Slashdot Mirror
Adobe Introduces the Paid Security Fix
Nimey writes "Adobe has posted a security bulletin for Photoshop CS5 for Windows and OSX. It seems there is a critical security hole that will allow attackers to execute arbitrary code in the context of the user running the affected application. Adobe's fix? You need to pay to upgrade to Photoshop CS6. For users who cannot upgrade to Adobe Photoshop CS6, Adobe recommends users follow security best practices and exercise caution when opening files from unknown or untrusted sources."
Almighty dollar wins again!
It isn't in the league of PS, although it tends to do almost as much.
Adobe already got brickbatted about security... are they just trying to get clubbered again? Only difference is that not as many people will get nailed by Photoshop holes as opposed to a hole in Flash or Acrobat, mainly because spending $2000 or so for the CS suite is out of the price range of all but the dedicated artists.
I can see it now, all software vendors are going to introduce security flaws or wait until one is discovered to release the next paid upgrade release.
I think a class action suit is in order for all the holders of the older version. It their software causes a security hole and if one person gets hammered by it then like the car companies having to recall and fix cars, software vendors will have to do likewise.
Are you listening Adobe.
If this was a years-old version, I'd understand, but CS5 was the latest version until literally days ago!
This is akin to buying a 2010 Chevy (under warranty), then finding out that the brakes catch on fire under certain circumstances, and the company's suggestion: buy a 2012.
Be a shame if something bad happened to it...
Wow... Actually sounds like our medical system. And just about every other "system" we have. Cars, houses, etc...
Wow, now that I think about it, that sucks.
Blech.
"Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
Sorry but Microsoft does the best at offering security fixes at no cost. I can't think of another company that does it better than Microsoft.
This is pretty much standard for stuff that's out of support. Try to get a security patch for Win98. That's not to say that I think Adobe is right to say CS5 is at that level, but this is hardly the first time that the solution to a bug has been 'buy the new version'.
Since I can't mod Adobe "-1 flamebait" I'll just say it again. Fuck you, Adobe! I'd like to go on record as stating that you should all be ashamed of yourselves.
with the new features in the 'upgrade'.
Interesting enough, the CS collections aren't listed on Adobe's products and Enterprise Technical Support Lifecycle Policy.
Intuit.
Adobe doubles its lobbying budget, griping pirate rates have doubled for their newest software Photoshop CS6.
When you have nothing to say, blame Microsoft.
Seriously. This is why people download pirated versions. Even if you have a paid version of something, the damned thing "phones home" every time you launch it, the bozos are so paranoid. You can disable this in /etc/hosts, but it's still indicative of greedy grubbing stupidity. If they charged a third of the price, they'd sell 3 times more copies. Look what Apple did with FCP -- they made it affordable (yes, I've read the complaints, but it works fine).
Doh.
people will know why they paid for an Adobe update.
My PAID Acrobat 8 has licensing issues. Once in a while, it complains the license is not valid and I cannot generate a pdf. Then it works again on the next day.
I called Adobe support twice. Their solution is to upgrade because they say they don't support it anymore.
I argued it is not a technical issue but a license issue. They don't care.
Nice.
"Just released, and coming in at 370 MB in size, the Mac OS X 10.7.4 update includes general OS fixes, and addresses more than 30 security vulnerabilities. But aside from typical security fixes, Apple has made an interesting move in an effort to protect users. Through this latest software update, Safari 5.1.7 will now automatically disable older â" and typically more vulnerable â" versions of the Adobe Flash player. While many software vendors would prefer OS makers to keep their hands off their software, the move appears to be welcomed by Adobe, which has constantly battled vulnerabilities in its widely installed Flash Player."
Maybe Apple should disable Photoshop CS5 as well?
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
When you buy a piece a software (or "license it", if you will), you buy it as is, defects and all - typically with no warranty or merchantability for any particular purpose. From that standpoint, consider yourself lucky if you get someone to provide an update at no charge. Besides which - how long is a manufacturer supposed to be "on the hook" for supporting an old version? And a "0.01" version difference IS an old version. Frankly, I'm amazed at companies continuing to provide updates for older stuff. On the other hand - it is GOOD BUSINESS to do so, to at least some degree. What better way to bring on a unnecessary (even if meritless) lawsuit, than to get popped for not fixing known security issues, even in old software. Given the general uselessness of juries, you're just ripe for trouble. But failing to do good business (generally) isn't "wrong" from some kind of moral perspective....it is (often) just not very smart.
Too bad they don't do that for say, the DVD codec in Windows 8... :)
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
You couldn't be more wrong. Nobody provides for longer support than Microsoft.
I don't respond to AC's.
Three orders of magnitude is very large in real life.
Windows 7 Ultimate: $200
Photoshop CS6: $700
Oh yeah, Microsoft is so much worse.
>Adobe's fix? You need to pirate the upgrade to Photoshop CS6.
Fixed.
There is an old story I will retell that should serve as a warning for all customers.
Once upon a time, there was a transport company employee charged with replacing a large segment of the companies trucks made by Volvo. The employee, being a bright individual called up a sales clerk from Ford that had been trying to get a foot in the door and asked him to send three Ford trucks for testing. The day the Volvo sales clerk came to make discuss the purchase of new Volvo trucks, these three Ford trucks happened to be parked on the lot. When the trucking company employee saw the Volvo sales clerk glance at them, he said "Yeah, the boss has been looking them, he seems to think they are an alternative worth looking into. But that is for later, lets discuss the deal you were going to offer us".
In another company far far away, an CTO who loved IBM hardware knew it was time to discuss the purchase of new hardware, so he ordered an underling to set up a trial project with HP servers, just to see what the competition was doing. When the IBM man came by he of course showed him the workfloor including the corner where the junior was working on those shiny new HP servers, "Got to give the kids their toys to play with " the CTO told the IBM sales clerk. "Btw, what was the price you were going to ask for again".
But in the dark and damp lands of Mordor, a very different tale was playing out. There the CTO invited the MS and Abobe sales clerk and proudly showed them how his entire business depended completely on their software product and how not only did they need the software to work flawlessly or they would be bankrupt in seconds, all the staff could only use the latest software and their customers demanded that they use the latest software. "BTW", The CTO asked, "what was that deal you wanted me to sign in my own blood again while bending over"? And there was much rejoicing among the Tribes of MS and Abobe, for they knew exactly who was calling the shots. One lockin to rule them all and in Eula bind them. For the users of MS and Abobe where greedy and feeble minded and could not break free of the spell.
---
Really, this is nothing new. In the land of NAS and control systems, this is par de course. You let a supplier control you, control you they will. Want to break free? Good luck, your company needs the new version, license or risk being unable to produce so you hand them the cash and lock yourself in just a little bit more.
Not a SINGLE Photoshop user will invest in his own freedom by making sure there are alternative methods to do his production. They will grind their teeth buy the latest version and invest yet more to make sure their production is entirely locked into Adobe clutches.
Cue countless protests about how there are no alternatives... no, there are none because any who dares to try is ridiculed for not instantly producting a 100% compatible product for free because freedom should be free of effort and cost.
You gave Adobe the control, enjoy it.
It is not as if you are alone. Governments often dictate that procurement must be regulated, meaning that once a procurement contract has been done, all interest in customer satisfaction goes out the window because the contract is fixed, can't be ended and renewal depends solely on the price offered (not charged) so fuck you peon.
I seen it to often in other industries, entire production line depended on one type of machine, fired your own maintenance team and anyone who could switch them out with other hardware. Goes, the "extra" charges sure went up a lot didn't they? Suddenly maintenance must be done by their certified team, at weekend charges.
Lockin, avoid it or pay the price.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
When I was a teenager, I knew that I wanted to be a software developer. I thought one of the coolest jobs would be to work at Adobe. How amazing would it be to add improvements to software used by famous graphic artists and video studios all over the world?
Now, I'm glad that I never even attempted to work there. They've become known for security holes all over the place in Flash and Acrobat, glacial pace of development, one poor design decision after the other, and no shortage of performance issues. It really is a shame how much they've stagnated, and in some cases regressed.
Too bad they don't do that for say, the DVD codec in Windows 8... :)
Right, because a DVD codec is critical to keeping the security of an operating system up to date.
They're reporting the vulnerability because it's their policy, not because it's actively being exploited. The install base of Photoshop, like Gimp and thousands of other productivity applications, doesn't warrant an attacker's effort. There are countless of vulnerabilities in other applications like this that go unreported and unexploited.
If they didn't report it, nobody would care.
It's common practice to stop supporting versions that are two or more out of date. They just released CS6 so this would be perfectly normal. They aren't forcing an update they are simply saying they can't continue to support products that are out of date beyond a certain point.
I'm sorry, but even "Non-Genuine" copies of Windows still get security fixes. There is no comparison here.
Windows: Pirate our software, we'll still give you security fixes (although we might put a watermark asking you to stop pirating it)
Adobe: Buy our software, but you only get security fixes if you give us even more money.
Hell, MS gives security fixes even to XP until 2014 (13 years after its release). CS5 is less than 2 years old.
AccountKiller
Fuck Adobe.
Apple has been doing this for years. Most of the users in their support forums even seem to think that there is nothing wrong with it.
I find it a terrifying precedent.
To be honest, I'm missing how this is *any* different from any of the major OS vendors (including linux distros). Security hole in Windows ME? Tough titties, buy a newer version. Security hole in Mac OS 10.3? Tough titties, buy a newer version. Security hole in REHL from 2008? Tough titties, pay us to fix it, or update.
Yes, saying CS5 is too old is a *bit* quick with the dropping of support, but it's really no different from any other vendor.
CS5 just passed its 2 year mark
AccountKiller
If it's broken, get them to buy something to fix it.
Oh come on, this 'oh Microsoft is just as bad' is the biggest cop-out. In this case it's just a blatant lie, CS5 was released early 2010 and this announcement means they've discontinued support for it, Windows XP was released in 2001 and is still supported now and will be until mid-2014.
I made the switch to the Gimp years ago. I got tired of pirating Photoshop. Then, when I switched to Linux, Photoshop doesn't run on Linux. Lo and behold, Gimp is an easy install, and I learned that. Now that I've switched to Mac (for the desktop), I still use Gimp. Ooh, and there's a new version out, and the development version handles high-bit images!
gimp.org
I do stuff Zhrodague
or maybe it was the last week of February. That's a mighty short support cycle for an expensive product. Perhaps a class action would be nice.
(note: I did not pay retail, but having essentially a 3 month supported period on a major software suite is pretty crappy)
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Aren't ya glad you switched to gimp like a decade ago? I sure am!
Adobe's fix? You need to pay to upgrade [from CS5] to Photoshop CS6.
Ah yes, I would be delighted to buy more software from you, since it worked out so well last time around.
This is especially egregious since according to the researcher's announcement, Adobe has been sitting on this bug since last September. Users of CS5 should demand a patch.
It would mean fewer people would pirate movies...
1000 / 3.5 ~= 285. Of course, that assumes you believe the OP's billions vs millions claim.
Sources claim 650M for windows 7:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Windows-7-Approximately-650-Million-Sold-Licenses-by-the-End-of-2011-202026.shtml
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=ADBE+Key+Statistics
If 100% of Adobe's 4.2B revenue comes from $700 Photoshop sales, that's 6M units/year, call that 24M units over the lifespan of windows 7 since release in 2009.
So for every unit of Photshop, you have at least 27 units of windows. Factor in the 3.5X price and you still have about 8 equivalent units of windows for every photshop over which to amortize costs.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
upgrading to CS6 from CS5 is 199 not 699.
A new CS6 license for photoshop is 699.
Perhaps that's because you're only considering Windows (and maybe a few other big-name products)?
Not all MS products get that level of support.
CS6 is not available in some markets. And this is going to be a real killer for chunks of the corporate world. My pet artists are going to be on a sneakernet if they want to keep CS5 and are going to have to learn a new toolset in the meantime if they want to come back onto my network. (The one hooked up to the internet with support contracts and enterprise agreements and production web servers)
PAIN.
A sig is placed here
To display how futile
English Haiku is
Thoughts on a way to fix this sort of thing generally:
The government should define a minimum support window for software, say 5 years or so. From the point where you purchase a software product at retail (not resold), you are entitled to support for critical security flaws (ie: exploitable risks which you cannot mitigate with normal usage) during that period. At the vendor's option, that support can be either free software patches (with no degradation of functionality or additional licensing requirements/terms), full version upgrades (under the same conditions), or the release of the complete source for the product into the public domain (BSD-style). The last option would be the legally-mandated requirement if the vendor was unwilling or unable to supply one of the first alternatives. Companies could, of course, adjust pricing of their software as appropriate to comply with the mandate.
It's not a very clean solution, but it would do wonders to curtail the "forced paid upgrade" trend in software. Plus, companies with "good" support policies in place (both large and small) would benefit.
*cough*IBM typewriters*cough*
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
Intuit has been doing this for years. That's why we moved to SQL-Ledger.
Check your sources again. $50 / mos for the entire Adobe CS6 suite. All the packages.
Actually, if by "RHEL from 2008" you mean RHEL5 then you were quite wrong. Apparently, redhat promises security updates at last until sometime in 2017:
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/
"Sorry but Microsoft does the best at offering security fixes at no cost."
No: Microsoft does the best at selling to gullible people that are grateful of being sold a defective product now on an "I'll fix it later if I'm in good mood" basis.
Microsoft is not "offering security fix for no cost": they are selling you "knowingly defective products at a high cost".
I for one would expect from *any* serious company to cover for production defects forever and for any serious legislation to force them to that if they don't want to: after all the defects were there the day the product abandoned the mill. "Oh, but that was 100 years ago!" Well, you are still in business, don't you? Then, if you sold it defective, you pay for the repair.
I'm not asking for adding, say, WiFi support to Windows 95; I'm saying you repair all the from-origin defects Windows 95 has. To "Oh! but then I would have to support Windows 95 forever" I say, "Not, if you sold a proper product to start with". You cut corners to be able to launch the product earlier and you already won your legit share out of that. Now it's time the return the corners you cut.
... Adobe has 100 words for "won't fix it"
And CS5/6 are completely different businesses than Windows anyway. CS5/6 isn't really for home users. It's for businesses or professionals and if the cost of doing business with CSx is a 700 dollar licence then you do that.
Support costs money, we can't, as a society, expect indefinite support for a product. Some items have 30 day warranties, some none at all. If the best Adobe is willing to do is 2 years then that factors into the TCO and the cost of doing business.
"Factor in the 3.5X price and you still have about 8 equivalent units of windows for every photshop over which to amortize costs."
Because, as we all know, developing a whole OS it's at the same cost tag than a graphics manging app that runs on top of said OS.
You forgot that Adobe offers upgrade protection. Now all those people who bought this "protection" won't have to shell out quite as much as those who tried to snub the "Familia". I'm being snide not at you but at adobe.. This almost makes it look like they set up this scenario.
Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
CS6 just launched and I mean JUST. It shipped on May 7th. So this isn't a case of an old version where Adobe is saying "Look guys, we are discontinuing support, have to buy the new one if you want it." The "old" version is only "old" by 3 days now.
Windows ME got 6 years of support (Microsoft offers a minimum of 10 years of support for Business and Developer products). Mac OS 10.3 got 4 years of support (Apple don't have a defined policy for their life cycle, just a general rule that they offer support for the current and previous version). REHL will get 13 years of support.
Two years of support for CS5 is not just "a *bit* quick" for such expensive, professional software. It is an insult.
Exactly. If people don't like this, they should find another vendor.
This is not support. This is fixing something that was broke in the first place.
I void warranties.
MS security fixes are not "no cost".
They just look cheaper on the surface, because the cost is amortized across BILLIONS of forced Windows licenses, instead of MILLIONS of Photoshop licenses.
Three orders of magnitude is very large in real life.
Does not compute. Windows XP has been around for a decade. XP will have received "free" updates for 12 years when support is finally dropped. On the other hand, Adobe Photoshop has had 8 major version releases during that time. According to Adobe's website site, 4 of those versions are no longer supported...and apparently we need to add another few versions to the list.
Bitch about MS all you want, but their support of security fixes for Windows and Office has been excellent compared to companies like Adobe. If I were a Photoshop user I would have spent thousands of dollars to keep my version in support compared to the $200 that XP costs up front. And yes, it really isn't fair to compare OS support to application support.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
Good God man, CS 5 has been around for two years. Find one example of a similar security flaw that was discovered two years after the release of a product, that Apple did not offer a patch for, ever.
Adobe is charting new waters.
You're not a programmer, are you?
You certainly know nothing about how impossible it is to write "perfect" software.
Thanks, now I'm having flashbacks to repairing Selectrics. Those things are tanks. Now get off my lawn.. darn kids
Don't blame me for redundant posts. I can't type very fast. Hence the user ID.
That has absolutely NOTHING to do with security patches or vulnerabilities. NOTHING. What's your fucking point?
Pixologic's Zbrush.
If you buy their software, the upgrades come with it. All of them. Forever.
From the bulletin:
Adobe released a security upgrade for Adobe Photoshop CS5 and earlier for Windows and Macintosh. This upgrade addresses vulnerabilities that could allow an attacker who successfully exploits these vulnerabilities to take control of the affected system.
Adobe has released Adobe Photoshop CS6, which addresses these vulnerabilities. For users who cannot upgrade to Adobe Photoshop CS6, Adobe recommends users follow security best practices and exercise caution when opening files from unknown or untrusted sources.
Sure sounds like CS5 had upgrade released that addressed these vulnerabilities. I think it also says that released version of CS6 is not vulnerable. Probably marketing people got involved to try and write this to encourage upgrades, which may have backfired a bit.
. 62,400 repetitions make one truth -- Brave New World, Aldous Huxley
"For desert, we have an ice cream peanut butter pie, blueberry cake, or the antidote for the poison you ate earlier."
Gently reply
That could be true, but in fairness at this point both companies are leveraging past investments and are mostly just sprinkling on a small dev effort for new features.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
No cost for the fix, you do need to pay pretty handsomely upfront for the software iteslf. The cost can be as extravagant as over a week's worth of salary on non-firstworld countries.
I do admit though, it's way more transparent than this crap Adobe is pulling.
Is that the RedHat (or rather OpenSource) method?
On the other hand, you were happy with Window's quality level when you purchased it (otherwise you wouldn't have purchased it). Maybe they shouldn't offer any updates at all after the date of purchase.
Adobe has crossed over to the dark side. Now they are officially Evil.
I didn't know Adobe is suffering that much they can't afford free security fixes anymore.
"Bitch about MS all you want, but their support of security fixes for Windows and Office has been excellent compared to companies like Adobe"
I have to agree, MS has indeed patched XP for a long time. MS gets lots of practice in patching security holes but to their credit (I never thought I'd say that about MS!) they have not charged anything for it. I can't even complain about them dropping support for XP in 2014; they've carried it for a long, long time and that is pretty responsible behavior (given the very slow move away from XP). Neither did they need to provide patches to pirated versions, but they did that in the best interests of the worldwide computing community.
IIRC Adobe is not the first to pull this "buy the new version" stunt.
GIMP? ...lol
"WiFi" did not exist in 1995. 802.11 did, but virtually nobody was using it because it was extremely unreliable.
And after all, OS/2, MVS, and UNIX never had patches and shipped complete and flawless, with all possible features, every version. It's all completely inexcusable.
Such a reasonable standard you have set. Good luck with your software company.
They moved to software as a service model in the last year.
You can now pay your adobe fees monthly (couple hundred/month) -- if you want the yearly plan, you buy all new versions at a discount.
If you don't want to upgrade right now, that's fine...
When you do, you can either pay full price (~30-50% more), OR you can pay for each upgrade between your current version and the current.
They shut down email and online support without paid contracts ON TOP of the SOFTWARE cost. (i.e. when you "buy" their software, it gives you a license to install it and they will give you help with installing it. That's it. Any bug fixes you want addressed?: you pay extra.
They also decided to merge the mac and windows support forums -- because their needs are the same (that's working out real well, ha).
And closed most of their product forums -- moving them to professional "customer handler" ("Get satisfaction")...
Yeah.. they've been pretty evil for some time now.
I've had to call and beg for 'reactivation' on windows 7 probably near a dozen times now -- because whenever win7 would hiccup, adobe's license mechanism would try to issue another license as it would think you were a different computer. Think of the MS-HW detection algorithm, but with the number of allowed changes in HW = zero or one (depending on the part).
It wouldn't be so bad if they were actually innovating, but they generated a V5.5 in between V5 and V6 just to create more revenue -- and force customers to pay double upgrade costs to get to V6 -- and it doesn't have much in the way of new features either.
Their biggest nightmare -- people weren't upgrading because their engineers stopped innovating as quickly, so people were using the same SW for 3-5 years... while adobe wants payments every year.
Yes, GIMP. Is GIMP identical to CS? No. So you need to weigh the alternatives: use GIMP for free, which has continuous security updates (for free), but get less convenience than PS CS. Or, buy PS CS and put up with having to buy a new version for $$$$ after a few months. No one owes you top-of-the-line software for a low price and with indefinite security fixes.
Again, if you don't like it, don't buy it.
Where are you from? There are no consumer protection laws where you live?
How is selling a defective product without warranty different from fraud?
Rethinking email
Tis is a perfect example why people steal software
As I said before (received with the standard mockery and excuses), it's hard to empathize with Windows or Adobe users. You know you're buying a paid service. You know they're in it for the money. They aren't your friends or your Mommy or your guardian angel. You give them money, they give you a license to use their product for a while, with premium services at extra cost. It's all in the EULA. You did read it, didn't you?
Where are you from? There are no consumer protection laws where you live?
Probably from the US, and none worth mentioning outside of food and phramacy, respectively.
I'm pretty sure that Adobe doesn't have to plan security bugs... They just unlock the cages that they keep the Flash dev team in and let them use their keyboards for a few minutes.
$50/mo for 12-24 mos (until CS6.5/CS7 upgrade time) = $600-$1200, and you don't even have a license to use the software if you stop paying $50/mo.
Nope, doesn't sound like a good deal to me.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
That's news.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
.. or do the first paragraphs of the bulletin's Summary and Details say that a security upgrade has been released for CS5?
Microsoft did not continue support for XP out of the goodness of their heart. They continued to support it, after repeatedly aanouncing EOL's, once they realized that netbooks shipping with linux distros was cutting in to their bottom line with Vista. Not saying Microsoft is equal to Adobe in terms of dropping support or security fixes, but they only continue it to maintain their market share.
Make sure you understand what they actually use Adobe products for, what the workflow is. Don't just glibly say "Oh GIMP will work!" because you heard they are both image editors.
See you discover that the problem is sometimes there really aren't options. Pre-press products just seem to be one of those cases. Adobe seems to be it for something, particularly an end-to-end solution.
Also please note "Just write it yourself," isn't a realistic suggestion nor is "Well just spend more time and effort to work around problems with a hacked together situation." Since the whole talk here is about money unless you can show how that saves money (and remember staff time is the biggest cost you have) then unless it does, it isn't a realistic suggestion.
You're not a programmer, are you?
You certainly know nothing about how impossible it is to write "perfect" software.
Between a perfect software (a mathematical impossibility) and bug ridden piece of shit software there is a big fucking difference. And 99,99% of software that's being sold/licensed in the consumer/professional market is precisley of the second kind.
Now who's to fault ?
Developers for writing shit code ?
Managers for imposing impossibile timetables leading to poorly writen code ?
Computer Scientists for not being able to develop and teach a new generation of programmers how to reason about program correctness ?
Software engineering for giving "stupid" advices on how to develop large scale software ?
etc....
There is a lot a blame to pass around, but the point is that it is the consumers that are on the receiving end of shit products. No other industry puts out shit products as the software industry. That has to tell you something.
How about "Every Linux distribution ever"? No need to wait until 'Patch Tuesday', either.
Leela: "Is all the work done by children?" Alien: "No, not the whipping."
Does not compute.
Yes, it does. If you'd just do a few basic web searches to gain the industry knowledge that you lack from experience, then pull out a calculator, and do the math.
I didn't "bitch about" Microsoft, and I didn't compare their support to Adobe.
I only pointed out that Windows support is NOT free, and it has been amortized across ~magnitudes~ more licenses than Photoshop. These are easily verified facts, even if you don't have experience in the volume software licensing biz.
I've gotta wonder if the average slashdot reader has gone full-retard, or if this crap and downmodding is astroturf-bot activity from Microsoft. Perhaps it was a clue when the /. Gates-Borg icon was redesigned all happy, and then mostly disappeared from articles in the last few years.
Follow the money...
First, it's a joke, Microsoft fanboy. Second, they may not charge you for security fixes, but they do for FEATURES of the OS... get the point?
Some people really need to get off the Bill Gates worship.
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
"... exercise caution when opening files from unknown or untrusted sources."
Untrusted sources, you mean like Adobe?
Canada.
And it wasn't intended as complimentary. But if you buy a pen what is the warranty on it? How about a chair? How about a chair from an antique shop? How about a house?
A 2 year warranty of business software is simply part of the TCO. If you don't like it, buy something else. If there isn't a competing product then you're stuck paying it and you have to suck it up, that's business. I used to buy (from europeans) electrical equipment, that was designed to operate for testing at european power standards, so we could export the actual products from here to europe. Care to guess how much that costs? Manufacturers warranty doesn't cover shipping costs outside of europe (duh), nor are they obliged to.
'Consumer' protection is a concept to protect consumers from unscrupulous vendors. If you're buying professional software you're not buying a consumer product. You're now into business contract law. Whole other ball game. We have consumer protection, that for example, houses can be sold 'as is', but if you fraudulently represent the state of the house then you could be liable. That's all well and good, but Adobe doesn't say 'we have a 10 year support policy we're amending to 2 years', they couldn't get away with that even in the US (remember Sony removing the 'other OS' from the PS3 and the legal fight they're having over that?), they're saying our product that you're paying X for has a 2 year support warranty with it. So... you knew that when you bought it, or at least, you should have read the licence agreement. And knowing that you shouldn't have bought it unless you had to.
So are you offering to pay $10K or more for this hypothetical near-perfect software?
or will you pay $200 and accept that there may be bugs (and that the company will offer fixes for major security issues for x years) ?
It all comes down to economics at some point.
This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
that's adobe's right, ability, etc. how long should they have to maintain an old version? i have no qualms with adobe employing this policy. it's also my right, ability, etc. to say 'fsck adobe' also and stop buying their product.
our society is so fscked up because we want to illegalize everything we don't like. what a bunch of lazy-ass, pussified, whiny-babies we are.
Microsoft sends out security updates for free.
Adobe also charges for added features, not just version upgrades (like 5 to 6) but even 5.0 to 5.5
Are you graphic artists really that dense or do you love me so much you want to make sure everybody understands how valid my points are by proving me right?
Maybe you just don't understand the rather simplistic story of how to deal with sales people?
This is not about GIMP or anything else, it is about how YOU allowed YOUR means of an income to come to depend on a single supplier. Others have given other examples. Would you build your loading dock to allow only one model of car? Would you pack your packages so only one package company can deal with them? Would you reshape your body so you can only fit in one airliners seats? Would you change your digestive trackt so that you can only digest McD hamburgers?
No?
It is not up to me or anyone else to provide you alternatives. When you are that depended on a product, you ROLL YOUR OWN. Pixar does, why do you think they support GIMP anyway? Because they don't want THEIR production line to depend on someone elses. THAT is why companies support Opensource software, why Vavle is looking at Linux despite its tiny marketshare. Because once you are open, someone else doesn't control you.
Back in the days of DOS, there was Blue Isle and the Battle Island series of games. Then MS announced Windows 95 and Blue Isle announced a Windows 95 only game. And then Windows 95 got delayed and the game had to be held back because it could not launch without the OS. Blue Isle had tied themselves to another companies products and so became tied to another companies goals.
iD did not do the same, they launched Quake with both DOS and Windows support. Guess which company did better with there game?
Oh okay, it is not as simple an example as the car example. Car examples are clean and simple but since you are not getting them maybe a game one will strike closer to your heart.
Graphic artists have locked themselves into a company that has shown multiple times to not have the same goals. They can either SHUT THE FUCK up about it OR do something about it. Moan about it while keeping the lockin going on, is just going to result in ridicule.
Ready? Okay, HAHA!
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
It's not released "knowingly defective."
With millions of lines of code they also can't test every possible application and error. What you're suggesting is that no OS could be released until there are no errors whatsoever. In this case, no OS would ever be released.
An OS can't anticipate the future.
A lot of patches and drivers have to be written after gold release, because of changes and new versions of hardware, new third-party software and apps, and new types of attacks.
Sorry but Microsoft does the best at offering security fixes at no cost. I can't think of another company that does it better than Microsoft.
Three off the top of my head: Mozilla, Canonical, Apache.
Oh, you probably mean to limit the discussion to companies whose primary goal is profit. WRT providing users with a secure computing experience, that certainly raises a lot of conflict of interest issues.
Will
"You certainly know nothing about how impossible it is to write "perfect" software."
So what? You either enter in the business of selling software usage licenses or you don't. It is enterly your choice and it has nothing to do with being or not a programmer since it is a business choice.
So it is impossible to write zero bugs software? Ok: you know that in advance, don't you? So plan resources to cope with that.
"Maybe they shouldn't offer any updates at all after the date of purchase."
That could be certainly possible... as long as they disclose in advance the list of defects that come with the product so I can make an informed decision.
Re-read what I wrote and you'll see that I didn't tell that I'd better wait forever for a defectless product nor that I would pay 100x for a zero-bug software but that you knowingly sold me a defective product (yes, it's knowingly: you can't tell at the same time "it's impossible to write zero bug software" and "but I didn't know my software had bugs") which was something you already took benefit of (you have my money now instead of later), now it's time to correct the defects.
"It's not released "knowingly defective.""
It isn't?
"With millions of lines of code they also can't test every possible application and error."
So they know for certain that there will be defects buried somewhere within those millions of lines of code, don't they?
In my book, selling something they know for certain it has defects is the very definition of "knowingly defective".
"What you're suggesting is that no OS could be released until there are no errors whatsoever."
Why do you try to second-read my "suggestions" when you can see what I did explicitly say instead? You released it with defects, you correct those defects.
If they pirate, they'll certainly download VLC. VLC can play the DVD, with or without the Windows codec.
The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
I don't mind paying for a new version for an increased feature set. I find it reprehensible that they expect you to pay to fix a security flaw. How about this, Adobe: All the people who have CS5 and want the security flaw fixed can pay to upgrade to CS6. After you refund the cost of the faulty CS5 you sold them. No, no...no protesting. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
JUG
Just Use Gimp
aaaaaaa
Well?
that they offered customers Photoshop CS5.1 for half the price a month ago.
The software industry is allowed to sell something that doesn't work without any obligation to fix errors.
Perhaps it was a clue when the /. Gates-Borg icon was redesigned all happy, and then mostly disappeared from articles in the last few years.
Gates is no longer running MS. Compared to a company like Apple, MS is no longer the "evil" company it was. Why would /. continue to use that icon?
So what you are saying is that you want MS to program protocols, drivers and other applications for things that haven't been invented yet?
So, buying it as a consumer, I now have no rights because it's "not a consumer product"? I really have no care for patriotism, but I'm ashamed that you're Canadian (because what you're spouting is retarded).
MS has a support policy of "minimum of 5 years from the date of a product’s general availability, or for 2 years after the successor product (N+1) is released". Regardless of the reason that they still support XP, they are doing it.
Cisco has been doing this since day 1.
The better quesition is, why did /. CHANGE that icon? I dunno how many decades you've been in the industry, but still. Think about it.
you can't tell at the same time "it's impossible to write zero bug software" and "but I didn't know my software had bugs"
Excuse me, I'm not sure if you are aware of it but your post has an identifyable bug, it contains an obvious strawman that your proof-reading appears to have missed. Can you please patch your original post and remove said strawman. Note, I don't want a new post, I want you to fix the original. I've donated to slashdot several times over the last decade to the tune of maybe $30 total, I know it's not a lot but nevertheless I didn't pay to see your bug ridden posts. /sarcasm
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Don't companies stop supporting older software all the time? Isn't this like Windows saying "IE6 is no longer supported so we won't patch it, you need to upgrade" (only in this case it's paid software, which I'm sure this happens with all the time too). For example do you expect Sony to continue to patch firmware for the PS3 even once we're onto the PS5 or whatever? Even if that firmware has massive security holes they won't do it, because they won't be making money off of it anymore.
And this seems to be a disincentive to "upgrade".
I think you're just being obtuse for some sort of personal pleasue but I'll bite anyway. Ten seconds to google MS's official list of known problems for win7 using the 'site:' switch. You can redefine that list as 'defective software' and argue about it if that's how you get your jollies, but the rest of the software industry will keep on being grown-ups about it and acknowledge such things as real world limitations to be worked around in the present and overcome at some undefined point in the future. Engineering and software are "best effort" endevours, you can go to jail for failing to make a "best effort" which is what the term "due dilligence" is all about.
Obligatory car analogy; A road is not defective just because you have to patch a few potholes after it's construction.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Adobe, shark ... shark, Adobe. Adobe, here's your jetski. Good luck!
Ballmer is running the company now, he is just as bad as Gates, there aren't even being very subtle with their current anit-competitive practices, so I don't know how you can say they are no longer the evil company they once were. Anyway, why wasn't the Gates of Borg icon replaced with a sweaty armpitted monkey-boy one?
I don't know what kind of deal MS gets on codec licensing, but I think the going rate is something like $5 for what is needed for DVD support, maybe they pay less, but it was certainly enough for them to drop a feature 90+% of people don't use anyway (they are more likely to use a dedicated portable player or the one hooked up to their big TVs or watch downloaded content (legitimate or otherwise)). I'm sure their profit margins could cover the cost, but they also have to think about their shareholders who may not be happy with the waste of money. And what does it matter anyway, if I did use Windows I'd probably install Media Player Classic (the Home Cinema fork, if that is still the best version) or maybe VLC both of which have built-in DVD support.
I wonder if this type of bug could fall foul of European consumer protection laws, since products sold have to last a reasonable amount of time (up to 6 years depending on the reasonable expected life of the product). If you bought it from a retailer in th EU, they might be obliged to refund your money (since they can't repair it and a replacement will have the same problem), although refunds can take into account the use you have had of the product so may be be full refunds. So can these laws apply to software, and if so would you get enough of a refund to make it cheaper to take the refund and buy the new version over just paying the upgrade price?
So I don't expect vendors to sell perfect products, but it isn't unreasonable to expect fixes (or refunds) if faults develop or become apparent.
A demand that software be "fit for purpose" with regulations etc to enforce it.
I can only hope can't I? Me I've had enough of the pap that's being passed of as great software, when a jenga stack shows more stability and security than most.
Apple, Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle, blah blah etc. They all dance the dance of new versions solving everything when there are too many problems dating back to the beginning of time that have never and probably will never be addressed, without the threat of penalties hanging over them.
Although you donated to slashdot you didn't pay him anything, but I'm sure he'd be happy to refund the $0 you paid to read his specific comment.
Every time I see "OSX" instead of "OS X" (or better: "Mac OS X"), I know that the author is one of those people that pronounces it as "Oh Ess Ex" instead of "Oh Ess Ten." It is a Roman numeral. That's why all versions of OS X start with 10, as in 10.7.3. This is much like how "MAC" is Media Access Control and not equivalent to "Mac."
It bugs me in a similar fashion to the they're/their/there and it's/its ordeals.
Adobe is saying "go ahead and just pirate the next version."
tell 'em not to accept .tiff's.
the vulnerability is in .tiff. it's not really _that_ big of a thing. of course because it could be just renamed to .png you'll need some auto tool to go through the files before they open them.. depending a bit on where they get the files, of course.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Depend on a Commerical Software Supplier and they will use their strong position to stick a rusty pipe up your anus. Then they will offer you a slightly less rusty pipe for the next fuck.
With Open Source you can at least hire a competent guy to fix all these security problems and review the code. Users have to realize that there are other ways of procuring software (i.e. Open Source + hiring competent developers to add missing stuff), or this kind of shit will go on.
Truthfully, it is the morally correct thing for MS to do, with an operating system so troubled with security issues (historically) which cause real problems worldwide.
Adobe is making very, very good profits (relative to revenue). They are clearly Greedy Bastards who abuse their position of power. Other companies manage to deliver much better software, consistently. And they fix security issues more or less timely.
Open Source projects manage to create (typically) the best software quality, and that is with developers who are either unpaid or work for some corporation which donates the code back to a project.
You argument is only theoretically correct. It deflects from the fact that Adove a worshipping their "bottom line" while giving the middle finger to all their customers. This kind of behaviour might be OK for the Moldavian Mafia, but is an embarassment for an American company.
The pirate bay introduces the free security fix.
"A road is not defective just because you have to patch a few potholes after it's construction."
In my country that IS a defective road. But maybe not in America, I don't know how low the quality of workmanship has come down overthere. I just assume your analogies suck.
Adobe released that product about one year ago. Now they don't want to provide a security patch. How much do they pay you for being a shill ??
Class action lawsuite time.
What makes anyone think that the security bugs in CS6 won't be just as bad as the bugs in CS5.
You act as if people are forced to use Windows. They are not. Just like people aren't forced forced to use Photoshop. HOWEVER, if I wanted a PC with supported software from both Microsoft and Adobe I would have only paid $200 to Microsoft over 12 years and over $1,000 to Adobe.
I know that Windows support isn't free. Neither is Mac OS. And technically some Linux support isn't free either. The cost of owning and receiving security/bug fixes (and sometimes new features) is built into the price.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
Norton did the same thing in 2004 with the September/October virus attack and they refused to patch the 2004 version saying the new version would resolve the issue forcing you to purchase the new version of software. As result I moved ALL and I do mean ALL of my clients off of Norton products totally and switched them to another Anti Virus Provider. As well I sent them all of their product and books and material to them and quit providing service for them, PERIOD. This WILL CONTINUE to happen until someone checks them by either a fierce lawsuit or by discontinuing the use of their product. You know kinda like when BOA started to charge the extra 5 bucks and the people outraged over it and they backed down, and like Go Daddy that lost over 100,000 accounts in one day over the SOPA support. IF WE BAND TOGETHER WE CAN beat them down on this.
At Brazil, if you are a consumer, and the seller didn't say anything, the warranty lasts for 90 days. Even for a pen. Of course, if you are not a consumer, you are expected to have lawyers to review the contract, and the means to get the seller into court, thus no protection (small business, as always, get the short end of the stick). By the way, one can't wave out the fact that he's selling for consumers just by saying that the equipment is professional.
In fact, if there is any power disparity when selling a house (for example, when you are buying from a big company), the seller must provide warranty on it. The same is true for used cars and other complex stuff. A consumer isn't expected to be able to discover hidden problems on such itens at negotiation time, but a big company is. About EULAs, nobody could ever enforce one here at Brazil, not even against other business.
If all our laws were as good as our consumer protection laws...
Rethinking email
No, if you're buying a business product expect to have to actually read the licence agreement, I know EULA's suck right, that's why it's for professionals and you have a legal team. 2 years of support for software would even meet EU standards for consumers btw.
There's nothing in a contract that includes support for 2 years that would reasonably fail any consumer rules. If they were amending an agreement after the fact down to 2 years (think about the sort of things Rogers does where it reserves the right to change your cell contract even during your 3 year contract period) that's bullshit, but 'we will only provide support, or this price or whatever' for 2 years is a business contract matter, not a consumer protection one. You can't even argue 'similar products' all carry a 10 year warranty but this one doesn't. E.g. would be a TV with a 30 day warranty and all other TV's have 2 year, because CS6 isn't similar in any way to Windows and its 10 year lifecycle.
And yes, businesses are out to screw you, especially if you're a business client and they think they can get more money from you. If you don't like it find an alternative, develop your own or suck it up and pay it and consider it part of the cost of doing business. If you think adobe is unlawfully leveraging its monopoly in the content creation suite file an anti trust complaint.
Sigh.
I've worked in the software industry for about 25 years, and I can tell you without any shred of doubt that MOST people are forced to license Windows for their computer. Unless they buy a Mac, in which case they are forced to license the MacOS.
Every once in a while, there is a slashdot story about someone who demanded a refund for the Windows license that was forced upon them when they bought a computer. But those "conscientous objectors" represent less than 0.001% of the population. Insignificant.
Like the other reading-comprehension-challenged retards on this thread, you have entirely missed the point. I never said that an individual Photoshop license is cheaper than an individual Windows license. I said that Windows has sold orders of magnitudes more licenses than Photoshop. Like 100x-1000x more licenses. Therefore, it is no surprise that what the idiots believe is "free" support lasts much much longer for Windows than for Photoshop. Simple economics.
I hope for your sake that you're just one of the /trolls who serves the /. corporate masters, and not really as stupid as you make yourself appear. Jackass.
Because people continually whined about how it was outdated. It was also cited as a pretty clear example of ridiculous slashdot bias.
Sigh.
/. "corporate masters".
UID > 2mil spreading FUD about
Seriously though, people are missing your point mainly because it's a fairly weak point to begin with. It's obvious from context that the poster meant "at no additional, post-sale cost", and anyone with a modicum of experience has to give a least a little respect to the Microsoft update machine.
Adobe the most insecure software on the planet, with a very long history of critical vulnerabilities wants you to pay for more of the same. As they nerf their own software capabilities to provide "testimony" they are becoming more secure, you pay for less and you know in another week there will be tons of more major security holes in version 6 products. They do not even have the decencies to let you know right away but wait months. Spend your money for flashy color images you frgn moths.
"Excuse me, I'm not sure if you are aware of it but your post has an identifyable bug"
You tell me where is it and I gladly produce a new release without it.
"it contains an obvious strawman"
It maybe obvious to you; it is not obvious to me so I advise you to produce a valid bug report in order for me to be able to fix it.
But first I want to make sure the problem is in my post and not in your ability to parse the source code: you are aware "I didn't know my software had bugs" != "I don't know where are the bugs in my code", aren't you?
"Note, I don't want a new post"
Then you get to stay with the old one.
Even if I could fix the original, which I can't, it would be the original no more. You are aware of Heraclitus's "you can never step into the same river twice", aren't you?
"I've donated to slashdot several times"
Not *my* problem, unless you donated to *me*, which I know for sure you don't.
I know, I know... tongue in cheek.
"And after all, OS/2, MVS, and UNIX never had patches and shipped complete and flawless, with all possible features"
New features != bug fixes.
"It's all completely inexcusable."
It is not inexcusable that they released software with bugs, but yes, I find certainly inexcusable, as long as the companies stay in business, that they don't fix bugs for them when a customer asks for it.
"Such a reasonable standard you have set."
The only one I find reasonable, yes.
"Good luck with your software company."
It's doing well, thank you very much. I produced software more than a decade ago and I for certain would fix any bug the customers could come to me with as I've already done up to this day.
And you know what? As long as they contracted support I managed not only the bugs but the new features too -the latter on a one-by-one basis, some of them we in common accorded that basically went into the original spec, so I covered them as a matter of respect my contract, others were priced apart, but bugs, always as a given.
I know that some of that software is still in use but there've been years that no new bug reports have come for them. I leave as an exercise to reader to imagine why.
Just reading this now, a few days after the original article - but it looks as if Adobe's Security Bulletin for this issue (linked at top in article summary) was updated on May 11 to indicate that they will indeed release a patch for CS5.x?
"Adobe Photoshop CS6 addresses these vulnerabilities. We are in the process of resolving these vulnerabilities in Adobe Photoshop CS5.x, and will update this Security Bulletin once the patch is available. "
If so, that's awesome that outrage & public pressure said, "This is not reasonable, release a fix for the previous version, which even a week ago is the version people would have bought."
Of course, not a soul will see this post.... :-(
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2842341&cid=39970629
"So what you are saying is that you want MS to program protocols, drivers and other applications for things that haven't been invented yet?"
No.
UID of current account is meaningless. I've been on /. since its inception.
You're obviously either a youngster, another corporate tool with no mind or soul of your own, or a bot. Too difficult to determine which one, from where I stand.
In any case, you = jackass^2.
I guess you think the world functions on the Plato's form model, where things achieve some kind of software perfection. They don't. Not with software or most any other product.
Manufactures don't have to make things perfect or even try. They only have to build something slightly better than the competition. For a real world example, look up the story of Henry Ford looking at his cars in the junkyard.
Here's a car analogy for you; By your standard, if you buy a new car, and the manufacture 'knows' that the hoses and tires will wear out after so many miles/years, then they:
1. Sold it to you knowingly defective.
2. Have a responsibility to give you free tires, hoses, belts, etc. forever.
"By your standard, if you buy a new car, and the manufacture 'knows' that the hoses and tires will wear out after so many miles/years"
Perfect analogy, yessir. Because the ones and zeroes in a computer program wear out too.