-
Creative Cloud and the future of the creative process
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “[Chris Harlan] “Sadly, I think you’re right, and that is what is actually bugging me about this whole thing. I’m okay with the model for Adobe–I’d prefer the choice be there, but I’m okay with it–but I don’t like the notion of everything going this way. It might be unavoidable, but there it is.”
Isn’t part of this because that the server technology is actually available and cheap enough to operate and these relatively massive scales?
Jeremy”
Absolutely. IMO, the real winners in this brave new world of connected, service oriented architectures are (in no particular order); Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Intel and HP. 🙂
Shawn
-
[Walter Soyka] “Isn’t this rather what everyone wanted from FCPX?”
Walter,
You’re uncharacteristically talking in generalities.
I have no idea “what everyone wanted”, nor do I think you do.
I think road maps are generally received well, if that’s what you mean. Neither Apple nor Adobe have presented anything like a road map – a few feature announcements do not a road map make, and “vision statements” are usually just so much marketing.
[Walter Soyka] “They changed something that people liked because they seem to believe they could make it better.”
I think you have several weeks of discussion to refer to if you wish to see how new features have been received generally.
You’re making cartoonish generalizations.
Franz.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “You’re uncharacteristically talking in generalities. I have no idea “what everyone wanted”, nor do I think you do.”
Fair, Franz. Please forgive my sloppy writing.
I was referring to the general consensus which I thought emerged here on this forum. Obviously you are correct that there was no unanimity, but many seemed to want Apple to continue offering FCP7 while selling FCPX, and many seemed to want to know what Apple planned to include or exclude from FCPX.
[Franz Bieberkopf] “Neither Apple nor Adobe have presented anything like a road map – a few feature announcements do not a road map make, and “vision statements” are usually just so much marketing.”
I agree there’s no roadmap, but I disagree that there’s no value in vision statements.
There’s obviously a design philosophy expressed in software like FCPX and Creative Suite. If there’s that vision statement is a description of a new philosophy that will inform a new development for Creative Cloud going forward, I think that’s worth discussing.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “QuickBooks Online. What’s more important to a business than their books? Easy multi-user access. Invoices/sales receipt automation. Delayed customer billing. Automatic daily bank transaction imported. Accept credit cards on your mobile phone or tablet. Third-party extension (hook QuickBooks Online to Salesforce, which is hooked to your Gmail!).”
Of course Intuit managed to offer this without scuttling Quickbooks perpetual license, which is what I use since neither my accountant nor myself needs the online service. Funny how I think Intuit is doing a great job offering you what you need, and me what I need. I wonder how they manage to do it?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “Funny how I think Intuit is doing a great job offering you what you need, and me what I need. I wonder how they manage to do it?”
By splitting their development resources across two products — something which Adobe has apparently decided not to do. Maybe that means you have to chose something else.
If there were a perpetual license plus subscription plan, I’d choose that. If there’s not, I’ll be ok with this. As I said above, I think that adding connectivity will enable development of new features we couldn’t get with products alone.
Others may make different decisions. I respect that. I just hate to see all discussion of the benefits of the new model totally drowned out by hysteria over the downsides of the new model (which I certainly acknowledge).
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “By splitting their development resources across two products — something which Adobe has apparently decided not to do. Maybe that means you have to chose something else.”
Walter,
That’s just weird. You’ve just argued that Intuit are (or will be) in financial trouble because of their distribution model. And you have nothing to back that up.
This CC thing has you crazy.
Franz.
-
[Walter Soyka] “What’s your first impression of their stated vision? “
Honestly I don’t get it. The problem for me with interoperability between remote partners is shared assets, not shared applications. I have no problems now sharing project files or reviewing projects with remote partners in Boston, San Fran and NYC from my suburban Westchester home studio. What slows down my collaborative process is sharing 13 Terrabytes of assets with these partners. I don’t see what CC is doing to help me with that.
The vision statement sounded like a bunch of vague hokum, there wasn’t anything there that seemed compelling. But I’m just an old editor, my needs are very specific and quite simple, so maybe it was just beyond me. What isn’t beyond me are features like integrated closed captioning in PPro 7 or automated rotoscoping in AE that I could actually make some money with. But ” Our vision is to remove friction from the creative process and make it more productive and connected” – that sounds like a used car salesman trying to sell me smoke.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Walter Soyka] “By splitting their development resources across two products — something which Adobe has apparently decided not to do.”
[Franz Bieberkopf] “Walter, That’s just weird. You’ve just argued that Intuit are (or will be) in financial trouble because of their distribution model. And you have nothing to back that up.”
Franz, please re-read what I wrote. You’re putting words in my mouth. I said nothing of the sort, I implied nothing of the sort, and I believe nothing of the sort.
I simply said that Intuit are splitting their development resources across two products, which is demonstrably true, and that Adobe made a different choice for themselves, which is also demonstrably true.
I believe that both models can succeed in general, and I believe that Intuit will be just fine specifically.
[Franz Bieberkopf] “This CC thing has you crazy.”
This CC thing has me frustrated.
I see people clinging to an illusion of security with shiny discs and perpetual licenses — never mind that the idea of “ownership” of software went out the window thirty-plus years ago or that they’re still dependent on activation servers in the cloud for install. I see people in business for themselves arguing that it’s borderline immoral for a company to make money on their products. I see people arguing that subscription is evil because it robs you of control of your own work product, then turning around and recommending a cheaper subscription solution. I see people who just spent thousands of dollars proving they could switch from one product or platform to another argue that the possibility of spending $20 at some indefinite point in the future on recovering a legacy project would be impossibly constrictive and utterly beyond the pale.
Most importantly, I see something new here with really enormous transformative potential, and I feel like nearly everyone else is so fixated on how or why the licensing model is different that they’re missing how or why the offering itself is different.
Connectivity and mobility are forces that are changing every industry they touch, so why are so many here arguing to ignore them? Having Internet access sounded non-sensical in 1993, but now in 2013, can you imagine being without it? How many IP addresses did you have in 1993? How many do you have today?
That’s the kind of potential I think the ideas behind Creative Cloud could have in our little niche, but I can’t get anyone to discuss anything behind this knee-jerk “Adobe is out to get me” reaction. I can’t get anyone to stop and consider the possibility that maybe there’s a positive customer outcome here, and that even though it’s different than anything we’ve known, maybe CC can be win-win.
Yet I keep trying. Maybe I am crazy.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “Yet I keep trying. Maybe I am crazy.”
Hey, I’m pretty much with you, though I do feel the subconscious pull the other way, as well. I think the time for what you want to talk about isn’t quite here yet. This is one of those moments where people’s survival instincts are kicking in–the reaction is almost physical–and you’ve got to let folks stand down a bit before going where you want to go.
-
Okay, Walter. I’m going to step out on this ledge with you.
If I look with rose-colored glasses, and disarm my defense mechanisms, it occurs to me that when tools have properly matured, we may actually want to discourage further rapid change to them–change for change’s sake–and only have them finessed, varied, and perfected, with occasional bursts of growth. In the traditional model, change drives the purchase cycles, and in immature products, this can be terrific. Improvements drive sales. But, at a certain point of maturity, it becomes change simply to drive sales. Fashion begins to replace functionality, and whole, useful structures can be tossed away–maybe have to be tossed away–to support sales. Yes. Sometimes those new structures can truly be useful, or better, but they can also be simply different, and worse.
So, what about this rent or tithe model? Could it actually be worth paying people to oversee a giant, complicated tool farm–to keep it healthy and clean, move it forward, polish the links and lenses, and help us easily navigate its labyrinthian mass of interconnected programs. Could this become a giant public tool, a worldwide art machine–with a library, supply rooms, research centers, and technicians permanently onsite responding to requests and constantly adding things bit by bit? Maybe rental is the wrong word. Maybe it really is membership. And, maybe it is truly worthwhile paying for a membership in something like that.
The more I think about it, the more I think it really could be. When I look at it that way, I even get excited about it. Yes, there are pitfalls and potential ugliness, but I’m going to think along these lines for awhile, and see where that takes me.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up