# Changes to Adobe Software Availability



## Paul_DS256 (May 14, 2019)

I received this email from Adobe the other day but can't understand if it relates to my old LR 6 I still run on my old Macbook. I also saw this blog from Light Stalking about limited access to older versions.  

I presently use LR Classic on my home desktop computer but LR  6 on my MacBook. I tried to upgrade the MacOS to a version that would support LR Classic but I took a huge performance hit so down graded.

Can some explain what Adobe is doing?

Thanks


----------



## Paul_DS256 (May 14, 2019)

I found a related conversation already going on at Downloading perpetual LR/PS versions


----------



## Victoria Bampton (May 14, 2019)

You can still run LR6 on your MacBook. If it's a perpetual license, you don't need to do anything. If it's subscription licensed and you want to be entirely legal, simply uninstall and reinstall it. If you decide not to bother, Adobe's just absolving themselves of legal responsibility.


----------



## Paul_DS256 (May 14, 2019)

Thanks Victoria. Adobe doesn't make it easy to understand.


----------



## Victoria Bampton (May 14, 2019)

Paul_DS256 said:


> Thanks Victoria. Adobe doesn't make it easy to understand.


I think they're limited by what they can legally say on this one - but yes, communication's not a strength at the best of times!


----------



## PhilBurton (May 14, 2019)

Victoria Bampton said:


> I think they're limited by what they can legally say on this one - but yes, communication's not a strength at the best of times!


 As best as I can understand the root cause of this latest brouhaha is Oracle's changes to the license for commercial use of Java.  You can read about the changes here Java licensing has changed, and you could be affected.  These changes are public knowledge.  Nothing is preventing Adobe from announcing that changes initated by Oracle have caused them to make their own changes.

This issue is a microcosm of a fundamental issue in the entire software industry.  Many commercial products are built with components purchased or licenced from other companies.  (Just look at the About tab for LR.)  If that other company changes terms or drops support for their product, then the first-party vendor has to make adjustments or there may be impacts on the product.  We saw that happen a bit earlier when Google changed the Maps API, and the Maps features in LR 6 stopped working, because Adobe (apparently) declined to update LR 6.14 to use the newer Maps API.


----------



## Johan Elzenga (May 14, 2019)

PhilBurton said:


> Nothing is preventing Adobe from announcing that changes initated by Oracle have caused them to make their own changes.


I'm sure that if Adobe _could_ explain it publicly, they would.


----------



## Conrad Chavez (May 14, 2019)

It has been pointed out that Avid published a nearly identical announcement for their applications, with very similar impacts regarding perpetual and subscription licenses:
http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/FAQ/Changes-to-Media-Composer-Licenses-in-2019/


> Due to licensing reasons, Avid will be updating Media Composer licenses and subscriptions, which will impact the software versions that they can run. Beginning May 30th, 2019, new perpetual and subscription licenses will only be able to run Media Composer 2018.9 or higher. In addition, existing subscriptions will only be able to run Media Composer 2018.9 or higher upon renewal. Please review the below Q&A for more information.



Avid is also not going into additional detail about the "licensing reasons." Something out there is apparently affecting multiple developers.


----------



## PhilBurton (May 15, 2019)

Conrad Chavez said:


> Avid is also not going into additional detail about the "licensing reasons." Something out there is apparently affecting multiple developers.



I'm going to "speculate" that the common reason is management tone-deafness to their customers' needs.

Phil


----------



## Victoria Bampton (May 15, 2019)

PhilBurton said:


> I'm going to "speculate" that the common reason is management tone-deafness to their customers' needs.


While Adobe's often (quite rightly) seen as "the bad guy", Adobe's clearly being sued for something (one might Google to see what's most likely), so they'll be watching what they're saying. They certainly could have phrased it a million times better, but this doesn't look like something they'd have done to spite their customers.


----------

