[Jim Dalrymple]

In reply to:

---

Question how does deauthroization work. For example when I deauth a computer but try to run the app still on that computer the article says it won't work. Does that mean my computer is checking in with Adobe everytime I run it?

---

I just deauthorized CS2 disconnected from the Internet and tried to launch GoLive. It came up with the activation screen and asked me to pick a way to activate.
Last night I was offline and using Photoshop and it worked fine, so it would seem that it's being done without contacting Adobe.

[adobephile]

Your irritation is based on false assumptions, and on misunderstandings of what was said in the article, of Alec's, and of my prior statements.
First of all, piracy is a phenomenon which, like it or not, does affect us all in one way or another. The "hassle" of more explicit security measures is not as large an effect as that of a company such as Adobe simply closing its doors, not wanting the "hassle" of its products being stolen.
And you're complaining already about something you haven't even seen. The activation process is simple and really no hinderance if you want to install Adobe apps on more than two machines. You click "transfer" on one machine and get a prompt acknowledgment. Then you go to the other machine and click "activate", and it's done.
No one's twisting your arm to upgrade, either. But you can at least download the trial versions to see what's there before you start bad-mouthing the products. That would be the reasonable thing to do.

[cjmahony]

In reply to:

---

I just deauthorized CS2 disconnected from the Internet and tried to launch GoLive. It came up with the activation screen and asked me to pick a way to activate.
Last night I was offline and using Photoshop and it worked fine, so it would seem that it's being done without contacting Adobe.

---

When you activated GoLive, this activated the whole suite. So when you ran Photoshop, it had already been activated. You had made contact with Adobe for this activation.
The trouble with activation isn't the 30 seconds it takes when you activate the software, it the 30 seconds after you reformat your hard drive and remember that you didn't deactivate the software.

[KARTman]

I think Adobe's Activation plan sounds fair, and if the users would just take a little bit of time to understand how it works, it will be a great thing.
I have been supporting for Publishing for the past 15 years, and have dealt with all sorts of activation schemes. I have had to sometimes do hacks, cracks and pirates to get a piece of softwork working that we legitimately owned, just to get it work on a particular piece of hardware. I have always battled Quark licensing, particularly for my site of 50+ users. This was especially evident when Quark came out with Quark 6.X and Quark License Administrator(QLA). However, over the last year I have become a real fan of Quark and their activation schema, especially now that I understand it. Quark licensing seems like a real fair way to do things, and it gives me the flexibility of having Quark installed on more machines then users. This is real cost effective, because about 30% of my users are not full time Quark users, so I don't have to pay for full license for them. It also allows me to install Quark on my users home machines and laptops, so they can do work outside of the company, and not have to violate any licensing policies.
I hope that Adobe CS2 Activation will work on par with Quark scheme. I know that Quark's activation ties the activation code in with the Ethernet ID of the machine, so that you cannot easily move the license for that machine around, unless you are using something like QLA. I would like to know if Adobe's Activation also ties in the activation with the Ethernet ID of the machine. I need to upgrade my site license for PhotoShop and Illustrator, and I hope that this will now allow for the flexibility that Quark offers.

[moose_n_squirrel]

In reply to:

---

Does that mean my computer is checking in with Adobe everytime I run it?

---

I don't think any company on Earth would want to take on that kid of burden, dumping money into huge server farms just to process millions of activations every day of the year. Plus it would mean that nobody could work offline, like on an airplane.

[fribhey]

In reply to:

---

For example when I deauth a computer but try to run the app still on that computer the article says it won't work. Does that mean my computer is checking in with Adobe everytime I run it?

---

no i don't believe that's how it works. from my understanding is that it will work similar to Quark. this is how it is explained to me from Quark: when you initially activate the software there is an activation key generated which is associated with your serial number, this info is stored on your machine. when you deauthorize the software i believe that's when adobe checks in on your computer to remove the activation key.... and in order to run the software you need both the key and the serial number.
but that's what Quark told me, whether that's a load of BS or me not completely understanding her explanation because of her Indian accent is another thing.

[fribhey]

In reply to:

---

I just deauthorized CS2 disconnected from the Internet and tried to launch GoLive. It came up with the activation screen and asked me to pick a way to activate.
Last night I was offline and using Photoshop and it worked fine, so it would seem that it's being done without contacting Adobe.

---

right because when you activate software an activation key is put into your prefs along with the serial number. when you deactivate the software that activation key is removed. the software won't run without both the serial number and activation key that is associated with that serial number.

[Jim Dalrymple]

In reply to:

---

The trouble with activation isn't the 30 seconds it takes when you activate the software, it the 30 seconds after you reformat your hard drive and remember that you didn't deactivate the software.

---

Good point -- in that case you would have to call Adobe to deactivate. If you uninstall the software CS2 will prompt you to deactivate.
Jim

[Nobody]

I am in a similar boat. For various reasons I need to run different versions of OSX on different hard drives. I can see that anyone with unusual set-ups is going to suffer. They will have to convince the powers to be, who always seem to be difficult to reach, why they should manage their own machines the way they see fit.
I am also disturbed by the incongruous pricing structure based around Photoshop ownership. Whether you owned just PhotoShop or the entire suite of software you paid the same, very high cost of upgrading last time and I see no difference this time. MacroMedia screwed me one time too many with their "Suites" which was when I gave up on them.
How many people never use the unwanted programs in the suite but are forced to pay for them because the other options are worse?
The extra sting in the tail is that most users upgrade in (usually vain) hopes of specific bug fixes and to not be locked out of opening other peoples' files.
Adobe has made the chain of programs necessary to open legacy files painful. Even if we can get away with it, it won't be long before we have another PageMaker on our hands and sticky notes everywhere reminding us in what sequence conversions must be done.
Unfortunately I think Adobe sees itself as getting the upper hand in its competition with Quark. Won't be long and Quark will be forgotten and then Adobe will be "enforcing existing software agreements" in a far less subtle manner.
----------
btw I am not defending piracy but where companies manage to implement strong protection on their software 4 things happen. The price goes through the roof, complacency sets in, customers drop off and eventually the product fails leaving a very bitter taste in everyone's mouths.
Having to run software on legacy machines that require dongles, I certainly will not recommend them as a solution. They add a whole new level of failure and inflexibility to production. I've spent a whole day trying to resolve a last minute failure to print which I tracked down to the dongle. Like most things in the computer industry they are badly labelled, and an imperceptible hardware (bent pin) or software failure can have catastrophic results.
Will Adobe be giving clear instructions how to backup the crucial activation file or will users be left to hang out to dry when things inevitably go wrong?

[pawliger]

For more information straight from the source, please visit http://www.adobe.com/activation There is a FAQ, as well as details on many of the questions asked here, including answers to "What happens if my machine or hard drive crashes/is stolen and I need to reinstall?", "What happens if I format my disk?", "What if I have many machines to administer (I am part of the Volume License Plan)?", and "Does activated software contact Adobe every time it's used?"
Note the activation now being used in all CS2 versions of products on all platforms is identical in functionality to the activation that was used in Photoshop CS on Windows for the past year and a half.

[altivec]

In reply to:

---

First of all, piracy is a phenomenon which, like it or not, does affect us all in one way or another. The "hassle" of more explicit security measures is not as large an effect as that of a company such as Adobe simply closing its doors, not wanting the "hassle" of its products being stolen.

---

Nobody is saying that piracy is good. Activation only punishes the honest. Quark, Microsoft and Macromedia have activation and there software is still getting pirated. If I wasn't honest, I wouldn't be complaining, I would just download the activation workaround patch and make my thousand copies.

In reply to:

---

And you're complaining already about something you haven't even seen. The activation process is simple and really no hinderance if you want to install Adobe apps on more than two machines. You click "transfer" on one machine and get a prompt acknowledgment. Then you go to the other machine and click "activate", and it's done.

---

I am not denying the fact that it may be simple to activate, however, what if your hard drive crashes or your computer dies. You say simple. just call in long distance, spend 10 minutes on hold (being generous with hold time), get the third degree answering a billion questions and hopefully you get your machine deactivated. That's fine and dandy if all you own is Adobe's Suite. If this is allowed to become the norm, soon even simple things such as your photoshop filters will have activation. How in the world do you expect to deal with a failure. Everyone will have a slightly different procedure and different levels of support. I would need to set up a database to organize this. It would take me literally months to get back to normal. To say this is ok, is absolutely ridiculous, considering this doesn't even solve the problem they are trying to fix.
So these are the facts:
Pirating will continue as pirates always find a way
Honest users are punished
Adobe increases prices (this should be going down if they believe they are actually cutting piracy)
I will guarantee you that Adobe sales will go down and not up like they are thinking. So far every company that has introduced activation has seen their sales tank. Adobe will be no exception. I will not budge from my stance. I will not upgrade any software that has activation. I own Office 2001, Quark 5.1, and the last Macromedia Studio with out activation and so far my life still seems to go on. In fact my software budget keeps getting bigger because they refuse to take my money.
I never thought in a million years that I would be looking at photoshop alternatives such as GIMP but when I get a chance, that will be the first thing I do. Apple if your listening, I've got a lot of money saved up for a photoshop killer.

[mdawson]

While Adobe, or any software developer has the right to protect the sales of their merchandise, they do not have the right to punish honest customers to do so. The entire software activation scheme is such an Orwellian Microsoftism in it application that it is reminiscent of a police state mentality. When I buy music or movies, I do not have to activate themnot that the RIAA and MPAA would not like to try such a tactic, but their closest attempt, DivX, failed miserablyso when I buy software the same should apply.
As has already been mentioned here, this will create logistical nightmare in corporate and lab settings where multiple machines are managed and several software packages are installed. In any given academic computer lab, a single machine can have dozens of applications installed to meet the computing needs of a very diverse user base. As for the personal user, especially on the Windows side, this can also be a nightmare. Every time someone needs to re-install software for whatever reason, they have to deactivate the old copy and activate it again. This is punishing the customer pure and simple.
Also, as was mentioned here, this gives far too much control to the software developer in terms of upgrades. I know several people that have very old versions of certain software packages for various reasons. The underlying logic is often that what they have fits their needs. While they may not upgrade their software often, some do regularly upgrade their computers. What happens when developer A decides to not permit activation because the user is trying to activate an older version of software that the company no longer supports? No developer has the right to tell me that I can no longer use software that I have legitimately purchased. Can you imagine what kind of world we would be living in if car manufactures could force people to purchase new cars every few years or if components of your home audio system were essentially designed to fail after a set period of time?
What Adobe, Macromedia, Microsoft and all other companies are doing with this activation scheme goes beyond being unethical. When I buy food I do not have to call General Mills to get permission to eat it. When I buy a car, I do not have to call Saturn to get permission to drive it. When I buy a television, I do not have to call Sony to get permission to watch it. When I buy clothes, I do not have to call Eddie Bauer to get permission to where them. Once something is purchased, the manufacturer is out of the loop excepting customer support issues. This tactic is wrong no matter how you try to look at it.

[melgross]

It is a joke when people threaten to never buy Adobe's products again because of this.
Either you guys have NEVER bought the products in the first place, or you are just smoken'.
There is no comparable product out there, and it's highly unlikely that there will be.
As for GIMP, that's a laugh! I have GIMP installed as well. Sure for basic things it can be used. If you really want to spend several times as much effort, more complex work can be accomplished as well. But I would NEVER consider using it for more than experimentation. It's clumsy, incomplete, and doesn't fit into a modern publishing workflow. It will never be a competitor. Why do you think that Linux users consider Photoshop to be one of the most important apps? Ditto for InDesign and Illustrator.
I admit that activation is annoying. I'm not happy about it either. but we are going to have to live with it.
My audio and 3D programs have always used either activation or dongles. If you think that a dongle is better, think again. Even my calibration tools use a dongle.
I've always had to buy several copies of Photoshop, etc. for my shop. The reason, for those who obviously don't know, is that you can't run more than one copy at the same time over a network if it has the same serial number. This is nothing new. It's been in place for quite some time. So there is no difference there. Most shops will need the same number of licenses they needed before.
My wife is an attorney for CitiGroup, and has dealt with Adobe a number of times over the years. She tells me that they are the easiest software company to do business with, that they understand the needs of their customers. I would imagine that they will work something out on that high level, if they haven't already.
This is the way of the future. It's too bad, but that's the way it is.

[mdawson]

In reply to:

---

I am not denying the fact that it may be simple to activate, however, what if your hard drive crashes or your computer dies. You say simple. just call in long distance, spend 10 minutes on hold (being generous with hold time), get the third degree answering a billion questions and hopefully you get your machine deactivated. That's fine and dandy if all you own is Adobe's Suite. If this is allowed to become the norm, soon even simple things such as your photoshop filters will have activation. How in the world do you expect to deal with a failure. Everyone will have a slightly different procedure and different levels of support. I would need to set up a database to organize this. It would take me literally months to get back to normal. To say this is ok, is absolutely ridiculous, considering this doesn't even solve the problem they are trying to fix.

---

You hit the nail on the head my friend. If this had become the norm before I bought my Cube and the software I now have on it this would mean that when I am finally in a position to upgrade in the next six months to a year, I would have to deactivate and re-activate:

[*] Microsoft Office:mac
[*]Vectorworks
[*]Adobe Acrobat
[*]Macromedia Web Studio
[*]Micromat TechTool Pro
[*]Canvas Pro
[*]Alien Skin Eye Candy
[*]GraphicConverter
[/list]and a number of other little apps that are on my Mac that I cannot recall right now. The task of re-installing software is daunting enough, particularly for those of us that run several packages, without adding activation/deactivation to the process. This is especially true for someone like me for whom the next Mac purchase also means finally moving from Mac OS 9 to OS X and replacing all of my apps with OS X versions.
Also think of this. With the Mac mini making the cost of switching financially less burdensome for those people that are fed up with all of Windows failings, imagine if they had to activate all of the software that they installed on their new Macs. While this would not be Apples fault, the simple fact that they had to go through such an ordeal will leave a bad taste in their mouths. After all, the whole point of switching to a Mac is to escape all of the hassles associated with using a Windows-based machine.