1st, I want to say how much many of us appreciate a representative from Adobe participating in this forum, watching this thread and sharing input to help answer questions and provide feedback.
There will always be arguments about whether the consumer products (Lr, Elements, etc) will go 'subscription only' in future, and Adobe can't do more than to say there are no plans. There really aren't, it's not something the target customers would accept. Maybe in 30 years when the entire concept of 'installing' something is dead and buried the idea will be forced upon us all, so Adobe cannot say "never".
Thanks for the insight. I suspect the Adobe stockholders will demand this subscription model be forced upon us all much sooner than 30 years. From the consumer standpoint, it appears to already be happening. The subscription model has been the holy grail of the software developer industry since the beginning of the industry. That and total control against piracy.
Right now with LR Mobile version 1, all the data flows through Adobe's network, and there's a lot of it. I do understand people are angry about having to subscribe to get the app working (personally I didn't think it was a good idea), but it's not ad-funded and there are real costs to keep the thing operational. By all means complain about it, Adobe do take note of feedback. That's what people like me are here for - I don't mind being shouted at.
I'm glad you have a thick skin!
While I know you didn't design the product, sending all the data through the Adobe network is quite silly if you ask me. If the goal is to sync images with a local LR database on a local computer, why go to through the Internet unless the local connection doesn't exist? There should be a way to set it to "local port only", "local network only", "cloud based" or have a connection priority setting since a lot of folks just want to put images on the portable device in the field from the camera and then sync with their computer when they are back home. A cloud only connection would be useful for social media while away from home but a lot of photographers don't need that if you ask me. I think many folks get the feeling when they try to use products like this that the designers don't quite understand what photographers want or need.
Sorry but with regard to the CC model payment requirement and needing revenue to fund the project... respectfully... that's ridiculous. Launching a new product successfully requires taking chances and accepting some revenue loss in the short term. Crippling the adoption of a new product by restricting the ability to use it based on a payment structure sends the wrong message to the loyal (already paying) honest user and invites negative assumptions about the company in general
A ver 1 product with limited functionality and bugs doesn't deserve to be paid for yet anyway. Wouldn't it be easier/more productive/better PR to just make ver 1 of this product free and see how many people jump on it, help test it, provide positive feedback to you and then require payment in the next more useful and stable version?
..and when I'm shooting on location I run Lr5 on a Surface Pro; quite frankly it's much better. I can shoot tethered, develop stuff and hand off the final results to a client while they're watching. I'd also suggest using a small laptop in the same way; the Surface is overpriced for what it is but I got the thing for testing, and forgot to give it back..
I totally agree. A local connection is the best way to do this. Then only upload selected images to the cloud as an option if needed/desired later. Hence my statement above about not sending the data through the cloud unless necessary. Keep it local. Why can't the iPad product simply do the same thing? Oh wait..... that's right.... the iPad doesn't have a connection port that enables tethering! (Except their proprietary connector that Apple won't allow to be used for connecting things unless it's a keyboard or iTunes! Nice.) But there's still an ad-hoc WiFi signal... ah crap. The camera doesn't have WiFi. Oh well, thanks anyway Apple. After several years, still no useful standard ports on an iPad.
Elsewhere in this thread I suggest using a Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro which is similar to the Surface Pro. These hybrid tablet/laptops are finally getting light enough and affordable enough to offer a good alternative to a tablet.