Lightroom Classic CC performance improvement not evident

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 5 months ago
One of the claims made by Adobe regarding performance improvements is that Lightroom Classic CC is faster to launch. I'd love to know what conditions this claim was established under.

It is very simple to test and here is what I experience:

Laptop i7 cpu with 8GB ram Windows 7 64 bit
Lightroom 2015 CC launches in 10 seconds
Lightroom Classic CC launches in 17 seconds

Desktop Pentium Dual Core cpu with 4GB ram Windows 7 64 bit (old machine)
Lightroom 2015 CC launches in 7 seconds
Lightroom Classic CC launches in 14 seconds

How is Classic CC faster?? It is not! And how can an old machine be faster that a newer one?

As Lightroom Classic CC is used, I experience an overall degradation of performance of my laptop computer as a whole. Switching to other applications takes longer and longer, mouse movements become jerky, applications start to display '(not responding)', including Lightroom itself, and scripts time out in my browser. Even after closing Lightroom, my computer remains very slow, almost crippled. It is so bad that I often need to reboot after using Lightroom Classic CC just to get reasonable responsiveness restored.

Thanks Adobe for a new class of software - Crippleware!

By the way, changing Lightroom to Lightroom Classic CC and giving the good name of Lightroom to the mobile/cloud rubbish is just dreadful rebranding. I love Lightroom, the concept is brilliant and have been a user since Version 1 was release over 10 years ago. But this move by Adobe does not impress me one bit! The failure to address real issues expressed by loyal users is just shameful. Even your competitors can see that it is a bad move and are actively marketing to lure dissatisfied Lightroom users away from Adobe.

Why Abode is so silent on the strong backlash it is getting is beyond me.
Photo of Anthony Blackett

Anthony Blackett

  • 51 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes

Posted 5 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Gary Rowe

Gary Rowe

  • 83 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
They know they'll get flack in the media if they admit anything that can be quoted, so they are keeping silent. Sad that it's the norm nowadays, I much preferred truth and openness but most companies cannot afford to behave that way any more because of all of the sensationalisim that pretends to be news.
(Edited)
Photo of John McGeough

John McGeough

  • 13 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
I agree, Lightroom Classic is slower and bug ridden.
Photo of Deborah Albert

Deborah Albert

  • 29 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes

Could not agree more. Have used LR for 8 years, looking for alternatives.


Photo of Stephen Rowson

Stephen Rowson

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
I have just spent 2.5 days editing 72 images using Lightroom classic CC. The job should have taken half a day at most. I use a top spec macbook pro (2016) and the performance issues are beyond bad. The previous version was slow but the latest version is not a viable option for editing in a professional/ work context. I'm so over adobe and have now decided to move over to Capture one pro. 
Photo of David Blocher

David Blocher

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Im heading that way too. Super frustrating.