Allegorithmic is joining the Adobe family (Part2)

[Vincent Gault]

I already switched to Modo because I don’t agree with the licensing policies of Autodesk and maybe I will also switch to Mari for texturing it’s also a very nice tool and they seem to keep their Perpetual license system, and I saw that Blender has some very nice Texturing tools as well. I’m currently still subscribed, let’s see where all of this will lead us.

I’m also scared that Allegorythmic will go a similar as Mixamo. The online service lost Features and sometimes Completely shut down and since they where bought by adobe there wasn’t any updates anymore…

Once again, you are assuming that the perpetual licensing is going away: did we announced that?

Second, we can argue on many things about Mari vs Substance, but I don't think there are any debates about the pricing:

[Vincent Gault]

Some more news/confirmations: https://allegorithmic.com/blog/substance-team-joins-adobe-family-update

basically: subscription AND perpetual license remain

[geoffeep]

Some more news/confirmations: https://allegorithmic.com/blog/substance-team-joins-adobe-family-update

basically: subscription AND perpetual license remain

Nice!!
Presumably the same deal for perpetual licenses of Substance Designer Pro, not just indie?

Or are Pro and Indie entirely equivalent these days, aside from revenue limitations?

[Sagar Thapa 0]

To everyone at Allegorithmic. Thank you for this! 

[Rectro30]

Some more news/confirmations: https://allegorithmic.com/blog/substance-team-joins-adobe-family-update

basically: subscription AND perpetual license remain

Thats not how I read this in full context. How I read it in short is that the perpetual licence will be kept for a limited time period until "when" not "if" the subscription model picks up pace and takes over.  The reason given is to innovate faster. to offer more value.

"These future offerings will be primarily subscription-based, but we will continue to offer indie perpetual licenses. We believe that when the content and services offered in a subscription package evolve and improve at a steady pace, the subscription model is the best way for us to innovate fast, continuously improve your tools, and bring you more value."

[Vincent Gault]

Some more news/confirmations: https://allegorithmic.com/blog/substance-team-joins-adobe-family-update

basically: subscription AND perpetual license remain

Thats not how I read this in full context. How I read it in short is that the perpetual licence will be kept for a limited time period until "when" not "if" the subscription model picks up pace and takes over.  The reason given is to innovate faster. to offer more value.

"These future offerings will be primarily subscription-based, but we will continue to offer indie perpetual licenses. We believe that when the content and services offered in a subscription package evolve and improve at a steady pace, the subscription model is the best way for us to innovate fast, continuously improve your tools, and bring you more value."

Indeed we don't read the same thing, we just precise that Yes, from a from a software development point of view, the subscription model allows us to develop faster and to offer more things. This is not new at all, and this is something we explained a long time ago. You are bringing your 'until' and 'when' from nowhere, and elaborate conclusions from this. Once again this is the strategy we have defined because we think it's the proper one. We hope you like it.

[ninsix]

So basically, the "We believe that when the content and services... & These future offerings will be primarily subscription-based" line signals you are all in with Adobe's method of turning SOFTWARE AS A PRODUCT...into SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE.

This is not pro-consumer. I'm afraid that all the damage control up until this point was done in bad faith, trying to use emotional appeal to make it seem like it wouldnt be the adobe "business as usual", but thats exactly what we seem to be getting.

 "I told you so" seems like a good response (feel free to correct me if I am wrong on this, but be honest as this message comes with exactly what many of us expected, in a bad way).

[Daf57]

We are truly at a "wait and see" stage here, and the Allegorithmic guys deserve the benefit of the doubt. Every possible question and speculation has been covered in this thread. The deal is done so let's just wait and see how it shakes out.

[Milus Thomas]

Hello All!
I'm relatively new et Substance Painter, i bought an indy licence, half a year ago, and i'm realy scared about what i can read and hear about Adobe, particulary from the folowing: " What you crate in an Adobe product is automaticaly become an Adobe product" I dont know if it is true, or not, but it is realy  crucial. So the question is realy simple: How the ownership of the artworks, created in Substance Painter, or other products will looks like in the future? Can we call our artworks to our own, or they will be Adobe products?

[Deep Diver]

@Milus Thomas | Yeah, I don't think you need to worry about that, because all art is copyrighted by the author of the work, if you're in the United States. I don't know how it works everywhere else, but it should be pretty easy to fight in court, as my argument would be, "The artist is the creator of the work, regardless of the medium they use." This is supported by Title 17, U.S. Code, that all digital art is considered to be on the same guidelines as a painting.

@Vincent Gault | SO, I'm an Adobe Creative Cloud user , and can't wait for the addition of Substance painter, do you know a general time frame they will be adding your software to the Cloud, if at all? (I.E. end of the year, a year, two!?)

Also to everyone, there is a group of people (including me) that wants to see the Algorithmic team come to Adobe with Substance, as is, and to continue their remarkable ground breaking work.

[Milus Thomas]

@Dipe Diver
Thank you, it is great relief! I'm not in the US, but i agree with your statement.

@Substance team
I know times like this is can be turbulent, but i wish you came out of it stronger, and batter then ever. Even if i abbsolultly agree with the concerns of many people here, ( i allso works for a big corporation, and things are realy are, as many discribed here) but i think, a great product, well known in the industry, and loved worldwide will not disappear. Be creative, innovative, and never stop listen to your costumers, and things will be fine. God luck to all of you!

[o.chabrand89]

Hello All!
 " What you crate in an Adobe product is automaticaly become an Adobe product" I

That is outrageously untrue and honestly, I'm surprised anyone would believe such obvious falsehoods. If Adobe could claim that then every Disney Movie would be paying royalties to Adobe because Adobe would own every movie they made.
Basically, no that's not true and anyone that told you that is either playing you for a fool or a fool themselves.

[Simon Spencer]

The recent blog post stated "perpertual Indie licenses" would remain after the transition - what about users like myself who have a Pro license, wishing to upgrade to the newest version?

[Vincent Gault]

So basically, the "We believe that when the content and services... & These future offerings will be primarily subscription-based" line signals you are all in with Adobe's method of turning SOFTWARE AS A PRODUCT...into SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE.

This is not pro-consumer. I'm afraid that all the damage control up until this point was done in bad faith, trying to use emotional appeal to make it seem like it wouldn't be the adobe "business as usual", but that's exactly what we seem to be getting.

 "I told you so" seems like a good response (feel free to correct me if I am wrong on this, but be honest as this message comes with exactly what many of us expected, in a bad way).

Let's take the entire phrase: "These future offerings will be primarily subscription-based, but we will continue to offer indie perpetual licenses."

so we are not turning software as a product to software as a service: we are offering both, as some people like you prefer perpetual, while some other will go for the monthly sub as it fits better to their needs. and indeed (as I already said on a previous post), from a development point of view the monthly sub makes more sense as we can develop and offer more. This is neither new nor related to Adobe acquisition: Substance Source, for example, has always been something we can offer via the sub.

hope it helps

[Vincent Gault]

Hello All!
I'm relatively new et Substance Painter, i bought an indy licence, half a year ago, and i'm realy scared about what i can read and hear about Adobe, particulary from the folowing: " What you crate in an Adobe product is automaticaly become an Adobe product" I dont know if it is true, or not, but it is realy  crucial. So the question is realy simple: How the ownership of the artworks, created in Substance Painter, or other products will looks like in the future? Can we call our artworks to our own, or they will be Adobe products?

I don't know where you read this, but this is completely untrue.