Lightroom cc vs. classic

  • 5
  • Question
  • Updated 1 month ago
Why did Adobe have to use the same name??? I haven't updated my version on LR because I'm scared I will choose the wrong one! Why didn't they just give it a different name? If it's still LR, something like LR Pro vs. LR Lite? Or anything else that someone in the marketing department could think up that would DISTINGUISH the two. Classic vs. CC, when I think I'm using the CC before it is now called Classic is awful!
Photo of Allyson Klein

Allyson Klein

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
  • confused

Posted 1 month ago

  • 5
Photo of Johan Elzenga

Johan Elzenga, Champion

  • 1606 Posts
  • 648 Reply Likes
Yes, we all feel this was a bad decision, but it's not that complicated. If you used Lightroom on a desktop computer before, then the upgrade of your version is called Lightroom Classic CC. What is now called 'Lightroom CC' is a different application that was only launched about one year ago.
Photo of Chris Wimlett

Chris Wimlett

  • 11 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
It is complicated if you try to search for anything using 'Lightroom CC'  - even Adobe's own website returns hits relating to Classic.  It only needs an extra word in the name, e.g. Lightroom Neoteric CC - perhaps Adobe could run a competion?
Photo of Monty

Monty

  • 125 Posts
  • 42 Reply Likes
Agree 100%. Searching it the worst!
Photo of Jean Barrell

Jean Barrell

  • 9 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
It has been a source of endless confusion.
Photo of Allyson Klein

Allyson Klein

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I finally updated because my Lightroom kept crashing. After much deliberation, I went for the Classic. Immediately I panicked because now I have TWO Lightrooms and TWO Photoshops just from updating. WTF?
Adobe, remember Macromedia Freehand? How about Aldus Pagemaker? No? because now there is Illustrator and InDesign. We know what they are and how they work. 
Photo of Olivenoire

Olivenoire

  • 145 Posts
  • 56 Reply Likes
Obvisouly Adobe is at a crossroads and don't even know what to do. They have limited resource and a complex way of working. (remember adobe create a 700mb pdf reader and flash some other strange and heavy software)
About LR:
- On one and, they have an old LR classic nobody know if it will evolve.
- And on other hand they have a LR CC with lot of missing feature and nobody knows if they will implement it.
So to be sure everybody will pay the fee, they gave confusing naming and they are happy to be leader. But most of all, the more you will use the cloud (LR CC), the more you will not be able to switch to competitor. This is what you have to remember every month you pay the fee.
Photo of Allyson Klein

Allyson Klein

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Very good point. I know some people live and die by the cloud, but I prefer to have my files on a redundant RAID drive and then backed up on some other cloud system.
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 326 Posts
  • 66 Reply Likes
Yeah, forget Lightroom CC and stick with Lightroom Classic CC (it's not going away). Your files are safely backed up at home, under your control. LR CC is good for photo workgroups, not individual photographers.
Photo of Chris Wimlett

Chris Wimlett

  • 11 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
In Adobe's defence, the cloud implementation is excellent if you stick to LR (non-Classic) CC, and I speak as a retired IT professional and victim of many bad 'cloud' implementations.  I still think that a simple renaming and some guide to their proposed way forward would be a huge help.  I've tried the opposition and none are close to Adobe IMHO.
Photo of Olivenoire

Olivenoire

  • 145 Posts
  • 56 Reply Likes
Yes. I have to admit cloud sync is very strong. But there is so many other weakness (no print, no smart folder, bad tag management, near useless IA, no off-line search, no trash). This software is near unusable alone in a production environnement