Adobe is Legacy Software - What Does the Future Look Like?

Is it time to get off the Adobe train? After 25 years of using Photoshop, the question becomes more urgent as drama and outrage swirl around the company. But making decisions in anger rarely leads to good strategic outcomes. Understanding the software relationship requires looking beyond the headlines.

The real question is not simply whether Adobe is "evil" but what creative software should actually be, how publicly traded companies inevitably fail their users, and what the integration of AI signals about the company's direction. Rising above the outrage means understanding the deeper dynamics at play.

What Creative Software Needs

The dangers of switching software platforms are real and often underestimated. Abandoning Photoshop for alternatives like Corel Painter teaches hard lessons about what creative tools actually require. Reliability matters enormously - professional work depends on software that performs consistently under pressure. Learning resources and community support determine whether problems get solved quickly or become workflow-destroying obstacles.

Different artists need fundamentally different feature sets. Professional requirements diverge sharply from hobbyist needs. Production integration, extensibility, and the ability to function as a chameleon tool that adapts to multiple workflows - these professional-grade capabilities often go unappreciated until they disappear. Speed and stability under real working conditions separate tools that support creativity from those that sabotage it. Bugs and technical hurdles can destroy artistic flow in ways that ripple through entire projects.

Adobe As A Company

Examining Adobe as a corporation reveals a company with an aggressive monopoly history that has transformed into something resembling a dinosaur - legacy software carrying legacy attitudes. The struggle to become a modern SaaS company creates friction between shareholder demands and user needs. Publicly traded companies structurally cannot prioritize customer care when quarterly earnings pressure dominates every decision.

The Silicon Valley hype cycle pushes companies toward whatever trend generates investor excitement, regardless of user benefit. Good software emerges from symbiosis between developers and users - a protopian ideal where both parties benefit and grow together. But incentive structures in large public companies actively work against this relationship. Understanding that this is not a matter of good versus evil but of systemic pressures helps clarify what to expect from Adobe and similar companies.

The AI Problem

The real issue is not the specific controversies that generate headlines but what AI integration signals about the company's priorities and future direction. The hype train around AI creates pressure to implement features that may actively harm creative workflows. If AGI and superintelligence are genuinely imminent, why put AI in Photoshop at all? The double-speak around generative imagery and LLMs reveals confused thinking or deliberate obfuscation.

The legitimate reason to reconsider the Adobe relationship is not any single scandal but the trajectory these signals indicate. Business models and functionality are inextricably linked - how a company makes money shapes what it builds. Photoshop remains genuinely unique in capabilities, but the organization building it shows signs of losing the ability to make and promote software effectively. The street price of Creative Cloud, the traps large companies fall into, and the fundamental disconnect between Adobe's current path and user needs all point toward an uncertain future.