the primary offender of piracy. As mentioned, activation will not stop the pirates and they are not requiring activation for volume purchasers. After reading the information from the BSA, I think it is because:
a) BSA has convinced the software companies that activation is the right thing to do EVEN THOUGH the world is experiencing declining rates of piracy (see below). Software companies have bought into their agenda.. b) Software companies are doing this to make themselves feel good about doing something to stop piracy even though they are not solving their primary loss areas. They really dont have anything else to do.
So here are some interesting statistics from the Business Software Alliance (of which Adobe is a member).
North America has the lowest piracy rate in the world and this rate has been steadily declining, from 32% in 1994 to 24% in 2002. Latin America: Between 1994 and 2002, piracy rates in the Latin American region dropped 23 points, from 78% to 55%. Western Europe: From 1994 to 2002, the piracy rate of Western Europe fell 17 points, from 52% to 35%, third best of all the regions. Middle East, Africa: The Middle East/Africa region improved the most of any region with a 31 point reduction in piracy, from 80% in 1994 to 49% in 2002.The Middle East, on average, improved from a piracy rate of 84% in 1994 to 50% in 2002, a drop of 34 points. As a whole, Africa dropped 29 points, from 77% in 1994 to 48% in 2002.. Asia/Pacific: The piracy rate in the Asia/Pacific region improved by 13 points. Chinas piracy rate showed modest improvement. Its rate changed only five points, from 97% in 1994 to 92% in 2002. .. How does BSA come up with the rates of piracy? In an example in the US they state that the rate of piracy in Wyoming is 40.3%. I believe this number to means that out of all the software sold in this state, 40% was an illegal copy. How can this be, there are not very many people in Wyoming anyway. But the BSA claims that 184 state jobs were lost.
I think the really interesting thing about the authentication subject is the contradiction in implementation, who it is affecting, the users reaction and the real impact on piracy reduction. I mean, what is the cost benefit analysis on this issue.
First of all, there is development cost (per an earlier posting, about one years worth of development and testing), versus lost sales do to consumer revolt offset by actual anticipated sales increases due to stopped piracy. The latter number in their analysis has got to be highly subjective and questionable. Secondly, since there are improvements to piracy without authentication, why not focus more on those methods which appear to have a lower cost structure and dont alienate the primary user base? How is authentication going to improve what is happening in China?
Excellent post. You articulated the incongruity very well.
While I was impressed that Drew made an appearance, and I DO trust Chris Cox, I’m not convinced at present that activation helps anyone. At least where Photoshop is concerned. Based on your post, it appears that Adobe may be fooling themselves into the "look boss, we’re doing something about it" mode.
I dunno. It seems to me that activation costs more than it will save. I know *I’m* not upgrading anytime soon. I will say that when I saw the feature set of PS-CS, I began to drool. I was noodling a way to work through all the other issues (XP upgrade, multiple suites, etc) so that I could acquire the new version.
Noting that activation, as a means to enforce licensing, changes the license, doesn’t solve the problem, and basically results in eroding the trust of the user base (by saying "we don’t know you, so we don’t trust you), in concert with the BSA stats, and the non-activation requirement where casual copying is more of a problem, hell, I’m not so quick to upgrade.
Maybe they thought that we were the least equipped to retalliate. I dunno.
Earls post has been bothering me. If I’m in a class of user that cannot be trusted, and my machine will become licensed instead of me, I’m wondering why the hell I hang out in a place that, fundamentally, doesn’t trust me.
Why the fark do I "give back"? Sure, I’ve gotten help here, but in the past year, I’ve given A LOT. I’m beginning to wonder why I do it now.
Company supported forums are a strange hybrid, they benefit the company as well as the users. In a forum as active as this one, development, support, marketing all directly benefit; as a result, so does the bottom line.
Would you feel more comfortable helping other users if this were not a company forum, Tony? I don’t contribute so much here as most of the questions that I can answer have already been addressed by the time I visit and read the threads. I look in enough to know that Tony’s one of the most helpful people around, giving his time, ideas and comfort even when he doesn’t have a direct solution. Adobe would do well, and good, to reward those that help it so freely.
I’ve been reading some of the interesting comments here on activation.
I, too, was excited about the upgrade and now am considering not upgrading (although I doubt it will do any good). I have several instances with "activation" that were more than an "inconvenience":
1. My sister-in-law bought a new comoputer awhile ago from Best Buy. She wanted her kids to be able to do some simple word processing for their schoolwork. After 30 days of using Word, the activation screen came up. She didn’t know what it was and thought she was going to be charged for it if she connected to the Internet, so she called Best Buy. The knowledgeable sales clerk at Best Buy told her that she needed Windows XP Pro to be able to get the word processing included and usually it costed $x, but they had something on sale or something and could she could get it for a substantial amount less. So she bought it. Guess what? It worked for 30 days and then the activation screen came up again. That’s when she called me. I had never heard of the activation process and really didn’t know what she had bought at that time. After thinking about it for a bit, I thought I knew what it was and told her. By that time, she gave up on the whole thing and downloaded some simple, free, shareware, word processing program. So, what did this thing cost her? Somewhere in the vicinity of $100-$150 for the upgrade to XP Pro from XP Home, if I remember correctly…
2. I had a subscription to Audible.com. They have audio books you can download to either your desktop, your laptop, your Palm. Course, you have to activate each machine, so that you don’t give the book to someone else to listen to (which I still don’t get…I can give a book I’ve read to someone else to read, I can give an audio book I’ve purchased to someone else to listen too…. I don’t think that’s illegal yet, is it?) So, I activated it on my desktop and at the time, I had a Palm. Yet, in a few months, I switched to a Pocket PC. Now, I not only had all the difficulty of figuring out the darn thing and backing up and switching programs, I had to figure out how to activate on this new machine. After searching help forums, etc., I called and after a few calls and trials, got it working (didn’t have cable then, so every time they gave me instructions, had to hang up, try them, if they didn’t work, call back.) Unbelieveable inconvenience, yet we got it to work. Within a few months, they added a feature that allowed you to copy the books to cd’s, so now you could listen to them on your portable cd player. But…. you could only download it once. (Don’t get this idea either…if I have a cd burned and want to copy it for someone else, I can just as easily copy the cd as download it from their site.) Not knowing their how their software worked, especially with my cd burner, I had to call to request that I could burn more. The book I was trying to burn was 7 cd’s in length. I’d get to 4 and some bug-a-boo came up, and it didn’t work. So then I’d call and they’d tell me to try such and such. Well, I could only burn 3 more, so at the end of 3 when I realized I could only burn 3 more, I’d call back and they’d try and figure out what was wrong and give me 7 more or something. After several tries and hours of my time, I gave up and never did burn the full book. Guess what… I don’t use Audible.com anymore.
Activation… more than an inconvenience… I think so.
Activation… more than an inconvenience… I think so.
As far your sister is concerned, well a bit of education could have prevented any lost revenue. I’ve had to activate MS software several times for myself as well as friends. No problems including reactivating after harddrive crashes. Inconvenient? No.
As far as Audible.com, well if what you say is true I don’t blame you for not doing business with them. But I won’t judge Adobe’s activation scheme using someone else’s as base. If it causes me nothing but trouble, I’ll be here yelling and screaming about it. In the mean time, based on past customer service, I’m willing to give it a go.
"According to Adobe the goal is stop casual copying."
And at a cost of antagonizing every honest customer they have, and at the same time doing *nothing* to stop serious piracy. In fact, this might even *encourage* pirates to offer software with disabled activation, and that in turn will appeal to customers who were previously honest. When a company’s perceived policy is to treat every potential customer as a potential thief, then a certain segment of the population is going to live up to that expectation. Another segment will just stop buying.
r_Harvey hit the nail on the head. I was being a bit childish I suppose, but John Woram sums it up quite nicely. I started coming to the forums to learn so that I could do it "faster, better, cheaper", and kind of "hawked" the forum for new techniques to get done what I do. Now I have a refined process, thanks to the forum, and I’m at "the top of my game" where photoshop is concerned, as it relates to what I do.
Paying it forward is the right thing to do. But I’m still P.O.’d because as John says "you body slam us, but let the criminals go free".
Also, we keep comparing Microsoft activation to others. I think there’s a fundamental difference between applicaion software and an operating system. I don’t think I was ever bothered by activation of XP – you don’t really port an OS, but an application is something that you need to follow you, not the machine. An OS isn’t something you’re going to uninstall and put on your laptop, Photoshop is.
Still, I feel like the girl who’s gone "too far" with a guy and didn’t get asked to the prom by him.
I respect Adobe’s desire to curb piracy, but like so many others, I regard Product Activation as worse than useless
– it will have no effect upon the real pirates, who will no doubt crack PA within days;
– as others have said, it will irritate honest users, who will be made repeatedly to explain themselves and their conduct if simply upgrading their PC.
– It can be used as a first step towards and annual licensing regime; pay more for new license or update, or no new PA for you;
– it may drive otherwise honest users in to the pirates hands. The pirate may no longer be seen as the bad guy. Talk about the law of unintended consequences.
Of course, nothing we, the honest, licensed users, say here will make any difference. Even Norton Antivirus is to become subject to PA. The only hope – a long shot at best – is consumer protection legislation.
What is so sad about this is that we should all be talking about the great new features of PS CS. Instead, I just feel resentful and angry.
– it will have no effect upon the real pirates, who will no doubt crack PA within days;
Unforturnately you’re correct here.
– as others have said, it will irritate honest users, who will be made repeatedly to explain themselves and their conduct if simply upgrading their PC.
Well if all you’re doing is making simple upgrades, then you’re not going to kill your activation. You get two activations without any question at all.
– It can be used as a first step towards and annual licensing regime; pay more for new license or update, or no new PA for you;
I personally find this argument to be completely ridiculous (please note I’m talking about the argument, not you.) Annual licensing could be instituted anytime Adobe chooses. Using this as a "first step" is not needed.
– it may drive otherwise honest users in to the pirates hands. The pirate may no longer be seen as the bad guy. Talk about the law of unintended consequences.
Again, I don’t disagree, but keep in mind that most users will never have to reactivate their software. As long as it’s on the same machine, you can install it over and over again with no need to "phone home." You’d probably have to replace some major component like a motherboard or processor in order to need to contact Adobe. And remember, you get two activations anyway.
Of course, nothing we, the honest, licensed users, say here will make any difference. Even Norton Antivirus is to become subject to PA. The only hope – a long shot at best – is consumer protection legislation.
Once again a valid point.
What is so sad about this is that we should all be talking about the great new features of PS CS. Instead, I just feel resentful and angry.
Amen! Except I’ll wait and see before I start feeling resentful and angry.
I personally find this argument to be completely ridiculous
Then you don’t read the news from computer journals. This is a predicted trend, it’s been talked about for a few years now.
The way to do it isn’t to "flip a switch". It is to gradually change the usage paradigm. If you want it to work, anyway. What the hell do you think happened with Microsoft? They created a dependancy, slowly. Then exerted prowess.
– It can be used as a first step towards and annual licensing regime;
pay more for new license or update, or no new PA for you;
I personally find this argument to be completely ridiculous (please note I’m talking about the argument, not you.) Annual licensing could be instituted anytime Adobe chooses. Using this as a "first step" is not needed.
To the contrary, PA gets the consumer used to the idea that the buying process does not stop at the checkout. Having paid their money, they (or rather, we) still have to activate it. And its a small step from there to the vendor (hopefully not Adobe – I’m generalising now) saying "we no longer provide new PA for that old software, you’ll have to upgrade", and a further small step from there to saying "you have to upgrade / buy a new PA license" annually.
I don’t think its ridiculous at all. I think it is inevitable. Maybe not Adobe, but someone will follow the path.
<sigh> Yes, this could be the first brand added to the fire to cook the frogs slowly.
Wall Street likes companies with evenly rising revenue, and monthly or micro charges would level the peaks and troughs. If a company’s portfolio of products is broad enough, and the upgrades are compelling, and distributed throughout the year, the fluctuations aren’t so great. That’s a few too many ifs for some companies; some are taking a "use it or lose it" attitude for upgrades, if you don’t buy the next in sequence, you’ll have to pay the full price the next time around.
Software rental wouldn’t be that much of a problem with products that are almost entirely used by corporations, as their expenses get spread through the year as well (SAS comes to mind, I think that they are still only working with an annual renewal model). Adobe must be broadly distributed, in terms of revenue, from enthusiast home user to small design or press shop to larger enterprise. Maybe they’re looking to rental on the enterprise level, and forced upgrade on the lower end. If so, those a the bottom that can will abandon the product for something less costly (or pirate, one way or another), the enterprise will accept it as an industry standard, and those in the middle get squeezed.
Adobe is actually SAVING money everytime one of us decides to buy no product or even one or two. Here’s the explanation. When I decide to buy only Photoshop at $169 instead of the CS Premium at $749, and then find the crack for the activation — which of course I will since I must be a pirate — and then give or sell it to all my friends, Adobe only loses $169 for each copy. When I find the one crack for CS Premium abd give or sell it to my friends, they would lose $749 for each copy. Of course, if I buy two or three of the apps (Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign, for example) they won’t save quite as much but they will still save something. Now, if I decide to be really obtuse, and buy nothing, they will save the entire $749. Don’t you see? By forcing me to buy none or fewer of their products, they are actually saving money in lost revenue!
Well it’s about time a little levity was brought to the table. Thanks Jake.
All in all, no matter what the argument for product activaion is, no matter which side of the table you’re on (pro or con), there are really a few facts that shouldn’t be ignored.
1. It doesn’t even touch piracy 2. The principle of Activation is built on mistrust, not as a benefit to long-time loyal users 3. Product Activation changes the form and function of the license as it exists today. 4. Where’s my cost savings from you piracy thwarting efforts?
Activation for an app helps no one, hurts loyal users. My concern about activation would really be moot, as a loyal user, if they changed the licensing to reflect user licensing, not machine licensing.
That is not to say I would like it; in principle, it’s a wrong move.
Know what would be cheaper? Offer a reward to turn in pirates. Not sure yet, how to make it work, but I’d rather have a bounty on seeking out and telling on pirates.
I am sure Adobe has been sold activation software, probably at a high level in the company. Sold on the basis that the costs will be covered in a certain time by payback in extra sales as pirates are now forced to buy. Predictions will have been made on the impact of users not upgrading. Overall the picture being painted will be of benefit to Adobe’s bottom line. There will have been many within the company at lower levels who have already argued the cases being made here. They have been overuled. It would have been fascinating to have listened in!
Adobe will have a contract with the vendor of the activation software. Hopefully if the benefits predicted are not forthcoming Adobe will get some money back and think again.
"Know what would be cheaper? Offer a reward to turn in pirates. Not sure yet, how to make it work, but I’d rather have a bounty on seeking out and telling on pirates."
That stinks of Stasi, I think many of us would rather not go there. I’m happy to report a commercial pirate; an acquantance who is one of the "casual" pirates deserves a lecture, not a police action.
Fewer customers or fewer freeloaders? Where are they gonna go? Quark? Whoops, no they have activation. Macromedia? No, that won’t work either. I know, Corel. But I have this funny feeling that when version 12 comes out, you’ll be screaming at them, too.
Everyone is talking a good game here, but the professionals are going to use the best tools available and if they have to have it activated they’re going to do it.
Now, let me point out that I’m not a big proponent of this but unlike most of you, I’m willing to give Adobe a chance to prove that it won’t be inconvenient. You’re accusing Adobe of not trusting you but are you trusting them when they say it won’t inconvenience you? For the most part you have no idea how this will affect you until you try it.
If you don’t want to try it, that’s your decision and perfectly acceptable. ID 2, PS 7 and Ill 10 are all very good applications and will continue to work quite nicely. I for one am going to upgrade and see how it goes. If it doesn’t go well, I’ll be first on line to complain, but I will have at least given it a try first.
I know, Corel. But I have this funny feeling that when version 12 comes out, you’ll be screaming at them, too.
I’ve been screaming at them since CorelDRAW 2. They’ll probably be slower getting it because the VC who bought the company is likely scrambling just to get it all sorted out, let alone considering tightening the screws. Their yearly upgrades aren’t that compelling as it is; no sense encouraging customers to skip one.
Possibly fewer of both, possibly fewer customers and more freeloaders. Maybe on the bottom line it will look just fine, people who treated the license as a user license will buy more to stay ligit, those who feel that this is the camel’s nose under the tent won’t, but it will go in Adobe’s favor. As you say, Adobe is working from a strong position, we’ll see how strong.
I trust Adobe to a certain extent. But one thing that changes with product activation is the licensing arrangement. The point is, find an activation mechanism that licenses ME, the user, as intended with the original license, not the machine. That means that no one complained about the original license because they could still operate like honest folk, allowing their license to follow them. But with activation, the license changes, and drives the license to the machine.
The EULA doesn’t change. You can have the software installed on two machines as long as only one is being used at a time.
You’ve said that you need to move the software around to several machines. In the past this was easy.
Now, you don’t have to answer this, but have you really uninstalled it from one machine when putting it on another? Sounds like quite a pain to me, especially after there have been patches released and if you have third party plugins (which BTW have their own licensing restrictions).
If you haven’t uninstalled each time, you’ve technically violated your EULA. Please don’t get me wrong. I’m certainly not accusing you of anything but the black and white agreement hasn’t changed. What will change is the way it’s enforced.
with all due respect, yes, it has changed. It *has* become machine specific. Whether or not this will be an issue for some or all remains to be seen.
I am not a fan of activation that has the *potential* to question the changes *I* make to my *own* system with regards to hardware, reformats etc. I realize that there are multiple activations and that Adobe has said there can be more de/reactivations as needed up to a certain number, but that’s the sticking point as far as I am concerned. The *potential* to be considered a dishonest person and NOT be given a reactivation number, thus effectively disabling a software that I paid a goodly amount of money for, is a scary thought.
Maybe you are right, maybe this is a moot point, but I agree with Tony that the license should remain with the USER and not their machine.
The only thing changing is the way you are interpreting it. Then I suppose we will have to politely agree to disagree.
By monitoring the equipment and NOT the user, perhaps you will call this interpretation, but I see it as a machine license and NOT a user license. When I am legally able to take my disk from one computer to another (with full uninstall to comply with the EULA) without concern about the hardware configurations, I believe the license is with the user. When the hardware is "monitored" (in whatever fashion the activation is using), then the license has, indeed, left the user and become machine specific.
When I am legally able to take my disk from one computer to another (with full uninstall to comply with the EULA) without concern about the hardware configurations, I believe the license is with the user. When the hardware is "monitored" (in whatever fashion the activation is using), then the license has, indeed, left the user and become machine specific.
No, it hasn’t. The enforcement of the license has changed. You can still uninstall and reinstall on another machine. Yes, if you do it too many times then a red flag is going to be raised. But let’s be honest here, how many people are going to be faced with this situation? I don’t know about you but one machine suits me fine for the better part of 2-3 years.
And you do have a situation that calls for multiple installation you call Adobe and explain what the reasons are. Again, come back and yell and scream AFTER they tell you have to buy a new license. Maybe I’m the one who’s naive, but I just don’t see that happening.
Tony, can you please explain (in simple terms so that I can understand) how it actually hurts you.
Sigh. Why should I have to buy more licenses just because *I* move around. There is no error trapping in PA. It serves as a gatekeeper to flag potential abuse; then it requires that my need be justified.
One guy, one license. It should follow ME, not the machine.
Bob,
The enforcement of the license has changed
That’s the point. That means that the license needs to change to fairly accommodate the new enforcement rules. Before it didn’t matter if the license was poorly defined or not, or whether it took into consideration the myriad of individual circumstances. The playing field will change with activation.
But let’s be honest here, how many people are going to be faced with this situation?
How many does it have to be?
Again, come back and yell and scream AFTER they tell you have to buy a new license
By then it’s too late – don’t you see?
Riddle me this Batman. Why shouldn’t I be able to install Photoshop on 10,000 machines? Who is licensed, me or the machine?
Are you telling me to wait until I have had my 12th activation event, when Adobe flatly says, "Uh, your usage is abnormal, we’re not sure, you had better buy another seat because you’ve used up your quota of activations"? Who is licensed, me or the machine?
All I’m saying here is, if you want to enforce your document, make sure your document continues to license YOU, not your machine. Prior to activation YOU were licensed, not your machine. It’s fine to say "only two installations", but if the way you are verifying is by a unique number that is machine driven, you have transformed the license to say: "Look, anyone who has not paid for photoshop is allowed to use the program, provided they have this machine".
Are you telling me to wait until I have had my 12th activation event, when Adobe flatly says, "Uh, your usage is abnormal, we’re not sure, you had better buy another seat because you’ve used up your quota of activations"? Who is licensed, me or the machine?
You are, but for the most part any reasonable person would still have to ask why you needed twelve installs. And keep in mind, thats 12 installs on 12 different machines; you can install it 10,000 times on the same machine and not have to reactivate it. I said it before and I’ll say it again. Call Adobe, I don’t know any more than you do. Get someone on the phone who knows what’s going on and explain your workflow and your concerns. I’d be very curious to know they have to say.
FWIW, this has been a pretty hot topic on the InDesign Blueworld mailing list, too. Quite a few Adobe people have chimed in over there. For the most part it’s been a pretty reassuring stance. Maybe that’s why I’m taking a wait and see attitude.
There really aren’t too many companies that have as many representatives spending their own time trying to help customers. I say they deserve the benefit of the doubt at this point.
You are, but for the most part any reasonable person would still have to ask why you needed twelve installs.
My point entirely. Prosecution rests. I have 10,000 girlfriends and while we’re smooching, I’m processing images on her machine. When I’m done, I uninstall, and go to the next girlfriend.
Are you satisfied? No? Hmm… my point.
I am not allowed free use. I must justify my use, my habits, my idiosynchrocies. I’m not licensed, the machine is.
Anyone who has not purchased a license to photoshop is allowed to run it, as long as it’s on THIS particular machine.
With respect to the Machine Licence vs User Licence discussion:
From my reading, current software licences are largely based on the licences that were used in pre-PC systems (mainframes, minicomputers, etc) where the machine was licenced to run the software, and you bought X user licences to cover the appropriate number of employees who needed to access the system.
The advent of desktop systems made it more complex, and, in the early days, mechanisms to enforce machine based licencing didn’t exist – it was easier to treat PCs as "smart terminals" and use per-seat licencing schemes for businesses, and an end-user licencing system for individuals (which was meant to be machine specific, as no-one foresaw the revolution in computing styles that the desktop technology brought about) . However, initially, there was no technical means to enforce the EULA.
Over time, as the ability to enforce the EULA grew more sophisticated (dongles, CD-keys, anti-copying measures, and now activation) along with the technology, so we are starting to see more focus on enforcement.
So the model that software companies are trying to enforce comprises two parts:
Corporate/Business licencing – where multiple seats are required, buy one physical copy of the software for installs, and then buy X users
End user – one specific user, one specific system (allowing for a laptop, and for upgrades/replacements to the hardware).
Is this good or bad? Well, as Tony says, it’s a paradigm shift in how current accepted usage patterns will change by technical enforcement of the "rules". Acceptance will only come, if it ever does, after adaptation to the new paradigm.
And speaking to the software rental system – some smaller vendors already use this approach – Stardock Systems have a wide ranging suite of OS utilities that you can "buy" for around $50 a year, and it includes all upgrades / patches.
Also, MS actually bought out a subscription version of MS Office, where you could buy the suite for around a quarter of the retail price, but had to repay every year (so it would take four years to cost the same as the retail package, but you would have probably upgraded to a newer version by then) – the scheme didn’t work, folks were confused about it, so MS set out full versions to all those who had bought the subscription package.
Why don’t you just give it up? Adobe could care less about how you feel. Certainly their hordes of defenders feel the same way. Adobe has essentially thumbed its corporate nose at its users because they know most people will pay and do whatever it takes to get the latest and greatest. There’s a sucker born every minute, as they say. The only way you will be able to express your discontent, with any effect, is to STOP buying their software. Unfortunately, you will be the one who does without the ‘latest and greatest’ because, as is evident from many of the comments on these forums, most people will buy no matter what.
I have had (and still do) a number of issues with Adobe:
1) Adobe Video Collection is available for $799 to anyone. There are NO upgrade offers to existing owners and no special discounts.
2) Adobe has taken the printed manuals out of the Creative Suite and apparently, the Design Collection. You can bet the rest will follow.
3) Adobe has raised the prices for individual upgrades to $169 from either $99 or $149. And this is at a time with interest rates at the lowest in history and inflation almost zero. You CAN still get the printed manuals with the individual applications but for how long?
4) Adobe is adding product activation to Photoshop and will, almost certainly, add it to other programs in the future.
So, what did I do? I did not buy the Video Collection even though I really wanted it. I bought Vegas + DVD instead (plus I already had Sound Forge) and got a great deal on it. I did buy After Effects as an individual product upgrade because nothing else compares. I also recently cancelled my order for the Creative Suite Premium when I found out there were no printed manuals. I might buy Photoshop CS (again, because nothing else compares) as an individual upgrade but have not decided yet. Now, I know that I am just a spit in the bucket as far as Adobe is concerned and they won’t even notice. But what if two people did the same as me? Still no matter. What about a hundred? Who cares? But what if several thousand people did it? Arlo Guthrie would call that a ‘movement’ (reference to "Alice’s Restaurant" for those who don’t understand). Now, that MIGHT just get Adobe’s attention. Who knows? The only way is to vote your conscience by NOT buying. We could always ask Jesse Jackson to organize a boycott …
If you are not willing to simply refuse to buy, and you know Adobe could care less even if you do, just stop complaining and buy along with all the other sheep … er, people.
Jake
P.S. Since we are all now pirates anyway, why not just go to one of the ‘warez’ sites and download it for free? Someone has already posted "Photoshop 8" on at least one. If we are going to be treated as pirates, why not act like it? I’m just kidding …
3) Adobe has raised the prices for individual upgrades to $169 from either $99 or $149. And this is at a time with interest rates at the lowest in history and inflation almost zero. You CAN still get the printed manuals with the individual applications but for how long?
IIRC, the upgrade from PS 5.5 to PS 6.0 was $199.00. They lowered it $149.00 from 6.0 to 7.0. If you bought it from Amazon you got it for $99.00. Prices vary. You don’t have to buy direct.
4) Adobe is adding product activation to Photoshop and will, almost certainly, add it to other programs in the future.
Which they’ve already said they intend to do.
So, what did I do? I did not buy the Video Collection even though I really wanted it.
And if you’ve read what I’ve posted already, I think that’s fine. This is a free world economy we’re talking about. You get to vote with your wallet.
I tell you what, Tony. I think we need to just agree to disagree on this and see where the chips fall. But I’m definitely in on the upgrades. It’s just a matter of whether I go for the suite or the individual apps. I’ll also be watching Amazon and the other retailer for rebates and other deals on these releases.
If my prediction is wrong, I’ll gladly admit when proven so. As for the lottery number, sorry, I’m keeping that to myself. I’ll gladly sell you last week’s, though.
As for the upgrade prices, I was speaking of direct from Adobe. You’re right about the Photoshop prices (I paid them). They did go from $199 to $149 and now to $169. However, if you read what I said, I mentioned ‘others’ (e.g., InDesign, Illustrator, LiveMotion, and GoLive) and the 2002 upgrade price was $99 for each (I know because I paid for them).
I was trying to get us OFF this topic because it is futile. ‘Nuff said, okay?
No disrespect to the serious Users or Adobe but reading this thread on activation, I think is a joke. If one wants to save hundreds of dollars, he/she will find a way to beat the system. There are many hacksters that come up with cracks for tier one products routinely. It’s like the portable radar detectors for cars.
Everyone at Adobe has spent a lot of money making sure their carefully designed activation scheme works. God forbid the customer who doesn’t follow the EULA to the letter (how many even understand it) and the activation scheme doesn’t allow him/her to get their work done and more important causes undo stress they have no control over. I know I now think twice when I buy a Microsft product. They forced me to give up a legal Office XP product on an important machine of mine so they could "guarantee" themselves an extra $500 for another copy. You can’t believe how much they have lost in sales from me. I’m not anti Microsoft (yes, there is one of them left) but they have caused me far too great an inconvenience so I vote with my wallet every time now. It has cost them a bundle and will in the future. Greed goes nowhere. Repeat, greed goes nowhere.
Here comes Adobe with an activation scheme. Obviously, many are annoyed and disappointed to say the least. Make it machine specific – great. I thought people use software and machines are dumb. Guess I’m the dumb one, huh. I doubt it. I spent full price for Photoshop a few years ago because I needed it and it had great value (listening Adobe). I had no problem laying out hard earned cash for it. Same with Illustrator and Acrobat and now I’m thinking InDesign. I need them and think they have value so I pay and get my monys worth. I also get support I wouldn’t get with pirated copies and my time is worth decent $$$ when I need answers. What happens when that great activation scheme keeps me from doing my work where I make a living. Will I be happy? Doubt it. How about if I start looking then at competing products that are more user friendly? Great Adobe, you just passed me on to your competitor. There goes the TOTAL future revenue stream from me. Again, I have the privledge to vote with my wallet and I will. All those marketing dollars and strategic plans focused at me are down the drain.
If you want me to use activation, then I will, for now. Get me ticked off about something I don’t think is fair after I spent my good cash to be supportive of Adobe so Adobe can make better products, and maybe I’m off to the competitor. That to me is a bigger problem for Adobe than activation.
Thanks for listening. Hope Adobe thinks this through again.
I think we need to just agree to disagree on this and see where the chips fall.
Yeah, you’re right. You’ve been a great devils advocate though, and of the mindset that it isn’t time to get ones dander up until we see the need. Where we fundamentally disagree is in… timing. I think it’s now, you think it’s only if you really experience a problem.
I am impressed that Adobe’s listening. I am disappointed with those for whom I have respect who claim that this is nothing. Present company excluded Bob – I know where you’re coming from. I am also disappointed with the mindset that says "if you object to it, you must be guilty". That’s not the case at all, but if one’s thought processes are so of the "Id", then they deserve what they get.
I think product activation stinks, plain and simple – I’ve already stated why. I can only hope that Drew has his ducks in a row and executes this intelligently.
I’m probably done here, there’s not much more to say.
If someone asks me, as an experienced user, what I think of upgrading, I’ll tell them that this version has an activation scheme, what that means (hardware hash sent to Adobe along with license code, activation code sent back), the restrictions as stated here regarding reactivation (I am a tinkerer, and likely to need reactivation, some won’t), what my *opinion* is about activation (I like the illusion of buying a thing and not having to ask permission to use it). Then I’d tell them to wait, particularly if none of the new features is a must-have-right-now for them, and watch this space to see how messy it gets.
I almost didn’t move from 6 to 7, because I saw nothing so compelling for my work in the upgrade. However, I had a bug related to my particular hardware setup that was not admitted by Adobe; I found out from another user of these forums that it was fixed, in their case. I installed a "borrowed" copy (after release, before the tryout was released) found that it addressed my problem, and ordered the next day. I still would have been able to do that with this activation system, with it’s grace period, assuming that all acts as advertised.
My personal quandry here, given that I’m an anti-activist, is that the upgrade offer to the CS suite would give me other products that I would dearly like to try that are still activation free (I regret not making a similar move last year). I could stay with Photoshop 7, install the other packages, not have to play activation, but then, I haven’t cast my vote against the only way that counts – with my cash. If they’ll be looking at the balance between units sold and units activated, I’ll bet that won’t make a blip on the chart.
Maybe I should just get out in the open air more, watch the river shrink, use my gluteals for something more than a seat cushion…
Why should I have to buy more licenses just because *I* move around.<
Because that is what the license agreement has always stated – that you may use it on your main machine and one other – provided that the other computer is eith a laptop or another workstation at home. The EULA has *never* given you permission to install it on 5 workstations. I am afraid that you have interpreted the EULA into a statement that provided you are the sole user then you can install it on as many systems as you deem fit. The EULA has always been very specific – one user – maximum of two machines *provided* that they are not being used concurrently.
AFAICS, the EULA has not changed in any way whatsoever, it is just that Adobe now has the opportunity to make sure that the terms of the EULA are adhered to. —
Because corporations are expected and assumed to control their licenses (though I’m sure that some "leakage" is out of corporate doors). Because IT departments scream at having to have one more little thing to do to get their colleagues running; they like push installations on old machines, ghost installations on new machines, and as little follow-up as possible afterwards.
You say you didn’t buy an extra license for Office but you implied if not for activation you would have just copied your version. So MS wouldn’t have gotten that money anyway.
Then you talk of going to the competition. Problem with that is the competition is already using activation.
upgrade offer to the CS suite would give me other products that I
would dearly like to try that are still activation free
I don’t think you’re correct here. But I could be wrong.
The suite is actually considered on application and I do believe you need to activate the entire suite. I’m not sure but that’s how I’m reading it. Perhaps we can get an answer to that from Adobe.
Yes, it’s true. Same goes for MS products. They generally pay for site license that permits them to install a certain number of copies. It’s pretty much an honor system at that point.
quotation from the information page on activation: "The activation process is currently included only on the Windows® version of Adobe® Photoshop® CS software licensed to end users at retail. Photoshop CS software may also be a part of the Adobe Creative Suite or the Adobe Video Collection Professional version 2.0. If you are unsure whether your copy of Photoshop CS requires activation, please check the outside of the software box."
It doesn’t state the Adobe Creative Suite is activated, only Photoshop. I make the assumption that the installation will be like Office, choose the parts that one wants to install. Any official word here, or will we have to wait until November and ask? If the suite is subject to activation, that solves my conundrum.
-They (corporations)generally pay for site license that permits them to install a certain number of copies. It’s pretty much an honor system at that point.-
Are corporations or people in corporations more honest than other people? Hmmm. I don’t think so.
-Because corporations are expected and assumed to control their licenses.-
Again, corporations have more control over their licenses than I have over mine? I don’t think so.
Unless there is some other reason, it seems to me it is indeed an inconvenience to mess with activation and Adobe doesn’t want to "inconvenience" the people with the big bucks and lots of influence in the graphics world. It’s ok to "inconvenience" the $169 upgrader though. That just "bugs me".
I am afraid that you have interpreted the EULA into a statement that provided you are the sole user then you can install it on as many systems as you deem fit.
And I’m afraid you may not have a full appreciation for the terms of the license.
Are you suggesting that I am not allowed to migrate my software? Further are you suggesting that the EULA does NOT make me the sole user?
Let’s not confuse terms here. Which part about the software following me the user, as I change my hardware, don’t you understand?
Lastly, activation, and specifically, YOUR interpretation, requires that we redefine the word "EULA" to "UMLA", or User Machine License Agreement. Since it is certainly not licensed to the USER it is licensed to the machine.
And I’ll say, one last time:
The enforcement of the current EULA the way that it is being proposed, TECHNICALLY, means that anyone who has not paid for photoshop may use it – provided it is on a particular machine that has been approved.
Lastly, activation, and specifically, YOUR interpretation, requires that we redefine the word "EULA" to "UMLA", or User Machine License Agreement. Since it is certainly not licensed to the USER it is licensed to the machine.
Wrong. I it’s up to you what machine you install it on. It’s up to you to allow someone else to use your computer.
The enforcement of the current EULA the way that it is being proposed, TECHNICALLY, means that anyone who has not paid for photoshop may use it – provided it is on a particular machine that has been approved.
That’s no different than it is now. I could have a friend come on over to my house and use any application on my computer. Take a look at places that actually rent workstations like Kinko’s. The license is for Kinkos to put on one machine. Who uses is it is up to them.
Are corporations or people in corporations more honest than other
people? Hmmm. I don’t think so.<
Corporations are far more likely to be scrutinised by the BSA and would face far higher penalties should it be found that they have more seats than the licence number permits – therefore most large corporations will have some policy in effect which will do auditing and is therefore less likely to to have more seats than the licence permits ……. all it needs is one disgruntled employee……. —
Are you suggesting that I am not allowed to migrate my software?<
Of course you can – provided that you do not have it on more than the two specified machines and is not being used by two people concurrently. That is the way now – and that is the way it will be after activation.
YOUR interpretation, requires that we redefine the word "EULA" to "UMLA"<
No, that is Adobe’s interpretation and the EULA has not changed one iota with the new activation – it has always referred to having the software on one prime system (with the allowance for its installation on a 2nd secondary system). The EULA has *NEVER* stated that you can install the software on X number of machines (where X > 2). If the software is installed on my studio computer, any of my staff could use that specific computer to do Photoshop work with the proviso that I cannot install it on another machine and have both of us using the same copy at the same time. In that repect, the EULA has not changed. —
Earlier in another thread, I asked specifically if Adobe would guarantee that it would always provide activation for PS-CS in the future. The answer was no. To me this is one of the focal points of this topic. I personally would buy CS if I knew for sure that I could stay with that version for however long into the future I wanted. The issue is not today or tomorrow, but next year or the year after that when I want to move my digital photo business to the newer, faster Pentium and I cannot get Adobe to activate CS because they now have a newer version of PS and have stopped supporting CS. Because I cannot get this assurance, I am going to stay with PS7 and use third party plug-ins that provide me almost what CS provides.
Secondly, I have heard a lot about what the EULA says and does not say. However, Adobes Activation web page states the following:
Q: Does product activation represent a change in licensing terms?
A: No. Activation is an interactive extension of existing licensing terms and as such represents the spirit of Adobe’s Product License Agreement.
I want to know, specifically what in the world the following phrase means: (it) represents the spirit of Abobes Product License Agreement. Most of us are familiar with legal jargon and usually this type of double talk means that they have changed the agreement but are trying to tell us that they really havent.
Third, in my last post, I quoted the statistics from BSA on software piracy. Specifically that USA has the lowest incidence of software piracy in the world and that this rate of piracy has been declining steadily over the last 8 years. Yet, the rate of piracy in Wyoming, according to BSA is approximately 40%. In thinking about this, its probable that the people in Wyoming dont have the money to pay $650.00 for this software. So, rather than alienate Adobes primary user base through activation, WHY didnt they do some elasticity analysis and determine how much piracy they would have prevented by lowering the price of their product versus the cost of activation? Certainly there is a cross over point here?
Last: It seems everyone here is assuming that the ONLY thing Adobe is or will grab in the future from my computer is the PS-CS identification information for activation? Do we have this assurance? Does anyone know this for a fact? It would seem to me that if a company like MS or Adobe were going to invest this much bad will from its user base, the stakes would have to be high. Either now or some point in the future, this authentication program may be planned to check for other stuff, like other Adobe products, other software, etc.
Hey, anybody else here remember when software came on and ran from floppy disks? The license was for you to use it, and you could stick the floppy in any computer you wanted to and run the program.
I’d like to suggest a challenge for Adobe (and other software publishers): Come up with an installer and license that cover a modern equivalent of that old program-on-a-floppy portability.
In today’s landscape, the place of the floppy would be taken by an external FireWire or USB drive.
Figure out how I can install the software to run on any computer where I plug in that external drive, and give me permission to use the software that way.
that sort of thing is already in place. I have some games for my children that *require* the cd to be in place or the program will not run. And they don’t require activation!
Most games these days require the disk be in the drive. Some are also copy protected in some way (bad sectors, intentional pitting etc.) to prevent copying of that original disk. I like that idea much better than activation too.
As an additional comment, I have this offer for Adobe. I am more than willing to accept authentication and the right to use it on only two computers, my base computer and a laptop. I think this is only right and fair. Further, I dont have any problems with having to receive from Adobe verification when I move the software to another computer (the third). In exchange for supporting authentication, (here I through down the gauntlet) Adobe has to put in writing that when they come out with a NEW version of PS beyond CS, (or CS1, the next release) they remove the authentication scheme for PS-CS. Stated another way, for versions of PS older than their currently marketed version, THERE IS NO AUTHENTICATION REQUIRED TO INSTALL IT. If an older version required authentication, than Adobe would provide a fix to remove it. If Adobe were to provide this assurance for CS, I would have no problems purchasing it.
The issue I have between PS7 and PS-CS is that I can use PS7 forever, regardless of what machine I install it on. With CS, there is no guarantee how long I can use it unless it stays on the same machine. Not acceptable.
The second guarantee is that their activation scheme only acquires information about Photoshop for activation and not other information about Adobe products or software.
If Adobe will provide these two assurances to its user base, I will purchase their product and support authentication
Complication comes when you need to run Photoshop and InDesign and Illustrator all at once … and they’re all under a new regime. Tho if you had the suite all on one CD, that could solve that.
I’d probably grumble if the disc were sabotaged so I couldn’t back it up. But even so, a key on CD would make the software deal a one-time transaction. More comfortable for me.
Earl, that’s a damn fine idea. One of the big misgivings I have is that you cannot be assured that the program will work as long as I own it. Whether Adobe is around or not. AFAIK, it’s never been tried, but it’s a great idea. It CAN be done (well it SHOULD be able to be done). Adobe has a chance to be a trend setter here.
This is from a message I left in the InDesign forum:
While I have no problem with activiation (been a legitimate user since 1990), and would prefer not to have anymore installation hassles than I already have (anyone tried reading a Quark activation number?) There were some misconceptions brought up in this thread.
1. While Apple may compose only 7% of the total market, they compose 35% of Photoshop seat purchases, so why single out the PC market for activation?
2. While KaZaa is very adept at finding and downloading illegal software, Sherlock is also very adept (and less damaging to the OS because of it’s integration).
The truth is I’ve come across more bootleg software on Apples per market share than on PCs. Simply because Sherlock can get an Apple user whatever they want, including keygens, serial number lists and softwares. These people are ‘semi-professionals’ (I say ‘semi’ because a professional owns all their equipment and software IMO).
As far as the PC market goes, most of the people who download Photoshop do it for the ‘bragging rights’, not because they need it or use it, just to say I got it. What they really want is a software that removes ‘red eye’, and may have some basic layer capability for playing around with composites, but most of this stuff is for family, not business.
In addition I would like to say that I have three versions of PS7 active, one on my main work machine, one on my back-up machine incase of catistrophic emergency and also one on my wife’s machine. The one on my wife’s machine is nothing more than a deluxe photo-viewer and by the time she gets home to use the computer, I’m long off mine so no harm no foul, still falls within the EULA. So I’ll leave PS7 on her computer and use CS on mine, totally cool by both of us.
As far as activation, the arguement of stopping casual copying, good in theory, but now you’re going to turn all the casual copiers into pirates, they will pirate even more software once they realize what they can get and the total point here will be zero prevention due to activation and an even greater tendency towards using pirated software, which as I’ve pointed out before, now accept credit cards and you can get all the Adobe software for about $49(US), cracked on disk.
The discussion of the use of dongles is a non-starter, you can download a bootleg MAYA with a software dongle that emulates the hardware dongle that hangs off the serial port.
Piracy has to be handled in a totally different way, but software companies, like politicians, go around in the same circles for so long they’re outright dizzy with stupidity.
The more that I have thought about this topic the more I am convinced that activation will increase piracy rather than reduce it.
Most of us here are users who have already purchased PS and are trying to decide if a $169.00 upgrade is worth it for a software rental with an unspecified life, i.e., we dont have the assurance that we will always be able to move the software to another machine in the future or that we will not forced to upgrade at some point because it is no longer supported. At least I have PS7 that I can use for as long as I want.
But look at the person buying a full price license of PS-CS. They are now being asked to fork over $650.00 for a piece of software that they may not ever be able to use two or three years from now. They will not have a base piece of software that they can use for as long as they want. There is no way I would make that kind of investment. So, in all probability, people in Wyoming will be even more temped to use that pirated piece of software rather than going legitimate unless Adobe makes some kind of assurance to the market place that they will ALWAYS be able to use PS-CS.
So if Adobe is committed to us, make the promise that activation will be removed on old versions of the software once a new one is released.
So if Adobe is committed to us, make the promise that activation will be removed on old versions of the software once a new one is released.
I wonder if that might damage Adobe’s bottom line (or the projections of it) rather than furthering it, in a strategic view. While I’m willing to bet that there will be a hack for the activation by at latest the end of January (any takers?) how does it look in the board room, that the latest but one version is floating "free" out there while the latest and greatest is collared by activation? They want the casual user/pirate to pay, but the easiest in for these casuals is to snag the previous version, which will likely do what they want.
Zdnet on activation. Drew McManus (Adobe, who commented in this thread) makes a comment in there too. Especially see the talkbalk forums. People everywhere, not just photoshop win users, are saying pretty much the same thing.
People everywhere, not just Photoshop win users, are saying pretty much the same thing.
But will the publishers listen (just a few malcontents), or go on regardless, because the instigators won’t admit that they made a bad move, or will the general public roll over on their collective back with four paws in the air and their tongue hanging out the side of their mouth, saying "they won, and it didn’t hurt, much", sales don’t take a nosedive, so the next scheme is implemented because the hackers are still out there?
or will the general public roll over on their collective back with four paws in the air and their tongue hanging out the side of their mouth, saying "they won, and it didn’t hurt, much"
Wait until the stoftware actually ships. It’ll start anew.
No it won’t. There will be 15 new threads everyday from people who nothing of the activation and can’t figure out why the software stops working after 30 days.
A quick search will find that these threads were started by the same people who can’t the 7.0.1 updater to find Photoshop.
No curiosity, for intellect’s sake? You surprise me. It would be a lot of work, without some ‘bot to at least collect the data. Maybe Adobe will do it, and share.
Well, at least Adobe isn’t the only one. All of Macromedias new 2004 products now have activation as well as Symantec’s 2004 products. I have a feeling activation is a sign of things to come. It doesn’t bother me at all, however it would if I had to buy another copy of the software for my laptop. — Rob
Stated another way, for versions of PS older than their currently marketed version, THERE IS NO AUTHENTICATION REQUIRED TO INSTALL IT. If an older version required authentication, than Adobe would provide a fix to remove it. If Adobe were to provide this assurance for CS,
I had the exact same thought, only I’d add the caveat that if the software is discontinued, or after say five years, activation would no longer be needed. To avoid the risk of software becoming useless due to the supplier going out of business, the authentication removal key would have to be deposited with a trusted third party.
If we have to put up with Product Activation, then this might at least offer some comfort.
After a lot of lurking on this topic I might as well say something as well. I have read quite a few of the posts so far and many have valid arguments and good ideas. I find the reason behind activation to be good, although it can (will?) lead to problems for the consumer. But it’s very easy to work around it. And I don’t belive that we get less piracy because of this, rather a lot more. If you want to use the program without activation you will for sure soon be able to do it. I’m sure a patch will very soon be available for the whole CS series to get rid of the activation. It happened very soon after the Macromedia 2004 was released and it will happen to Adobe as well. A 10 year old with basic computer skill can easily apply this patch and not activate the product. So you have the (unethical) option of downloading the trial, apply the patch and have the program for free. Or (the ethcial way) you can buy the program, apply the patch and not have to register if that really bothers you that much. Not sure the last option is really ethical since you are required to activate the product but if you fork out the money for the product I find it a minor "crime" of you to work around the registration. Please note that I’m not proposing you use the program illegally but the point is that the option is always there for people who don’t care about ethics and what is right (or can’t afford the program)
People on this forum are heavy users of Adobe products and I was glad to see that someone from Adobe read all the good ideas and valid arguments. Without satisfied consumers the company disappears and that is definitely worth keeping in mind for software companies.
Well, I, for one am not a subscribing member of IR, so I was only able to see limited commentary on the subject.
PA, IMO, is a poorly designed mechanism to get the boogey man, which, of course, it will not. Anyone who thinks it will has a myopic view of the environment.
Defenders claim it will reduce piracy or casual copying: it won’t.
Defenders claim that honest users should not be opposed: they have no principles
Defenders claim that it will be painless for honest users: they have no imagination
Defenders claim that it is right and fair to license machines and not users: be careful what you wish for.
IMO, the license issue is no small thing. The current argument is "it’s always been that way, so this is just a way to enforce it". Exactly.
Now that license enforcement is a reality, one had better be VERY VERY careful about the terms of the license. You are no longer free, as in the past, to uninstall and reinstall on a different machine at will. That must come with approval.
Hello, I Have Adobe Photoshop 7.0 and have a question about the activation process for adobe Photoshop CS….I Have 2 computers in my shop, one is my dad’s and the other is my computer…we both use photoshop on our own computer so does that mean we will have to purchase seperate copies for the upgrade or is there a special price if the computers are used in the same building or are for 2 family members as I Don’t want to have to pay $169.00 [upgrade] for both of our computers…..
The new photoshop say photoshop cs….what is the cs for, they used to say 6.0 , 7.0 etc. so is this the same line up or a diferent product…..
how many computers can this photoshop be activated on
Thank You
ps. if can only be used on one computer ..is there a way to pay a lesser fee for the 2nd computer
J Brett, as long as you’re not using them at the same time you should be fine. If you are, you’re in violation of the current (PS7) as well as any future (PSCS) license.
All your questions about activation are answered here <http://www.adobe.com/activation/main.html>. However, to give you the brief answer to your question, you can only have Photoshop on two computers you own and only if the two installations are not used simultaneously. If you and your father work in Photoshop at the same time then you need to have two licenses (always have by the way, activation only enforces the license through technological means). If you use Photoshop simultaneously on two computers now and you only have one license then you will need to purchase a second license for the second computer and there is no special price to do so. You would need to do this prior to activation anyway. As I said before, activation only enforces the license you have always agreed to when you installed Photoshop.
As for the CS moniker, it’s just a new marketing strategy for Adobe to name their new line of products to focus on the way they work together as a whole. Photoshop CS is really v8.0 though.
I Don’t want to have to pay $169.00 [upgrade] for both of our
computers…..<<
Adding to what others have said…..
You could not purchase TWO upgrades for a single existing application. You would need one upgrade and one FULL version so that you would then have TWO Licenses
How about if I order Photoshop CS from the Adobe site, I am an owner in good standing, then they can send me a corporate version that does not require activation.
Corporate is the key here. A week before XP was in the shops the corporate version was being distributed locally among a network of users who cared nothing for licences or legality. I suspect the same will happen for CS as soon as a coprporate IT man takes the disk home for the evening…
Those of you who followed the activation thread may find this interesting:
Intuit Apologizes to Customers Over TurboTax
"I want to personally apologize for any frustration you may have experienced due to the restrictions that came with our use of anti-piracy technology," Tom Allanson, general manager of TurboTax, said Thursday in an open letter to customers.
….In response to feedback from our customers, I want you to know that we’re making an important change to TurboTax software and have removed activation technology," Allanson said, adding that the new TurboTax for the 2003 tax year can be used fully on multiple computers.
While some customers were angered by Intuit’s move to curb rampant, unauthorized sharing TurboTax, most complaints arose due to the technology’s tying the software to a single computer — which meant people couldn’t do such things as prepare returns at home and print them at work, Barrington Research analyst Eric Wanger said.
The reason Intuit apologized is because they lost sales and are the subject of a class action lawsuit, pure and simple. Users voted with their pocketbook and there was an easy alternative to their software. I do like this quote from a former Intuit customer and think it is relevant: "If they don’t trust us with their software, why should we trust them with our taxes. TurboTax 2002 prevents you from using the program on more than one computer. You can install it on a second PC but you cannot print a return on it. What a cheap shot!"
"Unfortunately, I think Intuit was the proverbial pioneer that got the arrows in their back," said William Krepick, CEO of Macrovision, which supplied the activation technology used by Intuit. "I don’t think either they, or we, appreciated the level of the consumer reaction."
More importantly even the members of the SoftSummit acknowledged that customers need to be rewarded for participating in activation. There needs to be something given back to the users for their use and acceptance of this process.
But what I really do not understand is the claim by Macromedia that 17% of their activations were denied. That seems to be a high number, but then we do not know the statistics of it. Does this apply to US activation, world activation? More importantly, this is high when one is reminded that the purpose of activation is to only eliminate casual copying and NOT piracy. So, 17% of their activations were denied because of casual copying? Earl
To me it doesn’t matter if it is 17% of US or 17% of the world that is still a lot of people being turned down. I am sure that if they are turned down from activating online that doing it over the phone is going to be even harder.
Robert
wrote in message
More worrying would be Macromedia refusing 17% who were trying to
reinstall after PC upgrades, hardware failure, OS reinstalls etc.
The question is why were these 17% being denied activation? Was this 17% legitimate users who were denied or were they 17% that tried to circumvent the license agreement in some way (e.g. installing on more than one computer, assuming Macromedia does not allow this in their agreement). If it’s the latter than there is really no problem though Macromedia, and Adobe if this happens to them, just needs to work out the issue with regards to public relations and not necessarily scrap activation. If it’s the former than activation is really a problem and should be re-evaluated.
Last I checked Macromedia didn’t make any tax software. According to Earl 17% of Macromedia’s customers had problems with activation not 17% of Intuit’s. From what I understand well over 17% had problems with Intuit and their activation scheme.
The VAST majority (if not all) of "activation denied" messages relate to instances of folk trying to activate the software more times than the license allows. Somehow I doubt that all of those seeing such a message will have contacted Macromedia to complain. If you receive the message and have what you believe are grounds for complaint I would expect the vendor reinstate the activation and allow additional attempts.
See that is one thing also that bugs me. You can only activate so many times per year or something like that. If that isn’t the first step in consumer control I don’t know what is. What’s next…you only allowed to use the software Monday – Friday from 9am to 5pm.
Robert
wrote in message
The VAST majority (if not all) of "activation denied" messages relate to
instances of folk trying to activate the software more times than the license allows. Somehow I doubt that all of those seeing such a message will have contacted Macromedia to complain. If you receive the message and have what you believe are grounds for complaint I would expect the vendor reinstate the activation and allow additional attempts.
First of all, under regular usage you should NEVER come near to reaching this limit, much less use the activation procerdure more than a couple times a year at most. If you have a special case then you need to contact Adobe to discuss these issues with them. Suggesting that these cases are the rule and not the exception is ridiculous.
Second, if Adobe’s activation is anything like that for Windows XP (tied to specific hardware serial numbers) then changing a couple devices won’t force another activation. Changing most of your hardware would require a new activation. If you are changing hardware enough times to waste the 8 or so activations Adobe allows then you have a problem. Again, this sounds more like the exception and not the rule and therefore you need to contact Adobe or reconsider your use of the applicaiton under these terms.
As Adobe hasn’t clarified exactly HOW activatoin will work then anything you, I or anyone else says is mere speculation that goes nowhere. Please keep this in mind and keep the conspiracy theories to yourself.
Excellent points. I just reformmated a friends computer today. Third time I’ve had to install XP. (I told them if they let their son install Kazaa again, they were on their own<g>). The activation was accepted right over the internet. Took all of 3 seconds.
Let’s all stay calm and wait for the software and see what happens.
I never called anyone a pirate. Don’t put words into my mouth. I said you were the exception to the rule, so quit trying to be the rule. Geez people, get over yourselves. Wait until the softwar ecomes out before you start whining about how it doesn’t work. You might be amazed to find that it will work. Besides Tony, if you go through eight machines in a year than you are most definitely a unique situation.
If you are changing hardware enough times to waste the 8 or so activations Adobe allows then you have a problem.
I would caution against quoting anything other than the two automated activations that the license allows since additional activations are at Adobes descretion. I’m NOT saying you won’t have an opportunity to have additional automated activations just that the window and number off has not been formally defined.
What you say is true Stuart, but it is the whole point that there is a limit in the first place. Already we have gone to being able to install the software when and as many times as we want or need to on a single machine to being told they are only going to let you do it so many times before you have call them and beg and plead and cry to being to install the $600 plus in software you bought. That is simply wrong. It is also just the first step to other more nasty things coming down the line and just lends credence to what I have been saying these companies are putting activation technology in place for.
Once you move it more than some as yet unknown amount of times, then you need permission to do so. If they think you’re lying, a new seat is required.
Pre-Activation, the software was licensed to the user – good, bad, or indifferent, it was based on the honor system of removing it from one machine to put it on another once your limit on "primary" and "laptop/portable" was used. But if you were honest, you were legally allowed to move (uninstall and reinstall) the software from machine to machine as was necessary.
With activation, the license is functionally transformed into a machine license. That is to say, it is no longer based on the honor system, it is based on a machine specific hash. You are free to uninstall it, but at some point, you must have approval to install it on a new machine.
So if you decide to keep Photoshop CS for five years (as some have done with older versions of Photoshop), as you improve your hardware, by getting new machines, once you’ve gotten your automatic 2 activations, you may or may not be allowed to migrate Photoshop to a new machine. You will have to call Adobe and hope that they allow it.
They should allow it – it would seem to me that they would be logging patterns of callers and some patterns of uninstalltion/reinstallation may be more suspect than others, but in the end, it’s up to Adobe whether or not you can move your software.
That’s a machine license. Some say "it’s always been that way". No, it hasn’t. You have been legally able to migrate your software from one machine to the next without permission, in the past. Activation fundamentally changes that.
Tony is right, it becomes a machine license. You can’t get away from it. If you buy software which requires activation at some stage in the future you may be faced with the possiblity of asking the supplier for permission to use the software you already paid for. Seems rather unjust don’t you think?
The situation with WinXP is rather diferent, you can’t keep installing and uninstalling it. It is more part of the machine. When you change machines you get a new XP and sell the old machine complete with its XP. Actually I might upgrade the processor, I already added another IDE controller and two hard disks, do you think XP will accept more changes?
I have not upgraded MSOffice to activation. I can put my current Office on my new machine without consulting MS. But I won’t leave it on the old machine, whoever gets that will have to buy their own software.
PS7 is a fantastic product, it does a great job, no pressing need to upgrade for me so I won’t until I have to.
I will however upgrade ID2 to IDCS, hope I manage it before ID activation comes trundling along.
I don’t feel it’s fair and just to the users who *purchase* such an expensive program to be at the mercy of a tech support person who, and granted we don’t know how this will play out, has the ability to say, "I don’t believe you, you must pay again for the priviledge of using the software". Once it’s paid for, you should not be forced to purchase another seat simply because you have used up your activations. The potential for this certainly *does* exist and I will say, it’s not giving those nice warm, fuzzy feelings.
What does that tell you about the users of Photoshop that Adobe has to take such drastic measures to protect its software?
"With activation, the license is functionally transformed into a machine license. That is to say, it is no longer based on the honor system, it is based on a machine specific hash. You are free to uninstall it, but at some point, you must have approval to install it on a new machine."
No, no, no, no, no. There are at least two installations granted the user before this becomes a problem, if it becomes a problem at all. According to Adobe, the licens has not changed at all:
Does activation change the licensing terms?
Q: Does product activation represent a change in licensing terms?
A: No. Activation is an interactive extension of existing licensing terms and as such represents the spirit of Adobe’s Product License Agreement.
"Activation fundamentally changes that."
Tony, while you’re gazing into your crystal ball there, could you tell me if the Sox win Game 7 tonight? I’d like to know ahead of time so I’m not shocked if they lose.
We are going from a situation where we can uninstall and reinstall the product as often as we like for whatever reason, to one where after two activations we will have to justify ourselves to some nobody on Adobe’s customer services team.
If you don’t see that as a change then you are dumber than I already thought you were.
First of all there’s no reason to get personal here. Secondly, the thing that so many of you seem to not get is the fact that you can uninstall and reinstall thousands of times to the same machine with no problem.
Dumb? Who’s the one with the wild conspiracy theories? All I’ve ever said is no one really knows (except Adobe) how many times you have to install/re-install before you have to discuss the situation with Adobe. If you wind up installing/re-installing Photoshop so many times on enough computers as to warrant this call than you likely have a problem and you sir, are the idiot. I’ll bet that there are less than a thousand users whit this specific need. Contrast that with the total number of legitimate users of Photoshop and you will see that this isn’t even onthe radar for Adobe. You got away with a technical loophole but Adobe i sunder no obligation to respect this or even consider it a problem at all. But you will have to take that up with Adobe and whining about it here won’t do any good. If you think it will than youare dumber than I already thought you were.
It’s not about conspiracy theories, it’s about going from one system:
That was hassle free for all the paying customers with absolutely no potential to go wrong, but was easy to pirate for those so inclined…
to a new system:
that absolutely WILL be a hassle to a minority of users and has the potential to go wrong in many many ways for absolutely everyone, but will still be easy to pirate for those so inclined.
The reason I am so wound up about this is that the debate is going EXACTLY the same way as when Disreet introduced activation for Max, and I have had more down time with Max’s activation software than all other SW-related problems put together.
It’s also going the same way as the debate over WinXP and OfficeXP. Both of which acivated flawlessly in less than 3 seconds. And in the case of a friend of mine has been no problem through three reinstalls.
The situation with WinXP is rather diferent, you can’t keep installing and uninstalling it. It is more part of the machine. When you change machines you get a new XP and sell the old machine complete with its XP.
That’s not necessarily true, Jeff. Last time I upgraded my computer, I bought new parts (hard drive, chip, motherboard for about $300-400 as opposed to a whole new system for much more) and replaced my hardware. I then installed the same operating system I had been using on the new hard drive. (The old hard drive was not sold, with or without an OS, but is sitting in a box to use to backup the current one if/when I need to reformat.) Buying a whole new system is not the only way (or even necessarily the best way) to upgrade.
Question: Does activation affect how PS-CS runs in multiple sessions on one computer? Will I be able to open two PS-CS simultaneously on my machine or will there be a conflict as CS verifies twice the same program on the same hardware? Macromedia has some problems here
Comment: I have asked already for someone to tell me what the spirit of Adobes Product Licensing Agreement means. To me "spirit" means that product license has changed but everyone wants to pretend it is still the same.
Question: Does activation affect how PS-CS runs in multiple sessions on one computer? Will I be able to open two PS-CS simultaneously on my machine or will there be a conflict as CS verifies twice the same program on the same hardware? Macromedia has some problems here
You CANNOT and NEVER have been able to run two instances of the same version on the same machine at the same time. You can and will continue to able to run CS along with as many earlier versions on the same machine at the same time. This means you can run 5, 5.5, 6, 7 and CS at the same time on the same machine Oh, and YES it IS legal! – Does that make the doom and gloom merchants happy? Does that suggest that Adobe are the evil empire in drag?
Comment: I have asked already for someone to tell me what the spirit of Adobes Product Licensing Agreement means. To me "spirit" means that product license has changed but everyone wants to pretend it is still the same.
Yes you asked but at 290 plus posts the chances are that the answer got lost in the BS
Spirit?
You can legally install two copies – so no change! Legally you aren’t meant to run the two instances concurrently – so no change! At a more practical level there is NOTHING that prevents you (including on or off a network) from running CS on two different computers at the same time – so no change!. This has already been stated by Adobe near the beginning of this thread. What they have done is implement a system whereby they enforce the two copy limitation – so this is a change! Bottom line is that for most CS activation will be pain free and for the rest – ask yourself why you’re in pain?
you can uninstall and reinstall thousands of times to the same machine with no problem.
You’re missing the point. It’s not about the same machine. You’re a smart guy, you keep bringing up that point. That’s not a part of the issue at all – it’s a red herring.
Stuart,
According to Adobe, the licens has not changed at all:
That’s right, the language has not changed. That is the point – it needs to so as to reflect user licensing not machine licensing. Before activation came on the scene, it was easy to have a license that didn’t encompass all user situations. Now it isn’t. If they want to play hard line enforcement, fine; but then they must step up to the plate and create a document that accurately reflects the spirit of the license.
Are you telling me that Adobe has ALWAYS intended that after you install on the allowed two machines, that once you uninstall, and move to a different machine, then you needed to call them? I can’t see that language anywhere.
In many cases buying new system is a better way to go. You could have bought a new computer with XP for $100 more than you spent to upgrade an old PC that could have a power supply, CD Rom or any number of other things go wrong with it.
Had you bought a new system you would have a second computer where now you only have one. If you sold your old one you may have even been able to buy a new one cheaper than it was for you to put newer parts in an aged computer. I hope for your sake you at least have windows 2000 or XP on your computer.
That’s my point, Jeff. If someone chooses to upgrade that way, then the activation becomes a pain and the OS is not, contrary to what you suggested, all that tied to the hardware. That computer is running Windows 98 (although I finally got fed up with it and just ordered XP this week) so I didn’t have to ask for Microsoft’s permission at the time.
Given what I use that computer for (e-mail, internet, typing in notepad and wordpad, spellchecking in Word 97, Minesweeper), Photo Help, there’s no way that it would have made sense for me to buy a whole new system, especially given the fact that I was in college at the time and could not have laid out the money for the new machine even if I made some of it back by selling the old one.
You are right, I can only open one session of PS7 at a time. I am sure I knew this before, but it is a surprise to me this afternoon, as there is a lot of software that allows this, although I hardly ever use this feature. Virtually all of the MS stuff allows this. I am curious why? Is it because of memory management, memory seize used for the program? Maybe this question should be posted to another thread?
Remember you have 30 days to activate the product – that should be enough time to get the PC stable if you are doing a major upgrade/build from scratch. Just activate it once you are sure every thing is running ok.
To be honest how many of us would go through more than 1 or 2 major upgrades in a year? The most likely scenario is that major upgrades will probably be done about as often as a new version of the software is released.
Just reformat every 30 days or if it is just a registry key all you need to do is create a restore point before installing. If you uninstall and reinstall Photoshop that often running system restore won’t be a big deal.
If you uninstall and reinstall Photoshop that often running system restore won’t be a big deal.
A secret place will store the starting date, even if you uninstall Photoshop. However, when the script kiddies get their hands on it, you’ll run a utility every 29 days. Unless you’re honest… activation will only affect you if you’re honest.
That "secret place" is in the registry or a system INI file that would be replaced when you use restore points. As long as the restore point is created before the installation occurs you should be fine. Just make sure you go back to your restore point before installing other software, and create a new restore point after as well otherwise you would need to re-install every new program from that restore point on.
It is possible I am wrong, but it is unlikely. However if I am they have a very impressive way of hiding the fact that Photoshop had been installed before.
To be honest how many of us would go through more than 1 or 2 major upgrades in a year? The most likely scenario is that major upgrades will probably be done about as often as a new version of the software is released.
How many of us does it have to be? Then what? Are you suggesting that one do an upgrade? What if one doesn’t want to? What if you never again need more features than your current version has? Are you suggesting that we stay with the same hardware too? Machine license. Your migration of software becomes subject to approval of Adobe.
I’m not saying remove activation – re-write the license so that it accommodates honest users without requiring subjective approval. If they want to "lock it down hard", by all means, use activation. But don’t drive exceptions to some subjective process.
You really think that the activation vendors are that dumb?
They used to be. Now there’s a cottage industry, coming up with schemes for saving a few bytes of data where the 1337 d00dz won’t find it. They find it, anyway. Sometimes it just takes a little longer.
How much MORE are we having to endure this ranting. I share your pain. There are many threads I don’t like. My solution, and one I might suggest you consider, is to ignore them.
Thanks in advance.
Post Reply | Bookmark
Adding to it? Like Me? Let’s call it a day!
Regards
Mark
P.S. The LAST post gets a Free Copy of ADOBE CREATIVE SUITE
Honest, I heard it from Chris Cox. Seriously on purpose NOT!
I am, on the whole, in favor of bed. Although I haven’t considered the intellectual property rights involved in dreams. I hope you have pleasant, public-domain dreams.
You mean the free CS Suite will go to one of the forum moderators? They would be the last post. THH.
I’m more concerned with the lack of compatibility in Illustrator with previous versions because the new text engine makes them un-editable when saved in an older version.
I use Illustrator 9 and InDesign 2.0. While Illustrator imports and exports anything from the past dozen years, InDesign (which has what is effectively a type engine similar to AI 11), is pretty much a one-way street–you can export, but don’t expect layout to look the same (or as good) anywhere else. It makes PDF that can be read by Acrobat Reader 4.0 or later. See Illustrator CS: Let’s talk about the new text engine. <http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?13@@.2ccdcf7b/0> The new PS 8 engine is similar, so backward compatibility issues should be similar.
All text will reflow (and have better spacing), and give you access to more glyphs in OpenType fonts. There’s a line being drawn; someday we’ll have to cross it.
Even if Photoshop CS is the last upgrade you ever install then given that Adobe allow several reinstalls per year, (some have said 8 ) I think its unlikely that users will replace their HD or buy new PC more than 8 times in one year.
The real problem is Adobe not continuing to activate older products for whatever reason. But at this point it gets very complicated as we have to consider the useful life time of the OS. At some point in the future MS will drop Win2k and XP for users with XP how long are we going to be able to keep reinstalling and activating XP on new hardware?
I guess to avoid activation in all its forms we are stuck with Photoshop 7 running on Windows 2000 Pro.
I think its unlikely that users will replace their HD or buy new PC more than 8 times in one year.
You’re right, in most cases that will be true, but that wasn’t my point. And fwiw, there is no official announcement indicating 8 – only Carol’s mention of it. She’s a volunteer and it has not been stated anywhere that I can find.
The real problem is Adobe not continuing to activate older products for whatever reason.
That was my point.
Also, ask yourself this: should the license follow me or the machine? If you choose to install, and then uninstall, and then move to a different machine, install, and then uninstall, should you need permission to do that? Do you think that at some point, even though only ONE installation is being used at a time, and you are uninstalling the product on a particular machine, that Adobe should approve your install/uninstall?
Do you think it will be okay if Adobe requires you to purchase another license because you installed/uninstalled too many times?
If you keep Photoshop CS for three years and don’t upgrade is it possible that you will be asked to purchase another license because you have changed computers too many times?
How would you respond to the situation when you are asked to purchase a new license simply because your behavior is "odd", in terms of how you install and uninstall the product? How about if you did not upgrade for two full version releases, and had subesquently upgraded hardware – specifically bought new machines? At some point, activation will prevent you from making that decision on your own, and will require you to call Adobe. What if they tell you that you must upgrade or purchase a new seat?
Is this the spirit of the license? Is this what Adobe envisioned?
This whole thing is a "workaround" to a problem, not a fix. And as many know, workarounds often carry their own problems – this is one of them.
They need to re-visit, and re-work the license agreement.
All together now! If everyone here would simply refuse to buy the new version (yes, I mean boycott), Adobe would get the message very quickly and within a month this whole discussion would be moot. They are in business to sell software and if they don’t do that, they will want to know why. When they realize that we aren’t buying because we hate activation, they will change their policies pronto.
My money says that 95 percent of the folks here will bite the bullet and buy PS CS. If that happens, Adobe will take it as justification and acceptance of activiation … and they will be correct.
This suite thing, coupled now with activation, has opened up a whole load of possible scenarios. Surely, Adobe needs to produce a comprehensive document covering these different situations.
As it is only photoshop CS that requires activation, surely you can put the other bits of the CS on different machines?
What’s the situation with the latest MSOffice. Can you have Excel and Word on different machines?
MSWorks started off as 4 different applications within an overall wrapper. Today everything is wholly integrated. It gives you tasks to perform.
‘What do you want to do today? Import an Image, design your own flyer, Layout some text’ etc
Jake we all know that and Adobe knows it. But I think that as this is an Adobe forum we don’t like saying it. Fair to them they never try to influence us. Some will undoubtedly put off buying CS, others as you say will be so curious to see what the new product holds they won’t wait.
I even like seeing a new splash screen, they design them so well.
Yep. But, you don’t see me adding activation too it. I respect and trust my consumers. In my opinion to do otherwise just causes you to loose business. Contrary to how big companies treat their customers I have found that 99.9% of people are quite honest and fair and I am not about to penalize or assume everyone is a crook because of the 0.1%.
Robert
wrote in message
Robert,
What you say is true Stuart, but it is the whole point that there is
a
limit in the first place.
I seem to recall that you have rather strict rules on the use of your own
And fwiw, no one has mentioned yet, the idea that if you buy the Suite of products, does that mean that you must have PS and Illustrator on the same machine?
I believe you’ll have to install them all on one machine. It’s one license with one serial number. Essenstially it’s on application. But again, that’s just my interpretation.
If the Adobe system is like the Macromedia one you will be able to "deactivate" PSCS on one machine, possibly even without uninstalling it, and then activate it on another. This should cover most, if not all, migration situations with no question of getting approval (but obviously a dead hard disk or stolen system will put a spanner in the works, and there may be a limit on the number of on/off cycles allowed).
My understanding of the XP system is that, after activation, they keep the activation code "marked as used" for six months, then clear it (which is how the "three hardware changes in a six month period" allowance works). If this is the sort of thing behind the reported eight activations per year for CS, you again wouldn’t need to get approval for your reactivations unless they became very frequent.
The main issues for me are:
How long will activation for superseded versions be available? Since the system is for Adobe’s sole benefit the answer should be forever.
What happens if an OS change breaks activation but not PS (if the un-activated volume licence version still works, but the activated version doesn’t)? Again, since the system is for Adobe’s sole benefit they should patch (or remove) the activation system for all affected versions. Obviously, if the application itself fails that would be another matter, just the way the cookie crumbles.
What happens if Adobe goes bust? They ought to take out an insurance policy to pay for the webservers and phone centres for a specified period until a buyer could be found, and ideally to cover the release of an activation-killer patch if no buyer emerged or if a buyer refused to support current users.
My understanding of the XP system is that, after activation, they keep the activation code "marked as used" for six months, then clear it (which is how the "three hardware changes in a six month period" allowance works)
I believe that’s mostly correct, but I think it’s a rolling counter, with each upgrade inividually aged. There’s also different weight given to different upgrades. HD, network card, etc.
Since the system is for Adobe’s sole benefit the answer should be forever.
I fully agree. It’s also been requested/stated here that as a new version comes out, the activation should be removed from prior versions with a dot release. I’d have no problem w/activation if that were possible.
If the Adobe system is like the Macromedia one you will be able to "deactivate" PSCS on one machine, possibly even without uninstalling it, and then activate it on another.
If that’s true, and it works like that, most of my previous arguments and counterpoints are moot. Then the license remains a user license.
That would make me happy.
But I do agree with Dave and Richard in that "legacy" activation is still an issue.
I have to say, that Richards post is the most sane analysis yet; ya know, Adobe could have saved over 200 posts if they’d simply come out and say what’s what, and quell the native unrest.
True ID. This way, all the marketing folk can sit in on a meeting and say "well we’ve reviewed thousands of posts on this subject between four different fourms, and consensus is, that the market will accept it. Job well done folks".
beg and plead and cry to being to install the $600 plus
in software you bought. <
That is very emotive language and completely erroneous for probably greater than 80% of users – as most will have paid just the $169 (or less) for the upgrade.
If we cut this one off, it will only spring to life in a dozen other palces and we would then have to monitor them all. Some users have concerns and it best they bare their chests in just one place so that folk who do not share their concerns can simply avoid it.
So, as long as folk continue to discuss these issues civilly in an adult manner, then both Len and myself will allow it to contine.
But thanks for your concerns — Carol (Posted from the UK)
And fwiw, there is no official announcement indicating 8<
That is true and is something which I read about on the ozzie activation site – but apparently that statement has been withdrawn as I can no longer find any reference to it – or maybe I dreamt it in a public domain dream :))
Here’s one that should make most of the worriers a bit relieved:
Q: What happens if the product is discontinued? A: Adobe is fully committed to honoring the terms of its product license agreements. In the event that a product is discontinued, Adobe will enable automatic approval of all activation requests for that product or provide a means to remove activation outright. In either case, the customer will not experience any change in software capabilities.
A small woodworking tool manufacturer, Stots Corporation, includes a license agreement on its TemplateMaster jig tool. The tool is licensed, not sold, and customers cannot sell it or lend it to others. Nor can they sell or lend the jigs they make with it.
The Corporate "junk heaps" are filled with examples of marketing deciding that they, rather than the customer, knew what the market needed.
Let Adobe’s customer base vote with their pocket books on the issue.
Actually I wonder if anyone at Adobe gave any consideration on how many existing product buyers and users got their early training using from "pirated programs". Maybe it’s not right but it is/was there. And those early users are the ones that cough up $$$$ for proper use later in life.
The Photoshop elements program is a great idea for the beginner. I am happy to see it appearing as bundle ware on machines. It does give a beginner an exposure to the larger Photoshop program abilities.
Above all, let’s face it is Photoshop XX.0 going to offer enough new capabilities over version 7 to make it worth any upgrade cost? Sooner or later additional software advances aren’t worth much.
Macromedia claims it was the lack of an evaluation copy being offered.
"The lack of prerelease evaluation copies was in retrospect a management misstep and sets the upgrade cycle back by 30 days,"
I think it’s activation – although the lack of evaluation copies is, well, a "misstep". Users are wary – companies need to be assured that they can trust users (ergo activation), but there’s no reciprocity.
Here’s one that should make most of the worriers a bit relieved:
Q: What happens if the product is discontinued? A: Adobe is fully committed to honoring the terms of its product license agreements. In the event that a product is discontinued, Adobe will enable automatic approval of all activation requests for that product or provide a means to remove activation outright. In either case, the customer will not experience any change in software capabilities.
Bob>
Sorry, Bob; the potential for Adobe NOT activating the product some time in the future remains my big worry.
I can envisage plenty of scenarios that they could present as a let out situation – most involve bad business climate – hardly an improbable future scenario. As Jerry said "Sooner or later additional software advances aren’t worth much". Indeed. What does Adobe do then? Run down the operation, but devote an ever-increasing percentage of it’s costs to activating old products, enabling customers to decline the upgrade that Adobe are desperately pushing? Hardly. In UK law, unless a company goes bust, I believe that ‘a deal is a deal’. But doesn’t the US have ‘Chapter Something’ that sets all bets off? Isn’t that what recently allowed the phoenix version of Polaroid to nick their retirees pension money?
Most big software companies are switching as fast as possible to pay-as-you-go charging. That solves the nightmare they have about cashflow drying up but leaves users drip feeding cash forever, even though the software may never offer any new features useful to them. The company nightmare gives way to a customer nightmare.
Of course, Adobe could allay customer fears very simply and cheaply. Lodge the removal code with an internationally respected organisation to be released, come what may, when the version is discontinued. Use someone like Lloyds of London. If they did that, I would happily purchase the upgrade.
Sorry, Bob; the potential for Adobe NOT activating the product some time in the future remains my big worry.
They’ve issues a statement saying that won’t happen. If you elect to avoid the product because you don’t believe it, that’s certainly your choice and I respect that. In fact, it were any other company, I don’t know that I would be too quick to trust it either.
But, I also can’t think of any other company that has so many employees interacting with its customers. Seeking feedback and handing out advice and help. In short, I do trust this company to do the right thing for its customers.
"The Trusted Computing Group (TCG) is an alliance of Microsoft, Intel, IBM, HP and AMD which promotes a standard for a `more secure’ PC. Their definition of `security’ is controversial; machines built according to their specification will be more trustworthy from the point of view of software vendors and the content industry, but will be less trustworthy from the point of view of their owners. In effect, the TCG specification will transfer the ultimate control of your PC from you to whoever wrote the software it happens to be running…"
"TC provides a computing platform on which you can’t tamper with the application software, and where these applications can communicate securely with their authors and with each other…"
"… will also make it much harder for you to run unlicensed software. In the first version of TC, pirate software could be detected and deleted remotely."
"(It) provides for a monitoring and reporting component to be mounted in future PCs. The preferred implementation in the first phase of TC emphasised the role of a `Fritz’ chip – a smartcard chip or dongle soldered to the motherboard."
What makes things even more frightening is that it is already in use, according to the article, by Microsoft.
That article is an interesting read to be sure. Activation (a subset of Trusted Computing) is definately not here for the consumer – it is a step in gaining increased control over the market without having to add more value.
From the article:
TC does not so much provide security for the user as for the PC vendor, the software supplier, and the content industry. They do not add value for the user, but destroy it. They constrain what you can do with your PC in order to enable application and service vendors to extract more money from you. This is the classic definition of an exploitative cartel – an industry agreement that changes the terms of trade so as to diminish consumer surplus.
Be careful what you wish for; you may just get it.
Adobe interactive with its customers? Where are you seeing this? It isn’t here. Only one or two Adobe people are here and they aren’t here as official Adobe employees just as users.
Adobe has been the worst when it comes to interacting with customers, listening to what they want, etc.
Macromedia on the other hand has a ton of programs insight to help and interact with customers. They have a helper program on their forum. They have Macromedia personal on their representing Macromedia. They have had questionnaires asking customer opinions they have setup several advisory groups and more all to get feedback from their customers.
They also get users post release information for extensions and stuff that work with their products where Adobe forbids it. I guess they are afraid someone might make a buck that they didn’t get.
I never said they were here in an official capacity. All the more impressive that they do it on their own time.
If you want to buy into conspiracy theories, don’t let me stop you. But I’m buying the software and I’m not afraid that someone is going to be knocking on my door in the middle of the night to confiscate my computer.
"(It) provides for a monitoring and reporting component to be mounted in future PCs. The preferred implementation in the first phase of TC emphasised the role of a `Fritz’ chip – a smartcard chip or dongle soldered to the motherboard."
Atkinson was keen to point out that this has nothing to do with digital rights management (DRM), which is a controversial technology designed to protect copyrighted material,
I guess Frank Zappa was right. Stupidity is the fastest growing natural resource on the planet. Too bad we can’t harness its energy potential.
Why don’t you nay-sayers just wait to see how activation works before you start your conspiracy theories going there. I swear, when I read this thread I feel like I’ve clicked on a Slashdot story. I read Slashdot for humor value, I expect a little more intelligence from the Adobe forums.
I expect a little more intelligence from the Adobe forums.
You seem to continually confuse intelligent debate with agreement, Stuart. There is nothing unintelligent about what many, throughout the computing industry, are saying as it relates to Activation, DRM, and the TCG. You simply refuse to admit that there’s another point of view, and if a view is in direct contrast to your own opinion, it cannot be well reasoned.
Stop calling people stupid and put forth your own well reasoned position, or just lurk.
Stuart, please. I know you’re a smart guy, but we disagree on the ramifications of this issue; you choose to call people unintelligent for doing so.
In the 350+ posts in this thread, I have put forth several we-reasoned positions, as have others. You choose not to agree. Fine. But to call it tin-foil hat is a stretch. There are many in the industry saying the same things, presuming you read the publications. Maybe we’re all nutz and you’re the only sane one.
No reason to get personal here. Just stop calling people unintelligent and counter with a good (or bad) argument.
I call people unintelligent for developing boogeyman type conspircay theories from thin air. There are far too many pundits in the technology industry and most of them are no more intelligent than your average baboon. They are heard simply because they can write, not because they can develop a well reasoned argument. There is no counter-argument for these delusions. You can’t argue with crazy, tin foil hat wearing loonies. If you want to believe in the boogeyman and keep your curtains closed lest the black helicopters circling your house find out you’re home, fine, go right ahead, I’m not going to stop you. Whatever floats your boat man.
Macromedia is taking some punches about activation in the forum thread following this Macromedia shares dip 30 percent <http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/10/24/macromedia/> article. While their John Dowdell usually offers a fine defense, he’s surprisingly quiet on this issue. He did say that people often wait until midway between releases before upgrading, but, to me, that means after the first bug fix, which may not happen if the upgrade cycle is too tight.
Since Macromedia instituted activation in its product, sales should have gone straight up. No? Or it’s just that Macromedia products all suck so this is happening and Adobe won’t suffer the same fate?
I call people unintelligent for developing boogeyman type conspircay theories from thin air.
Perhaps you could call people naive or ignorant, if your claims were correct, but calling them unintelligent is presumptuous and insulting.
There are far too many pundits in the technology industry and most of them are no more intelligent than your average baboon…
An argument is not the automatic nay saying and attacking of your adversary’s credibility. That’s not how humor works, either.
You’ve stated that nobody knows how Activation will affect us, so we shouldn’t worry about it. You’ve said it several times. All anecdotal and substantive reports notwithstanding, I hope your gut feeling is right. We all just need to trust our feelings more.
I hope this thread stays open and interactive; I’ve learned a lot from it. Adobe’s forums continue to be a wonderful resource, and I thank them for providing it.
As far as I can tell no one except Adobe is in favor of Activation. I’ve talked to a lot of people that have cancelled order’s for the upgrades or new installs. It seems like Adobe punishes there loyal user’s instead of going after the ones that cause them harm. Here’s a fact: I once got an e-mail that was from a site that was selling "cheap" Adobe software, I did my loyal duty and came to the Adobe site and after searching for quite some time finally found a way to report this to Adobe and send them a copy of the e-mail….Did they go after the guys selling the illegal software? I never received a thank you one from Adobe, I never received a follow up from Adobe, and I never sent them another e-mail that I got where someone was pushing illegal Adobe software…the same old story with Adobe; the "Loyal User’s" get the "Loyal Shaft"…I mean it took me like 40 minutes just to notify Adobe and send them this e-mail, no thank you, no nothing from them….they most likely contacted the site selling their software illegally and gave them a better deal on the latest upgrade packages, haha, I mean that sounds like Adobe doesn’t it?!!!! I truly love the Adobe products and would do anything to help them, example above, but I really don’t think this will help Adobe or curb theft of their software, what’s the answer, I don’t have any idea except maybe to track down people who send out e-mails saying "Get your cheap Adobe software here" and make them suffer, ya’ know instead of the loyal user’s having to pay make the ones doing the crime pay. Reader’s please comment…..
It will stay open – but I must admit that whilst I don’t mind activation if it does cut down on piracy in any way and I do trust Adobe (at least a lot more than other software companies), I don’t take kindly to insults being traded from either camp – so please let’s cut that aspect of the discussion out and let it continue in a civil manner on both sides.
An unexpected large drop in Microsoft Corp.’s unearned revenue has financial analysts worried that the company’s biggest challenge is not Linux or an IT spending dip, but an installed base that’s rejecting its software subscription plan… The amount of unearned revenue on Microsoft’s balance sheet dropped $768 million.
They’re blaming it on the Software Assurance program, which may be true for corporate sales, which aren’t constrained by Activation. This drop is during the time when the old Y2K computers are being replaced. The picture should be getting rosier, as the MS percentage of the price of each computer increases, with decreasing hardware costs.
Geesh, get a clue. This is becoming more and more of a common practice these days. Microsoft has been doing it since Office XP was released. And now Macromedia is doing it (had to activate DWMX2004) and Symantec is also (had to activate my new copy of NAV2004). I think Macromedia’s activation implemention (haven’t tried Adobe’s yet, but it sounds similar) was very fair. I was able to activate it on my desktop and laptop without having to call them. And, over this past weekend when I rebuilt my machine I was able to deactivate the software and then reactivate it on the new machine. It was fairly trouble free. Same thing for Windows XP. I just had to give Microsoft a quick buzz and tell them I rebuilt my PC and they happily activated it. I don’t know why people are so scared of activation. The only thing I can think of (and I’m not implying that you are doing this) is that they’ve loaded one copy of the software onto several PCs and are a little unhappy that they now have to buy several copies of it.
Also, if you read Adobe’s site, they mention that you may not get a reply. I’ve sent them emails myself and haven’t received a reply in regards to reporting piracy. — Rob
wrote in message
As far as I can tell no one except Adobe is in favor of Activation. I’ve
talked to a lot of people that have cancelled order’s for the upgrades or new installs. It seems like Adobe punishes there loyal user’s instead of going after the ones that cause them harm. Here’s a fact: I once got an e-mail that was from a site that was selling "cheap" Adobe software, I did my loyal duty and came to the Adobe site and after searching for quite some time finally found a way to report this to Adobe and send them a copy of the e-mail….Did they go after the guys selling the illegal software? I never received a thank you one from Adobe, I never received a follow up from Adobe, and I never sent them another e-mail that I got where someone was pushing illegal Adobe software…the same old story with Adobe; the "Loyal User’s" get the "Loyal Shaft"…I mean it took me like 40 minutes just to notify Adobe and send them this e-mail, no thank you, no nothing from them….they most likely contacted the site selling their software illegally and gave them a better deal on the latest upgrade packages, haha, I mean that sounds like Adobe doesn’t it?!!!! I truly love the Adobe products and would do anything to help them, example above, but I really don’t think this will help Adobe or curb theft of their software, what’s the answer, I don’t have any idea except maybe to track down people who send out e-mails saying "Get your cheap Adobe software here" and make them suffer, ya’ know instead of the loyal user’s having to pay make the ones doing the crime pay. Reader’s please comment…..
I spent this weekend searching for people that were saying they were not going to upgrade because of activation. (Google is very helpfull for this.) Try it.
A quick survey gave me at least 100(rounded off and bieng conservative). Thats $169,000 adobe will be loosing because of activation.
And this is just upgrading.
Now lets just say lets guess 20 people wont buy PS becouse of activation thats $12,980 dollars that adobe wont get.
Unless they dont mind loosing money thats up to them.
I don’t know about you, but I am not liking the idea that in a year or two I may have to call every company that I purchase software from each time I upgrade or reformat.
Then what will you say… "It’s only 20 or 30 phone calls I don’t know why everyone is complaining".
Why will you have to phone Adobe – you obviously have a modem/cable connection as you are here – simply activate/reactivate over the internet – it really is a no brainer and takes a couple of seconds. —
Now, of those alleged 100 people who will not bother to upgrade, how many will upgrade around a month or so after its release because they really want some of the super new stuff in Photoshop CS – probably at least 99% of them I bet. —
In all fairness, Carol, if you get a new computer, there may be an issue depending on how many activations Adobe will allow. Which brings me to a question.
Can you deactivate on one computer before installing on another to avoid the hassle of the phone call?
Carol, I’ve had to call Microsoft for both XP and Office XP because my new motherboard was bad. The problem with the board was not evident until after I had installed and activated everything, and in the process of troubleshooting I changed hard drives, PCI slot locations, etc., thus causing my internet activation to fail after my new board was installed. It wasn’t a big deal but you never know what can happen
—
Rick Moore Barnes Gromatzky Kosarek Architects (512) 476 7133 (512) 478 2624 FAX www.bgkarchitects.com
Carol what would happen if every single software you had had activation (Im afriad thats the way it going to go). How many call would you have to make?
What if your Internet was down?
What if your company didnt allow outgoing requests from software to go out for security reasons?
None of these things are taking into consideration.
I’m sure everyone can pull out some sort of first or third hand anecdotal evidence which demonstrates how activation failed to work at one time or another. I don’t trust third hand stories and anecdotal evidence, even first hand, is typically the exception and not the rule. Sure there will be glitches but many here seem to think activation will force them to turn over the contents of their computer or risk black helicopters swooping in and jack-booted hit quads to bust down their doors. Assuming Adobe gets 1 million users of Photoshop CS relatively quickly, nagash2’s 100 (hell, I’ll triple that to 300) users with problems is quite insignificant. No one has claimed activation will be perfect but I’m guessing Adobe worked out those problems with their beta test of the process in Australia so it’s not like this is the very first use of activation by Adobe.
Yes I have 2 Mbit connections at work and home, but many people don’t. I know of many small businesses off the top of my head that despite recommending routers or proxy servers continue to have only a single computer with internet access. For many of us this is hard to imagine but it is the case more often than not in small businesses. Many Photographers have their computer in or near their lab and only use it for photo editing and have never had the computer on the internet.
It is unlikely to be down for more than 30 days – and as has been explained many times in this thread, you can install it and *use* it for a full 30 days after installation before it becomes mandatory to activate.
What if your company didnt allow outgoing requests from software to go
out for security reasons?<
Then the phone bill is down to them and you are picking up (hopefully) a healthy salary for being stuck on the phone for 5 minutes. —
Now, of those alleged 100 people who will not bother to upgrade, how
many will upgrade around a month or so after its release because they really want some of the super new stuff in Photoshop CS -probably at least 99% of them I bet.
Or, alternatively, how many of the people who have consistently upgraded over the past few versions, in spite of being slightly disappointed at the improvements (or lack thereof) each time, will see product activation as the straw that broke the camel’s back and stick with their current version for the foreseeable future?
The upgrade doesn’t offer anything I can’t do without, and it has the potential to be a pain in the you-know-what. How much potential and how much pain is totally irrelevant, because even a tiny potential for a miniscule irritation is still worse than no irritation at all. Afterall, I don’t have Adobe’s best interests at heart, I have my own.
Sorry, but I don’t feel inclined to make my own life even marginally more difficult just so that Adobe can add another bullet-point to their glossy annual shareholder’s report.
continue to have only a single computer with internet access<
In a business like that they will more than likely have a multi user licence – which doesn’t need activation.
If they really only have a single user for Photoshop, then they can temporarily set up a USB modem on that computer and do it that way (or indeed, activate over the telephone if they really don’t want to go down the online route – but at the end of the day, that is their decision). —
It is one single application. I doubt very much that you would be singing the same tune if you had to register every single audio CD, DVD, and software package you owned. Far fetched? I hope so but the way things are going I wouldn’t put it past them.
It will be in the name of protecting copywritten material. The Audio CD’s will each have unique embedded audio signatures so you will be required to register your audio CD’s. That way if someone downloads an MP3 with a signature that matches the one on your CD they know it was you. You know what I bet it will all start with one audio CD and everyone will say "It’s just one CD it only takes a few seconds over your Internet connection".
I am all for protecting intellectual property, but if they can’t find a better way I fear the term "intellectual property" may be an oxymoron anyway!
"They That Give Up Liberty For Safety Deserve Neither" -Benjamin Franklin
Afterall, I don’t have Adobe’s best interests at heart, I have my own.<
So, although there is no irritation (hasn’t been for Australian clients or folk on the beta AFAIK) you are prepared to not upgrade to use the far better tools which will be available in Photoshop CS.
That is fine Iain, but I would suggest that you are cutting off your nose to spite your face, as they say. Surely you will not dig in your heels if it is going to offer you many ways to improve your workflow and the quality of your images all for the sake of making a non-existent point
I would suggest that you wait and download the trial when it becomes available and see all the improvements that Photoshop can give you before you commit yourself either way. That way at least, besides cutting off your nose to spite your face, you won’t have to lose the entire face either —
You do hear yourself don’t you? On a system upgrade you could be looking at 20 or 30 phone calls, depending on the number of programs requiring activation, with potentially long hold times. Even if each call is only 10 minutes you are looking at 3-5 hours on the phone. Ok so Adobe is only responsible for 10 minutes of that time, but they are contributing to a paradigm that has a very grim forecast.
Here is a scenario for you. What if the next Motherboard or OS revision is not compatible with your activation scheme. Is Adobe capable of handling simultaneous phone calls from a large percentage of it’s consumer base?
Is Adobe capable of handling simultaneous phone calls from a large
percentage of it’s consumer base?
Interesting scenario, but I think if it came down to that there would need to be a patch posted on the website. And yes, I know that not everyone knows to look there, but I would imagine anyone buying some hot new technology would have enough intelligence to check there.
So, although there is no irritation… you are prepared to not upgrade…
Correct! It’s a freedom thing.
to use the far better tools which will be available in Photoshop CS.
Which is, of course, the way to force everyone to eventually upgrade. A file uses a new feature, then it’s handed-off to someone who doesn’t have Photoshop CS, then they upgrade, then the next guy…
That’s the method used by the folks in Redmond–and it is quite effective–is to change things a bit with each version, so that eventually everyone will be forced to upgrade. Say, change the text engine, introduce new file formats… if you even want to look at a file, you will have to upgrade.
Just imagine that all software has this Activation feature. I wonder how much time/money is going to be wasted by individuals/Companies/Corporation just trying to activate.
Which is quite right and proper – but is it really a freedom thing when you are restricting your own freedom of choice to use the best tools available for the job, by your reluctance to accept a very minor irritation for 2 seconds per month/year/whenever.
I would respectfully suggest that you are indeed in trouble of becoming your own jailor (but that of course, is your choice too :)) —
Not at all, simply ask the person who sent it to send it again as a flattened TIF file – that way even Photoshop 2.5 can read it.
Who wants to edit that TIF? Especially if it’s larger than 2GB. As I said, once an upgrade gets into the workflow, everything changes.
Just imagine that all software has this Activation feature. I wonder how much time/money is going to be wasted by individuals/Companies/Corporation just trying to activate.
Corporate versions often don’t have activation. Say it’s universal–it would likely make corporation move to Linux a little faster. It is happening; Activation will only encourage companies to invest in Linux.
Which is quite right and proper – but is it really a freedom thing when you are restricting your own freedom of choice to use the best tools available for the job, by your reluctance to accept a very minor irritation for 2 seconds per month/year/whenever.
that’s something I really don’t understand, why is it that large corporations, where the chance to "borrow" the software is greater, don’t have to activate? The single user is required to, but the multiple license folks don’t.
Perhaps it’s a misconception on my part, but I would think that the majority of casual copying, especially witout the need to activate, is going to occur MORE in a corporate setting than it will in the private setting. So the corporate copy gets out, no activation required and all the pirates are happy. Meanwhile, the lowly private user needs to jump through the activation hoop.
I am not trying to cause problems here, but I am not sure that I have seen an answer to question about future versions CS. Hypothetical here: 3 years from now, PSCS3 gets released. You are still using PSCS. You have to change your harware configuration, say a new mobo. Will Adobe still allow for PSCS to be activated or will they refuse that activation (as, in reality, they have the right to do) and force the user to upgrade to PSCS3? Do we have any guarantee, in writing, that they won’t prevent PSCS from being activated after future versions are released?
First, it’s copyrighted not copywritten, two very different things.
Second, the quote is:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
If you’re going to quote somebody get the quote right. Note also the use of the word essential, a word often left off by many who misquote Mr. Franklin.
Third, I wouldn’t mind activated CDs one bit because I don’t use my computer as a CD player. That wouldn’t bother me one bit. On a side note, it people are going to insist on using computers as stereos, when is the AHRA going to kick in for them I wonder?
Last, if you’re having to deal with 20-30 system upgrades of Photoshop you are likely going to have purchased a volume license in which case activation is not necessary. If you did not purchase a volume license for 20 or more copies then you wasted quite a bit of money and any troubles brought upon by doing so are our own fault.
"Just imagine that all software has this Activation feature. I wonder how much time/money is going to be wasted by individuals/Companies/Corporation just trying to activate.
Ah the though just makes me angry"
Apparently nagash2 you’re not thinking. It has been stated multiple times in this thread as well as elsewhere on the Adobe site that activation is not going to be on volume license copies. It is therefore very likely that no companies or corporations will be wasting any time at all and for those who only need 5 or so copies of Photoshop, you’re not wasting any time at all even if one person has to install the applications. Activation will be a very small percentage of the time spent installing the app.
…I wouldn’t mind activated CDs one bit because I don’t use my computer as a CD player.
So nobody else should care.
On a side note, it people are going to insist on using computers as stereos…
They’re being promoted as home info-tainment centers.
…with 20-30 system upgrades of Photoshop you are likely going to have purchased a volume license
Which is exactly where the pirated copies all over the Internet will come from. Nobody’s going to bother cracking it if a corporate version has the work done for them. Adobe’s making it easier on pirates, and harder on honest individuals.
There are so many Dave, it’s difficult to know where to start. For me *personally* and the way I work if I could choose only one thing, it would have to be the new File Browser and its abilities to run actions and automated tasks on either a whole folder of images or just a few selected ones. This would be followed by the ability to work in 16-bit mode for many more functions. Vastly improved contact sheets and picture packaging facilities – also the new Image Matching and highlight/shadow adjustment feature are extremly useful. Additional methods of resampling also springs to mind (upsampling with the ‘smoother’ option enabled gave incredible results going in one step from a 17Mb camera image to a 40"x30" enlargement).
There have been many requests for photographic style filters (eg red, blue, green and CC filters etc) and these have been incorporated into CS and work extremely well at producing the type of effect which you would obtain using the convention filters on the camera and at correcting images taken under a variety of light sources. And you now have the often requested feature for type on a path – not something I use much myself but other folks will love it now it is incorporated into Photoshop itself.
There are a whole variety of other useful stuff, some of it quite small amendments (such as the ability to choose either black, white, grey or indeed a choice of any colour – you no longer have to rely on changing the background swatch colour to what you want the canvas extension to be. Similarly for the stroke tool and the fill tool has an added colour option.
In my opinion there are many major improvements – but there are also some very minor improvements which will help enormously in getting the job done faster in a more relaxed way.
ACR has been much improved over the older version – and now includes the ability to correct for Chromatic Aberrations (generally found in digital cameras when using wide and extremely wide angle lenses).
Anyhow that is a very brief sysnopsis of what you can expect.
I didn’t say 20-30 system upgrades! I said one system upgrade with 20-30 potential applications requiring activation. Remember Photoshop is but once single application and more and more vendors are adding activation. Will you be as forgiving when all the programs you use require activation?
Sorry for the misquote it was the first I found and the web site had it misquoted. It still "represents the spirit" of the quote! Besides we all know where you stand and it obviously isn’t with Mr. Franklin.
I am not trying to cause problems here, but I am not sure that I have seen an answer to question about future versions CS.
From the FAQ:
Q: What happens if the product is discontinued? A: Adobe is fully committed to honoring the terms of its product license agreements. In the event that a product is discontinued, Adobe will enable automatic approval of all activation requests for that product or provide a means to remove activation outright. In either case, the customer will not experience any change in software capabilities.
Now, of those alleged 100 people who will not bother to upgrade, how many will upgrade around a month or so after its release because they really want some of the super new stuff in Photoshop CS – probably at least 99% of them I bet.
Carol, I have been computing almost 3 decades now and never have to call any software compary for anything I buy. Besides English isn’t my native language, I don’t know how to call several hundreds different software companies to activate all my Old/New softwares. And do they remember and still support some very old softwares? I am still using some old DOS util dated back to 70’s.
In the event that a product is discontinued, Adobe will enable automatic approval of all activation requests for that product or provide a means to remove activation outright. In either case…
What if, what if, what if… there are so many. No failsafe mechanism or deadman switch? If I purchase a license, I should be able to use it even if what if occurs.
Theres a crack for all this Activated products:
That’s why so many people purchase MS WindowsXP, but use a cracked version.
Since we’re going off topic with Mr. Franklin’s quote, let me tell you that, IMO, there’s a great deal of difference between what you wrote and the actual quote. And since I worked in the World Trade Center and was there on 9/11 and for the 1993 bombing, I can attest to the fact that I would give up a few small freedoms, like getting into the building without ID, to have been safer on that day.
So please stop turning this into a give me liberty or give me death scenario. It’s software–not life or death.
Can you deactivate on one computer before installing on another to avoid the hassle of the phone call?
In that case phone free activation will be dependent upon the time period that has elapsed between your initial two (2) activations and your third attempt and is NOT related to whether you deactivate
Deactivation is a step that can be undertaken (but not essential) as part of uninstalling PS. Deactivation does NOT feed back to Adobe. It just makes you feel better when you sell that box to someone else. Since activation is also tied to your serial number they would also need your serial number before they could reactivate.
When you deactivate you remove only one of the codes provided by Adobe (the one in the registry). There is another identical code burned to your HD that stays. So long as you don’t do a low level format of the HD this hidden code will ensure that your old activation code remains valid and ready for your next attempt to reactivate that machine at some future date.
Unless selling the box I personally wouldn’t bother deactivating. If you don’t deactivate then reinstalling PS is no different to what it is in version 7.
Someone asked if Carol was a beta tester – she was – so was I. Both of us have been using it for months and gone through activation many times. In my case on different machines. I’ve also been through deactivation and even tried to conn the system. If you buy a new box you will have 30 days from the moment you install PS until it ceases to function. Say the HD falls over in this 30 day period and you get another one – reinstall PS and again you have a further 30 days of use before you have to activate.
Bottom line folks is that many of your worries are just that – worries! As for those bitching about activation screwing up the way they work on multiple computers – TOUGH – read the EULA!
1. If I bought the upgrade shouldnt I be able to use it without any further contact to adobe?
To me it seems that im paying Adobe 169 for Demoing the software and then I can choose to really use it if I want.
Is this legal? I have to go to the Harvard Law shool and ask around. It just does not seem right. If I bought it I should be able to use it without any restrictions.
2. In my opinion if Activation is a Guilty until proven innocent kinda thinking. Theres that freedom people like to talk about. ( I have owned PS since version 2.5 i think. Got to search for that. I know that ps3 for a fact.
It’s interesting that the Adobe ‘helpers’ here will nit-pick over exact wording of quotations but resolutely avoid addressing the serious challenges made in posts or in links.
nagash2’s link in 424 quotes Microsoft as admitting that after a few activations you have to buy a new licence. Carol – would you find THAT acceptable? Probably you are ‘in the know’ and a quick call to a secret number in Adobe would sort it. Do you think the rest of us should fork out another £150? Or would it be £500 for the full version? Are you going to give us your secret number? I doubt it.
It is common here to trade quotes from the US constitution and great thinkers. Let me give you one from the English Civil War.
"We know very well that in all ages those men that engage themselves against tyranny, unjust and arbitrary proceedings in magistrates, have suffered under such appellations, the People being purposely frighted from that which is good by insinuation of imaginary evil."
It’s uncanny that this was written in 1649 and even more so the insight that it is applicable to ‘all ages’!
IMHO; that is exactly what is going on here. Gates & Co see their ability to find new features worthy of purchase drying up. They desperately need to introduce a pay-as-you-go system so that cashflow is guaranteed even without producing anything. But punters will not buy activation on this, true, basis. Hence the ‘imaginary evil’ of copyright cheats.
Anyone who hasn’t read this: <http://www.againsttcpa.com/tcpa-faq-en.html> please do. Among the vast array of evidence is a link demonstrating that Microsoft is quietly slipping words into EULA’s allowing it to mess with everything on your PC! Download something benign like Media Player and you’ve just agreed to let Redmond decide what to delete or de-activate from your hard disk, at their whim, without your say so.
Everyone happy with this? Carol? You happy with such an arrangement?
Boycotts probably wont work. Deferred pain doesn’t hurt now. Eighteen months+ down the line everyone will be squealing but the game will be lost, activation will be a nightmare, and we’ll be paying monthly forever for software which they don’t even need to improve. It’s being termed ‘selling software as a utility’ but I’m sure the CEO’s of utilities would disagree – they have to produce something for their money.
nagash2’s link in 424 quotes Microsoft as admitting that after a few activations you have to buy a new licence.
No it doesn’t. It quotes someone who CLAIMS that’s what Microsoft said. That whole site and the rest of the sky is falling sites are so flawed it’s laughable. None of them have facts, just conspiracy theories.
1. If I bought the upgrade shouldnt I be able to use it without any
further contact to adobe?
You can…after you activate it. Remember, you’re not buying software, you’re buying a license to use the software.
BUYING a licence? This transaction, where the vendor can disable the product and force you to ‘buy’ again is, for most folk, ‘Buying, Bob, but not as we know it’.
If I bought it I should be able to use it without any restrictions.
BUYING a licence? This transaction, where the vendor can disable the product and force you to ‘buy’ again is, for most folk, ‘Buying, Bob, but not as we know it’.
Who have they done this to?
Again, you bought and AGREED to a license.
Ditto
Exactly. When Adobe violates the agreement, come on back and let me know.
There is nothing to refute here. A lot of the comments are from people who live in a fantasy world with green skies, black helicopters and government hit squads that raid your house on a daily basis. None of the links nagash provided were from reputable, reliable sources, much less from anyone with any reasonable amount of knowledge of which they speak.
"It is common here to trade quotes from the US constitution and great thinkers. Let me give you one from the English Civil War."
It is not common nor is it intelligent. Those people lived hundreds of years ago in a completely different world (though it still had blue skies). Their comments speak to events which bear absolutely no correlation to Adobe’s activation scheme much less world events as they are unfolding today. Their comments are about as insightful as those by Nostradamus. The comments are only intelligent in so far as their ability to bend to fit the situation one wishes. Nostradamus could not see into the future, he could merely write in such as way as to make people believe what they wanted to believe. There is no arguing with resolve such as that.
Do you really think market enthusiasm will be enough to support Microsofts bottom line in 2018 as they launch Office2019 (or Adobe launches PS18)? If not, can you suggest how, short of pay-as-you-go, the companies will avoid massive downsizing?
Anyhow that is a very brief sysnopsis of what you can expect.
Thanks Carol (and Ian). I’m hoping a lot of the little stuff that’s punted around the features request forum makes it in. For example, can you check if you can now use the zoom tool while in free transform? That one’s really a pain for me.
I’ll definately be upgrading. (But Activation still BITES! <g>) Now that it’s shipping, I’ll be giving customer service a call to clear up some questions I have on the Suite upgrade and the ability to continue to upgrade PS standalone if I have a previous license. I’ll post the results when I get an answer. Should be within a day or 2. I hope to order by the end of the week if it’s indeed true that CS has begun shipping.
Some people just don’t like to have their freedoms taken away; I guess for others, it’s okay. It doesn’t matter if to you, or anybody, it’s totally benign, it’s not what some people want. Even if you did offer more fact and fewer flowing metaphors, it wouldn’t change things.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. The past always has bearing. More importantly there is the future that you have no vission for. The only thing you seem to be able to see is what is going on now. IF this is true you are just another mindless zombie living for the moment. Everyone is happy that everything is smooth sailing with just a few speed bumps to keep everyone in check and then you run into a brick wall and wonder where the heck it came from.
The Berlin wall wasn’t built overnight and software activation isn’t going to destroy your computer as you know it overnight but are you going to sit by and wait for that to happen. There is a very real possibility of abuse and once we cross that threshold there will likely be no going back.
First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.
Wow Herb, you got a crystal ball there? Could you give me the lottery numbers for tomorrow night’s drawing please? Thanks.
Seriously, do you think you can predict fifteen years in to the future of the economy and computers? Fifteen years ago I didn’t even have my first 286. Could what you describe happen, especially with society going down a path of entitlement to anything they desire without responsibility? Yes it could. Will it? Well, you’re the one with the crystal ball, offer up some proof.
r_harvey,
"Some people just don’t like to have their freedoms taken away; I guess for others, it’s okay."
What freedoms have you been denied? What civil rights are being taken from you here? How is our Constitution under imminent threat from Adobe’s activation? Specifics, specifics, specifics.
Probably you are ‘in the know’ and a quick call to a secret number in
Adobe would sort it. <
Don’t be daft :), the only person I know who works for Adobe is the Forums manager here – I suppose I could be said to know Chris Cox, but only as much as the rest of you know him. Secret number in your dreams – but thanks for the laugh
dmitting that after a few activations you have to buy a new licence<
Do you *know* why further activation was refused???? Might it have been because that person gave a copy to his son and daught and they gave a copy to two each of their friends etc, etc. After about 13 gifts this would mean aroud 16,000 copies and if just 1% tried to register that would have been 160 registrations with the same serial number. Any activation tracking software is bound to throw a wobbly after that. —
I doubt that anything I write will help quell the fears of those who see green men leaping out of spaceships and thought police around every corner but here’s something that might help those with less active (forgive the pun) imaginations:
Whilst having something selected and going to Free Tranform funcytion, if you hold down the [ctrl]+[spacebar] keys, the cursor chages to the zoom tool which you can then use to magnify the image.
do you think you can predict fifteen years in to the future
Well, in this case, yes. I purchased Office 97 in 1996. I have been using it since then. Short of insanity, I will NOT be drip-feeding Bill Gates $x/month pension contribution fifteen years from now. Furthermore, I know first hand that a lot of big UK companies still use Office 97. I know ONE that still uses the previous version. From what I read, lots of US companies feel the same. Microsoft is not idle:
‘Fierce resistance is brewing to Microsoft’s new software licensing program for businesses….."There’s a lot of confusion, outrage and resentment, and it’s growing, not abating," says Laura DiDio of Information Technology Intelligence, which surveyed companies on the change’
‘The meter is running ……a new era in which software became a service rather than a commodity. And, in spite of Microsoft’s stance, both CIOs and analysts noted it would also goose revenues on the aging Windows and Office franchises. ‘
‘Microsoft isn’t the only company that’s working on a software-as-a-service strategy. Software industry rivals, including IBM (WebSphere), BEA (WebLogic), Hewlett-Packard (Bluestone), Oracle (Dynamic Services) and Sun Microsystems (Sun One), are looking to Java technology to bring software users on to the Web.
The evidence of what is happening is well documented. If you insist on putting the glass to your blind eye and declaring ‘I see no ships!’ – fair enough.
Very nice. Could you please do the same thing for the other side? So far nobody’s listed any of the wonderful long-term benefits from their point of view. It must surely be as good an idea, since they defend it even without supporting data.
Don’t be daft , the only person I know who works for Adobe is the Forums manager here – I suppose I could be said to know Chris Cox, but only as much as the rest of you know him. Secret number in your dreams – but thanks for the laugh.
My apologies! I noticed someone here last week berating a beta tester who posted a secret link. I thought it was you. Obviously not. Sorry!
dmitting that after a few activations you have to buy a new licence<
Do you *know* why further activation was refused???? Might it have been because that person gave a copy to his son and daught and they gave a copy to two each of their friends etc, etc. After about 13 gifts this would mean aroud 16,000 copies and if just 1% tried to register that would have been 160 registrations with the same serial number. Any activation tracking software is bound to throw a wobbly after that.
Did you read the link? How did you get so confused? Why not simply check before you fire off such an accusation? The guy stated that he talked to a MICROSOFT activation representative. That was the person who gave the information.
I did a most unusual thing. Half an hour ago I actually emailed the guy, John Walkenbach , for confirmation. He said ‘that’s exactly what the phone rep told me.’
There’s his email address above. Why don’t you mail him?
This isn’t evidence, it’s the same crystal ball gazing you’re doing. I repeat, Where is the evidence? You do know what evidence is right? The information you posted wouldn’t even fly in The People’s Court. You have offered nothing substantial that proves this is where software is headed and specifically this is what Adobe plans to do with software. Regardless, market forces will work in the end and if activation is truly a bad idea then it will be noted in the annual reports of software development companies such as Adobe.
I noticed someone here last week berating a beta tester who posted a
secret link. I thought it was you<
But yes, it was me. But that doesn’t mean I have access to a secret telephone number any more than you do. But this is what I would expect from a conspiracy theorist – several completely unrelated facts are linked together and given as ‘evidence’ that something is going on and they have the ‘proof’.
The guy stated that he talked to a MICROSOFT activation representative<
OK, so now you can say that you have talked with an ADOBE activation representative – and I can tell you that you have no need to have any fears over Photoshop activation. Now, that will have bound to have convinced you as to the veracity of what we have all been saying and I now fully expect you to go forth and evangelise to the whole world that nobody needs fear activation from Adobe.
See how daft that is??? See the link???? Get it??? —
This isn’t evidence, it’s the same crystal ball gazing you’re doing. I repeat, Where is the evidence?
Hey Stuart! Tell you what! I’ll have a word with Bill. Get him to put in writing that he forsees software being sold pay-as-you-go, with activation (removal of) as a central tool. Maybe if I took a diabetic kit he would use it and sign the declaration in blood. (Would only hurt a little).
Perhaps then you would believe it. But then again….perhaps not.
Once again; you didn’t read the links. If you did, you would notice that Microsoft is ALREADY pushing endless-payment licensing and are antagonising customers because of it. No crystal ball required.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Well, Herb, that would actually be evidence (unless he did it under duress so I guess the diabetic kit would be out) now wouldn’t it?
As for License 6.0, it has gone through a couple re-writes due to market forces not being all that happy with the terms of the original. However, you should look into who’s eligible for License 6.0 and you’ll see this is not as widespread as you might think. Not to mention that not everyone eligible has decided to sign on. As you noted you still use Office 97 and despite the inclusion of activation in Office XP you are still able to run Office 97 quite effectively. Odd no given your belief that activation will lead to forced upgrades?
The guy stated that he talked to a MICROSOFT activation representative. That was the person who gave the information.
Well now, in that case my mind has been changed. You know someone who knows someone who posted a claim on a website. And we all know that if it’s posted on a web page it must me true. </sarcoff>
I am not claiming that activation is good. But this attitude that’s it’s the beginning of the end of the world is so ludicrous that I just don’t understand it.
My order is in for the software. I’m voting with my wallet. I suggest you do the same.
Tell me, do you have cable tv? Satellite perhaps? Do you remember when tv was free? I do. All 5 channels. In fact, if I didn’t want cable or satellite I could still have those 5 channels for free. But the picture would suck and I’d be missing out on a lot of stuff. So I pay for it.
It’s called progress and it has a price. You can stick with the 5 channels. I’m moving ahead.
Those people lived hundreds of years ago in a completely different world (though it still had blue skies). Their comments speak to events which bear absolutely no correlation to Adobe’s activation scheme much less world events as they are unfolding today.
Then by that logic we should revise the Bill of Rights and the first (andfifth) amendment – times were different then. Surely the way they lived that long ago doesn’t apply today.
Carol,
I respect you and do not want to suggest even the slightest amount of disrespect with what I’m about to say, but frankly, I don’t believe you have any credibility whatsoever on the matter of activation.
You are not in a position to publicly oppose it. If you really thought Activation stunk (and I’m not saying you do, but just suppose), would you publicly denounce it? I’m not convinced that you would; and therefore, I don’t know that you could bring a credible argument to bear.
I’m sorry, please don’t take it personally, it isn’t meant to be disrepspectful. —- Ian says that if you don’t like the EULA, "tough". Fair enough I suppose, but the fact remains that Activation changes the spirit of the license from a user license to a machine license. Further it allows Adobe WAY deeper into how we work and how we use the product than ever before – there are those who will have to call Adobe and explain how they are using the product that required additional activation. The EULA never called for that before.
The EULA never said "uhm, you know, you have changed hard drives 8 times this year, that’s highly irregular, would you please explain why you have had to do this?"
The EULA never said "I’m sorry sir, your use is highly irregular, I’m afraid you’ll have to buy a new seat in order to continue using the product".
Activation is a functional transformation of the license. And the Media Player example is Step One.
How would Ian like it if he installed Photoshop, only to discover that he had agreed to remove all competing products from his machine before use, and non-compliance would result in deleting photoshop from the machine? After all, he agreed to the license.
Activation transfers control over the use of the software to Adobe, period.
Oh, if only you were all so vocal about the curtailment of your civil liberties since 9/11…………Strikes me that that would be a far more worthwhile cause to protest.
Why on earth not, I am not a paid employee of Adobe, I don’t have any gagging orders on me. If I see something in the program which I don’t like I will (and have) recommended other alternative products. I am a volunteer moderator, that is all. If I say something which Adobe doesn’t like, then tough, let them replace me.
What I don’t have a problem with is activation – Adobe has every right to protect their intellectual property rights, simply trusting people to stick to the agreement which they made when they accepted the EULA is not working. I would *love* it if somebody came up with a way of protecting my copyright with my images. —
Well at least I am happy now. Having heard from someone with first-hand experience of CS I am now positive there’s nothing in there that I would be willing to pay for, probably even without activation, so I guess I’ll just stick with my current version.
Might check out CS out of curiosity once the hooky copies hit teh net, which I am sure they will do with exactly the same regularity they apparently always have.
"Do you *know* why further activation was refused???? Might it have been because that person gave a copy to his son and daught and they gave a copy to two each of their friends etc, etc. After about 13 gifts this would mean aroud 16,000 copies and if just 1% tried to register that would have been 160 registrations with the same serial number. Any activation tracking software is bound to throw a wobbly after that."
We all seem to have forgotten the 7.01 update, that included serial numbers that were known to be floating around the web, and that legitimate users were required to phone Adobe for a new serial number. I don’t see that activation will solve this problem. Hopefully Adobe will not do that again, but then it looks like they’re merely changing horses at this point without any change to the outcome of crossing a stream (its a metaphor in case anyone has totally lost their sanity due to the excessive heat).
"Oh, if only you were all so vocal about the curtailment of your civil liberties since 9/11…………Strikes me that that would be a far more worthwhile cause to protest."
While I agree that protesting curtailment of civil liberties is a worthwhile endeavor, you live on the other side of the pond and have absolutely no idea how our political process works apparently. Nothing has gotten so far out of hand that it requires widespread protests in the streets so don’t expect it. Laws can be written but once they are enforced organizations like the ACLU are ready to attack their constituitional basis and the Justice Department knows this. Our system of government works quite well still, despite what you might have heard on the internet.
How would Ian like it if he installed Photoshop, only to discover that he had agreed to remove all competing products from his machine before use, and non-compliance would result in deleting photoshop from the machine? After all, he agreed to the license.
Sorry Tony, but this one doesn’t fly. You can’t inforce an illegal contract and at least in the U.S. this would be illegal.
Again the new license makes the software machine dependant instead of
User dependant.<
Q. Does it allow you you install it on a new computer which you have bought to replace the old one?? A. Yes
Q. Does it allow you to upgrade componentents in your computer so the machine is radically different from the one you started off on?? A. Yes
Q. Does it allow you to install the software on your works computer and the one which you have at home should you decide to bring some work home with you?? A. Yes
Q. Does it allow you to install it on your main computer and also on your laptop?? A. Yes
To me this means that it is still User Dependent within the terms of the EULA which I agreed to (and haven’t changed significantly since version 2.5)
If you had an axe to grind, it should have been against the EULA conditions when you bought your 1st copy of PS whether it was 2.5 or 7. But you probably thought, blow it, they won’t know if I use it on more than the stipulated number of machines. Now they will and you simply don’t like it. —
No. AFAIK, it was never free in the UK. My father bought our first TV in 1963. He paid a licence to fund the BBC. Commercial TV was funded from advertising. Forty years on, that remains the situation today.
Cable and satellite stations are available. Equipment is available for receiving it. But there is no group of manufacturers planning to plant chips in general equipment which can disable reception of free channels.
It’s called progress and it has a price. You can stick with the 5 channels. I’m moving ahead.
Bob
Interesting that you make this point. Why does it feel like you are moving from ‘It will never happen’ to ‘It is progress. It might not be a bad thing’?
Maybe it is progress. Maybe it would not be a bad thing from some people’s point of view. But I bought Photoshop on a fundamentally different basis. I had no reason to think that Adobe would not honour the original agreement made. I contributed to it’s current monopoly position. Now it is using that position to renege on the deal. I wish to continue with the original agreement, just as I’m happy with my TV. A deal is a deal in my book. I have no intention of EVER moving to monthly payment.
With respect; your view that it is progress is irrelevant to the argument. But it does reveal that you really DO know where we are headed.
They haven’t changed a thing. The EULA is virtually the same as Photoshop 3’s. It hasn’t changed at all for PS CS. The enforcement has.
Now, as far as liking things just the way they are. That’s fine. Stick with PS 7.0. It’s a fabulous program. It doesn’t stop working just because PS CS has been released.
To me this means that it is still User Dependent within the terms of
the EULA which I agreed to (and haven’t changed significantly since version 2.5)
They haven’t changed a thing. The EULA is virtually the same as Photoshop
3’s. It hasn’t changed at all for PS CS. The enforcement has.
It was previously possible to move the software from one machine to another, then another, and so on, an infinite number of times, and so long as you always uninstalled the old one first you would never be breaking your EULA, and you would never have to explain yourself to anyone at Adobe.
Now you will.
Is that, or is that not, a material change in how the license works?
Im not advocating piracy im advocating NOT using "Activation feature" . Its useless and cuases to many problems/ waste of time.
I don’t think it’s all for priacy *but* they are forcing owners to upgrade to newer version when they no longer support older version. IOW, in 2-3 years the $800 program would worth less than the free AOL sample (as the AOL sample people can use when Photoshop can’t be activated to use).
To continue your thought in post #465, does the EULA allow you to take Photoshop CS to ANY machine you like, as often as you like? Let’s not play games: let’s say for the sake of brevity, that you only install Photoshop CS on one machine, then, uninstall Photshop CS from that machine – you completely remove it. Can you bring it to another machine? Yes, you can.
According to the EULA, you are allowed to install two instances, provided they are not being used at the same time.
But what happens when you uninstall, completely, from the second machine, and want to reinstall? You have to get Adobe’s permission.
Let’s take it further. Does the EULA read that one cannot, go to a client site, install his or her licensed copy Photoshop CS on that machine, perform work on that machine, then uninstall it? Then, when you move to your next location, can you install Photoshop CS there, perform more work, then uninstall it?
Does the license follow the user or is it machine dependant?
A lot of folks keep saying that the license hasn’t changed – technically that is true. But functionally, what has changed is that the enforcement mechanism of the license, changes how you can use it.
That’s what makes it a machine license.
The EULA adequately covers the scenario whereby a user can install the App on any machine as long as it is uninstalled when "you’re finished", and have it on no more that two machines concurrently, provided it is not used concurrently. Quite clear on how you can use it. Activation changes that aspect of the agreement.
Tony, if indeed that’s the way you use the software then I’ll repeat my suggestion from some time ago. Call Adobe, talk to someone in a supervisory role and explain the situation to them.
It doesn’t matter whether it affects me, personally, or not. It is still a fundamental change in the EULA, since enforcement changes how you are allowed use it, while the language of the EULA does not change.
They haven’t changed a thing. The EULA is virtually the same as Photoshop 3’s. It hasn’t changed at all for PS CS. The enforcement has. Now, as far as liking things just the way they are. That’s fine. Stick with PS 7.0. It’s a fabulous program. It doesn’t stop working just because PS CS has been released.
Bob
At this rate, I think many Photoshop users are thinking of sticking with Photoshop 7, or at least when the Activate-Crack is available. Usually many talks about newer features months before the releasing date, but this time here (this newsgroup) most talks are about the "activate" and other newsgroups *not* a soul care to mention about Photoshop CS.
Now it is using that position to renege on the deal<
No its not, you can still continue to use your existing software according to the terms of the EULA which you agreed to – that has not changed one iota. It is only the upgrade whereby activation is present, Adobe has no plans (AFAIK) of introducing retrograde licensing on its previous products. —
That is a pretty unique situation you are describing. In over 10 years of using Photoshop, I’ve *never* had cause to install it on somebody else’s machine. For most situations the EULA has not changed – but you are dreaming up improbable/impossible situations to make your point.
However, even in that improbable situation which you have just devised, YES you can still do it as you have a 30 day grace period before you need to activate – so even in Dreamland it would be possible. —
I hate the idea of activation as much as the next guy. I also see it as a step down the slippery slope to <insert your nightmare scenario here>.
However, with all the complaints and legitimate concerns, I would like to know who HAS and who HAS NOT already ordered the upgrade. If you don’t like activation but still have ordered (or plan to do so) PS CS, then in my view you have justified and sanctioned what Adobe is doing.
I’ll bet there are very few people who have not already ordered it. Be honest!
Me? I really haven’t decided yet. If I do decide to order, it will not be for the Suite because I want to get the user manuals AND the ability to upgrade individually in the future. The activation part will be cracked before the month is out, I predict, so that will not be an issue for me.
So far as I know nothing has changed in PS CS since you posted this reply to my early query.
YrbkMgr 10/1/03 12:23pm </cgi-bin/webx?14/107>
Please read your reply – think about what you wrote and why you wrote it – the words are yours – the thoughts are yours! Now tell us why did you change your mind AGAIN?
I still think they should have used hardware locks. Can hardware locks be defeated… Yes. But it completely removes the risk of "casual copying" which is who they are really targeting as activation will have no impact on the bootleg CD market. With activation you are guaranteed the ability to install to 2 computers. That means a lot of people are going to be splitting the cost with friends (ethical or not).
Therefore if they were being completely honest about their reasons they would have used hardware locks. Unfortunately you can’t download a hardware lock so it probably wasn’t even considered. At any rate it is an OPTION that should be available for people that want an alternative.
It is nice that multi user licenses don’t need activation but it is not fair to people purchasing single user licenses. I believe they made a huge mistake in not forcing a server activation for their corporate license. We have a multi seat license for Autocad that is based on concurrent users that works very well.
I just think activation is based on flawed logic and that there is a good chance Adobe will loose sales over it. These are the kinds of decisions that can break large companies. It has happened before and it will happen again. I just hate the thought that I may need to find an alternative to Photoshop if this bad decision costs Adobe enough money that their development budgets get cut for future releases until they recover.
I hate the idea of activation as much as the next guy. I also see it as a step down the slippery slope to <insert your nightmare scenario here>.
However, with all the complaints and legitimate concerns, I would like to know who HAS and who HAS NOT already ordered the upgrade. If you don’t like activation but still have ordered (or plan to do so) PS CS, then in my view you have justified and sanctioned what Adobe is doing.
I’ll bet there are very few people who have not already ordered it. Be honest! Me? I really haven’t decided yet. If I do decide to order, it will not be for the Suite because I want to get the user manuals AND the ability to upgrade individually in the future. The activation part will be cracked before the month is out, I predict, so that will not be an issue for me.
Jake
I will wait to see if the is any activate-crack available then I will decide if I want to upgrade or not. Actually I am doing just fine with the current version, I don’t make money with Photoshop but just another hobby. I got started with Photoshop because I got a bundled deal with a scanner ($100 extra for FULL version).
2. I will have soon on my computer 2 Hard drives. One pimary and a secondary i will probably be installing (If I decide to buy it which at the moment im dead set agianst it.) in my second Slave Hard drive.
Will Activation be Saved to my old hard drive or my new one? What If I discontinue to use my old hard drive?
Who can answer all these questions?
Who here has read the actual license that comes with PS CS?
Where can I read this license. I could only find Ps 7.0 license.
I still think they should have used hardware locks. Can hardware locks be defeated… Yes. But it completely removes the risk of "casual copying" which is who they are really targeting as activation will have no impact on the bootleg CD market. With activation you are guaranteed the ability to install to 2 computers. That means a lot of people are going to be splitting the cost with friends (ethical or not).
Therefore if they were being completely honest about their reasons they would have used hardware locks. Unfortunately you can’t download a hardware lock so it probably wasn’t even considered. At any rate it is an OPTION that should be available for people that want an alternative.
It is nice that multi user licenses don’t need activation but it is not fair to people purchasing single user licenses. I believe they made a huge mistake in not forcing a server activation for their corporate license. We have a multi seat license for Autocad that is based on concurrent users that works very well.
I just think activation is based on flawed logic and that there is a good chance Adobe will loose sales over it. These are the kinds of decisions that can break large companies. It has happened before and it will happen again. I just hate the thought that I may need to find an alternative to Photoshop if this bad decision costs Adobe enough money that their development budgets get cut for future releases until they recover.
Yes, many colleges using cracked version cuz they can’t afford to let their students stealing the expensive "dildos" (oops I meant dongles).
No it cant be the same. It has to mention activation at some point and tell you your legal right as of why you cant use the software after you have paid for it without "Activating" it
You basically re-install the program, it will ask you to reactivate – so you will do so over the internet. It will be reactivated, or if you have activated over a certain number of times over a certain time span you will be asked to phone the Activation Centre and asked a few basic questions before they issue you with an activation code. —
You don’t give up do you? The license is a completely separate issue from activation. Activation is a part of the installation process. Get over it already.
Depending upon how much time has elapsed between your second activation and your third attempt you MAY have to contact Adobe by telephone to arrange an activation bump. Once this time period has elapsed I believe one or two further AUTOMATED activations will be available to users. The idea being that folk who change their computers regularly (e.g. every 6 months) don’t have to keep ringing Adobe.
2. I will have soon on my computer 2 Hard drives. One primary and a secondary i will probably be installing (If I decide to buy it which at the moment im dead set agianst it.) in my second Slave Hard drive.
If your going to replace the computer within 30 days of loading Photoshop CS then I wouldn’t waste the activation on the old system.
Will Activation be Saved to my old hard drive or my new one? What If I discontinue to use my old hard drive?
The actual location of Activation/Authorisation information is contained within your registry AND a second protected part of your HD. I can’t give an definite location for the protected information.
Who can answer all these questions?
Adobe!
Who here has read the actual license that comes with PS CS?
I have and I posted the relevant sections back around post 100. The only significant change is that "laptop" becomes "home"
If activation is a seperate issue then explain why I cant use the software without activating it AFTER I BOUGHT A LICENSE TO USE IT?
The license defines the "conditions of use". It does not stipulate that you activate. Activation is the means by which Adobe ensure that you don’t (without their prior permission) breach the conditions of use clause relating to the number computers on which the software can be used.
You can use PS CS without activating it for 30 days. If you do not activate within the 30 day grace period it will cease to be useable. Yes it will launch and you will see the activation dialog. If you wish to continue using after the 30 day period you will need to activate the software. If you don’t activate it will close.
It does change Bob. In order to Fully use the Licesed software I bought I first have to activate it. If I dont activatew My Licensed software it will quit working. In effect CANCELING my Licesed software.
If you don’t activate, you haven’t installed it properly. No different, IMO, than the fact that it requires Win2K or XP while PS 7.0 would run on Win 98.
So agian In effect Activation IS CANCELING my License to use the software.
NO! It is YOU who make the choice to continue or cease using the software. Use of Photoshop CS on that particular computer after 30 days REQUIRES that you activate the software.
But I have the LEGAL right to use the software becouse I licesned it (I payed money to use it). So in effect Adobe is stopping me from legaly using the software I licesned from them.
It’s right on the box. Along with the need for WinXP or Win2K. Are you going to protest that it won’t run on Win 3.1 or DOS? Does that violate the license? Again, it’s part of the installation process.
I guess I will call adobe legal department and get them to explain why I have to legaly activate the product I already legaly Licensed from them to use.
If I dont activatew My Licensed software it will quit working. In
effect CANCELING my Licesed software.<
You would be the one who cancels by not doing the activation – nobody has evaded your questions but you have asked the same/similar ones which have been answered that people are starting to assume that you aren’t capable or don’t bother to read the answers. —
Im not banging my head against a wall. Im trying to get an answer that wont be answered. if you dont have an answer to my questions please do skip them
THE SOFTWARE MAY INCLUDE PRODUCT ACTIVATION AND OTHER TECHNOLOGY DESIGNED TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED COPYING. THE ACTIVATION TECHNOLOGY MAY PREVENT YOUR USE OF THE SOFTWARE IF YOU DO NOT FOLLOW THE ACTIVATION PROCESS DESCRIBED IN THE SOFTWARE AND DOCUMENTATION. Visit <http://www.adobe.com> for information about product activation.
If activation is a seperate issue then explain why I cant use the software without activating it AFTER I BOUGHT A LICENSE TO USE IT?
The license defines the "conditions of use". It does not stipulate that you activate. Activation is the means by which Adobe ensure that you don’t (without their prior permission) breach the conditions of use clause relating to the number computers on which the software can be used.
You can use PS CS without activating it for 30 days. If you do not activate within the 30 day grace period it will cease to be useable. Yes it will launch and you will see the activation dialog. If you wish to continue using after the 30 day period you will need to activate the software. If you don’t activate it will close.
Will Adobe refund 100% within 30 days if user decides s/he doesn’t like the activating trouble?
If you don’t activate, you haven’t installed it properly. No different, IMO, than the fact that it requires Win2K or XP while PS 7.0 would run on Win 98.
Bob
WinXP has Backup feature to avoid many problem, does Photoshop CS has feature to stop WinXP from acting up? IOW, WinXP communicate directory to hardware, when Adobe and all other software companies will have to depend on Windows.
Do you see what I am seeing? Example I installed some softwares few days ago, and install Photoshop CS today. Tommorow I find out that some of the software I installed before Photoshop CS causing problem and I have to RESTORE WinXP the some day before those softwares installed, and Photoshop CS has no choice but get its butt cleaned with no choice. Does user have to activate Photoshop CS again because of WinXP?
But I have the LEGAL right to use the software becouse I licesned it<
What you are saying is the equivalent of saying that you bought the licence to use it, but you don’t want to install it on your system. How can you use it if *you* don’t install it – it’s actually exactly the same with the activation system, it is part of the installation, exactly the same as pressing a button to say ‘install’, except you have to push another button which says ‘Activate’. —
now just go and buy the damned upgrade and enjoy all the new features
I can’t. It means migrating to XP, and that’s not going to happen for a while yet. And most of the advanced PDF features in Photoshop CS require AA 6.0 – If I build in 6.0, all of my customers have to upgrade to XP; safer to wait a while longer. ‘Sides, fundamentally, I’m opposed to Activation. <grin>. I think it’s bad for Adobe, and bad for the market – not so much because it inhibits a user from doing "this or that", although that’s valid enough in my eyes, but moreso because it is a trend that impacts privacy and consumer rights.
You have addressed my "dreamland" scenario, but the fact remains that activation changes the license by controlling, to whatever extent, what machines it is installed on and when. Look, the bottom line is, there will be circumstances when a user must explain to a rep why they are making the changes they make.
Arguments like "it’s so rare, why concern yourself" and all the "dreamland" commentary doesn’t change the fact that now, you need someone else to approve your use, in certain circumstances. In fact, functionally, the software is licensed to the machine, not the user. The user is restricted, in effect, sometimes justifiably, and sometimes not, in how they may use the product.
—-
Ian,
Please, okay? You’re a smart man, I know you read the sarcasm in the post you pointed to. Your entire position is based on the fact that you don’t agree with, or perhaps see the issues that some have brought forth. You don’t have to agree, but I can’t imagine that your point is, really, "just shut up and do what they tell you".
Let’s not forget whom Adobe serves; and while there may be lack of broadbased agreement in the market, one would still do well to consider the ramifications of this move – just because they don’t or won’t affect you, doesn’t mean that the issues are not worthy of consideration and commentary.
"If everybody just thought the way I do, there wouldn’t be any problems".
THE SOFTWARE MAY INCLUDE PRODUCT ACTIVATION AND OTHER TECHNOLOGY DESIGNED TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED COPYING. THE ACTIVATION TECHNOLOGY MAY PREVENT YOUR USE OF THE SOFTWARE IF YOU DO NOT FOLLOW THE ACTIVATION PROCESS DESCRIBED IN THE SOFTWARE AND DOCUMENTATION. Visit <http://www.adobe.com> for information about product activation.
Meaning Adobe will continue supporting the software even after 3-5 years (or longer)?. I don’t mean they have to provide all the upgrades, but I mean will they still let you activate the 3-5 years older version (the one you paid $700 for it)?
Or they use this activate to FORCE user to upgrade to newer version every 1-2 years?
About 100 posts ago Ian Lyons provided a link to the PSCS activation procedure. I must admit that what I saw there went against the grain. I buy a license and then part of that license is if you dont activate in 30 days the product you bought will no longer function. OK I dont like that.
The thought that, if for example I had to reformat or replace my hard disk would mean that I would have to phone Adobe for their permission to use the software worries me. They might not give it. And then little ol’ me would be up against a massive international company. No contest I think. At that point they would have the power to effectively steal my money.
I therefore will not upgrade to PSCS, the price for me anyway is almost twice that in the USA and I would think about it seriously in anycase.
I am an honest guy, I paid a lot of money for photoshop and all my other Adobe products. I am not going to let any other person use them, why would I? They are my business tools and I have learn’t how to use them and make my living.
Adobe has made their marketing decision and (it is interesting that they did not bring in activation for corporate users) and I have made mine. Nobody is forced to buy anything.
The thought that, if for example I had to reformat or replace my hard
disk would mean that I would have to phone Adobe for their permission to use the software worries me<
Only if you plan on replacing that hard drive every couple of months Jeff. For most users, this would be a non-issue as they will simply reactivate via the internet as part of the re-installation of the software. —
I still think the point is ‘they might not give it’. They have my money up front and they are now the judge. Can’t get around that unfair basic point, however much you argue it will never happen.
I would like to point out that registering your software (not activate) at the Adobe site is a good idea, then they have your software purchases on record. I assume that they look at those records when deciding if you are ‘good’ or not for a new activation number or replacement software.
At least with the online registration process, it is voluntary and a good idea. As an example, I had purchased Illustrator 1, but could not longer find the software, but I was allowed an upgrade to Version 7 without any problem because I had registered my software and kept the bill with my address at that time.
I prefer ‘voluntary registration’ over ‘forced activation’ anytime.
All my stuff is registered. I think the phrase "they look at those records when [they] deciding if you are ‘good’ or not for a new activation number" says it as it is.
Another Idea:
Endless activation but they keep a check on it and if they are not happy contact you. Enough to put off crims but stops me worrying. Then I’d be happier.
I have noticed alot of peopl just have NO CLUE how activation works technically. I bet those people would change thier mind if they knew more about who makes it how it works and why it really doesnt stop piracy .
Oh yeah.
I didnt get this question answered.
If we are paying 600 for PS because of Piracy why hasnt the price gone down with the new shiny *Bling Bling* Anti piracy Activation Scheme?
"If we are paying 600 for PS because of Piracy why hasnt the price gone down with the new shiny *Bling Bling* Anti piracy Activation Scheme?"
The price hasn’t gone down because activation is costing Adobe more than they are "saving". My prediction is that they are going to make significantly less on this version than they did with the release of 7.0 even though 7.0 didn’t offer as many new features.
Me I have been looking forward to nested layer sets and text on a path for a while. Layer comps and the SWF export in Image Ready sound very promising. Unfortunately for Adobe I can live without nested sets and layer comps. I don’t need 16 bit editing and large file support. I have other means of putting text on a path and making SWF files.
Adobe is hitting on a lot of demographics with it’s improvements. They seem to have something for everyone, but are there enough features they can’t get elsewhere or don’t already have with another application that will do the same thing better.
The part that really gets to me is how much time money and resources went into implementing activation and you can be sure that without it we would have had a Photoshop upgrade months ago. Adobe will never know how good sales could have been if they had gotten to the market sooner without activation.
The part that really gets to me is how much time money and resources went into implementing activation and you can be sure that without it we would have had a Photoshop upgrade months ago. Adobe will never know how good sales could have been if they had gotten to the market sooner without activation.
I think that’s an excellent point. For me personally, I would have been working the numbers to see how I could get this upgrade. I need to move to XP (which I will have to sooner or later anyway), and need multiple seats; so without activation, I would have been obsessing over how I would swing the upgrade. As it is, as much as I would love some of the new features, when you add activation to the fray, "that dog don’t hunt".
I don’t think the rollout timing had anything to do with activation. Remember, they’ve been testing this in the Australian market for a long time. The real holdup (if there was one) was to get all the apps ready for a single suite.
For those who believe subscription software is going to simply take over the industry, read this article <http://www.thestreet.com/tech/ronnaabramson/10122922.html>. While subscription software may someday come to pass, it’s going to be on the customers terms and more to their benefit. If Microsoft can’t make software subscriptions work, very few will have the chance to either.
It is interesting, coming back and reading the current postings after being away for a while. Here are my current thoughts about activation.
1st: I am a photographer and I have my own web site where I display images to promote my abilities. I am personally tired and fed up of people who come to my site and take my images without asking or paying me for their use. Or more importantly brag about how easy it is to take them. I put a lot of time, effort and money into this process. Honesty has to start someplace and it has to start with you and me. Theft and greed is wrong, whether it is high places or in the home. It is wrong and we have to contribute our effort to stop it or more things like activation will become part of our life.
2nd: The statement by Adobe that they will honor the terms of their product licensing agreement even in the event that product is discontinued goes a long way to eliminating the concern I had about their Activation and makes it a lot more easy for me to consider upgrading to CS. (Did I miss this or is this a new add?)
3rd Even though I understand the motivation for activation, I am repulsed by their process. I cannot help but feel we are being dictated to, that Adobe is taking and not giving anything back in return and in the end I feel more the victim. Its not like they made a price concession because this is a more secure product and they will therefore increase sales because of activation. (As a matter of fact, I think there defense of fighting piracy is week give that the rate of piracy has been falling for 8 years.) Its not like we are meeting Adobe 50/50 on the playing field, they are dictating and we (the individual users) are kowtowing. We are the ones that cannot be trusted and it becomes just another frustration along with showing your drivers license when using a credit card, standing in line to have your bag checked as you leave a store or walking through an electronic detector and hoping the sales clerk deactivated the magnetic detector, video camera in the banks, taking off your shoes to get on an airplane .Another humiliation at the price of advanced technology.
4th. I think nagash2 hit the nail on the head and it was very interesting reading this exchange. I would guess that the 30 day money back policy is linked to the 30 day Activation period and that if a person chooses not to activate, they are implicitly saying that they do not want the software and therefore can receive their money back. I think it would be a completely different legal argument if this was not the case.
I think this is the beginning of a long battle between consumers and the arts industry and all of it is over a decreasing income stream. Take a DVD movie. If I buy a movie, it is for my use and I can watch it anytime I want. However, do I have the right to loan it to another so they can watch it? I think so (But I think the movie industry would have a problem with thislost revenue). Do I have the right to make a copy, possibly, if for my own enjoyment? Do I then have the right to loan or give a copy to another person? No, definitely lost revenue. How about if I rent a movie or watch one on TV/Cable, can I make a copy. Not even for my enjoyment because the terms of the deal have changed and I have only a limited use agreement and there is definitely lost revenue to the industry and artist. Now project out where Microsoft wants us to go with the PC the center of downloaded movies, music, etc. The only way this will happen is with the concept of a trusted PC, one that will not produce copies of the art medium.
5th: The revenue game of product updates. Because of activation I asked myself the relevant bottom line question. Will I be able to produce a materially better product out of CS than I currently get from PS7? The answer was no. Therefore, I am not going to upgrade, pure and simple. It is a tough economic environment out there and it is time for me to get serious about what I spend my money on. Activation caused me to rethink my freewheeling willingness to fork out money for every upgrade. The truth is that there are other vendors who provide either separate products or plug-ins that satisfy my needs and quite frankly I am satisfied with the product I get from my existing software. I dont need the increased hassle.
I took a different stand with Intuit. A person is required to keep the last 7 years of tax returns for audit purposes and, under an audit, the IRS can open up years further back than 7 years. The ability to install a software to support an audit is imperative and it was stupid for their industry to try to impose activation given the external demands of the product their software was supporting.
Last: Quite frankly I am shocked at the lack of good company imagery being projected by Adobe representatives in this thread. From managing technology people, I had determined that they are people with big egos and fragile personalities. The responses to some of the questions here validates my opinion and lessens my respect for Adobe. A couple of these people need to take a cold shower and think again about how they field these questions.
When I called they would not give me any info about activation except the marketing spiel from the webpage .they said that any other questions about the license/activation I would have to fax them to the Legal department(Currently not listed on the adobe site).
Nice of them huh.And they plan to keep long time adobe customers this way?
Both Drew McManus and Stephanie Schaefer have commented in this thread.
Well I did say it was a quick read. <g>
That’s appalling.
Come on Tony. That’s standard corporate policy everywhere. I’ve already suggested that you contact Adobe about your concerns two or three times. Have you taken me up on the offer?
"Tightly integrated licensing. SafeCasts secure licensing mechanism is completely integrated with your products, and wont be perceived by users as a separate, intrusive mechanism on their PCs."
You’re wrong. I’m not all for it. I’m simply giving Adobe the benefit of the doubt. You can be damn sure if this doesn’t work, I’ll be yelling and screaming louder than you can possibly imagine.
I think it’s quite clear than many of us here aren’t going to call Adobe to complain, we’re going to call Adobe to order a copy of Photoshop CS. Give it a rest already. Your voice has been heard and now it’s getting annoying.
Well, Nagash2, they got my $169. You can add me to the list of "I will – I did".
I’m halfway glad I did buy it but at the same time I’m halfway disgusted with myself for being such a vacillating weenie on the activiation issue.
Jake
P.S. Adobe did NOT get my money for the Creative Suite which I see as a ripoff due to the higher prices and the lack of user manuals. I guess that is a small victory for me.
You also didn’t get Version Que, Until I saw a demo, I thought of it as unnecessary. It’s really an excellent utility which will definitely come in handy.
and you can be sure that without it we would have had a Photoshop
upgrade months ago.<
Can you then explain to me why the Australian market has been happily activating their versions of PS quite happily for many months now – i.e. activation did’t affect the release date one iota.
I should imagine one of the reason for the dry run in Australia was not only to see how activation worked and affected users and Adobe’s capabilities of running an Activation Dept., it would also be to monitor sales and see if there was the disastrous turn down in trade that many here are gleefully predicting. The fact that Adobe has now seen fit to implement activation globally should really tell you something, yes???
I don’t think for one moment that all Australian users are more honest than their American counterparts – in fact, if anything they would be more prone to use pirated software due to the price of Photoshop in Oz (AU$ 1799 = $1,264.66 i.e twice the US price) – so what does that tell you. —
It’s a totally erroneous point Tony – especially when you look at the facts
Facts? What exactly ARE the facts. Just as in statistics, you can apply your own set of rules and call certain data "outliers", and then look at the facts you feel represent the populous…especially when you want the results to show certain trends, or if you feel they’re aberrations.
Let’s look at ALL the facts. Here’s one: I’m not upgrading, and Activation is a HUGE reason why. You can throw that data out if you like.
So I guess if they use that better not use spyware detection programs
you might inadvertently kill PS<
I use spy detection software on my system – and have been using Photoshop CS for several months without a single hitch – better not start (yet) another false rumour. —
And here I was thinking it was because it won’t run on Win98
What I posted earlier was in response to Photo Help’s comment. Were it not for Activation, I’d be moving numbers all over the page to try and get XP and thus Photoshop CS. As it is, with Activation, my upgrade, if it comes at all, will wait far longer than it would have without activation.
Stuart, I post to this thread because I care, I find the subject fascinating, and mostly because it makes me cool.
I called Adobe about the cdilla/Macrovision. The guy wouldnt not admit that thats what they use. Even though the Macrovision does state that adobe uses it in PS
I wonder if it becouse of the intuit problem. Nah Couldnt be it
On a more light hearted note – I think activation should be tied to reading the User Manual. On the Activation page there should be a set of randomly generated questions which are answered in the User Manual.
We wouldn’t have to resort to tactics such as RTF(lippin’)M half as often in these forums then :)) —
carol, ‘member a couple of days ago i asked about cs with free transform and zoom? i made a mistook. can you please check to see if you can change the layer opacity while in free transform mode? (zoom has always worked… sorry, my bad.)
On a more light hearted note – I think activation should be tied to reading the User Manual. On the Activation page there should be a set of randomly generated questions which are answered in the User Manual.
I remember some older software from about 15 years ago that did that very thing. Of course scanners and copying machines were a lot more expensive back then.
Having been used to having to activate (and reactivate) my copy of WinXP and OfficeXP for the last two or three years, I personally would have no issue with activating another product. I can’t afford PS CS right now (what with living in Australia, the high prices, and having to beat the dingos off as noted in earlier posts), so it will be awhile before I do so.
My acceptance of Adobe’s activation scheme is based upon my experiences with the Microsoft mechanisms. For WinXP, every time I’ve reformated my hard disk and done a clean re-install, I’ve had no problems with the activation, whether I’ve changed hardware or not. OfficeXP was the same.
Whether or not these schemes will eventually lead to subscription based software, well, even MS gave up on that. I bought a copy of OfficeXP Subscription at approximately one third of the full price, and giving me twelve months usage. I based the purchasing decision of the fact that this allowed me to spread the cost over multiple years, and if a nev version came out within the year, then the next subscription purchase would be for the new version. When the first twelve months were up, I got a notice from MS saying that too many customers didn’t understand the subscription model, so here, have a full version for free . So I don’t see this model taking off in a hurry.
So how is it we know the customers in Australia are all so happy about activation? Sales statistics generally don’t differentiate between happy and steamed-but-stuck.
Andrew is probably right. Although I would like the activation supporters to concede the point that activation is an insult to the integrity of honest freelance people. We are the small guys and they can try it out on us with no real effect on their income flow. I would like Adobe to introduce it to corporate users, their biggest customers. They won’t because it could hurt too much.
I would not feel so hard done by if Adobe had treated everybody equally and also waited until they could introduce it in the Mac as well.
Please, look around this forum and what exactly do you expect to find. There are people here who can’t even figure out how to turn on a computer and you want me to believe that one person with an installation issue means that this product is no good.
Sheesh, you’re really grabbing at straws on this one.
Are you actually naive enough to accept one installation problem as vindication? And, just how does this vindicate you. That person gave no system details whatsoever. How do you know it’s an Adobe issue?
They want to install thier Legal Bought licensed product (PS CS on one computer) and install the rest of the CS pakage on another. Whats wrong with that?
It’s one product with one serial number with one price. You can’t split it up. What’s so hard to understand about that?
Your argument about this is just proof of how little credibility you have in this argument. You’ve done zero research about the licensing or activation schemes and you’re making claims of a software apocolypse based on two install problems of people who probably didn’t even have enough harddrive space to install it.
I suspected that you couldn’t install different bits of the CS on different machines but I didn’t know, now I do. Adobe probably have made this clear somewhere? but I think quite a few users will fall into the trap, after they bought it.
Only time will tell how many activation woes will appear here in the next few weeks. I would have thought that activation online is automatic so what went wrong?
It’s one product with one serial number with one price. You can’t split it up. What’s so hard to understand about that?
Technically you are correct. Unfortunately if you read the portion of the EULA that you would be referring to you would need to buy a license for each processor your computer has. I am sure all the Mac users that need two processors to achieve what we can with one wouldn’t be very happy at all.
There is no reason you shouldn’t be able to install different components on different computers for load balancing when you are the only person that uses the computers.
And this is all that really matters in the end. If you have a "what if" scenario take it up with Adobe because you won’t get much help here.
"There is no reason you shouldn’t be able to install different components on different computers for load balancing when you are the only person that uses the computers."
The problem with this is there is no easy way to identify the user as owning these computers without tying activation to registration and processor IDs (a la the original Pentium III, or was it the Pentium II?). If you think people have problems with activation now, imagine what things would be like if they had to deal with this as well. In the end Adobe has done what they felt necessary to ensure casual copying of their applications is limited.
"Which in the end is what really matters to adobe. $$$ not us."
You’re right nagash2, that’s why there are no new features in PSCS. They just slapped on a new version name and are selling it to new and current users of PS because they just want your money. How could I have been so blind? Thanks for helping me see the light. </sarcasm>
Unfortunately if you read the portion of the EULA that you would be referring to you would need to buy a license for each processor your computer has.
Yup, so again I ask, What’s so hard to understand? If you want to split the apps up you buy individual apps.
I am sure all the Mac users that need two processors to achieve what we can with one wouldn’t be very happy at all.
The Mac users are under the same licensing restrictions as Windows users. They just have a different installation procedure that will make it much easier to use the software illegally.
FWIW, I do think it’s unfair that Windows users have to activate and Mac users don’t.
There is no reason you shouldn’t be able to install different components on different computers for load balancing when you are the only person that uses the computers.
Sure there is. You’re getting the suite a very large discount to buying the individual apps. The reason you get the discount is because you can’t split them up. Think of going to a restaurant for an all you can eat buffet. Under your reasoning, if there are four people shouldn’t they be able to just share one plate?
I was referring to multiple processors within a single computer. Under the current EULA you would need to have two licenses if you have two processors.
In other words if you have a computer with dual processors and follow the EULA you are required to have 2 seats of Photoshop. The letter of the EULA would apply in the same way it would with 2 computers (used by one person) each containing a single CPU.
The fact still remains that they were unable to install to two separate computers which IS allowed under section 2.4 of the EULA for a "work computer" and a "home computer".
Think of going to a restaurant for an all you can eat buffet. Under your reasoning, if there are four people shouldn’t they be able to just share one plate?
No Bob, I am one person wishing to get a salad on one plate and a steak on the another. It is still just one meal eaten by one person. Your analogy is flawed
We were talking about one person, who is the only user, splitting the apps between two local computers.
I never read the license agreement to mean that and I don’t for one minute think that it does. The "box" the computer is really made up of is often reffered to as the CPU as is just the processor.
No Bob, I am one person wishing to get a salad on one plate and a steak on the another.
I don’t like my salad on the same plate, either. <g>
Seriously though, this is still not flawed. Because some places offer ala carte or complete dinners. Take your pick, but you don’t get to share because those same restaurants can also have a sharing charge.
We were talking about one person, who is the only user, splitting the apps between two local computers.
Yes, we were. And that person is effectively trying to give the salad to one person and the steak to another.
Well, as predicted, only the small Windoze paying customer is going to suffer. The un-licensed community are already downloading their freshly hacked versions of CS.
Well, I had this whole big retort about activation and machine licensing, but after I thought about it, I had to come to a full 180 where the Creative Suite is concerned.
The fact is, this is the model that MS Office uses, so to some extent, it is a "user understanding" issue. Specifically, it is a case where one is unaware of the limitations of the license.
Adobe has the right, IMO, to create a license on a suite of products that helps protect their revenue, and they spell it out in section 4.3 of the license on how it can be used – there’s no ambiguity here; at least where the creative suite is concerned.
It isn’t fair that a user should be able to buy the Creative Suite, and then "give" AI to Joey and ID to Howard. I think the license fairly captures their intent and specifies how you can use the products (to some extent).
IMO, this has nothing to do with activation whatsoever except in as much as it enforces a pretty fair statement in their license, and there’s no ambiguity. The point is, the Creative Suite is discounted as a bundle. If you want freedoms with the individual components that are not allowed by the CS License, then you need to buy that freedom. It isn’t largely different than wanting to be able to install copies of In Design to 4 different machines concurrently – it’s against the license and they should have a mechanism to enforce that aspect of the license.
I don’t know if they do or not, but they SHOULD make it clear, when a customer buys the product.
Now for those of you who think that I’m doing a reversal here, I’m not. I clearly see the difference between the license terms in the creative suite v. the standalone application, in this case, photoshop. I don’t think Adobe has yet written a license for photoshop that accurately captures how ALL users work. By implementing Activation with the current Photoshop CS license, they enforce a "most" concept – how most users work. That legally binding document (the license), like many legal documents, has holes. Activation puts a burden on the users to justify their activities for those holes.
If you are concerned about activation read the NIGHTMARE on the creative suite forum.
As I’ve said in this thread and the Macromedia Activation thread in the lounge, synchronizing upgrades for multiple products is bad for the developer, and bad for the customer. There’s no way the developers can get all of those millions of lines of code, and thousands of pages of documentation, right all at the same time. There’s no way users can adapt to all new applications at the same time.
Very good points. I agree. I was just pointing out that the way it is written the limitation could easily apply to multi processor systems as well. BTW that is from the Photoshop EULA, I didn’t see one for the Creative Suite.
"Fwiw, from what I read in the CS Forum, the issue has to do with the installer, not activation."
True, I also didn’t see multiple computers mentioned in the thread.
Robert,
"And that person is effectively trying to give the salad to one person and the steak to another."
I hate to tell you this, but computers are not people
nagash2,
"now you have to pay adobe per Processor? WTF???"
No, the EULA hasn’t changed. However it could be interpreted that way.
I was just pointing out that the way it is written the limitation could easily apply to multi processor systems as well.
I understood what you were saying completely, and agree. My point was more to the issue of folks who get upset when they find out that they can’t split the product across machines. Personally, I think that’s a shame, but I don’t find any ambiguity in the EULA statement. To some extent, "Caveat Emptor".
My personal issue with activation is that it doesn’t fairly capture legitimate use by ALL users, rather, most users. There are ways around it, to be sure, but my opinion is that if you are going to "hard lock" customers, you’d better be right.
Back in 1988, I was a avid CompuServe member. That’s where I got all my tech support. Friends and colleagues would be amazed at the information I could come up with to solve problems. I encouraged them to use CIS with this statement:
Tech support is usually very poor. Any idiot can, and usually does, pick up a telephone. If you go to the CIS boards, you get more technically savvy people to help you because the process of BBS posting isn’t as common and thus, the "table stakes" for even having a presence as tech support on a BBS are raised – they have more technical ability by the nature of being there, if you know what I mean.
While the playing field has changed today, in as much as any idiot can now get an internet connection, I remain convinced that telephone support people, except in the rarest of circumstances, are… well… "less than capable". But what can one expect for $25-35K per year, if that, for tech support salaries, and a fraction of that for Customer Service.
With that basic concept in mind, in concert with the stories you hear about from user conversations with tech support, I’m not convinced that these folks will have the ability to separate the wheat from the chaff in regards to granting activation. That makes for an unfair situation, and no consumer recourse.
Finally, I’m not convinced that this "machine license" strategy will help Adobe or the market. But as many have pointed out, only time will tell.
No, it’s not just a rumour. Photoshop CS has been cracked. Just like Studio MX 2004 was cracked immediately. This gets rid of the activation and you can use it as you wish. All Adobe managed to do was to alienate their most loyal and competent users. Was it worth it? Not in a million years but that’s just my opinon.
I know nothing about ‘cracks’ and it seems that if the ‘crack’ upsets the shortcuts the next one won’t. I don’t like activation but I don’t see why Adobe has employed an activation software that can be disabled literally a few hours after the product is out. If you put us honest users through all this hassle please make sure that it cant be cracked. I want an even playing field. And also inroduce it to corporate users as well, and the Mac or give it up!
Ctrl is not disabled by default, a lot of shortcut commands depend on it. Some people are not experiencing difficulties with this, but as Carol pointed out, she is not using the ‘release’ version at this point.
The crack isn’t completely successful since it kills the control key shortcuts. Also note that even if it does successfully get cracked, it does stop those gutless, cowardly theives from registering under other people’s serial numbers, getting tech support, and otherwise costing legitimate users time and/or money.
Cracks also usually come with viruses and/or trojan horses, so people should really consider if their stealing the software is really going to be worth the trouble.
The Mac side of the activation product wasn’t ready in time. The playing field will get levelled.
Also note that even if it does successfully get cracked
It’s really not a matter of "if", rather, "when". Any technology is crackable.
As an aside, I don’t know of a legal requirement to activate; further I don’t think you *can* require users to activate, legally. There may be issues between those who get around activation and the third party that Adobe uses to implement activation (referring to issues raised with another Adobe product and that russian company), but I’m not sure Adobe can enforce activation legally. Thus, by-passing the activation mechanism is not a breach of the EULA. Using an unauthorized copy of photoshop certainly is though.
I don’t think you *can* require users to activate, legally.<
Why on earth not Tony – it is Adobe’s licence, they are entitled to put whatever restrictions they want in it – then it is up to you to either agree – or to walk away and use an alternative product.
Besides which, if it were illegal to rquire product activation, don’t you think folk would be queuing up in the courts taking Microsoft to task about product activation – after all, how long has XP been on the market now?? —
No Carol, that’s my point. Where does it say that you are required to activate? Requiring it as a condition of use is very different from saying it may not work if you don’t activate it.
it is up to you to either agree – or to walk away and use an alternative product.
Not so. There is no alternative. IMHO, Adobe has built a monopoly position using a user friendly licence model and, having achieved that position, is mis-using it to force an unfriendly model which users would NOT accept IF an alternative were available.
As with previous versions, the license agreement for Photoshop CS allows you to install the program on both your desktop machine and your laptop.
If you weren’t violating the license agreement before, then why would you feel insulted by Adobe making a fairly benign attempt to enforce it? Would you rather they started using a hardware dongle that has to be plugged in while using the program? Or would that also be too inconvenient for you to deal with?
Taking an insult where none is intended is simply not logical. You don’t feel that your neighbor is calling you a thief when they lock their front door at night, do you? Just because someone takes security precautions doesn’t mean they’re directed at you in particular.
If you want to make the argument that the license agreement should allow you to install the program on more than 2 machines, then make THAT argument.
I’m told you can save your registration-activation info to the HD, well
I’m sorry but that doesn’t help when you completely lose a Windows installation and have to wipe the HD as happens FREQUENTLY to most of us who live in the real world of Windows hell
Did it ever occur to you that maybe you should be making a backup onto CD-R or floppy? Seriously, if you really have to reformat your hard drive and reinstall everything 3 times a year, and YOU’RE NOT BACKING UP YOUR FILES regularily, then you’ve got real serious problems above and beyond any concerns about activation.
Maybe you ought to be focusing your energies on dealing with that issue, rather than ranting at Adobe’s perfectly reasonable attempt to make at least a small dent in the sales they lose to piracy.
Excuse me guys, for the semi-rant here, but this is how I feel, and I’m hoping some bigwig at Adobe is over here reading this because IMHO, they need to….
Just some idle comments because I’m genuinely disgusted over this and I have no intentions of upgrading and activating PS7 to CS. Microsoft just tried this with Windows XP, and it was a pain in the tush for ALL of us, not just the software bandits. (Who barely blinked…)
I reformat my drive at least 3X a year. I’m sorry, but I am NOT calling up Adobe to re-register everytime Windows goes south. Nor am I paying for both my laptop and my home computer to have Photoshop on. That’s just plain GREEDY, not to mention an insanely inconvenient thing for Adobe to ask. I’m told you can save your registration-activation info to the HD, well I’m sorry but that doesn’t help when you completely lose a Windows installation and have to wipe the HD as happens FREQUENTLY to most of us who live in the real world of Windows hell…
I will NOT jump through hoops just to install a piece of software no matter how much I like it. A serial number is sufficent, IMHO. That’s bad enough these days when you’re talking strings of numbers 8" long that you have to manually type in. Try being handicapped with arthritis and dyslexia and doing THAT all the time…That alone is enough to drive you CRAZY!
Wake up Adobe.
There are other options out there, and compared to Photoshop they are far less expensive. They may not be quite as good, but they do nip at your heels, and frankly, if this is how you’re going to treat your customer base as "guilty until proven worthy" well, I think it’s time I checked the competition out.
Oh, just a FYI, I’ve been using Photoshop since version 4, and Illustrator since 7….
There are probably 50,000-100,000 people who’ll choose to do the same this year, and the year after that, and so on, and all of a sudden that small percentile of folks who don’t like this new "activation" scheme isn’t going to seem so small. That’s a LOT of cash when you add us all up. I’m only the tip of the iceberg I am sure, but I surely don’t think I am alone in disliking this one. Most people will probably knuckle down, grin and bear it, like they did with Windows XP, but me, I’ve had my fill of being inconvenienced by software companies more concerned with imaginary profits than customer service. I’ve been on that phone to Microsoft one time too many this year, and I am NOT going there for Adobe too.
No offense, but most of those pirates won’t buy this application anyhow. This may stop them from using it, but it won’t bring you those people at customers. (I say, maybe because I sincerely doubt that. I believe they cracked Windows XP 5 seconds after it was released, and I have no doubt they’ll do the same here.) I think it’s a tad optimistic of you to think it will. They’ll just keep at it until they break it. They don’t want to buy. Most don’t have the money to buy. So they won’t.
In the meantime you’re still seriously inconveniencing those who DO buy your software. To me, it seems like Adobe now cares more about the "supposed" profits lost to pirates than it does about the folks who have stood loyally by your software buying up every upgrade.
I dunno, maybe it’s just me, but I find this whole thing a bit insulting, and I’m defintely put off by it. Just my 2 cents, and probably my last post because it’s likely I won’t be posting anymore since I’ll be one version behind and/or using someone else’s software and I’ll have no reason to…
How do you do for not having to activate windows? If you use 95/95/me, isn’t it the reason that you have to wipe your HD 3 times a year? why didn’t you consider upgrading to a stable OS?
There are other options out there, and compared to Photoshop they are far less expensive
I thought you said they were a monopoly… <g>
To me, it seems like Adobe now cares more about the "supposed" profits lost to pirates than it does about the folks who have stood loyally by your software buying up every upgrade.
That’s the sentiment. Well said.
Mike,
Would you rather they started using a hardware dongle that has to be plugged in while using the program? Or would that also be too inconvenient for you to deal with?
Yes. That WOULD be better. IMO. It’s not the inconvinience of activation, it’s the intrusion of it.
You don’t feel that your neighbor is calling you a thief when they lock their front door at night, do you?
I did not read your entire rant because what I did read makes no sense. First of all, you don’t speak for "all of us." I have had no problems at all with Microsoft activations.
If you really need to reinstall Windows every 3 months you have some serious system or workflow problems.
You can install the Creative Suite software on your desktop and laptop. This is where I stopped reading because you obviously have done no research at all on this topic.
If he’s running XP he has bigger problems than activation if he needs to reformat every 3 months.
My guess is he downloads and runs every exe and cute file someone sends him in a chat room or mail (no offense morrigan – lots of people do it, but it’s not the safest thing in the world and would explain the need to reformat – Not that there’s anything wrong with that!).
I just had to clean up my friends system last night because it was so filled with spyware and junk that it was messier than my garage (and that’s saying something!) Had it gone any longer it would’ve been almost unsalvagable.
The concern I have with activation is how I actually use two copies of PS. I have mine installed on two desktops at two locations, not a desktop and a laptop. So, I suppose I am in violation of the letter of the license, but not the spirit or intent of the license. I am the only user of these two computers and can only use one at a time because they are miles apart. I use a portable HD to move current work back and forth. While the laptop policy is clearly intended to allow us this kind of flexibility, there is lots of wiggle room for use not intended by the spirit of the license.
By bringing in activation software that could potentially enforce the letter of the license agreement, I might find myself (especially as an amateur photographer) facing a quite expensive situation that I don’t believe Adobe intended me to be in. I just received CS yesterday and have not installed or activated at my other office. We’ll see how it goes. I believe I’m justified for, at least, being a little upset about the possible expense and inconvenience.
I have a friend who’s machine I’ve had to reformat 3 times already. They never kept the antivirus definitions updated and have a son who’s a Kazaa freak.
Thankfully I finally talked them into broadband and keeping the kid away from Kazaa so all’s well there finally.
I have to agree with Robert here. If you are having to reinstall Windows XP so often you have something else wrong.
Let me lay some background here for you. I test software and hardware for an online publication. In doing this I install and test probably 30 to 40 programs a week on my Windows XP system. These programs run from freeware, shareware, beta, even alpha software and final release versions. I also remove them when done with them, those that I don’t want to continue to use that is.
Before Windows XP I was formatting and reinstalling Windows 98 probably 3 times a month. No matter what I did the thing just couldn’t handle that much installing and uninstalling of software. When Windows XP came out I was skeptical about it but tried it. I have been running a single install of Windows XP on my system for over 2 years. This is with installing and uninstalling all of these various programs each week. It has been the most stable OS I have ever used on my PC.
So, you have a problem someplace else. It isn’t Windows. That said I have also not had a single problem with activation on Windows XP. However, I will also say right now for the record that Activation technology in any form is a waste and doesn’t work.
Many people do fall victim to spyware, viruses, and children. For many, there’s a constant battle to keep the thing running at all–let alone trying to figure out activation, registrations and license agreements.
These users, who are truly not uncommon, will not want to put up with yet another unnecessary annoyance in their lives.
I hope that Adobe warns potential customers of mandatory activation in their advertising, sales e-mail, and on the product packaging. Before you click OK to purchase online, something should tell you that the software will write non-standard data to your hard drive, outside of the file system.
Even MS puts a warning on the upper-right corner of the back of the product boxes–and whenever I’ve show the MS warning label to a potential (typical) customer, they put the box down, and look for another choice. Unlike MS, Adobe does not have a monopoly, so typical customers will have other choices available.
online publication. In doing this I install and test probably 30 to 40 programs a week on my Windows XP system. These programs run from freeware, shareware, beta, even alpha software and final release versions. I also remove them when done with them, those that I don’t want to continue to
use
that is.
Before Windows XP I was formatting and reinstalling Windows 98 probably 3 times a month. No matter what I did the thing just couldn’t handle that
installing and uninstalling of software. When Windows XP came out I was skeptical about it but tried it. I have been running a single install of Windows XP on my system for over 2 years. This is with installing and uninstalling all of these various programs each week. It has been the most stable OS I have ever used on my PC.
But guess what, you don’t speak for everybody in the same situation like you. I too install and uninstall somewhere around 50 applications every week, all the kinds that you mentioned. It’s is absolutely not true that your Windows XP will still be in the same shape after 2 years, it’s just absolutely nonsense. I’m working long enough in the IT business to have all the experience to say this. I do agree that it’s very difficult to crash XP once you have the drivers right, but all that installing and unistalling doesn’t do a lot of good to the OS in the long run. Maybe for you your system is just a test system. For me it’s also the system I work on and some of these programs I use on a daily or weekly basis can show annoying glitches after all that installing an unistalling, not to mention strange behaviour of the OS itself. If you think that that beta and alpha software can’t bring Windows applications down or the OS itself, well then you’re either very shortsighted or you have no clue what you’re talking about. Did you ever ask yourself why network administrators for example tend to wait with updates and service packs? Are you willing to state here in public that no update, no program, or service pack will ever do damage to either the OS or other applications? The kind of Operating system you talk about doesn’t exist, it’s a myth. It’s like you saying that the system is perfect. I’m more than willing to give you a large list of programs that will mess up your system. It’s even documented on the web sites of the manufacturers. I do agree that it’s very hard to bring WinXp down and that you can go a very long way before things can be really messed up, but if you installed and uninstalled (I calculated) between 3,120 and 4,160 in 2 years and you’re still thinking that it runs as great as two years… sorry, you’re making a complete fool of yourself.
I can understand your frustration but there is not a lot you can do about it. You have 2 choices; deal with it or choose different software. But guess what… MS started to use activation, then Macromedia, now Adobe… and many will follow. Do you really think that they care about your rants? Look at Microsoft, that whole activation thing didn’t harm them at all, as a matter of fact, it did them more good than bad (facts that confirm this).
I too install and uninstall somewhere around 50 applications every week, all the kinds that you mentioned. It’s is absolutely not true that your Windows XP will still be in the same shape after 2 years, it’s just absolutely nonsense.
50 applications every week? What are you, the offical program tester for DOWNLOAD.COM?
If you’ve really been doing that kind of volume for installations, then it’s pretty likely that at least 90% to 95% of the programs involved are shareware/freeware/PD. And unfortunately, the general lack of any QA process means such programs are far more likely to wreak havok on a computer and leave scars that a simple uninstall process won’t heal. So I wouldn’t be at all surprised if you had to start fresh occasionally.
But the question remains: why aren’t you doing backups? Why are you forcing yourself to start from scratch every time? Why don’t you install Windows and your core applications, then do an image backup from which you can later restore?
And beyond that, why do you think that this sort of situation is something that anybody else should consider to be either typical or commonplace? Many users don’t install 50 programs over the life of their computer, let alone in one week.
Convicted predatory monopolists have more leverage than most people.
Recently, MS has lost close to a billion in sales. They’re blaming it on people not liking their corporate licensing schemes. And, of course, Symmantec has just been clobbered by their new activation failing.
or the OS itself, well then you’re either very shortsighted or you have no clue what you’re talking about.
i’d like to see you bring down xp with an application. can’t be done. xp is process isolated. unless it’s running as "system" not a user, it just ain’t gonna happen. note, NOT a driver. Just an app.
I have a friend who’s machine I’ve had to reformat 3 times already. They never kept the antivirus definitions updated and have a son who’s a Kazaa freak.
Try to do something about your spelling. It’s ‘whose’, not ‘who’s’
Well Wings, I never said it was. What I said was I haven’t had to format and reinstall. I am perfectly capable of performing the needed maintenance on my system to keep from having to do that. However, Windows XP has been the only OS that this has been possible with. Everything prior to that even with maintenance it would still quickly require a format and reinstall.
You can take this however you want. But, formatting as often as mention tells me either you don’t know how to operate and maintain your system or you have another problem besides the OS because you shouldn’t have to format that often. That is the simple fact of it.
Come on Tony, it’s not interesting because it’s blatantly one sided. It’s written by another "big brother" is coming fanatic.
Yes, of course. Where are the articles about how lives were improved and computers ran more smoothly, and costs went down, and support issues were reduced? And users were less concerned about being seduced and abandoned? And where is anybody mentioning the throngs of people who are petitioning software companies to add Machiavellian restrictions to products they purchase?
And where are all the people who have no problems whatsoever with their computers?
Unrelated. Unless you’re equating Activation with computers no longer being reliable.
People don’t go anywhere to extoll the virtues of anything. It’s simply the nature of the beast.
Most people who come here, like Adobe products, and think they work quite well. Compare, for instance, the percentage of random topics, to pointed rants between here and, say, Macromedia or Quark forums.
A few fan sites do exist. People do say nice things when they like them. Some build little shrines to things when they suit their needs–even products <http://www.gotfuturama.com> that are no longer produced. People really do care, and they extoll the virtues of things that make their lives better.
It IS interesting. It is another person with specific experience and opinion on the subject of a specific type of activation. I found it particularly interesting that C-Dilla is, to some extent "monitor-ware".
Bob, to some extent, you seem to dismiss everyone’s opinion or experience. You seem to suggest that "Well, that’s one person" or "Well, that doesn’t count". Indeed there have been articles posted in this thread that point to specific issues, yet you dismiss them as "naysayers".
I submit that you want objectivity, but are not yourself being objective about it – it seems that the only credible people are those who have no trouble with activation either technically or in principle. It’s kind of like saying "You’re a witch – and the proof of it is that you deny you’re a witch".
I know you love a good argument, but you cannot tell me that you have done research on activation, and it’s mechanisms and concluded that everyone is happy except for the "subversive" contingent.
[Edit]: Here’s something for your "Sky is falling"…
I think you know that I’m not dismissing you. But yes, I am dismissing many of these sites because there’s just nothing scientific about them.
Anyone can create a website. I’m just the type of person who needs something to back up a claim. Just sitting at a keyboard and typing that something is bad or on the opposites side of the spectrum, something is good, means nothing without some kind of proof.
How many people have come here with links to websites selling genuine Adobe software for $49.00? Just because it’s on the web doesn’t mean it’s legit.
Anyway, like I said, I’m not dismissing you or your concerns. I’m just enjoying a good debate. I’ve already said that if this does inconvenience me in anyway I’ll be here yelling and screaming louder than all of you.
And I’m a hockey fan, so I know how to yell and scream with the best of them.
I’m not dismissing you or your concerns. I’m just enjoying a good debate.
I know Bob. I’m not taking it personally. I was pretty oblivious to Activation until they announced that Photoshop CS would have it. Then I panicked a bit, cooled down, and began trying to find out what’s what.
The fact is, outside of Microsoft’s activation, I seem to be finding more and more issues. I take Microsoft out of the equation since an Operating System is different than application software. It may not be the most scientific thing to do, but I think that if Activation is the wave of the future, these companies better stop looking at it as the panacea to copy protection. And with that, they should be thinking very carefully about how they implement it.
Since activation is only now coming to the forefront of Software companies’ minds, it seems that they say "Look, Microsoft did it, so can we!"
One of the things that is on my mind, in particular is this:
Activation is a "developers tool" of sorts. Each company that licenses activation from a particular company like Macrovision, has the ability to customize it and tweak it for their particular desires. For example, Quark allows "this" and Macromedia allows "that". Most company’s are pretty myopic in thinking that their implementation, along with that of the OS is the only activation that users will have, and if there are conflicts with other Mfr’s activation implementation, then it’s not really their problem.
We’ve all seen installation routines that are poorly written; with that in mind, what happens when you fill up that "undocumented" sector on the hard drive?
Maybe, based on the way activation schemes work, there will be no issues. But as I read about it, I find, more and more, that in some way, shape, or form, something is being written to an "undocumented" sector of the hard drive.
Can different activation schemes co-exist? That is, is company 1’s activation scheme cognizant of company 2’s activation scheme? Is everyone using MacroVision? If not, should we blindly accept peaceful co-existance?
This aspect of it is more "chicken little" than anything, but I’ve never been one to "wait until it’s a problem" – call it a personality quirk.
To some extent, it’s like this: If you want to play hardball, okay, but get it right. There is little evidence to suggest that software companies are looking at activation as anything but a means to protect their revenues without "due process" on the long term ramifications of both EULA enforcement and total cost of ownership.
…I am dismissing many of these sites because there’s just nothing scientific about them… Anyone can create a website. I’m just the type of person who needs something to back up a claim.
There’s little formal science in anything to do with computer programming. Unfortunately. A little more scientific method would be a load of help–to both sides.
Activation did not hit its "inventor" on the head in some brilliant aha! moment. What part of it that could be considered scientific, is proprietary and secret–there is no peer review. Since there is no public disclosure, there is not way to debate, except by investigating what it appears they are doing, and projecting how it looks like it will affect us.
Of course, pro-Activation arguments are made only by the people who promote it, to those they want to use it. It is in the interests of purveyors of Activation tools to promote their use. They are not unbiased. They are champions for Activation; when it fails and the lawyers start making their pounds of flesh, Activation peddlers will quickly become champions for whatever they start selling next.
Off topic: Could somebody please chop-up the long link in post #647?
You can take this however you want. But, formatting as often as mention tells me either you don’t know how to operate and maintain your system or you have another problem besides the OS because you shouldn’t have to
format
that often. That is the simple fact of it.
Robert, if I talk about formatting a system for the second time, then I’m talking about restoring a clone disk, which only takes a few minutes. I agree that those users who reinstall the system over and over and go through the whole OS setup and reinstall every previous applications are nuts.
I also agree that one doesn’t have to format that often and it does take some good understanding that we both seem to have to keep a system running and I mean ‘running’. I mean, you can have a car that takes you from A to B, but that doesn’t say anything about the shape the car is in and the driver’s experiences on how the car handled.
The only question is; when does a user decide to format? Your reasoning can be totally different than someone else’s don’t you think or is everybody just the same like you?
I’ll give you an example; at work I only format systems (using a cloned image), when it takes me more time to figure out what the problem is, than restoring the system. It’s all about time. I can probably solve most of the problems, but how much time does that take? How do you think my boss would react if he discovers that I’m still trying to solve that same software problem, when it could have been fixed an hour earlier. Once I worked a few years for a company and my boss’s boss was…. a financial manager. Trust me, in those day I’ve learned how to solve problems in the most effective ($$$) way ha!
I would like to see you saying with a straight face that any updates, service packs and some 3000-4000 programs that you install/uninstall don’t do any harm.. Robert, I know better, I’ve just way too much experience, I’ve read and heard so much since I started in the IT in 1987, to know better. You’re just an home users, I can sense that. If you weren’t then you wouldn’t ignore the fact (which I repeat a gain) why network administrators wait before they install the latest updates and service packs. I know one who was stubborn… it took him over a week to fix the mess…
Let’s say that the person who started this thread, has at least has the knowledge to solve these problems. A lot of them can’t be solved in 5-10 min, simple as that. Let us say that this guy isn’t fixing a computer at work, but at home. Let’s say that he doesn’t want to sit for a long time in front of his computer to fix some problems, so he takes a boot floppy, grabs his cloned system on CD and starts the restore. Then he takes his dog for a walk and when he comes back his system is back to normal. (Don’t talk me about "system restore points", that’s just a half solution, for several reasons). Total time he was sitting behind the computer; probably 2-3 min.
You will probably agree with me, that this is a good solution to restore your system in fast way.
If a user installs WinXP AND it’s applications and during a period of 2 years he installs numerous updates, service packs, 3000-4000 alpha, beta, shareware and freeware programs and you say that this doesn’t do any harm to either the OS or applications and that this is just a matter of how experienced the user is… I’m sorry to say Robert, but then you’re just incredible stubborn to admit when you’re wrong.
I’ve taken a lot of my time to come up with good arguments, but I haven’t seen that many of you or the other guy who replied.
I can understand your frustration but there is not a lot you can do about it. You have 2 choices; deal with it or choose different software. But guess what… MS started to use activation, then Macromedia, now Adobe… and many will follow. Do you really think that they care about your rants?
I’m sure they’d be relieved considering the wild fluctuations in attitudes…
My attitude has remained unchanged. However, the temperature here, since this thread started, has cooled by 30-degrees.
…about this hotly debated topic.
From what I can tell, there is no debate. One side says there are potential problems or they just don’t want to be insulted or burdened by Activation, while the other side first said that "It’s too early, wait until it ships," and now says "Your necktie is cutting off circulation to your head."
I’m a bystander. I’ve stopped giving the Evil Empire their tithing, and I’m coasting along as well as possible, while waiting to see if Adobe will spread Activation to the one-button mousers.
Phew! Made it this far. Guys, try and keep your replies shorter, my right hand is aching. (From scrolling down, Honestly! LOL!)
Question? I run two machines networked at home in the same room. If I install CS on both, have I used up my full quota? If so what has to be done if I want to install CS over in the studio, (Different location) even though only I will be using all computers exclusively?
"Smith said the problem has not been easy to locate and asked the consumers to go to the company’s site and run the Symantec Automated Support Assistant to submit data on their particular PC. He also recommended that customers who encounter the problem not restart their computers."
And to the remark "Well it was Beta’d in Australia and it didn’t stop them from coming out with the product:
"We thoroughly tested the technology," Smith said. "We ran extensive tests worldwide. You had well over 250,000 customers complete activation, and we didn’t have any complaints about this."
And the Coupe de Gras:
"Smith said the company hasn’t determined how effective product activation has been in deterring piracy but said Symantec was studying the issue."
In a related article about MacroVision:
"As product activation becomes more common, software makers need to think about rewarding customers for putting up with it, said Drew McManus, director of worldwide antipiracy programs at Adobe Systems, which is doing limited testing of product activation."
Ive noticed that Adobe never will anwser questions about activation.
1. I asked if they were using Macrovision as their "Activation" provider. The Support specialist had no clue what I was talking about.
2. Now here are my questions for you all.
A. If I buy PS CS Can I be assured in writting that I can use this program indefinitely? So in 3 years from now I can install the PS CS again and use it with or without activation. (I doubt an Adobe employee/support person will answer this. (Bob please dont!))
B. If I upgrade to PS CS and then to PS CS2 will PS CS still require activation?
C.If there is a limit to activation what is it? Will I have to buy a new License ($600) to get the legaly licensed software runing again after so many activations or years?
Why was I given the run around when asking technical questions about activation? Why arent the support specialist given the right answers to all activation questions?
Why is Adobe being so secretive about who provides activation and how it really works? BTW its Macrovision who provides is.
Why arent we told specifically what activation does and how it does it? We only get minor information on this page (http://www.adobe.com/activation/main.html) which in my opinion only Generally speaks of how activation works (Not really how it works.)
In this part of the Activation FAQ Adobe states:
"How is Adobe educating customers about activation?
Q: How is Customer Care prepared to support users during the activation process?
A: The Adobe Customer Care team is fully prepared to address all customer concerns during the activation process. We believe that in most cases, customers will have a seamless experience and will not need to contact Adobe Customer Care. In unusual circumstances or with issues not anticipated in the Product Licensing Agreement, Customer Care can override the activation process. Adobe also provides for unforeseen circumstances (such as communication outages) to ensure that Customer Care can respond to customer calls or extend the activation period until full communications are restored."
This is not accurate in my opinion. When I called they had no clue what I was talking about.
Is there a special number for Support on activation?
They also state:
"Q: What is activation? A: Activation is a series of simple and quick steps users of Adobe software take upon installation in order to begin using the applications. A simple, anonymous process, activation helps prevent casual copying.
Activation is a more interactive representation of the licensing agreement that has always existed between Adobe and its valued customers. The activation process authenticates licensed users of "shrinkwrapped" products (for retail purchase) without hindering their ability to use the software the way they always have. Just as photographers use watermarks to protect their intellectual property, Adobe is using activation as a way to watermark Photoshop. "
Activation DOES hinder my use of this software.
I cannot run my Legaly licensed software UNLESS I activate it. So I am Buying software that is in DEMO mode for 30 days. After that if I really want to use it then I have to Activate it. Or return it for my money back (Bob Please dont!)
Will Adobe answer this questions. IMHO no they wont.
i’d like to see you bring down xp with an application. can’t be done. xp is process isolated. unless it’s running as "system" not a user, it just ain’t gonna happen. note, NOT a driver. Just an app.
That’s a load of crap! As a "programmer" who writes user applications, I manage to do a pretty good job of bringing down XP on a daily basis. XP is stable, but it’s not THAT stable.
I know about 7 or 8 API calls that will crash Windows XP real easily if you pass the wrong pointers. In fact, if you install the latest RPC patches to combat the blaster worm, you can crash XP real easy with recursive RPC calls using buffers on the stack instead of global memory.
Why are you asking those questions here, in a USER to USER forum.?
You won’t get answers here from Adobe, only from other Users…
Certainly there are a couple of Adobe employees that do drop by here from time to time (for which we are very grateful), but they do so as Users, in their own time, and NOT as Adobe employees. No-one from Adobe has, as part of their job specification, the requirement to to answer questions or even visit here.
So where can we get adobe to answer the questions we have. Since by phone in my experience is a loss of time. And support just doesnt seem to have a clue. Not surprised. It is support.
Activation became necessary because Photoshop 7 was very, very pirated. It accounts for the largest single chunk of bandwidth on many of the peer sharing networks, and in at least one case, the majority of the total bandwidth used. I’m under no illusions that activation will stop piracy – locks keep honest people honest – but I don’t think many of you realize how bad the problem has become.
Activation isn’t about violating privacy. Call up and activate by phone if you’re really worried about it. It isn’t about stopping you from upgrading or even replacing a machine – provisions are made for that. Ghosting back a partition shouldn’t be a problem either, as it still will be recognized by the same machine and should re-activate with no problem.
For those who were "slightly" violating the license before and are now having issue with activation enforcing that, the small volume licensing program is ready for you (http://www.adobe.com/store/general/openoptions/main.jhtml). If you want to provide feedback that you think there should be a shrinkwrapped 5 license version or some other family/small-shop style licensing outside of the volume licensing program, visit http://www.adobe.com/activation/main.html and use the feedback link.
You *know* I wish it weren’t necessary. But it is. We’ll continue to look for less intrusive mechanisms.
Sorry Scott Activation Will not put even put a dent in the piracy. I read theres already a crack for it (Not a good one) but there is a crack right now.
So will it prevent piracy? NO not one bit. So why use it?
thats my question to you.
My concern is that if this trend continues I will have to activate OVER 20 products. That is annoying and time consuming.
If My machine decided to die and all these products required Activation that would be a royal pain in the #%#.
I do have a question on activation with CS that hasn’t been asked before.
I’m asking becasue of a recent question (that some of you may have read) re: ps7 and c-dilla/macrovision. I answered that c-dilla was spyware and to remove it. And that macrovision was related to the MX suite. Was that wrong?
So here’s the question (nagash, please don’t try to answer)
Is it required for the PSCS or Creative Suite Standard Edition software to continuously have a connection to "phone home" (i.e. continual monitoring of the activation status – say at every startup or 1st use after a reboot) or once I activate can I safely block internet access for photoshop and or cs suite?
Activation became necessary because Photoshop 7 was very, very pirated.
That’s as logical as saying: "We had to close the road because too many people were speeding."
but I don’t think many of you realize how bad the problem has become.
You’re wrong. Some of us have actually been personally affected by software piracy. Directly or indirectly, we all have been. We know about it–it was featured on the 60-Minutes TV show last night, so people who don’t even use the Internet have heard about it.
Activation isn’t about violating privacy.
Correct. That’s a side-effect.
Call up and activate by phone if you’re really worried about it.
Which will of course be totally anonymous, without caller ID.
You *know* I wish it weren’t necessary. But it is.
There is no relationship between adding activation and stopping people from "sharing" files. It’s necessary, perhaps, if you want to make sure that businesses that are loyal customers, will buy enough copies for everyone–that’s the only way it’ll help sales.
We’ll continue to look for less intrusive mechanisms.
How about lobbying against file sharing services? How about closing down the Web sites that give away other people’s intellectual property? How about hunting down thieves?
No one likes to show actual prices for fear that it will scare people away. It is almost like businesses are trying to hide something or is it just good business not to show prices for products up front, on the first page, in the first paragraph, in bold, large type. It seems you have to spend loads of time just to try to find out how much something costs.
Well, I’m impressed that Scott commented. I understand where they’re coming from (and always have). But the point is, really, what are you doing? You’re implementing a mechanism that doesn’t solve the problem and incites the natives.
Anyone who wants to get around activation will, that’s a fact. So then… what’s the point?
Activation typically takes around 3 seconds – so adds a very small time penalty to the overall time for installation.
As has been said on *many* occasions here, you will *not* have to reactivate if it is a simple re-installation of the application. If you have suffered a major crash, the amount of time for re-activation is an infinitesimally small amount of time compared to the amount of time for re-installing the OS and all your applications.
say at every startup or 1st use after a reboot) or once I activate can
I safely block internet access for photoshop and or cs suite?<
During the beta, I had Adobe blocked with my firewall as it did try and connect each time it was launched. This was no way it affected how the program ran (flawlessly). It was only later that I discovered the reason why PS wanted to go online – it was to check if there were any new offerings or to connect to "Shutterfly" whereby I could upload finished images for printing. —
That’s as logical as saying: "We had to close the road because too many
people were speeding."
You do realize this is done quite a lot for neighborhood streets, right? And the analogy is wrong, anyway. It’s more like putting in rumble strips or permanent "Your Speed" signs.
How about lobbying against file sharing services?
That’s worked so well for the music industry, hasn’t it?
How about closing down the Web sites that give away other people’s
intellectual property?
Yeah, like we can really close down a site out of China. (Like we should even be able to!) Nope, not workable.
How about hunting down thieves?
Already doing that. It’s not enough.
And it’s not about trusting the honest person. It’s about reminding them, gently, of the licensing they agreed to. I’m sorry if some of you are really trying to avoid seeing it like that. The point is activation has already had a good effect – it’s thrown doubts about the solidity of the cracked version into the minds of the casual pirate, because it’s no longer the case that you can download exactly what was in the box, you have to rely on some Johnny-in-the-basement unethical hacker to patch in some shakey code. Is 3 seconds of your time really worth that?
So, no, I don’t believe "anyone" who wants to get around activation will. I believe the serious pirate and the high school kids will, because they have nothing to lose if parts of the program don’t work right or it crashes more often. But there is a large class of users who will decide that it’s simply not worth the risk.
I don’t think any of us can tell yet if this will be worth the trouble. I think Adobe has taken a much better tack on it than some of the companies that have gone before us. I know that there are going to be some users who don’t think you could ever get it "right" (short of removing activation) – there’s no pleasing some people, and that’s just what we have to live with.
But I’m not willing to put naked bits out there anymore. Bandwidth is too cheap, and the music industry p—– away the opportunity to educate young people about intellectual property, and too many countries (China) refuse to put any teeth into IP protection. In an unconnected world, you could get away with it – the spread of naked bits was slow enough that the losses were tolerable, and any sort of activation scheme was too painful. In a connected world, it’s the opposite.
You’re implementing a mechanism that doesn’t solve the problem and incites the natives.
That’s the whole point of the argument.
Activation typically takes around 3 seconds – so adds a very small time penalty to the overall time for installation.
That’s not the point.
It was only later that I discovered the reason why PS wanted to go online – it was to check if there were any new offerings or to connect to "Shutterfly" whereby I could upload finished images for printing.
Good info. Thank you Carol!
To prevent casual copying and hopefully to keep otherwise honest people honest.
But it doesn’t… as evidenced by the plethora of Crtl key doesn’t work posts within days after CS’s release. (Do I get a nickel for using that word in a sentence?!! <g>)
Scott, re #752. Mostly very well argued. Nice post. Thanks.
Well, to be fair, Scott does have a point, and I’m grateful that he’s taken the time to come to "The Argument Clinic" <grin>.
First of all, he’s right when he said:
I don’t think any of us can tell yet if this will be worth the trouble. I think Adobe has taken a much better tack on it than some of the companies that have gone before us.
But the thing is, about this "honesty" and "gentle reminding" business, smacks of what my College Algebra instructor used to say. "Please sit one seat apart from each other during this test. It’s not that I don’t trust you, I don’t trust your neighbor".
At the end of the day, the question remains: What are you doing? You are not solving a problem.
Now Scott, I’ve sat in as many of those meetings as you have, and I know good and well that the statement about "gently reminding honest people to stay honest" is something that our managing directors like – it has managerial brio that can be administered to the public in press releases and Larry King talk shows.
But the fact is, you are in our world – you know the real deal. You know better. Do you really think that Crack v.0.1 is the end? No, it’s not. Therefore, that "doubt" argument goes away.
However, when you said:
But I’m not willing to put naked bits out there anymore. Bandwidth is too cheap, and the music industry p—– away the opportunity to educate young people about intellectual property, and too many countries (China) refuse to put any teeth into IP protection.
I couldn’t agree more. That rings more truth than anything we’ve heard so far. In fact, I buy it. But the question remains…
What are you doing? You aren’t solving the problem.
There is the argument that says "Well, doing something is better than doing nothing". Then why not use decoder rings? That’s doing something too.
I hope you believe me when I say that I see what you’re doing and understand the rationale. Maybe it’s the only thing you *can* do. But even Drew McManus said that this is painful for users and companies should reward customers for putting up with it. That tells me that even Adobe admits there are and will be issues that this implementation creates, and in the end, you still don’t solve the problem.
You’d be better off with a dongle, or using something like IBM’s Embedded Security Subsystem chip. Costs less and works – the talent pool for cracking the chip is orders of magnitude smaller than the script kiddies who crack software.
You do realize this is done quite a lot for neighborhood streets, right?
While corporations look out for their stockholders long before their customers, the primary goal of government is to support the user.
It’s more like putting in rumble strips or permanent "Your Speed" signs.
Or more like disabling your car if you’re caught speeding.
How about lobbying against file sharing services?
That’s worked so well for the music industry, hasn’t it?
The music industry has problems that are unrelated to file sharing. Still, the problem has crept in over the last few years, and it’ll be an ugly process to correct–especially since neither side agrees on what the problem is. Take away the file sharing Web sites, and kids will do it at school–but at least the major source for new material will be gone.
I haven’t been on a high school campus for a very long time, but I presume everyone has folders with all the latest music and Adobe software. Maybe they’ll be future Adobe customers, I don’t know, but I do know that they won’t be stopped today by Activation.
Yeah, like we can really close down a site out of China. (Like we should even be able to!) Nope, not workable.
I’ve had piracy sites removed from search engines; it’s a start.
It is a war; know your enemy–and know who isn’t your enemy. The first thing I’d do is not allow software to work in some areas–especially don’t localize for them. Hire a programmer who can crash debuggers, disassemblers, RegMon and such; it’s not that tough. I’d recommend stronger measures, but not in a public forum. They won’t play by our rules; we must play by theirs.
And it’s not about trusting the honest person.
That’s apparently not an option.
It’s about reminding them, gently, of the licensing they agreed to.
A reminder is an optional string around your finger, not a mandatory shackle. Some people take exception with allowing others to others enforcing morality on them.
The point is activation has already had a good effect – it’s thrown doubts about the solidity of the cracked version into the minds of the casual pirate
And for the honest user, who is just now realizing that there are landmines in software that they purchased legally–things that can make their software not perform as earlier version did, as they used to expect from Adobe. Now, they have doubts… could I accidentally install the wrong utility, and all of a sudden Photoshop is going to eat my files? Is that a bug in the program, or is it the first sign of some time bomb, not correctly debugged by its authors, that could go off at any minute?
So, no, I don’t believe "anyone" who wants to get around activation will.
With twenty years experience in Assembly language programming, I’ve written anti-hack and protection code; I’m very comfortable jumping into the middle of an instruction and writing bogus jump addresses. I know how hard it is to follow every what-if scenario to keep the bad guys out without affecting the honest user. It’s a nightmare; there’s never 100-percent certainty.
I personally won’t try to defeat Activation. But I’ll help with CMYK support for GIMP before I’ll submit to it.
I might submit to an unlocking code, available only from Adobe, not retail, with a warning about what would happen if that code were found in the wild. I have no problem with registering.
But I’m not willing to put naked bits out there anymore.
Somebody else will strip them for you, whether you like it or not. That’s the world today.
In an unconnected world, you could get away with it – the spread of naked bits was slow enough that the losses were tolerable, and any sort of activation scheme was too painful. In a connected world, it’s the opposite.
The losses Adobe suffers from piracy are intangible; the company is profitable. The losses from unhappy loyal customers are not.
User groups in the beginning were there to share copies of VisiCalc (then 1-2-3), WordStar and dBaseII. The only thing that’s changed is the size and speed of the market. In that market MS Word was copy protected, and nobody used it; in 1986, they removed copy protection, and they sold pretty well. Yes, they restored copy protection; they can get away with it–they are a predatory monopoly. Adobe is not a monopoly.
I need no help staying honest, thank you very much. I’ve taken that as
a hint that it’s time to look at other options.<
Does that mean you will never be friends with anybody who has a lock on their door, or do business with anybody who keeps their takings in a safe in their office – so you will only ever do business with a company that leaves all their cash lying about all over the counter??? —
Companies like Adobe don’t listen to customer any longer. To affect any kind of real change, vote with your dollar. Simply don’t upgrade to the new version.
If a signigicant number of consumers decide NOT to upgrade, it’s a significant loss of revenue for Adobe and perhaps they’ll finally "get it".
Pirates will always pirate software no matter what. Adding activation requirements to their products doesn’t prevent piracy, it treats honest people like criminals.
By adding the activation feature, Adobe has come right out and said "We think ALL of you are criminals and we’re going to treat you as such".
No one likes to show actual prices for fear that it will scare people away. It is almost like businesses are trying to hide something or is it just good business not to show prices for products up front, on the first page, in the first paragraph, in bold, large type. It seems you have to spend loads of time just to try to find out how much something costs.
Scott you are wrong. The Cracks will get better and the Pirating will continue.
Now Business 101.
Keeping current customers is cheaper than getting new ones.
Ive been a loyal Adobe customer for many years. Ive gotten every PS upgrade as soon as it came out.But now I fell insulted and I really dont want to do any more business with Adobe if they dont trust me.
Its like going to the bank and getting a gun to your head while waiting to make deposit (Just in case im not honest). Bank is just looking out for thier cash.
To prevent casual copying and hopefully to keep otherwise honest people honest.
But it doesn’t… as evidenced by the plethora of Crtl key doesn’t work posts within days after CS’s release. (Do I get a nickel for using that word in a sentence?!! <g>)
Then they were honest people, were they? You’re making the assumption that they accually bought the program and disabled the activation. I’d make the assumption that they didn’t buy it at all.
Here is another interesting post about Symantecs activation problems . Apparently they dont know what the problem is or how to fix it I bet this has some people worried!!
Does that mean you will never be friends with anybody who has a lock on their door, or do business with anybody who keeps their takings in a safe in their office.
Well, they are doing things TO their own property (notice I said TO, not WITH, there is a difference). Activation is about like rape. It’s MY computer that they are messing with TO ACHIEVE their own satisfaction.
Does that mean you will never be friends with anybody who has a lock on their door, or do business with anybody who keeps their takings in a safe in their office…
I’m not stupid; I’m prudent. I keep master CDs in a locked fire safe.
Yes, I lock the door, because I may want to vacuum without pants on. I know that locking the door doesn’t inconvenience my friends–they have keys. Alas, nothing stops dedicated thieves.
I liked Kathleen Turner in "Peggy Sue Got Married," I wonder what happened.
First, your analogies are WAY off-base. I’d suggest you reconsider them.
Second, one could make the argument that installing ANY software allows one the potential for "messing around in an unknown way with their machine". If you’re that paranoid I’d suggest finding a job that doesn’t require the use of computers. Trash collector and Park Ranger come to mind, take our pick.
No, I was referring to the ludicrous notion Jerry presented in #764, and I quote, "Activation is about like rape."
Really?
It’s MY computer that they are messing with TO ACHIEVE their own satisfaction.
Seems to me that from my computer’s point of view, this is getting awfully close by definition. Maybe the "casting couch" is a better example. Having spent over 30 years building and working with some of the fastest main frames ever designed, I’m not paranoid, just a believer in Murpey’s 14th law. "The unexpected WILL happen".
I’m beginning to see a trend here. Many designers on the forum see no problem with activation. It’s the geeks who’ve likely dropped by from /. who are stirring up trouble. The problem is designers see the benefits Photoshop CS provides their workflow and the programming geeks who dabble with PS don’t. Activation then becomes a burden for them but the greater number of users being creative types see activation as a necessary evil and since we make enough money on a single project to offset the cost of a single license of PS CS (speaking as a freelance designer) it’s not a big deal.
If you have no problem with registering, then what’s your issue with activation? That seems very backwards.
Losses from piracy are very tangible. We end up with smaller development teams and can do fewer features.
I haven’t heard one cogent argument about why activation is "bad". I’ve read the pages along the links; fanatical, but not terribly coherent or reasoned. Everyone says "activation is useless, it’s cracked instantly, why do it?" but that hasn’t yet been the case. Sure, it will be eventually, but by then it’s already served it’s purpose – it’s introduced doubt into the minds of those who previously assumed just downloading the warez was a way of getting something for nothing.
And if you’re willing to submit to an unlock code, how is that different from activation? It’s not, as far as I can tell.
I really do think activation is here to stay. Some companies have messed up and have had to step back, but I think that’s more for poor implementation than a fundamental flaw with the idea. It’s not copy protection, it doesn’t get node-locked, and doesn’t interfere with backups. Yeah, I’ve been through all that stuff too (my favorite was always half-bad sectors with a time-to-error check – yuck!), which is really why all these objections to activation surprise me. I know what’s going on and it simply isn’t that complicated.
So, this thread has really seem to run it’s course. There seem to be a few people who are determined to avoid activation for whatever reason. I hate to lose them as customers, but like I said, even if the bits do get stripped to naked quickly, I won’t put naked bits out there anymore – it makes no sense to make the pirates job easier when, in my opinion, the activation is so easy and innocuous as to be unobjectionable by reasonable people. As long as the bits the pirates put up have to be different than what’s on the CD, it introduces enough doubts, and I suspect that alone will make activation worth it (we’ll see). I’m much more concerned for those who were absentmindedly violating the licensing and are now being caught and having a reasonable license and price structure for them.
I guess us geek types just know more about how the computer actually works and understand why activation is bad.
I guess well see in 2-3 years when you have to activate every single peice of software out there. When your computer break or crashes because of it us geek types will be there to fix it.
Sorry nagash, I can’t stand the smell. I know plenty about computers having built a few systems of my own, being a computer systems op in the Air Force and working with them on a daily basis. Just because I’m a creative type now doesn’t mean I don’t know how to maintain and fix my systems. Don’t need your type, don’t want your type. I’ll just activate my software and be working on new projects in no time
Please don’t misunderstand me. I have no problem with protecting a software program from pirate use. My problem is in how it is being implemented. To me, messing around in my computer is not nice/good. With most "normal" programs, I can uninstall them and use Norton to get rid of the remnants. Can’t do that with the "activation", that is one reason why I never install time limited "trial" software either.
"penetration without permission"? Hard to call that passive consent. Anyone that has ever had their home burgled will not find the analogy very far from their feelings. I remember how I felt (even as a male).
Activation PREVENTS me from using the software.It prevents me from uninstalling it and reinstalling it whenever I see fit.
Why the hell do I have to call Adobe to tell them I have to reactivate PS because I change my hard drive?
Who the hell are them to tell me how to use my computer?
Imagine if I use lets say 10 different software packages.And all those use activation.
I would have to call all those companies to explain that Hey I change my Hard drive. Can you let me use your software again?
What if they decide (Which Will happen) that you can’t, you have done it to many times and you have to pay a full license. I read some company is already doing this.
Screw that. But hey Designer people (Stuart)can spend that money if they want. I have better things to do than that.
Let’s get real here. If Adobe want to use activation. So What? You don’t want activation. So What? This may or may not be Adobes’ way of dealing with a problem they may or may not have.
As Stuart says, real designers get on with what they have ‘coz they realize they have a workflow to contend with and they see new features as a way of reducing the workflow.
If Dinosaurs saw any problem and adjusted to the situation, they would still be around. They might not like activation but over time, they realise if they don’t adapt! Die!
Obviously i’m using an analogy but it fits all, go with it or fall behind. I had posted to Tony about win98 (Not draging him into the argumaent as his circumstances are £poundage) but why not go ahead with implementation and at a later date deal with things as they arise.
Times too short to worry about crap like activation. I neither love or loathe it, it’s life and I like as much of this precious comodity as i can get.
Anyway, where do you get the time to post so much? Very busy aren’t we?
It is quite simple. I have never ‘even absentmindedly’ broken the license. But one day, it may happen to me, that I will have to ask Adobe to use the software. They might say no. And then I will know that Adobe has stolen my cash. Adobe are the judge and jury. If the system breaks down it does so in Adobe’s favour.
That is what it is all about Scott. It’s a basic unfairness.
To me like Ive said before is like going to the bank and having the guard put a gun to your head just in case you are thinking of robbing the bank. And hat even doent start to explain what activation is.
If mark and stuart dont mind that hey more power to them.
I’m beginning to see a trend here. Many designers on the forum see no problem with activation. It’s the geeks who’ve likely dropped by from /. who are stirring up trouble.
I wrote a response, point by point, thinking how silly each statement was. I realized, though, that my rebuttal might add credence to just about the silliest post in this whole thread–he even squashed his own hypothesis in #774. He’s not even trying anymore. Please don’t answer this post; it’d be silly, anyway.
With most "normal" programs, I can uninstall them and use Norton to get rid of the remnants.
So you have a problem with a two second activation but no probem with installing Norton? With the exception of anti-virus that software is absolute poison.
Well, Scott makes a terribly convincing argument. The most notable of which is, basically, "I’m not willing to put naked work out there". I abhor activation, but I buy the argument. Games like The Sims have been doing this for some time, and the public buys the argument of protecting IP – even though The Sims uses an easily crackable technology, it’s more obscure for the target market.
However…
I haven’t heard one cogent argument about why activation is "bad".
Fundamentally, my issue surrounds this single issue, which has been brought up by others:
At the end of the day, sometimes, some users will have to get Adobe’s permission to use the product.
To say that this concept isn’t cogent is simply, well, not accurate.
Some people say "what’re ya worried about? If you’re using the product according to the terms of the license, you should have no problems". Operative word = "should".
You put activation in, and then when the rules logic is unable to make a decision, it drives the user to a customer service rep. Therein is the potential for problems. Once your customer service rep says that the user must buy another seat, there is no recourse for the user.
Every company, I don’t care who you are, are going to say "Our customer service people are well trained." Hello? McFly… are you listening to yourself? You cannot tell me that a 25K/year hourly customer service rep is going to be able to ferret out apple butter from BS when they can’t even answer standard questions correctly with 100% accuracy.
The argument that "it shouldn’t happen much" is shameful. To say "It will not happen at all" is naïve.
The EULA is a legal document that is broad in scope. My attorney and your attorney can probably say, with a reasonable amount of certainty, what means what, when it comes to conditions that are not explicitly stated in the EULA – but your customer service people cannot. My attorney has told me time and time again, that if you want your document to be as "iron clad" as possible, spell out every condition. Adobe’s EULA does not do this, thus there are areas left to interpretation and legal opinion.
The fact that, in some conditions, activation drives the legal decision, based on interpretation, to grant a user the rights to continue to use a license that they have paid to use, to a customer service rep, IS the problem with activation.
I began reading this thread with amusement, then it turned to boredom, and now its back to amusement again. I have installed and activated the standard suite on my workstation and my laptop. The operation was flawless, no problems what so ever. I have also installed and activated Photoshop CS on a second workstation. Again, no hassle, no problem. I too was concerned about problems installing and activating, but I am very pleased with the lack of hassle actually involved. I just ordered two more seats of Photoshop CS from Adobe today. If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn’t be concerned.
Sure there is, it’s called small claims court. If you are in the right then using this court will likely get your license reactivated or another full license of the product since it would cost Adobe more to send their representative then it would to give you a new license.
Scott Byer – 12:10pm Nov 4, 2003 Pacific (#772 of 790)
Losses from piracy are very tangible. We end up with smaller development teams and can do fewer features.
Scott,
Thanks for being one of the few Adobe spokepersons to treat your customers with basic respect.
Concerning the point above; Adobe publish profits of some meaningless number of hundreds of millions of dollars per quarter. The current size of your development team is being constrained by your management, not by your customers.
Once your customer service rep says that the user must buy another
seat, there is no recourse for the user<
Where have you seen this written down in the EULA or the FAQ (or anywhere on the Adobe site). If you have a valid reason why you think the person on the activation desk is not giving you a fair crack of the whip, then escalate it to the next level of management. —
If I can in truth remove ALL activation code if the software is uninstalled, then it is at least border-line acceptable. And by that I mean every bit or byte that the installing program and activation placed anywhere on my hard drive.
I have never had any problem with the Norton utilities. I do miss their old disk editor though.
In that case you take his or her name down and the exact words which he/she said to you – you then write to Adobe with your complaint stating the valid reasons why they should activate saying that if you do not here back from them by return, you will go to the Small Claims Arbitration Court and sue for damages as well as the return of your activation code.
Provided you are within the terms and conditions of the EULA, you would win the case and make enough money to retire on
However, in all honesty, I suspect that unless there were clear signs that you had breached the EULA, I would think that the Activation team have been instructed to deal fairly co-operatively with people. —
What Carol said, except for the retiring part. Unfortunately you can’t typically get more than $5000 in Small Claims Court but the upside is lawyers aren’t typically allowed in this court (you represent yourself – check what your state allows/disallows) and it’s enough of a bother for corporations to simply settle instead.
But when we started all of this, all we wanted to do was make pictures. It seems like priorities aren’t exactly what they taught in either art or geek school, and certainly not what we expected when we signed-on.
Funny r_harvey, one can still "make pictures" with Photoshop CS. Hmmm…perhaps they have the special "make pictures edition". Let me ask…nope, nothing special. It seems you just need to click OK to activate the application and you can "make pictures" all day long. I guess this makes you wrong about yet one more thing here, huh?
Good points. Just out of curiosity though, to whom would one write? How do you know that a secretary doesn’t screen the notes and go "ah, nuther ‘nut case’" and file it in the circular file?
Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t an argument for or against activation, rather, something I’ve wondered about seperately.
Well, some are going to think I’ve sold out. I haven’t, but my post in the Creative Suite forum (below) summarizes why I may be re-thinking my position on activation.
Focus on the message, not the messenger. Examine the words for their merit; then again, for the writer’s motivation, without vacillating with each well-phrased argument.
Some posters are doing their job, defending oracular decisions that were made in isolated, donut-filled rooms. The priority is stock price–they are stockholders.
I like the term "naked bits," it succinctly expresses the tragic vulnerability. I, very seriously, would have no problem with hiring bounty hunters. Still, the stopgap effort of Deactivation, to keep honest people honest, is insulting, alienating, misguided, ineffectual, and lazy. There are better ways.
One reason Photoshop is a high-percentage of bandwidth for file sharing sites is that it’s quite large–an awful lot of smaller applications are being downloaded. Copy protection hasn’t affected other downloads. Windows XP is not a more popular download than Photoshop because it is already installed on 95% of computers–but licensed copies are frequently replaced with cracks.
No, I hear ya harv. There are two issues: activation as a mechanism to do something good, and how activation affects me personally.
The "me personally" part is what that link was all about. I’m not so easily swayed by marketing hype – hell I’ve helped create some of what you see today (which is why I don’t believe there are large organizations that can push a vision down to the customer service level). But the real point is, for me personally, I have found a way to live with it.
From the standpoint of "principle", activation is about as effective as pi$$ing on a spark plug.
But know what? I ask myself this question (and have asked it since day one): What if, just supposing, they can execute this thing well? There certainly seems to be plenty of movitation for them to do so.
What did we get from Redmond? Wank off. What happened at Intuit – too bad (although their faux pas was open for the entire public to see including wall street).
What are we getting from Adobe? It certainly isn’t the cold shoulder.
So let me continue the point… what IF they did get it right by implementing a benign mechanism that did not impede legitimate uses of the product, while protecting their intellectual property? Would we care then?
If the answer is "no", then I say that we have seen the appropriate posturing, and very little "wank off" (none of that actually). I have to believe that if they can execute, then there shouldn’t be an objection. My objections have, at their root, been about execution.
If the answer is "yes, we still care", then it becomes more of a discussion of politics and religion. It’s about what’s right and what’s not. IMO, Adobe has already made that decision.
Does activation screw up my workflow? At first I thought so, but it doesn’t appear that it will. If I can activate and DEactivate without getting Adobe’s blessing, then I have only to modify my workflow.
Does activation change the EULA? Without a Deactivtion scheme, it changes the EULA to a machine license, which is not what we pay for. But if there IS a deactivation mechanism, then the EULA is preserved.
Now what happened at symantec is laughable. Their activation screws up, then they ask users to log on to a web site that analyzes their machines so they can find the problem – there’s someone who’s had a bit too much coffee (with Jack Daniels in it). But what was the issue? Execution.
So at the end of the day, I’m coming to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe, they’ll get it right. But know what? If they don’t get it right, they’ll pull it while they continue to search for the holy grail.
As I said, you ask for an immediate response and failing that you take it to the Small Claims Court – but you are really painting some silly situations here, I don’t believe for one minute that it would have gone anywhere near this far.
These situations are getting about as far fetched as saying what would happen if Bin Laden wiped out the whole of Adobe – how would I get my activation.
At some point in time you will have to drop the paranoia and start to have a little more trust. Honestly, they are not all out there to get you —
BTW can Adobe in written legal form guarantee me that they will provide a way to remove activation if they discontinue PC CS or any other product that has activation?
I just upgraded to PSCS (standalone. I couldn’t justify the cost of the suite, might still get Ill though.). Yea for me! Should take a week to 10 days (amazon free shipping) to get to me! Whoopie!
MS will announce on Wednesday that it will offer two $250,000 bounties for information that leads to the arrest of the people who released the MSBlast worm and the SoBig virus…
" Panel discussions on the future of software pricing, on-demand computing, utility computing and software as a service with participating executives from Sun, Salesforce.com, and other leading companies "
To download the full conference brochure, visit www.softsummit.com/ssbroch.pdf.
Notice this part: on-demand computing, utility computing and software as a service
I can’t believe this thread is still going. I wish it would just die and go away. It seems like the only person left on it who is still emotional (and perhaps a little paranoid) is nagash2. Can we just let this die. If you have activation so much, buy some other product and move along.
wrote in message
Hey Carol Read on some of the Software trends on these corporation you
The loudest argument, and truly the only one that matters, is how good results look for the next quarter. We’ve repeated the arguments time and again; the other side responds in kind. You can’t expect an Epiphany, and suddenly everyone will agree.
Follow your principles; perhaps share anecdotes and evidence. Then wait for sales reports.
First, let’s get one thing straight. As indicated by Adobe, Activation policy is *not* primarily aimed at the large-scale pirates, who will likely overcome Activation easily, but is aimed squarely at the licensed user who may casually try to copy the software to one too many machines in order to accommodate usage at different locations, portability, or whatever. Force him to buy another "seat", or go elsewhere. We’ll see in time what the true impact is here. But, IMHO, that is not really as important as the following:
What primarily bothers me about the Activation scheme is its unknown impact on my system caused by implementation procedures that presumably extend outside the normal boundaries of the Operating System APIs and/or File-System. Yes, Adobe and fellow users can tell me how painless it is, that "they’ve *finally* got it right", and that I’m paranoid or whatever, but the bottom line is that I don’t really know just how PS CS Activation is implemented, or how it’ll impact and interact with my *particular* setup. Most of what I currently do "know" is related to historical PC "copy-protection" (CP) schemes of the 80’s; mostly driven out of the industry by customer choice. Choices that were based on the adverse impact of CP schemes on the care, maintenance, workflow & use of PCs. Much of which was unanticipated by the Vendors at the time of CP implementation, however well intentioned or theoretically painless. Most of which, in the long run, merely sent customers running to the competitors that didn’t feature CP. Memories of naturally adversarial relationships with CP-implementing-Vendors, justifiable or not.
Will this scheme adversely affect my system performance, or interact adversely with other applications? (especially those that also implement Activation technology by working outside the OS API?) Will it adversely impact my system even while I’m not running PS? It’ll take time to see just how we’ll actually be inconvenienced in "legitimate" usage of our licences. PCs are not as standard as Macs. Right off the bat, there are orders of magnitude more hardware combinations and variables, making "successful testing" extremely difficult. And almost impossible when you start stepping outside the boundaries of the standard OS APIs, such as maybe using low-level operations on users’ hard disks, stepping "outside" the file system. Especially while relying on 3rd Party CP technology and trying to ensure that it interacts properly all around. Here, you’re again likely to take us back to the aggravation of the 80’s CP schemes. This stuff currently makes me too nervous to install the new software. No matter how well intentioned a company is to "execute" their CP scheme, when it’s likely working outside the intended system boundaries, it concerns me. And what happens when the OS du jour changes to XP\64bit – or whatever? Will our old PS CS require an upgrade to a new version just because the Activation scheme didn’t follow API standards and no longer properly functions? Oh yeah, Win2k & XP only, now I remember.
One thing of which I’m convinced – serious users *will* experience hard drive replacements, either due to hardware failure or due to rapid availability of much faster and higher capacity upgrade potential. If all our software eventually requires Activation, no matter how well implemented, this will soon become a yet another blight encountered by users during an already painful process. We may just skip the major benefits of hard-drive upgrades if this becomes too painful. I really hope you developers appreciate what you ***collectively*** will be asking of us. I hope that Adobe, and other software vendors, can find alternative approaches to CP than effectively turning our PCs into big hard-to-port dongles directly tied to our hard drives.
Personally, will I upgrade to PS CS? Probably, in time. I was excited about a few new features added with CS that might help my workflow. But that excitement immediately turned to disappointment when I learned of the Activation requirement. Due to my historical experiences with CP schemes, and dread that industry history of failure-prone CP schemes seems to be repeating, my sense of ownership and passion for Adobe products has now dropped significantly. And rather than jumping right in as I normally would, I’ll wait a *very* long time to see that things such as multi-boot setups and other less common configurations aren’t adversely impacted by Activation’s implementation approach. This need for additional research on user Activation experiences is, by itself, a notable inconvenience. Finally, I’ll factor in Activation to my reassessment of whether there is significant enough competition to PS v7 to warrant a jump to CS (or elsewhere.) And this may be the *only* Activation-based software I install for an even longer time, since each additional Activation-based application presents more likelihood of maintenance related headaches.
Regarding Adobe’s other products, I’ll no longer be automatically upgrading the apps which I only occasionally use, such as InDesign or GoLive. Normally, I’d take the hit just to have the latest, but between the Activation issue and the new, much higher upgrade pricing on lesser products, I’ll just pass until I have a major project that really requires something specific to the new versions. But that’s just me?
"I just cant put it so elocuent and explain myself so fully as you have.
And I cant spell."
No kidding. How enlightening. About as enlightening as the rest of your posts.
Carol, please, please, please, please, please kill this thread. Scott has done an excellent job of explaining Adobe’s stance on activation and anyone can come in here and read the remarks to their hearts content but it serves nothing to leave this thread open to further discussion.
Don’t kill the thread, there are lots of previous posters still reading it.
I must admit I was not very happy with Mr ‘Scott’ Adobes comments. I found them very arrogant, typical of big company attitude.
If he wants go after people who steal Adobe software invest some money and go after them. Somebody here said that Adobe knows where most illegal copying originates from the product registration numbers.
Don’t encumber honest users we aint done nothin.
Actually, by the shareholders, since it’s the shareholders that complain loudly (by selling) when certain productivity measurements slip in the wrong direction. On the other hand, mature products on certain levels of growth can afford certain levels of investment / team size. Piracy does flatten that growth.
-Scott
wrote in message
Concerning the point above; Adobe publish profits of some meaningless
number of hundreds of millions of dollars per quarter. The current size of your development team is being constrained by your management, not by your customers.
First of all I found your posts very well written, yet not without flaws.
Everyone says "activation is useless, it’s cracked instantly, why do it?" but that hasn’t yet been the case. Sure, it will be eventually, but by then it’s already served it’s purpose.
Has it? They have 30 days use with a clean install. Do you really think a perfect crack won’t be available in 30 days time!? If Adobe believes that they are even more naive then I thought.
I hate to lose them as customers,…
If you hate it so much then why are you doing it?
but like I said, even if the bits do get stripped to naked quickly, I won’t put naked bits out there anymore…
Then explain the multi user activation free release as well as the Mac release. They don’t need to crack it, activation free versions are available straight from adobe on both platforms.
– it makes no sense to make the pirates job easier when, in my opinion, the activation is so easy and innocuous as to be unobjectionable by reasonable people.
Again, explain the activation free multi user license. I mean if it is SO easy then everyone should be doing it, shouldn’t they?
First it was to prevent "casual copying" now you are saying it was because of warez sites all along.
Stephanie (Post #777),
The Photoshop uninstall offers users a couple of options, one of those is to remove all activation code from the system.
If it removed ALL activation code then the activation wouldn’t work. Who do you think you are dealing with? These lines may work on the average home computer user but we are all professionals here and should be treated as such.
All,
The problem with activation is that it assumes that the users will purchase the software if they can’t get it from a friend. In the case of software exceeding $100 this is seldom the case. In fact over about a 5 year period of time sales will start to drop. As the high school students that would have been using and learning through "Pirated Software" start entering the workplace after having been exposed to alternative software that was available. What software do you think they will be asking to use? The software that they have never had the opportunity to use or the slightly less powerful photo editor that they have been using for the last 5 years.
I can tell you right now if a friend hadn’t installed Photoshop 3 on my computer to show me that it was better than what I was using I never would have bought Photoshop 4. In fact even after it was installed I was so used to what I had been using that I didn’t want anything to do with Photoshop. It was only with time that I realized what I had been missing.
Innovation is expensive, duplication is cheap. Can Adobe really afford to loose customers at a time when software can easily be developed and mimicked so inexpensively. Software is already available that will do things Photoshop can’t. Right now Adobe is just lucky that there are enough features that aren’t available in other software packages. Will they be able to say the same thing with the next release.
In the end, it gets back to trust. Is Adobe the kind of company that let’s engineers put a face on the company, or is it ashamed of it’s practices and hides behind a wall of phones? I know what I think, but you’ll have to decide for yourself. Do you think we’re trying to be as upfront and honest about this as possible? Do you think we’re capable of implementing activation well enough that it won’t cause you any problems or that it will be easily rectified if there is an issue? I don’t want to cheat anybody out of their money, and I think our implementation of activation won’t.
"What software do you think they will be asking to use?"
I don’t buy that argument or the last company I worked for would be using InDesign 2 instead of Quark 4. Employees use what they are given to use and if during the next upgrade cycle it can be shown that application y is better than application x and the retraining of existing employees would not be a major issue then it might be considered. If these same kids were starting their own design firms then things might be different but if they go from college into a design firm they get what they are given to work with and they have to learn it. Why do you think Quark is still used to this day?
The Photoshop uninstall offers users a couple of options, one of those is to remove all activation code from the system. If it removed ALL activation code then the activation wouldn’t work. Who do you think you are dealing with? These lines may work on the average home computer user but we are all professionals here and should be treated as such."
Who do I think I am dealing with? Well, in this case, a user who asked a question in regards to his use of Norton to clean up after applications uninstalls, and how activation played into this workflow.
So, read it, and it’s pretty much just spelling out facts. Was there something dramatically surpising you expected us to get out of it? It pretty much re-iterated what I know and expect.
If these same kids were starting their own design firms then things might be different.
Those kids ARE starting design firms. Some of those "Kids" will also be putting you out of a job if you don’t wise up They are the companies that will grow to replace the current user base. What software would Adobe prefer them to use when they do?
Don’t feel too bad. IBM though Bill Gates was just another kid out of college too
Bob, activation isn’t copy protection. It’s a lot more passive than that. I don’t know enough of the precise details to alleviate your fears, so if you feel more comfortable waiting for a bit to see if any issues crop up, I understand. I don’t believe any will.
As for the hard drive replacement issue, that’s where we think we’re more flexible than the other vendors. Do note that one notable source of piracy is white-box assemblers who buy a single version then "pre-install" it on far more machines than they should, and so quickly rotating hard drives through the same machine and re-activating has to be protected against. In practice, only a very low-level format of the hard drive will require re-activation, and I think we got the timing on possible hard-drive/machine replacement set at a reasonabe length. Hard drives are a lot more reliable than they used to be, but failure does occur, and so we’ve tried to take that into account.
I do expect that OS vendors will add in direct activation support in the future. Hopefully, that can alleviate the rest of your concerns.
Personally, I do find it a little bit ironic that if Intel had been allowed to keep the chip ID on, that activation would be much less restrictive.
Nagash2, try it a little bit at a time. Relax. You don’t have to upgrade right now; take your time. Negotiating is a funny thing. You give a little, you get a little. One day, everybody thinks they’ve given twice as much as the other side, and eventually they all go home.
Why is adobe not Stating the fact that they use Macrovision as thier third party Activation provider?
Why does it matter?
Why is Activation not explain fully?
It’s been explained. You just don’t want to listen. What would like? The code?
Why is Activation only on PC when it can be also implemented using the same provider Macrovision on the MAC too?
Good question. It’s about time.
Why are the little guys the ones to suffer from activation when most of the actual pirated copies are CORPORATE versions?
Suffer?
By using activation are you trying to avoid Casual piracy or actually stem piracy overall?
Read everything. The goal is stop casual copying.
When will we be rewarded for the annoyances of activation?
Annoyance? You haven’t even bought it. How do you know you’ll be annoyed? It took me less than 3 seconds and one mouse click.
Can I use PS CS 5 , 10, 100 years from now? Will adobe state in written legal form that in case PS CS is no longer supported IT WILL REMOVE activation from it. Will it even do that?
Read the FAQs. They’ve stated that if the product is discontinued they’ll remove the activation. What exactly do you want?
Finaly whats in it for us??? What benefits do we get from activation?
A great piece of software that you get to use. What else did you want for your money?
A great piece of software that you get to use. What else did you want for your money?
Trust
Not to be treated as a theif/Pirate.
Not to have my usage of my computer questioned.
Be able to install and uninstall PS 500,000 times (on the same PC) if I want without Adobe questioning me about how I USE MY LEGALLY LICENSED SOFTWARE.
There are no restrictions to installing and un-installing Photoshop CS a gazillion times if you so choose. The only restrictions are what the license has always allowed or not allowed.
I once went through three IBMs very quickly and I… wait a minute, That’s none of anybody’s business. Like when the phone solicitor asks if you own the house.
Actually, in the very unlikely event that I go through 10-12 harddrives in one year, no it wouldn’t bother me, because I realize it could look a bit suspicious. I have nothing to hide and if a quick phone call clears it up, it’s just fine with me.
Re: "Do note that one notable source of piracy is white-box assemblers who buy a single version then "pre-install" it on far more machines than they should, and so quickly rotating hard drives through the same machine and re-activating has to be protected against."
Scott, you ain’t foolin’ me with that, they have and will use pirated software (usually the corporate version that do not require activation).
Look, I’m about as vocal as anybody about activation. But let’s take this thing rationally.
Saying I don’t want activation "just because", isn’t an argument worthy of having. To suggest that it leads to subscription-ware, while it may be true, is nothing anyone can do anything about.
As far as I’m concerned, activation is fine if they implement it well. We are (collectively) afraid because we see a$$holes all the time implementing stupid control tactics that don’t work, screw the users, and can’t find their butt with both hands and a map.
But what I hear is that Adobe is not considering whether or not to include activation, rather, they are refining exceution of activation. Guys and gals, that’s a huge step, and you HAVE to give them some credit for that posture.
The issue is, really, only this: Will activation affect you?
There are three answers: Yes, No, Maybe. Those are the only possible answers.
Maybe: Well, wait and see then.
Yes: How?
No: Why do you give a flying leap?
If they can implement activation without it affecting you, do you care?
If yes, as I said earlier, the topic belongs in the morality column next to politics, sex, and religion.
If no, then relax.
Now, having said that, this is the single most important point that I would like to make.
You MUST be able to deactivate your software, thereby setting it back to the original state in which you purchased it. If they can’t do that, then I’m back on the side of the anti-activation team because it WILL affect us.
What I mean is simply this. Let’s say you install PSCS twice – laptop and desktop, and activate them both. You should be able to fully uninstall one instance (say your desktop), and remove activation. That should restore your license to being eligible to install it on another machine, and activate it, without needing permission from Adobe.
The point here is, you should be able to de-activate, and allow the license to follow the user, provided they are in compliance with the terms of the EULA. That means you can install it on as many machines as you like, provided it has previously been deactivated when you uninstalled it from the other machine.
To take it one step further, for the sake of clarificaiton, you should be able to uninstall BOTH instances you previously installed, Deactivate BOTH of them, and thus have restored your full rights to re-install on two other machines (provided they aren’t used concurrently), as if you just purchased that day. This should be able to be done without getting Adobe’s blessing.
If they can’t do that, then they are falling short in implementation. But if they can, then all user rights are just as they are now, only, there won’t be any ability to install and activate on more than the requisite two units.
nagash2 – 10:17am Nov 5, 2003 Pacific (#825 of 864)
I guess you all wont mind when you have to signup per month to use PS.
I wont mind at all, because I wont be going down that path. Not a chance. I’ll stick with the last version I own. If Adobe don’t honour their promise to keep activating that version, I’ll mind THAT a lot. IMHO, all the evidence points to this scenario.
That’s why I don’t want adobe’s customer service reps helping me to keep honest. Let me deactivate and restore the state of my licnese without some pimply faced kid telling me what’s what according to the EULA.
Can I use PS CS 5 , 10, 100 years from now? Will adobe state in written legal form that in case PS CS is no longer supported IT WILL REMOVE activation from it. Will it even do that?
Read the FAQs. They’ve stated that if the product is discontinued they’ll remove the activation. What exactly do you want?
Their promise is as cast iron as a retired Polaroid workers pension.
Is Adobe on an ever upward profitable curve? Will new features endlessly encourage upgrade purchases? Will there never again be an economic downturn, not to mention world recession? Will the current CEO ever grow old / retire / die even? You may claim that none of these will never happen; but just for a minute, humour those of us you treat as idiots. Suppose (it’s a very remote possibility, but just suppose) that Adobe hits hard times. The maths of the market are not in their favour and the recommendation is to sell. The CEO gets the boot and is admonished for his sins by payment of lots of millions of dollars. New CEO arrives whos first priority is to honour the deals done with customers in the past – NOT! The temptation to pull the plug will, IMHO, be too strong. The PR Dept can craft some weasel words about how it is just one more example of Adobe being sensitive to the needs of their customers. (eg, they can claim that Win XP is discontinued so the platform is inherently unstable. Hey! I could even write it for them. There’s plenty of examples around for inspiration.)
The above is the ‘certain downturn’ scenario.
The more obvious scenario is the ‘quiet implementation’ one. Companies / shareholders are running scared of software sales drying up. They see pay-as-you-go as the way-to-go for them to continue to rake in dosh. (PAYG is already happening with a lot of vendors). Activation (or, more accurately, the ability to de-activate) is fundamental to the strategy. Introducing activation ostensibly against ‘cheating’ is a neat way to have it in place if you want to slip in pay-as-you-go.
If it walks like a duck …..
Customers have given Adobe a monopoly position on the basis of one type of deal. I would consider it dishonourable if they tried to change it now. Still, I wouldn’t complain much if they let me go on using my last purchased version. If they de-activated me… well!
As to the contemptous question: ‘What exactly do you want?’ Why keep asking? It’s been put a number of times that the removal code should be lodged with a trusted third party who would use it to honour the terms from Adobes activation page, copied above. So far, no one has responded to the suggestion. Why am I not surprised?
I dont trust those highly trained poorly paid support personel to make that decision.
Thats why I called multiple times and talked to multiple highly trained adobe support personel and aasked the same questione. They all said the same thing
2 activations every six months then you have to call adobe and explain why they need to allow you to continie to use your software
And what evdidence would that be? Please, no references to Intuit or any other company. Where is the evidence against Adobe?
Bob
The current move to a situation where Adobe can remotely de-activate (as against, for example, dongle protection) is a pretty good starter.
Surely you can hear a lot of quacking?
Any views on using a third party to hold the removal code, Bob? You do keep avoiding this issue! Why would you want to avoid it, if Adobe’s intentions are purely honourable? Isn’t it in the best interests of everyone.
Guys! guys! Sorry, I’m 40, bald and a beard, wash my hair with a face cloth, i’m just trying to get that wee shite to stop posting. He’s on a roll and won’t give over and really I am promised a 1000 reward so NAH!
No, I’m not killing it Stuart – despite many temptations to do so when it was going wildly off course.
Whilst it can still serve as a means of enlightenment by Scott and others and because the ‘doubting Thomas’s’ can see that Adobe is concerned about them and is trying to alleviate their fears with a rational explanation as to how activation is implemented, then it still has a purpose. —
Any views on using a third party to hold the removal code, Bob?
This may amaze you, but yes, I thinks it’s probably a good idea. I just don’t know how you would decide who gets to hold onto Adobe’s intellectual property.
I’m not avoiding anything. I’m just sitting here enjoying my new software. I’ll leave the conspiracy theories to you.
If you come up with anything new, I’ll respond to it, other than that, you know how I feel–I’ll trust them to do the right thing until they prove that they won’t–I’m done with you.
You sit and complain that they find you guilty until proven innocent but what exactly are you doing? Pot, meet the kettle.
i’m just trying to get that… to stop posting Hey! I’m standing right here! Well, in my day people…<
r_harvey, sorry, i didn’t mean you, aimed at nagash2, shame on you you should have known that after all these years. No way are you getting the free suite. it’s mine.
You can deactivate it on the machine (hard drive) you are using – but *AFAIK* no message is sent to Adobe that you have deactivated it Tony. The only time your system will send a message to Adobe is when you activate it over the internet. You are allowed several internet activations over a given time period without any problem – but if this just happens to be your (say) 6th internet activation in (say) a month (I don’t know what these magic figures are) then you will be required to contact Adobe by telephone sometime in the next 30 days to explain why you need to activate that many times. Provided that you can give them a half reasonable explanation, they will send you the magic numbers to activate it yet again. —
Try changing the clock on your computer before you’ve activated PS. You will get an immediate message stating ‘since the computer clock has changed, you must activate now. Click OK or Cancel’. I had to go back and change the clock to the original date (wrong date) to get PS to run. That sucks!
Is this intentional, Adobe, or is this the first of many bugs with activation?
Provided that you can give them a half reasonable explanation, they will send you the magic numbers to activate it yet again.
My point is, and I think you know this, if you deactivate it, why do you need their permission? If they don’t buy my explanation, then I have to take them to small claims court?
No, no, no. If you deactivate your software, you cannot use it on that machine anymore, until you re-install and re-activate it. There is no reason on God’s green earth why we should have to contact Adobe to get permission to re-install, on any machine we choose, once we’ve deactivated it.
I’d sure like to hear Adobe confirm this yeah or nay.
IF YOU DO IT TWICE IN SIX MONTHS YOU WILL NEED TO ASK PERMISSION from adobe to reinstall PS!
And I guess that they can say NO to you.
Now how much money would you loose if you couldnt use your software until you took adobe to small claims court just to be able to get $5000 from them. I thinks thats the limit of small claims court.
"Otherwise you could keep setting the clock back and never have to install."
You mean activate, right? What happens if your PC battery dies? What if you really need to change your clock because it was set incorrectly in the first place? What if you fly to England with your laptop and decide to set the clock back to England time?
I suspect there will be a lot of issues with this. Is this the first of many?
I’m not sure if your post was in reference to mine or not. But if it was to mine, I missed the point.
Just like we connect to activate, we should be offered the option to connect to de-activate. That’s my point. That de-activation event, only occurs as a last step after removal.
Once that’s done, there’s no reason that your license shouldn’t "roll back" one activation event.
That way, the license follows the user, not the machine.
Dude, I hear ya, but lighten up on Carol. She’s an extremely intelligent woman who helps all of us a lot. I’m not saying not to advance your point, but just try to do it with a little more respect.
I’m not trying to break your ball$ here, I’m just trying to say, that there are many here whom I respect, with whom I do not agree, and that just because we don’t agree, doesn’t lessen my respect – and it shouldn’t lessen yours either.
Bob, on the other hand, well, he’s fair game <grin>.
No, no, no. If you deactivate your software, you cannot use it on that machine anymore, until you re-install and re-activate it. There is no reason on God’s green earth why we should have to contact Adobe to get permission to re-install, on any machine we choose, once we’ve deactivated it.
I’m not sure they wouldn’t give you an automated pass if you reactivated the same serial # on the exact same hardware. The hash would probably work out to be the same and the system would say, oh yea, we know this guy. Activated.
I like your deactivate idea tony. No reason not to make it so, number one. Seems pretty simple even to slipstream in as a patch. Connect through the same pipe the activation takes. Simply send a code to roll back activations by one for this user. (Or more specifically, roll back hash xyz for this user.)
Ideally you could simply flick a switch and deactivate w/o un-installing. The sw on the machine should be rendered unusable until reactivated then you could move to another machine and activate it.
In fact they could remove the install twice run one at a time requirement (which afaik is not enforced. You’re still being trusted to only run one of your two installable copies at a time). They could make it so only one machine at a time could be activated per license. This would allow you to install on multiple (not 2) machines, while still allowing adobe full control and assurance that there is only one machine able to run PS per license at a time.
It’s only an issue if you’ve installed and haven’t activated. You have 30 days to do so from the time you install. If there was no protection there you could keep setting your clock back and never have to activate. Once the software has been activated the system clock is not an issue anymore.
No, we’d like you to shut the hell up. You have added nothing new to this discussion. You keep addding
comments
with
double
spaces
between
every
line which is quite annoying. You keep asking the same questions over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over (is this annoying you yet? Good, now you know how we all feel). You have been given plenty of answers yet you insist on being some know-it-all regardless of the information being provided. Until you get Photoshop CS and find out how activation works/doesn’t work, you won’t know. So far it looks like activation has worked quite well as the only people whining about it are those who haven’t tried it.
No do us all a favor and shut up until you can actully add something new to the conversation. Until then grow up a little too. My 5 year old nephew is less annoying than you and his parents let him get away with a lot of crap.
Sorry mark. I wont stop posting. But you can ignore me…
It would be nice, though, if you could combine a few paragraphs into single posts. So many posts, so little time. Besides, I want to get the free CS Professional for making post #1000.
Thank you Dave and Bob, for your support on the idea. I have been trying to noodle out a negative issue by allowing deactivation, and I can’t think of one. Glad to see folks I respect are on the same page.
I honestly thing that if they allow deactivation that way, all ills go away, and there’s no EULA issue, no customer service issue, etc.
If that could be made to work it makes much good sense Dave – especially for people like Tony. However I suspect that it might be more difficult than it seems and we would still have the doubters who would say such things as "What would happen if the internet connection went down and I couldn’t deactivate/reactivate on another machine" or "I don’t want to have to phone Adobe every time I deactivate/reactivate".
I suspect that Adobe hasn’t gone down that road (yet) because it could be interpreted are taking more control of your system than the simple method which they have implementated.
But basically I agree you have a good idea there if it could be made to work. —
The answer on deactivation of CS is no. While the uninstaller does have an option for removing all activation code from the system during the apps uninstall, there’s nothing sent back to Adobe.
How the heck did this become Dave’s idea? Not that I take issue with it, just curious – is this like the proverbial "nobody reads post #1?"
Stephanie,
But why can’t that be implemented. If you do that, you have a license that follows the user, not the machine – which is what we pay for. And, you reduce all kinds of problems with folks having to call in to Adobe.
1 activation is per computer / hard drive combo. Don’t switch main hard drives and you can uninstall and install all day long to your heart’s content and not have a problem – that machine’s already been activated. It’s pretty clear that you do have the time to uninstall and reinstall all day long. So go ahead.
Tony,
The point on deactivation is very good. Yes, right now it takes a phone call. In practice, I don’t believe this situation will come up very often, but you’re right, you should be able to do it without a phone call.
Thank you. I was sweating there for a minute. Whether it is actually implemented or not, and I hope it is, I’m glad to have a credible source validate the probity of the idea, as a sanity check.
I guess the support person neglected to see that if you dont change the harddrive you dont have the 2 activations every six months problem.
I would also like to state that I would have no problem with activation if it worked as Tony stated. That would make the license a true user license instead of a machine license.
Macromedia has a very slick activation and deactivation scheme (I have the software activated on my desktop and laptop). I deactivated my DWMX04 a few weeks ago (which occurs through the net) and replaced my drive with a larger one and reloaded my OS and software and activated again without a single call (I usually do that every fall to get rid of all the crud that I installed and uninstalled over the past few years). It worked very well and truly allowed the software to move with me without the hassles of ever getting on the telephone. — Rob
Holy Shiete! Ordered pscs standalone from amazon.com yesterday 10:45am, request free shipping (7-9 bus days).
Just got a mail from amazon a few minutes ago, your order has shipped. Went in checked the tracking and it says DELIVERED 2pm today. Go downstairs, open side door (raining here in NJ today). FOUND AMAZON SHIPMENT BOX INSIDE DOOR! PS CS SHIPPED AND DELIVERED 27 1/2 hours!
Setup ran for 4.75 minutes including activation. Activation by itself ran for a total of 12 seconds. Start PS. Register w/adobe.
TOTAL TIME FROM POPPING IN THE DISK TO FULLY USABLE/REGISTERED CS INSTALLATION: 5.5 minutes.
there is no custom install that i saw. (or i selected it by force of habit). I got the dialog for choosing file types. the only one i changed was it had png set to IR and I changed it to PS. More to come. Survivor’s coming on!
Odd. I don’t remember my install except that I did change the default install location, but I didn’t get a choice of files to associate with Photoshop. Note that I got the suite, not the standalone.
1. Where in NJ? I grew up in Bridgeton. Also lived in PA right across the Delaware.
Sayreville. Almost on the coast. Central Jersey.
2. While you trying out the new toy, please try out the Color Replacement issue we discussed last night.
The red eye thing right? Gotcha.
I’m going to start a new thread to talk about issues good and bad about the new cs. More feature oriented. That way when someone finds something cool there’ll be a place for us to share without starting a jillion threads.
Thanks for leaving this thread going and having patients with us skeptics .
I must confess that in reading Tonys comments (#865) as well as the discussion about activation and its effect in the install, uninstall process that I now have no logical basis to oppose the activation scheme that Adobe has presented. There may be some emotional feelings that linger, but they are my problem and not Adobes. I do have some remaining concerns about the relationship between Adobe and Kodak DCS files, but that is not for this thread. I also have found it to be advantages to wait a little while after the initial release, but I am now a whole lot closer to considering an upgrade.
With regard to piracy, my wife and I discussed this issue the other night vis a vis Microsoft. I presented the argument that countries with high piracy rates are also countries (and States) with a lot lower per capita income. I dont know what the marketing strategy and price structure is in those countries, but my discussion point was that if Microsoft, et al, marketed older versions of their products at substantially lower rates, this strategy may take the pressure off piracy and the need to steal software because they just cannot afford to by it. I have no clue how important it is to people like Adobe to maintain the cost image of their product, but, say you now sold PS7 at 50% of the cost of PSCS and PS6 at a 75% discount of PSCS, individuals would have a channel into Adobe products legally just a thought.
say you now sold PS7 at 50% of the cost of PSCS and PS6 at a 75%
discount of PSCS, individuals would have a channel into Adobe products legally just a thought.<
But they would then be able to upgrade that product immediately up to PS CS using the upgrade price at a substantial discount making it completely unfair to any user who was able to pay the full price for the product. —
The thought is to provide initial product pricing on old versions of software at reduced prices for low per capita countries to reduce the temptation to pirate software and to increase the revenue stream to Adobe as well as provide an easier entry channel. I dont think support would be a big issue. Microsoft already farms out a lot of their product support to contractors. However, the upgrade policy is a complexity. Not being a programmer or software person, I dont know what the options are in serial number codes, etc to be able to distinguish between full price copies and discounted ones .
I do remember visiting a used software store in LA one time that sold old versions of software, including Adobe products. I would imagine a person could track down an old original version of PS7, buy it at a discount and then pay the upgrade price. What does Adobe do with old PS7 versions at retail stores? Take them all back and destroy?
The point is $650.00 US for a new version of Photoshop is a lot to pay by anybodys standard. Again, I do not know Adobes pricing philosophy, but take an Engineer in India that makes approximately $25,000 US annually. If he/she tries to buy a new copy of PSCS, that is almost one months income.
I personally reject the argument of Microsofts attorneys that what lower per capita countries must do is establish the rule of law and realize piracy is a crime. I think that is American arrogance and I would suggest that in many non-North American countries, their ethical standards are as good as if not higher than the US. Its just that they dont have the economic means to purchase US products at US stand-of-living rates.
Besides, if Adobe was able to develop such a good activation scheme, they should be able to solve the upgrade issue :-)
but take an Engineer in India that makes approximately $25,000 US
annually.<
Funny, but I make that $2083. $650 is just over 1 weeks pay – not that I am belittling your point. However, I doubt if they sell computers at knock down prices just because they live in India or China.
The only way round it would be to offer the out of date software with special serial numbers with the proviso that these could not be updated for a minimum of 18 months – and then only to the next version. But that is getting a lot more complex. —
I must confess that in reading Tonys comments (#865) as well as the discussion about activation and its effect in the install, uninstall process that I now have no logical basis to oppose the activation scheme that Adobe has presented.
For the sake of clarification, my premise was centered around the idea of effective DEactivation and that’s not a done deal yet. I’m encouraged that it seems to be being considered, and there was no major "pushback" from Adobe, but when I see it is when I will start obsessing about how I’m going to swing the upgrade. Until then, really, it’s academic.
Personally, I think it makes the most sense for both, Adobe, and it’s users, but until it happens, I’m just watching closely.
I may be caught in the last century, but I really, really want my personal computer to be *my* *personal* computer. Much as I like the Net and telephones (when it’s not a telemarketer on the line), I don’t want to have to have access to either one in order to use my computer and software I’ve paid for.
So it doesn’t matter to me whether the activation process is convenient. I’m just not buying software-on-a-leash.
I’ll give Adobe credit for being very up-front about the activation in PS CS. I’d have been very po’d if I’d found out only after paying my money.
I hear ya. For me, if activation doesn’t get in my way, provided I use it according to the EULA, then I only care from an "Industry Trend" perspective.
Since MS has gone Activation and proven that it can be done, you know where this is headed – it’ll take a few years, maybe a decade, but that’s where we’ll be; some level of subscription-ware.
So in the meantime there are businesses to run and I’m already a dinosaur for still being in Win98se. At some point or other, I have to succumb to activation in one form or another. So to be opposed to it on principle as opposed to dictating my workflow, means that one would never be able to go to XP and beyond. That is to say, if one opposes activation on principle, it really limits the OS choices, as well as the app choices.
I dunno. I can’t fault adobe for this move – from day one, it’s pretty much (although not entirely) been about implementation. If they do this move right, then at least I can get on with my work, and not have my workflow impeded by some customer service rep. I think that’s about the best we can hope for since this is a done deal.
That is of course, unless user push-back is too harsh. But why would it be? Only implementation. That’d be the only thing that will dramatically affect the bottom line for Adobe.
But if they don’t allow user driven DEactivation, me? I’m back to my original stance of Machine License v. User License, and WILL NOT buy into that. Hell, if macromedia can do it, so can adobe. I think they will, but it’ll take a patch on the shipping version so… time will tell.
But they would then be able to upgrade that product immediately up to PS CS using the upgrade price at a substantial discount making it completely unfair to any user who was able to pay the full price for the product.
Nope… for those buyers you could charge a full/or slightly higher upgrade price… or not let them upgrade tfor a specific time period or release version. The advantage for Adobe would be that it would help reduce piracy and get in a serious customer base. And wouldn’t affect serious professionals… at all.
Look… i’m an Adobe user (a PS buyer)… i think it’s a fab product… i have no hassles with others getting to use it… if they can get it cheaper… it only enarges the community and ultimately – hopefully, which i doubt, reduces our cost. Because, for serious and professional users the here and now – of the latest release – matters more than a few dollars here or there… else eevryone would wait a while to pick up discounted options or buy just before the next release
The thought is to provide initial product pricing on old versions of
software at reduced prices for low per capita countries to reduce the temptation to pirate software and to increase the revenue stream to Adobe as well as provide an easier entry channel. I don’t think support would be a big issue. Microsoft already farms out a lot of their product support to contractors. However, the upgrade policy is a complexity. Not being a programmer or software person, I don’t know what the options are in serial number codes, etc to be able to distinguish between full price copies and discounted ones..
I do remember visiting a used software store in LA one time that sold old
versions of software, including Adobe products. I would imagine a person could track down an old original version of PS7, buy it at a discount and then pay the upgrade price. What does Adobe do with old PS7 versions at retail stores? Take them all back and destroy?
Earl… your comments are valid… keeping in mind that PS is cheapest in the US… everyone else pays far more… and when you convert the US$ to standards of living in other countries it could end up close to the price of a secondhand car! No wonder piracy exists in the "third world". For instance, taking Sri Lanka, 1 USD equals 95 rupees in Sri Lanka… How much does a coke cost on the street in the US? 50cents… ? in SL it costs 20 SLR… cheaper than the US equivalent cost of 45+ SLR but more in keeping with their income levels. But, to a Sri Lankan, a PS upgrade costs… Rs 15000+… that’s a lot of money!!! 780 cokes vs 332 cokes! And i’m just taking the base US price… not the other factors of margins and taxes…. In effect it’s more than three times what someone in the US pays….
In Europe they’re paying twice the cost on a straight conversion basis….
What a lot of people here (in the US) forget is that the US price is not what others pay – and when you factor in the cost of living, etc… it becomes humongous.
I personally think that software companies would do far better if they looked at their pricing on the same basis that McDonald’s and Coke or Pepsi looked at theirs… meaning, the ability to pay as against straight USD conversions… they’ll still be making more than they are right now… and piracy would reduce. Activation – which i’m, personally, dead against – would make this eminently viable…
The point is $650.00 US for a new version of Photoshop is a lot to pay by
anybody’s standard. Again, I do not know Adobe’s pricing philosophy, but take an Engineer in India that makes approximately $25,000 US annually. If he/she tries to buy a new copy of PSCS, that is almost one months income.
I personally reject the argument of Microsoft’s attorneys that what lower
per capita countries must do is establish the rule of law and realize piracy is a crime. I think that is American arrogance and I would suggest that in many non-North American countries, their ethical standards are as good as if not higher than the US. It’s just that they don’t have the economic means to purchase US products at US stand-of-living rates.
Besides, if Adobe was able to develop such a good activation scheme, they
should be able to solve the upgrade issue..:-)
Earl… see my earlier reply to you… and $25000 annually is an overestimation! US$ = INR 45 at the moment. Average salary in India for studio technicians is INR 15,000 per month (at an optimistic estimation at that level). That equals US$ 4000 per year! So a new PS costs… mmmm a bit more than a month’s salary…
I know several freelancers… they started on pirated copies… today they all own legit copies… 650 US$ (= INR 29, 250 but actually much more as software in India costs more) add to that cost of living factors as well as market factors and the costs become astronomical… a simple example… an A3 colour photocopy costs INR 12.00 in India – that’s less than 17 cents…. versus, i think, a couple of pounds in the UK (INR 150)? but the equipment costs more, or maybe the same… so margins are much tighter.
Basically, it’s as you said, ‘"the economic means to purchase US products at US stand-of-living rates."
And, whatever, people say about, "Iif you can’t afford it, don’t buy it." , The fact remains that the only reason they have it at the price they do is because of all the programmers from "third world countries" who actually get the job done.
think that software companies would do far better if they looked at their pricing on the same basis that McDonald’s and Coke or Pepsi looked at theirs… meaning, the ability to pay as against straight USD conversions…
I’m no econcomist, but if Adobe had the same distribution mechanism and economies of scale that McDonalds and Coke or Pepsi, it might be different. I don’t know about their frequency in Europe but in the US theres a Micky D’s almost every few miles, especially in metro areas. McDonalds and Coke and Pepsi can strike agreements with local suppliers and cut beaucoup import/export taxes and issues. They strike deals with local governments to employ local workers, and in return get more favorable tarrifs and what not.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not arguing that the price shouldn’t be lower, but I’m not sure Adobe has the same ability to do a "straight" conversion when we don’t really know what the issues are from a "get the product into the country" standpoint.
In addition, really, many people can get by on Adobe Elements – that’s one snappy program, and is priced really well. Personally, I think Adobe would do well to pump up advertising dollars into that product since the natural progression, for those who are serious and need more power, would be to Photoshop.
Activation is about getting your email address, name, phone number, etc. They find out where you first heard about the product, where you bought it, etc. You, generally, get some "free" spyware and "free" spam offers in your mailbox, as well. Activation is about preventing bootlegged copies from circulating freely. And, activation is about extracting "cash" from you-the user (buyer). Isn’t the "upgrade game" also about all of these same things, for the most part?
How is it that a crash, involving Photoshop CS, not the OS, can require reactivation? See:
YrbkMgr "Activation not cool issue." 11/9/03 12:20pm </cgi-bin/webx?13/7>
When a customer service rep tells you to re-install your Operating System what do you normally think?
Why is Adobe License Manager always running in the background if this is a single event, non-issue? There are temporary files in the XP Prefetch directory related to License Manager and they are indicated as active processes -why?
I am NOT prepared to see this topic turn into a platform war. I’m giving you due notice that any further postings in this vein will be deleted without further warning as being totally off-topic.
If you want to fight about platform merits go do it in the Bear Pit (the Photoshop Lounge)
Just a thought here: If rolling your clock back would force an immediate de-activation of the PS license, wouldn’t everyone in NA have to re-activate at least twice a year with Daylight Savings Time?
The topic is dead anyway. The comment was taken out of context and I was responding. I believe my original post was referring to the way the EULA is worded in such a way that they could claim you need two licenses for dual processor machines.
The fact remains that you can buy a single processor Wintel machine that is comparable to a dual processor Mac. When you start buing Dual and quad speed Wintel machines there is no longer any room for comparison.
Feel free to delete this post. As for this topic it has since been replaced several times over and is for all intents and purposes dead.
Rolling back the clock doesn’t cause any problems unless you are running a copy that is still running on the 30 days you get before activation. Once activating is complete it is a non issue.
i can see the video now, legit folks gone bad. 100% of the people in our local photoshop group have upgraded, legally, to CS. 85% of the same people are using the combo of activation crack/keygen/service disable patch. state, govt, locals, etc.
honestly, did they think that activation would work ? should’ve learned from ms, symantec, autodesk, turbotax and all of the other failed attempts at activation.
my copy was activated via my purchase, period. i refuse to activate it any other way. and when they release a "service pack", which is normally nothing other than a known serial blacklist, we switch to using keygens.
pretty sad since the keygens, cracks, etc. were leaked from the inside =)
i can see the video now, legit folks gone bad. 100% of the people in our local photoshop group have upgraded, legally, to CS. 85% of the same people are using the combo of activation crack/keygen/service disable patch. state, govt, locals, etc.
We don’t know if that is the truth, but you pointed indirectly to an interesting question: Will Adobe know how many legitmate serial numbers were never activated?
i can see the video now, legit folks gone bad. 100% of the people in our local photoshop group have upgraded, legally, to CS. 85% of the same people are using the combo of activation crack/keygen/service disable patch. state, govt, locals, etc.
We don’t know if that is the truth, but you pointed indirectly to an interesting question: Will Adobe know how many legitmate serial numbers were never activated?
The real question is will Adobe corp ever care? If (probably when) it becomes painfully obvious activation is nothing but a waste of time, money and users’ goodwill, will the dumbass execs who rammed through imitating a Microsoft bad idea put their asses on the line and admit it?
My impression is "no," having experienced that kind of beast far too often, but this is yet another thing I’d rather be wrong about.
good point – i always wondered if they keep a track of what printed serials went out, and compared those coming in (via activation) to that list.
ms did just that after the whole xp devilsown fiasco, but alas, it still didnt stop keygen’d copies from being registered
"jjs" wrote in message
In article , "craptivation" wrote:
i can see the video now, legit folks gone bad. 100% of the people in our local photoshop group have upgraded, legally, to CS. 85% of the same
people
are using the combo of activation crack/keygen/service disable patch.
state,
govt, locals, etc.
We don’t know if that is the truth, but you pointed indirectly to an interesting question: Will Adobe know how many legitmate serial numbers were never activated?
i can see the video now, legit folks gone bad. 100% of the people in our local photoshop group have upgraded, legally, to CS. 85% of the same people are using the combo of activation crack/keygen/service disable patch. state, govt, locals, etc.
honestly, did they think that activation would work ? should’ve learned from ms, symantec, autodesk, turbotax and all of the other failed attempts at activation.
my copy was activated via my purchase, period.
I admire how you silly people create your own laws.
i can see the video now, legit folks gone bad. 100% of the people in our local photoshop group have upgraded, legally, to CS. 85% of the same people are using the combo of activation crack/keygen/service disable patch. state, govt, locals, etc.
We don’t know if that is the truth, but you pointed indirectly to an interesting question: Will Adobe know how many legitmate serial numbers were never activated?
The real question is will Adobe corp ever care? If (probably when) it becomes painfully obvious activation is nothing but a waste of time, money and users’ goodwill, will the dumbass execs who rammed through imitating a Microsoft bad idea put their asses on the line and admit it?
I had to activate AutoCad with Autodesk and you don’t hear me whining and crying about it.
As I sated before, those why whine and cry about activation are more than likely software piraters.
Regards, Uni
My impression is "no," having experienced that kind of beast far too often, but this is yet another thing I’d rather be wrong about.
i can see the video now, legit folks gone bad. 100% of the people in our local photoshop group have upgraded, legally, to CS. 85% of the same
people
are using the combo of activation crack/keygen/service disable patch.
state,
govt, locals, etc.
honestly, did they think that activation would work ? should’ve learned
from
ms, symantec, autodesk, turbotax and all of the other failed attempts at activation.
my copy was activated via my purchase, period.
I admire how you silly people create your own laws.
You need to learn the difference between a "law" and a "contract" moron.
If you pay for the program or upgrade, Adobe would have a hell of a time in court trying to recover non-existent ‘damages’ from breach of contract, which would be the case in a violation of the EULA after legal purchase of the software.
You need to learn the difference between a "law" and a "contract" moron. If you pay for the program or upgrade, Adobe would have a hell of a time in court trying to recover non-existent ‘damages’ from breach of contract, which would be the case in a violation of the EULA after legal purchase of the software.
And of course they would never live it down if they even tried to make such a case. Further, US states are free to interpret a EULA differently, sometimes regardless of the specific language. Unfortunately I cannot see a successful case where a legal licencee sues Adobe because the activation scheme failed and caused a catastrophic business loss. That language exception is daunting. Note how even Micro$oft is finally making a sincere effort to scrub the worst security flaws from their products because finally, after all these years, some big buck attorneys are looking at Micro$oft as the next Tobacco case – a hugely profitable suit in the making.
Someone posted "Wouldn’t it be funny if a kid who was trying to crack a program happened upon the method to remotely de-activate? I guess it wouldn’t. " Well funny or not it’s been done – and it’s out there. Along with not 1 but 2 ways to bypass their PITA activation. So much for the impenetrable anti-piracy scheme.
It does make you wonder what the Adobe guys are really thinking. To date there hasn’t been any software Co. that has come up with a fool proof way to stop piracy. MS couldn’t do it and Adobe isn’t going to either. There are cracks and bypasses for every Adobe product made. You’re either going to buy it or not.
It’s simply an added measure of security. The requirement to use a valid serial number is also an added measure of security, although there are ways around that as well. Nothing is going to be perfect, but Adobe, it seems, is balancing their need to make it a little more difficult, with market acceptance. Activation is part of their solution.
The folks who work on Photoshop are sick and tired of seeing their work stolen so this is one small step to twart.
Fwiw, prophylactics are not 100% effective against all disease, but that doesn’t mean one shouldn’t use them. <shrug>.
Anyone who produces intellectual property, has the right to protect their work. If you find their methods too extreme for your taste, well that’s just tough toenails–don’t use their intellectual property.
So what if it inconveniences some honest but perhaps not computer-savvy users, as long as it enables the intellectual property owner to exact revenge on those who would attempt to use their property in ways not authorized by the EULA. As long as the intellectual property owner can smite their foes, a little collateral damage is acceptable.
Preserving the stock value quarter-by-quarter is the quest, not brand loyalty.
On an unrelated note: 2004 is the year that OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> replaces MS Office on tens of millions of computers in business, industry and government.
It isn’t even coming close. Anyone can D/L serial numbers, activation hacks and even full programs for every Adobe product made. It wasn’t even 30 days after CS was out that there was a hack for it. That’s supposed to be the big deterrent? I understand their need to do something but activation isn’t it.
2004 is the year that OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> replaces MS Office on tens of millions of computers in business, industry and government.
For the record, it isn’t that I disagree with activation as a mechansim (although I do disagree with the principle); my stance has been more one about implementation. I am passionate that a deactivation scheme be built into the product so that users don’t rely on Susie the stoned customer service rep. When Adobe indicated that they also felt deactivation was workable, I piped down.
Harv,
As long as the intellectual property owner can smite their foes, a little collateral damage is acceptable.
Well, that’s the battle, isn’t it. How do we find balance? If we assume SOMETHING should be done, then what is it? The only thing that really protect copy protection from being hacked is obscurity – and that has it’s own problems <grin>. So at the end of the day, it’s financial as well as philosophical. The point was really driven home when Scott B from Adobe said that he simply wasn’t willing to put naked code out anymore.
Rick,
It isn’t even coming close.
You may be right. Remember this whole thing is about "paradigms" (I happen to know Chris Cox hates that word <grin>). But what I mean is, the category is piracy. Within that category, there are at least four subsets. We know that activation will not stop piracy from at least two of the subsets, and is questionable on one of the subsets, but for at least ONE subset of pirate, it may reduce incidence.
The BSA has said that Piracy is down, especially in the US. I’m not convinced that activation is driving the reduction. That said, you have to admit that there must be a HUGE emotional issue for Adobe and PS Authors when they see their "baby" available for anyone to download without recrimination.
So if SOMETHING must be done, what is it? My contention has generally been that if it doesn’t affect you, you shouldn’t care. Some folks take a higher philosophical route <cough *Harv!*>, and don’t like being assumed to be a thief. To each his own in that regard.
But why is it that we don’t take issue with the requirement to enter the serial number from the product packaging?
Stand in line at airport security, and compare how willing you are to be assumed to be dangerous, compared to how willing you are assumed to have potential for copying photoshop. Why do we accept the airport more? Isn’t that more insulting? Maybe we don’t "boycott" flights because we agree on the ramifications of doing nothing at our airports. Maybe people don’t see unauthorized duplication as a serious issue – which goes to Adobe’s point.
"But why is it that we don’t take issue with the requirement to enter the serial number from the product packaging?"
It doesn’t pop up some time down the road and say I don’t believe you any more – please call customer no-service and tell them you really own the program and we might let you use it.
When Adobe indicated that they also felt deactivation was workable, I piped down.
That’s their job. What would you expect them to say? There are no American infidel soldiers in Baghdad.
The point was really driven home when Scott B from Adobe said that he simply wasn’t willing to put naked code out anymore.
That’s a purely emotional response. With tools available today, code is relatively easy to strip. From what I’ve read, Adobe still does a poor job of obfuscating code, so it might as well still be naked. Strangers are still snooping around in their drawers.
I personally have no problem with mandatory one-time registration in order to get your access code, with the knowledge that if I were to share that access code, I’d be personally prosecuted for the full $250K fine. But if I wanted to install it on thirty-seven computers, and they were all for my own personal use, it’s none of their business.
If I were Adobe, I’d use pirates and casual sharers as a profit center… or when that doesn’t work, make an example of thieves; a little revenge will help morale–let company executives participate in public floggings. If blatant, sociopathic thieves can’t be stopped through conventional means, I can suggest other ways… their methods.
According to MS, OpenOffice.org <http://openoffice.org> is as good as MS Office 97. It’s worth noting that many people still use Office 97–I used Office 95 from June ’95 until about April ’00, and would still use it, if they hadn’t changed some development tools (burning backward compatibility is a way of life for MS). Soon, The Gimp <http://www.gimp.org/> will be as good as Photoshop 7; Linux versions already have CMYK and vector drawing tools. Perhaps a year later, Scribus <http://www.scribus.org.uk/> will be as good as InDesign 2. This is the time for Adobe to be developing brand loyalty; that doesn’t seem to be the strategy being pursued.
You have got to be th biggest troll in the world. I don’t even know where to begin. Do you have any facts to back up your claims or are you just using the wishful thinking of the OSS community? I’ve been hearing how OS software will soon be good enough to take over the world since the late 90’s. It’t not 2004, 6 or 7 years later, and you guys are STILL saying that [insert OS project here] will be good enough to replace [insert closed source equivalent]. Then as evidence that OSS works you point to Apache (or A-Patchy, recalling its first efforts) and the Linux kernel, two projects out of tens of thousands floating around Sourceforge and the web.
As for brand loyalty, I don’t see activation having any impact here. I’m sure you’ll n odoubt pull a couple articles off the web that suggest that Adobe activation is killing sales but like you, they’ll be short on facts and long on speculation.
This is the time for Adobe to be developing brand loyalty; that doesn’t seem to be the strategy being pursued.
I agree. I see the developer’s (actually the corporation’s) points, but emotionally, I can’t shake the feeling that they’re burning bridges (said the guy running CS. <g>).
That’s their job. What would you expect them to say? There are no American infidel soldiers in Baghdad.
They could say "too bad, so sad, like it or lump it". What would Redmonds answer be?
You can’t tell me that when I proposed a deactivation mechanism, and Scott said it sounded do-able, and that he supported it, that it’s corporate rhetoric. We’ve seen those kinds of responses. Maybe it’s a bit "pollyanna" of me but when developers and the pencil heads chime in, their commentary seems to carry more weight. But you’re right, I mean, really, the jury’s out – it’s about hope for a company to do the right thing.
That’s a purely emotional response.
That’s why it got my "vote" so to speak. I can totally identify (as I know you can) with the sentiment. Watching your work get illegally downloaded without recrimination is a horrible feeling.
Look, all I’m saying is, agree or not, it’s doesn’t seem to me to be an unreasonable position. And again, implementation is another story. Without a deactivation mechanism, I vow to not use PSCS, whether we update all our OS’s and machines or not. I think there was an oversight in terms of the implications of the licensing, in concert with the activation scheme. It’s my opinion, and I don’t ask that anyone agree, that deactivation solves the issue. So in the end, again, if implementation is ironed out, I’ll buy into it personally, but I can’t see SOME attempt at IP protection as being unreasonable, and certainly not subversive – at least not from Adobe.
They could say "too bad, so sad, like it or lump it".
But then they’d not be doing their job.
What would Redmonds answer be?
For a year or so, it was "lump it." As predatory monopolistic thugs, they thought they could get away with that. Now, as they see that their customers don’t like it, they’re doing damage control. It’s too late for many, many MS Office customers.
You can’t tell me that when I proposed a deactivation mechanism, and Scott said it sounded do-able, and that he supported it, that it’s corporate rhetoric.
Adobe damage control. Of course they want to adjust it to make it more palatable to more people… they’re trying to delicately determine exactly how much people are willing to put up with, without alienating too many. Is this better, or worse? It’s a spreadsheet thing.
"Without a deactivation mechanism, I vow to not use PSCS…"
While Scott has commented that he liked the idea of deactivation, CS is out and does/will not include this functionality. We will look into it for a future version of Photoshop.
Speaking of Redmondian damage control, see Get The Facts On Windows and Linux <http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/facts/default.asp>. That’s the kind of stuff you have to do after playing hardball for too long.
The only good thing about it is that they’ve finally decided to publish in PDF, instead of trying to kill it–well, this week, anyway.
I personally have no problem with mandatory one-time registration in order to get your access code, with the knowledge that if I were to share that access code, I’d be personally prosecuted for the full $250K fine. But if I wanted to install it on thirty-seven computers, and they were all for my own personal use, it’s none of their business.
Of course there’s nothing to stop me from registering as Santos L. Halper, 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield. But I will have to present a valid phone number, or e-mail address, or physical address… one of those must be real for me to get my access code. And the code could contain a few common characters that Adobe could go to Google and search for–that would be in every code in a series.
Try and be nice to people. Avoid eating fat. Read a good book every now and then. Get some walking in… and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations.
I need to ask what might sound like a stupid question and I am not trying to start a MAC vs PC war! I was at another forum (NAPP) and saw a post regarding activation which prompts this question: Do MAC platforms using PS CS have to activate their software like PC users?
I know this might sound like a stupid question, have waited several hours before asking, but the thread at this other site has really propmted this.
I did check the MAC link here and found nothing. PLease folks this is just a question no attempt to start a MAC vs PC war!
This sheds some clarity on the activation process. Obviously the vast majority of PS users does not need to activate (Corporate licences and Mac users). So either Adobe feels that the potentially "bad" boys are exclusively private WIN users, or – more likely – they probe customer reaction to activation with the least significant section of their business. In case reaction is bad, damage to the busines is limited. Hans-Georg
Unless Adobe are running a trial and saying nothing then there is no activation required on the Mac. Are you sure that you’re not confusing activation with registration?
I’ve used both the Mac and PC versions of Photoshop CS since May 03 and only ever had to activate on the PC.
I’ve used both the Mac and PC versions of Photoshop CS since May 03 and only ever had to activate on the PC I think Ian *meant* to say "never had to activate on the Mac"?
The only Mac products requiring activation are the (Simplified & Traditional) Chinese versions of Photoshop CS. Unless JWright is using one of these Mac versions, he is not having to activate the product.
I am not 100% sure that the individuals don’t have activation and registration "mixed" up… but I tend to believe the thread was referring to activation based on the number of comments I read.
This has really given me some things to think about. I feel I have always been very nuetral in my thoughs when it cames to MACs, PCs, Adobe and some of the comments made on this forum, and hope to remain so but…
It would really be interesting to see what Chris has to say!
Hans-Georg states, "Obviously the vast majority of PS users does not need to activate (Corporate licences and Mac users)".
I’m curious as to where he gets his figures. I don’t have the figures myself, but I would guess that the "vast majority of PS users" are running Windows, rather than a Mac OS, simply based on the huge number of Windows machines vs Macs. Thus, installing a piracy-protection scheme on the Windows version makes perfect sense, as that is the platform most commonly used, and represents the greatest potential loss.
And given that my brother in law saw shrink wrapped, indistinguishable from the legitimate copies of PS (both mac and Windows) in major department stores in( provincial) China for rather less than 20$US I can see why they may have put activation onto the Chinese language Mac version…
I think he was getting at the corporate version with it’s no activation multi license seats may make up more sales of PS win than individual licenses do.
Dennis, I’m thinking as you do that there are WAY more PCs out there than Macs. However, I have spoken with several folk who use PS and there’s a definite leaning toward Mac users. Seems that for years, the only way to do high-end graphics was with a MAC. Had something to do with on-board graphics or built-in graphics processing on the MB or some such thing.
Mac loyalists may have followed the swing toward PCs, but I’ll bet there are still lots of pros out there who wouldn’t be caught without their Mac machines. This includes two friends that are my mentors in learning and using PS. Every time I have a question for them, they start with "If you had a Mac, it would be easy to…"
I had to refresh my PC as I was having problems,but when I came to reinstall Photoshop CS I accidentally put the wrong Activation in, and now it will not accept the cd at all, does anybody have a solution.
I had to refresh my PC as I was having problems,but when I came to reinstall Photoshop CS I accidentally put the wrong Activation in, and now it will not accept the cd at all, does anybody have a solution.
If you haven’t already, uninstall PS completely and see if the install works. Then call Adobe and they will straighten it out. —
Mike Russell www.curvemeister.com www.geigy.2y.net
I used to be on this forum a lot, but for over a year now, I have been working two jobs, and just don’t have any time. Many of you will remember the activation problems I had with Creative Suite 1 and Photoshop activation. Of course I can’t run Photoshop CS2 on my home computer because of the activation problems with that particular computer, so I can only run it on my new work computer, which has no internet connection, and there is no telephone line there.
When Ceative Suite 2 came out, I didn’t upgrade because of the activation problems. Finally, last summer, I was in Best Buy, and right in front of me was Photoshop CS2. I broke down and bought it, and installed it on my work computer. I clicked the button to activate by phone, and copied down the code. When I got home that night, I called, and activated Photoshop. When I got to work the next morning, and typed the code into Photoshop, it wouldn’t accept it. The next day, I called Adobe, and was told that the computer only holds the code for 20 minutes. Well, my house is more than 20 minutes away from work, so I couldn’t activate Photoshop until I brought my computer home in early December. (My computer is in my shop from April until December, so I only have an internet connection for 4 months, and cell phones don’t work in Stonington, Maine).
Well, from December until July, I was enjopying using the latest version of Photoshop again, but then, my power supply died. I got a nice new 600 watt one from New Egg, and it was defective. My computer started up, and the power supply blew a gasket or something. The power supply company told me to RMA it back. When I got the replacement power supply, and turned on my computer, I got the message to load the default BIOS, or whatever it is that the message says when something has zapped your BIOS. (Must have been either the defective power supply, or the old one when it died). The next message was to set my date and time. Well, most people here know what happens when you have to reset your date and time. Every program with activation worked except Photoshop. Now it will be December before I can use Photoshop CS again, and I have to go back to an older version. Lucky thing that Adobe lets you leave an older copy on your machine until you get the bugs worked out with the latest version.
I’m just wondering if when Photoshop CS 20 comes out, we will still have to revert to Photoshop 7 every time something happens which zaps our activation.
I’m sorry for the rant, but I didn’t rant last year when I couldn’t use my legal copy of Photoshop for 6 months. Now that I am having to use an older version again this year I am really mad. I don’t understand why Adobe is still using the same activation scheme that had all of these problems when they first began using it, when there are alternatives which work well for other companies. I can’t stop using Photoshop, because there are no other viable alternatives, but when I pay for the license to use it, I expect it to let me activate. When you look at the box, no where does it say that you only have 20 minutes to get from your computer to a telephone and back. All the time I am working on my photography, I am not doing the best work possible, even though I paid for a license to use the best program. I am not a pirate. If I was a pirate, I would still be able to use Photoshop CS2. Adobe is still punishing legitimate customers because they haven’t changed the activation to something which doesn’t break all the time.
My studio is in an old Clam Factory. It’s a huge barn over the water, which can’t really be heated. When it is cold, I use a space heater. I live on an island, and I love to do my photography, but we only have tourists for 6 weeks of the year, and there aren’t enough year round residents to support me for the rest of the year. It makes no sense to pay $18.95 a month for a telephone line, when I only make between $500 and $800 a year at the photography.
While I’ve never been in the situation you were, I agree…once a code is generated, there should be no expiration of it, and certainly not as soon as 20 minutes. A minimum of 1 day would be reasonable, but given that activation is required in order to use PS CS2, an even more generous time period should be allowed for.
As you may remember, I was no fan of activation in PS CS for how poorly it was implemented and prone to random failures, leaving the user with a useless piece of software due to the lack of any reactivation grace period. Although that remains true with PS CS2, the license management of it is far, far improved over PS CS. I have not seen a single failure of the license manager since I first purchased and installed PS CS2, whether on my desktop or laptop system.
I’m surprised your power loss caused a corruption of it, but the fact that it did means that somehow the activation hash (presumably the one in the hard drive boot sector) was corrupted. Having to reset your BIOS shouldn’t have affected it at all, nor should setting the system time again. That probably would have affected PC CS’s activation, but I don’t believe it would hurt PS CS2. I say that partly based upon having just built a new PC, installing PS CS2, and later re-flashing the BIOS to explore some system issues. Admittedly I didn’t have to reset the time, but I still don’t think that would have affected anything. For all of what I’ve observed and tried to test out with PS CS2, time has never factored into causing any activation/reactivation issues. The activation is tied only to the hard drive itself, and that drive can be moved to another system and PS CS2 will still run fine, even though the two systems may have different system times.
I think you just suffered an unusual situation…one which I’m surprised didn’t cause greater data loss on your hard drive since it seemingly affected the hidden area of the boot sector. That notwithstanding, you have identified what I’d consider a serious issue that Adobe should indeed address. Requiring no more than 20 minutes elapse between when an activation code is generated and an authorization code (or whatever its called) being entered, is stupid.
In my opinion, Adobe should address these issues in the next release of Photoshop:
1. Provide a grace period for reactivation.
2. Provide a minimum of a 24-hour period to enter an authorization code after an activation key has been generated.
3. Provide a method to export the activation data to removable media so that reactivation can be performed as a localized process by importing that data, eliminating the requirement for any telphone or internet connection. This data should be duplicatable and reusable so that reactivation can be performed any time a need arises to do so..
4. Related to #3, provide a method to export activation data that includes a Transfer of Activation status, so that this data may be used for a localized Transfer Activation process, eliminating the required internet connection. This would have to be implemented in such a way that the data cannot be used but once per activation transfer, so that multiple machines cannot be activated with the same data.
It looks as though you’ve got quite a place to work and get those creative juices flowing!
Hi Daryl, I do remember that you like this method of activation as much as I do. Also, good points. At the very least, we should get the 30 days grace period, since the program obviously knows that it was once installed on the machine it deactivated from, and 24 hours should be the minimum amount of time anyone has to enter the numbers they get from Adobe.
That’s an interesting point about the hard drive thing. Possibly it wasn’t the zapped BIOS and date and time thing which zapped my activation. I remember with CS1, that if the date and time was rteset, it would trigger the need to reactivate, so I just assumed it was the same with this version.
My old power supply didn’t die instantly, it had a long, painful death, with lots of symptoms which could have been anything. My first fear was that it was one of my hard drives. (I have four). When I checked my error log thing in Windoes, I was getting codes related to hard drive failure, but all of my drives tested as okay. I disabled them one by one, but had the same problem no matter which one was hooked up. The next cheapest thing I could do was to put them on my promise chip instead of the VIA chip, but the results were the same. (All my drivers were up to date). I then stuck in a new VIA PCI card, but that didn’t help. I had already swapped out both sticks of RAM and tried them in different slots. The next thing I decided to try was the PSU, because a new one is cheaper than a new graphics card, mother board, or CPU. The power supply seems to have fixed the problem, knock on wood.
Anyway, now I’m wondering if moving my hard drives to different chips may have been the problem, rather than the zapped BIOS and date and time.
Yeah, the clam factory is a pretty amazing building, with an interesting history. It belonged to my great grandfather. I also live in a great place for photography. It sure is a lot more fun than my other job as a minimum wage deli slave at the local grocery store!
A possible solution would be to use a CB or SW radio (like in The Shining) to contact someone who would telephone the Adobe activation number on your behalf. They would then relay the activation response number to you so you could get PS working.
I agree that there needs to be a more sensible activation alternative for folks in isolated areas. But this would at least get you up and working with the software you paid for.
Hi, I have Photoshop CS on 2 computers. I would like to remove it from one computer and install it on a new computer. Can someone tell me how? Thank You;-)
I don’t think there was a deactivate in cs. so just uninstall and reinstall. if you have problems you’ll have to call, but i believe they used a rolling activation screen so that after X months, the available activation count per license would be reset. (x=3? 6?)
Thanks Dave M. I installed it on the new computer. Tried to activate and was denied. (that was before I remembered I had a copy on a laptop up in the closet that I haven’t used for a long time.) So I called Adobe for help and got a person that I could not understand. (Asian?) So that’s when I decided to try the Forum. I appreciate your help. Best Regards, Riley
I sympathize, John. I recently had a hard drive crash, one that had CS4 installed on it. Replaced the HD, got everything up and running, and of course, had to call Adobe to re-activate. Got an offshore woman who was vary hard to understand, and who was having a hard time understanding what I needed to do. She finally got it done, though, after several sessions of putting me on hold.
So I called Adobe for help and got a person that I could not understand.
I hear ya, but they’re the only ones who can restore an activation, call back and get another rep. if you can’t understand someone, politely ask to speak to a supervisor because you’re having trouble understanding their accent.
I’m back, I finally mustered-up the will to call Adobe again. I called and when the person said hello and introduced himself I hung up.(Same guy I think). Waited a while, called back and got ‘Russenn’ (roll the R) who I could understand. He said that I should have called before removing CS from my other computer…but that he would make an exception for me.(sigh) After giving him all my personal information he gave me an account number. After some chat he gave me the Authorization Code.(relief) Then he asked me to give him positive feedback. I told him I would praise him. Riley;-)
PS. Thanks again and I enjoyed the humor! If I had a relevant joke I would add it.
On the other hand… "Two men walked into a bar… the third one ducked."
If so, I suggest you explore the possibility of a sense of humor, or at least the recognition that other people may have one.
I meant no harm by my earlier joke, which you didn’t apparently like. Sorry about that, but I don’t excel at being politically correct in everything that I do or say.
Now, we know that you’re not an expert at humor, so what exactly is it that makes you an expert at Photoshop? Or, are you only an expert at trolling?
(Go ahead, Bob. RO it. Won’t bother me a bit, the OP is happy, so am I.)
Would there be a problem Installing CS4 on a machine that is not connected to the internet? i.e. It can’t be activated. Is there a time limit on usage.
Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!
Related Discussion Topics
Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections
