Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 592 posts

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#401

Post by unfocussed_mike »

bambax wrote: post #245
oldstrangers wrote: post #229

Graphic designer here: I got hired at an agency recently, signed up using my company's account so I could save $50/m doing away with my subscription and ran into this issue. Very fun. Anyways, the future isn't going to be kind to Adobe. Figma has replaced a lot of my Adobe workflow, it's just infinitely a more pleasant experience. Canva has replaced things that require 3 different Adobe products to do. For serious vi…

Affinity products are really great. Not yet on par with Adobe's but almost there for most tasks, and more than enough for casual users.

It is an interesting mix of things, actually.

Some things are missing -- a JavaScript or AppleScript interface for example. And small stuff like you can't reseed the perlin noise generator in Photo.

But some things are surprisingly better.

Affinity Photo has live filter layers that work much better than smart objects, it has a frequency separation tool that is genuinely easier to use, it has proper blend curves that are enormously powerful (sharpening just the highlights? noise reduction just in the shadows?), and you can do things like use Lab curves on an RGB image.

Affinity Designer I know less well, but the symbol and artboard support is astounding (bordering on what Sketch can do), and small things like the rounded corners support is amazing. Its one omission -- it doesn't have an autotrace.

I am sure there are several things InDesign does that Publisher can't, but Publisher's integration with Photo and Designer is absolutely remarkable.

This mix of missing features and improvements is exactly what you should hope for in a competing app; they don't have quite the same objectives in mind and they have started afresh rather than chasing a feature set.

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#402

Post by whimsicalism »

Rexxar wrote: post #379
whimsicalism wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going to use evil for ISIS, what's left for the Nazis?

Inform yourself on what happen to Yazidis recently and you will not do this sort of humor anymore.

What sort of humor? I'm showing the ridiculousness of the claim. The Nazis can be evil as well as ISIS.

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#403

Post by marcosdumay »

chrisseaton wrote: post #317
marcosdumay wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and a software provider hiding a non-cancel clause somewhere in a dozens of pages after the deal "contrat" doesn't impact on your legal obligations either.

I would guess that ‘annual plan’ is presumed to be clear enough, you didn’t have to read the contract.

Hum... Annual plan is not stated on any of the large text. It is stated on the "review order before you buy" as part of the name of the product, what makes it nothing any similar to "clear". "Completely confusing" is more apt.

Near it the price information carries the monthly price only, with no indication that you are signing up to 12 times that amount.

The only saving feature is that you don't need to read dozens of pages. If you open the contract, it is confusing from page 1. But it's also not clear at all what is going there.

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#404

Post by stjohnswarts »

Marsymars wrote: post #278
hedora wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For future reference, just tell the vendor "I did not authorize this charge. Please refund me". Don't engage them further. When that call fails (or, if they don't pick up the phone in a reasonable amount of time), call your credit card company and say "I want to issue a charge back". They'll ask if you tried to work with the vendor. Answer "yes", full stop. There should be a phone number associated with the charge on…

> You can also say "this service wasn't rendered", or "I never received the product I ordered", as applicable. Those are specifically listed as valid reasons to issue a chargeback. The person at the credit card company has to enter a numeric reason code for the charge back, and by using those phrases (or similar), you're making their lives easier. This is, unfortunately, not a panacea. I paid for tickets pre-covid fo…

Ticketmaster is definitely a great example of one company essentially owning the market, but they have a legal out against being a monopoly in that most places will also sell a few tickets through other channels like grocery stores or a hard to get to box office somewhere or “at the door”

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#405

Post by stjohnswarts »

seafoam wrote: post #102
is_true wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on your card it could be a pain and cost you some money. Mine requires a new card if I want to do a charge back.

You need a new credit card company.

I would definitely switch, it isn't hard and I've done it in the past just to get better terms or rewards several times.

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#406

Post by charrondev »

peeters wrote: post #144
mrtksn wrote: post #64

Just yesterday, on a local streaming platform that has a series that I want to watch I was offered "7 days free". Great, I can watch the accumulated episodes and if I still feel like watching the new ones that come weekly I can keep the subscription, right? Nope, the "7 days free" wasn't a a trail but 7 extra days when you purchase a full year subscription. I was considering to get a monthly subscription to try it ou…

There need to be laws that you cannot advertise anything as "free" or "introductory price" if it's amortized into a longer contract. A common tactic in Canada is to say "$4/mo for the first three months" but when you sign a contract for $12/mo over a year commitment. This should be treated as straight-up fraud. The price is clearly $10/mo and they're just deferring some payments.

Quebec has separate civil law from the rest of Canada and our consumer protection act prohibits this kind of behaviour (with very clear case law and precedence siding against companies).

As a result though there are a fair amount of companies that will have these trial offers everywhere except Quebec. Spotify is one that comes to mind.

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#407

Post by tasha0663 »

vel0city wrote: post #279
jeroenhd wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I opened their page and the drop down was clearly labeled as an annual subscription to me. It also told me the exact date by which I should cancel not to infer any costs. The drop down offered me to pay the full year upfront, or a monthly plan which is cancellable at any time. I don't think this stuff is illegal at all. What they effectively did here is put the email address and personal information for…

The author of this tweet thread even acknowledges it states the terms in the workflow. > But what does "Annual plan, paid monthly" actually mean? I don't understand how "Annual plan, paid monthly" could be taken as something confusing or requires some additional context to make any sense out of it. How are other people reading "Annual plan, paid monthly" any other way than that it is an annual plan broken out into mo…

Every single button said "Start Free Trial", not "Start Annual Plan" and the cancellation terms were hidden and hostile.

I was actually considering trying out the Adobe line for my own work, but I'm going to be sticking with Affinity and Procreate now. Bad enough that they went to a subscription model, worse still that they run it like mobsters. I have too many kids, too little sleep, and not enough amphetamine salts to remember to cancel the membership in 7-14 days.

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#408

Post by stjohnswarts »

readingnews wrote: post #390

I will get "downvoted" into oblivion, but dear god does no one want to write a small blog/page anymore? I read so many "this is super interesting useful information" blurbs about contracts, laws, etc, but they are in the smallest possible digestions given to us by twitter. Either "when did I get so bitter" or "when did the web go to hell" thoughts enter my mind.

You reach a much wider audience with twitter, it's sad but it is what it

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#409

Post by stjohnswarts »

Karunamon wrote: post #388
ElemenoPicuares wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's correct. If you cancel within 7 days you pay nothing. If you cancel after 14 days you have to pay for half the year. I'm not sure what happens between those two points— I'd guess it's a grace period but I'm not sure— but personally I'd be surprised to have any reduction in cost if I went beyond a clearly stated free trial I agreed to. Folks have legitimate bones to pick with Adobe— including the cost alone…

I tend to agree on principle, but this whole concept of 'annual, monthly' is really scummy. Even YC startups are doing it now, showing you a per-month price while de-emphasizing the fact that you're paying for a year up front. Adobe is the first one I'm familiar with that does normal monthly billing but forces you to stay a year. >Hanlon’s Razor shreds the assertion of deliberate malfeasance over a site-wide design s…

I got caught up in one recently but was able to talk the operator out of it. I thought I was signing up for a 1 month trial not for a year. Evidently they didn't push the people on the other side of the phone to refuse just make you have to at least call and talk to a human. I could find no way on the website to do it. Some people would just have let it go for a few months after not being frustrated enough to call customer service, as it wasn't a lot of money $8/month if I recall correctly.

Re: Adobe tricks users into a 12 month contract

#410

Post by rabuse »

josephcsible wrote: post #396
bambax wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you can just block the recurring payments and wait for them to come at you? Anyway a "free" trial that asks for your cc number is obviously not free. Better to stay away of those to be on the safe side.

> Anyway a "free" trial that asks for your cc number is obviously not free. There is a legitimate reason to do that: to keep people from making a bunch of accounts and getting free trials with them forever.

I always just create a virtual number through my CC, set the maximum to $1, and have it expire within a couple months. Works like a charm.
Post reply on HN