They are a day late and a nickel short for me. I have my work flow shifted over to Pixelmator and Pixelmator Photo. I am not going back.
Photoshop has always been expensive, and I think rightly so, but its being a subscription makes it unjustifiable for a hobbyist like me, at this point. I’m kinda sad. I wish they’d offer a 1-and-done with a support expiration date, instead, so that I could always have and use a given version I’ve purchased to the extent it continues to work for me on the hardware it was offered for. I can see how professional software might need subscription revenue to remain a viable business into the future with how demanding cloud service ongoing costs are and such, but I still reject the business model as a consumer and end-user, and I think the solution isn’t to bend consumers to the business, but craft the anscillary and cloud stuff in such a way as it can be neatly excised and revolve instead around the individual user’s control of their own assets, locally or in the cloud (or both). I notice reviews already complain of servers locking them out of creating new documents even after verifying their login. It’s literally a reverse-personal computing dystopia, as far as I’m concerned. F that.
I still use version 5.5 of Photoshop, due to the cost.
Abso-f’n-lutely. (And can I borrow “reverse-personal computing dystopia” sometime?)
Feel free 
(not like I set out to coin anything 
)
the photoshop/lightroom package is $10 a month and can be used across multiple devices…I think it’s a pretty good deal personally…
This excites me. I’d have to get a keyboard for my iPad to see how well it works. I’m currently sitting in the executive q&a.
Nice. I’m looking forward to loading it up on mine.
Value for money arguments really miss the point, which is liberty and autonomy. I mean, we live in an age of free products, and the consensus is clear that the trade-off’s aren’t always wise. Depending on who you are and what work you do with it, yes, I’m sure many will find it an excellent value and I don’t begrudge that at all. What I do resent is leaving anyone else behind in a way that curtails even those paying customers’ ability to use it to their own ends, and that is something I think everyone, regardless of whether or not they’re a Photoshop user, should be concerned by. Tra-la-la-ing that you don’t mind a nominal fee is as tone-deaf as any anti-inclusionary tech myopia there’s ever been. Free/open-source alternatives are the very best value by that logic, yet I seriously doubt anyone so eager to use Photoshop as you seem to be wouldn’t be given pause if forced to take your own argument on price at face-value.
I tried to stay away from photoshop. Tried FOSS alternates. Worked. But I needed more and wanted more efficiency. So yeah, the value of time meant more for ME than fighting with apps that didn’t provide a need and efficiency. I ran Ubuntu/kbuntu/mint for years until those distros started costing me time. Had to make a choice and spend cash I didn’t want to. 
I see/hear the pricing or subscription anger all the time. Adobe does, too. And I remember when the CEO was asked about it in a presser I attended, he looked the person in the eye and discussed why the subscription is what it is. Almost like a take it or leave it. Unapologetically. Seems to work fine as a business model for them.
Plenty of other options such as Affinity or freebies.
I prefer Apple for what I feel to be many similar reasons. Since iOS 12 proved old device users still matter to them, I’m less down on them in these regards. I think it’s important not to let irrationally angry users cloud what I find to be legitimate and vital arguments against the loss of liberty in commercial software. That a business model is secure is no less irrelevant IMO than price-value propositions, particularly in the case of software where constraints are fundamentally negotiable to a degree perhaps greater than in any other sector: a secure, but more modest, business model I am sure could be proven at least as sustainable which satisfies basic libertine stipulations I mentioned above. It would be more work. It would slow them down. As you noted, the hot-bed of an industry leader can premiere efficiencies and features others cannot and this is why arguing for their bearing the standard for user empowerment is IMO inescapable if we know what’s good for us.
The reason I’m piping up about this on iOS’ Photoshop debut is that this represents likely their best opportunity to return the dignity of ownership to users. Such a modest launch feature-set surely could have succeeded commercially (their earlier hobbled bite-size apps were just that, which I consider different in kind now that iPad OS & iOS 13 are here); subsequent releases would sequester cloud integration into optional means to be subscription for those wanting that, without locking paid users out of their “licensed” software “copies” (again, today’s examples of logged-in, paying users’ inability to create new documents… shaking head ).
Alternatives like Affinity go a long way for a lot of users/use-cases, but don’t benefit from the vast troves of hegemonic institutionalized intertia in the space both technically and politically amongst corporate/deployment decision-makers. Even Adobe’s own backward/cross-compatibility is a patchwork hellscape; 3rd parties can’t ever hope to avoid drop-stitches beyond their control. Free but not open-source alternatives generally are stuffed with privacy trojans and stunted IAP shenanigans.
There are already some very good alternatives for the iPad. For my photography on this trip I’m using Pixelmator Photo and Darkroom. Both handle the A7R4 RAW files although Pixelmator Photo won’t open files larger than 57 megapixels. If I open it in Darkroom then pass it to PP it works. I have this weird feeling it’s converting the raw to jpeg though.
I have the CC Photography subscription but I just hate what Adobe is doing with Lightroom and the forced cloud storage. I’m considering moving to DxO on the desktop.
I love this community and the discussions here 
My problem is that no other app that I’ve found offers the Fuji Film simulations that Lightroom does. That and the presets that I use keep me on Lightroom.
Interesting, @Leo… I easily move around Lightroom, LR Classic, LR on iPad and LR on Android without worrying or interfacing with Adobe cloud storage. I use the 100gb that comes with my subscription to host my current edits and files, and use LR Classic on desktop to manage my local copies (with google backing everything up to the cloud)…
Doesn’t Lightroom want to sync the entire catalog? I’m up to 2TB on cloud with no end in sight. You must store your photos outside of LR.
Capture One does, actually partnered with Fuji on them.
I set up my lightroom catalog so that when I import it is only referential. Functionally it works the same, but this prevents an entire sync. for photos I know I want in lightroom mobile (for editing on device or posting to social media) I place in a collection that is set up to sync. Any photo that starts on my iPad or Note 9 automatically syncs back down to lightroom. This way even on desktop I can switch between Lightroom Classic or the new version.
I’ve spent a lot of time figuring out the right set up on all of this, including how to have Google Drive backup everything without duplicating anything. Took a long time to tweak everything to my liking.