-
Apple and Adobe Software: Together
-
[David Lawrence] “Yep, I guess some people are fine with letting a multinational corporation control access to their native project files because for them it’s all about business. “
Or just pragmatism. Best tool for the job and all that. I’m certainly not all about business (if I was I’d seek out more lucrative work as opposed to more enjoyable work), but editing does have to keep the lights on and put food on the table so the business side is inescapable if you do it for a living.
[David Lawrence] “That’s it. SOX and business arguments aside, there’s no technical reason whatsoever why Adobe couldn’t offer perpetual copies of their creative applications if they wanted to”
Business and/or SOX arguments aside, there’s no technical reason whatsoever why OS X can’t run on non-Apple hardware and Avid can’t give away upgrades for free. Take business and/or SOX arguments into consideration and we have Apple’s DRM preventing OS X from running on anything but Apple hardware and Avid won’t even give you a bug fix anymore unless you have a current maintenance plan or subscription. Putting aside business considerations means putting aside major factors in the decision making process I mean, aside from the business argument that I’ll very quickly go out of business, there’s no technical reason why I can’t edit for free.
Could Adobe take the same path as Avid? Technically yes, although the size of Adobe’s product offerings makes it impractical IMO. And, to be honest, I’m not overly keen on Avid’s setup because of the massive penalty for letting your maintenance subscription lapse.
For example, a few weeks ago I went to upgrade my Avid from 8.0 to 8.4.2. But I had accidentally let my maintenance contract lapse so I couldn’t go beyond 8.4.0. If I wanted the two rounds of bug fixes (8.4.1 and 8.4.2) and to be running the same version as my collaborators I’d either have to pony up $1300 or signup for a subscription. Both options felt like a kick in the nuts due to my own mental lapse, but thankfully Avid customer service took pity on me and allowed me to re-up my maintenance contract for the normal $299 rate. Now, the backward compatibility with Avid is excellent so I probably would have been okay on that front, but what I really wanted were the latest bug fixes. Having to live being capped at 8.4.0 wouldn’t have set well with me.
If Adobe had a similar offering, then new users would probably pay $2500 up front for the whole suite and then $600/yr for the ‘maintenance contract’. This would satisfy the perpetual license seekers but what about the downside? What if you accidentally let your maintenance contract lapse? That’s another $2500 if you want to get back on the perpetual license upgrade wagon. Or what if you let it expire on purpose (say CC2016) but you later need to collaborate with someone and it requires CC2017? Of course you can just sign up for a month of CC2017 to get the work done, but now you have work in CC2017 that might not be openable in CC2016 which defeats the purpose of buying the perpetual license so you’d always be able to open your work.
To be 100% honest I feel more locked in to paying Avid annually to keep my maintenance contract active than I do to Adobe to keep my CC subscription active.
-
[Andy Field] “What is the incentive to constantly improve its product if everyone says – “Gee – your 5 versions ago software is fine – i’ll pass.” They quickly go out of business. Apple gives you a dirt cheep editor in order to sell more macs…if you buy it once – they’re done with your software business…so instead they keep improving their hardware – faster, better etc..in fact they change the operating software so eventually your “older, it’s just fine NLE doesn’t work so well, or at all in the future…and you see value so you upgrade the computer. Or you stay with an older computer and software that doesn’t play well with new video formats. Your choice.
“Well….I’m using a 2009 Mac Pro to edit with the latest version of FCP X and it
works just fine. Plays with all new video formats and does so even faster than CC.
So not really sure about that argument. If Apple had made it impossible for the older
computers to use the new version of FCP X, I’d say you had a pretty valid point, but
that is certainly not the case.Gabe Strong
G-Force Productions
http://www.gforcevideo.com -
[Michael Gissing] “I would dearly like to buy a liftime’s garbage collection but the bloody council insist I pay quarterly subscriptions called rates for such services.”
An obvious non sequitur.
[Andy Field] “The continuing improvements on CC saves me time and makes me money.”
Huh? So how exactly do “continuing improvements” not apply to any and every other NLE on the market… only in most cases WITHOUT the monthly expense?? Apparently you missed the fact that the software I paid for ONCE over four years ago has had over FIFTEEN updates for naught ever since? Never mind that that figures out to roughly six bucks a month (and getting less by the day).
No idea why you appear to want to sell us on the idea that PPro/Adobe are somehow following some brilliantly unique master plan that everyone else is missing out on. But then I guess they are, just that there a lot of people that in fact want no part of it. To each his own. Just try not to justify your own decision by suggesting everyone else is a clueless doofus because they made a different choice and lack your superior “pro” vision and business sense. That truly does not help your position the least bit.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Andrew Kimery] “Or just pragmatism. Best tool for the job and all that.”
I’m all for pragmatism. But I’m not happy about having less choice as a customer.
[Andrew Kimery] “Putting aside business considerations means putting aside major factors in the decision making process I mean, aside from the business argument that I’ll very quickly go out of business, there’s no technical reason why I can’t edit for free.”
No one’s asking Adobe to give away software for free. Just the opposite. I want to give them my money. There are many possible scenarios that would work. We’ve discussed this for years. The key is a fair exit strategy instead of “Like it or leave.” I don’t think this is asking too much.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~researchlinkedIn: https://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
vimeo: vimeo.com/album/2271696
web: propaganda.com
facebook: /dlawrence
twitter: @dhl -
[Bill Davis] “So sorry, but I SOX regulation can be seen as the really having much to do with the primary REASON Adobe went subscription. Maybe it was one small factor. But the reason? Hardly, I think.”
To the best of my knowledge no one (outside of making a straw man argument) has stated the SOX forced Adobe to do what it did or that SOX was the primary reason Adobe went CC only.
The decision to go CC only was multifaceted and the point of brining up SOX and accounting is to shed light on why Adobe can do some things but not others after going CC. For example, Adobe can offer much more specific product roadmaps and release feature upgrades whenever they want** now that they offer just a subscription. One thing they apparently can’t do (and I wish they could) is offer some sort of loyalty ‘buy out’ option (ex. after X amount of years of subscribing you get a perpetual license for whatever version you currently have). As Tim has pointed out this ‘rent-to-own’ option can’t work accounting wise which would help explain why Avid offers two paths (maintenance contract or subscription) that never intersect.
I think Adobe’s main goals were to become more nimble (more frequent feature upgrades), branch out into services that their competitors lack (Cloud storage, BeHance, the marketplace, etc.,), and generate a more reliable revenue stream. For example, I think when CS 5 came out Adobe announced that they were going to a 12mo cycle, as opposed to an 18-24mo cycle, and that upgrade discounts would only be applicable if you were upgrading from the previous year. So, basically, if you skip a version (skip a year) then you have to pay full price. Presumably this would motivate a lot more people to upgrade every (more steady revenue stream), and make Adobe a bit more nimble (shorter release cycle) but it could also piss people off, it wouldn’t solve the problem of people that are okay skipping multiple versions, and even feature upgrades once a year might not feel fast enough for users that are increasing exposed to software upgrades multiple times a year.
As I mentioned in another post ( https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/85551 ) Adobe could have technically gone a similar route as Avid, but given the number of Adobe products I don’t think it would be very practical.
On a related note, if the product teams are to be believed then life under the CC model is an improvement for them as well. They are allowed to communicate more openly with customers, spend more time responding to users requests, and there is less emphasis on upgrades that ‘demo well.’
Coming back to the accounting rules, if it the accounting rules were total BS why would Apple charge for a software update that activated a WiFi radio and why would Avid tank it’s stock by not submitting required paperwork to the SEC and get delisted from NASDAQ? Maybe there are so few issues with SOX cases because doing the accounting wrong and hoping not to get caught is more trouble than just doing it right in the first place? Maybe someone with ethics is running the accounting department? Maybe the investor class as a whole doesn’t take too kindly to massive companies losing 76% of their stock value overnight (see WorldCom) and that puts non-governmental pressure on companies to not cook the books the way Enron did?
[Bill Davis] “Just make it as easy to unsubscribe as it is to subscribe = and code in a mechanism that allows the content creator unfettered access to their own creative work done via the software – permanently. Then I’m fine with it”
I agree that signing off should be as easy as signing up though I’m obviously not as averse to it as you are. My major complaint with Adobe CC, which I have voiced many times before, is that I don’t feel like there are enough Cloud/service offerings. I’m still waiting for the, “Yup, there’s no way in hell they could’ve done something this awesome and useful under the old CS business model” moment. There have been a lot of improvements to existing products, but I still think Adobe CC, as a concept, is still missing its killer app.
**Yes, Adobe could try to figure out a way to determine fair market value to every feature upgrade and withhold accounting that amount of revenue from every perpetual license sale until the feature upgrade is released, but the logistics of that for a company with as many product as Adobe has just doesn’t seem viable at all.
P.S. Wrote this piecemeal while working so apologies if it is a bit scatter brained.
-
[David Lawrence] “I’m all for pragmatism. But I’m not happy about having less choice as a customer. “
As am I, though obviously we have different preferences when it comes to which choices we can life with and without.
[David Lawrence] “The key is a fair exit strategy instead of “Like it or leave.” I don’t think this is asking too much.”
Does any public company similar to Adobe have a fair exit strategy though (a system that allows you to take what you’ve already paid for a subscription and apply it towards purchasing a perpetual license)? Even with Avid there is no off ramp from their subscription. They just offer a totally different road (buying the perpetual license + maintenance contract).
-
On the thread in general – always an interesting conversation albeit, the same folks are always adamantly staking out their same positions…
[Robin S. Kurz] “Huh? So how exactly do “continuing improvements” not apply to any and every other NLE on the market… only in most cases WITHOUT the monthly expense?? Apparently you missed the fact that the software I paid for ONCE over four years ago has had over FIFTEEN updates for naught ever since? Never mind that that figures out to roughly six bucks a month (and getting less by the day).”
Certainly, there have been some terrific updates from FCP X (and all other NLE’s for that matter). However, I would politely argue that no other NLE has had the scale and enormity of improvements, fixes and innovation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Premiere_Pro#Features
Just counting from CC (not four years ago from June 21, 2011 – launch date of FCP X), I can casually add up about 200 items that don’t include all of the small features or bug fixes that we incorporate into any release. And of course, stay tuned, we’ll have something for you shortly that will add to this list…
That is the basic value proposition of the subscription – we provide continuous improvement that is addressing the market needs – and as others have pointed out, if we fail to meet your needs, you have an immediate out. As I’ve said before, the subscription model puts the onus of delivering excellent releases on a continual basis – something that a perpetual model does not.
And with the greatest respect let me just suggest that some of the ‘features’ that some folks talk about over the last few years were things being added back that were in the previous iteration. Broadcast output, tape lay back and a source monitor are all ones that come to mind.
As always, if it (insert current NLE) works for you great! If it doesn’t, you have many great choices you can look at and try (for free).
Cheerfully,
Dennis -
I agree. However my concern is an exit strategy. How can I opt out to move to another software if at ANY time in the future I decide to not renew my subscription?
For media creators we are talking massive libraries of data. I still have a way to play my projects from 10 years ago. Will I be able to do this if I cancel CC?
The rest is just money. Do I want to spend x amount for so and so. I think FCP X has been a great bargain but with the need to only use Apple Hardware which does have some concerns like not having a modular system that has been kept current (MacPro is getting old in the tooth). Adobe software however is just scary for me to consider cause I don’t see the long term ownership of my own media.
Kinda like if the only road leading to your home was a privately owned toll road.
Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “Just try not to justify your own decision by suggesting everyone else is a clueless doofus because they made a different choice and lack your superior “pro” vision and business sense. That truly does not help your position the least bit.
“Did he say that?
[Robin S. Kurz] “Huh? So how exactly do “continuing improvements” not apply to any and every other NLE on the market… only in most cases WITHOUT the monthly expense?? “
True, but his point is the PPro has had many more features added and enhancements than other NLE’s
To be fair they haven’t added 3D text though, so they are lagging behind in that area
-
[Steve Connor] “To be fair they haven’t added 3D text though, so they are lagging behind in that area
“Absolutely. Which of course means that X would have a MUCH easier time accurately re-creating a HUGE percentage of the television ads, movie trailers and promo videos we all see every day.
Oh well. You can always do it the traditional way – hire it out to a 3D shop!
Fits right in with the “traditional” 1980s style non-magnetic timeline. Retro editing FTW!
(teasing mode off)
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up