I have no desire to be an apologist for my bank account.
That said, some of the old features it has depend on the amount of money
leaving it not exceeding the amount coming in. So, the use of standalone
LR ensures that the bank account is capable of being used to provide the
future.
This gentle balance is one reason why CC subscription can be an
unreasonable requirement for these old features.
Otherwise, I'd have to search for more and more of $$ to support features
like this, making using LR more unreasonable and ultimately increasing the
potential risks of bugs crawling into my proverbial wallet.
And if I am not needing both PS and LR, the cost analysis clearly shows
that a standalone LR is much cheaper than CC.
:-)
Cheers,
Igor
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I have no desire to be an apologist for Adobe.
That said, some of the new features they add to Lightroom CC depend upon
service programming interfaces (SPIs) which utilize Photoshop CC internal
libraries to get the job done , so the use of CC ensures that the correct
versions of both LR and PS are installed and capable of being used to provide
the feature.
This integration is one reason why CC subscription can be a reasonable
requirement for these new features. Otherwise, they'd have to port more and
more of PS into LR to support new features like this, making testing more
expensive and ultimately increasing the potential risks of bugs on different
versions of LR and PS.
And if you are going to need both PS and LR, the cost analysis of what it
takes to stay up to date between perpetual license versions and subscription
favors subscription.
G
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
