Evidently, some of this is quantified.

[Walter Soyka]

[David Lawrence] “If I have to pay the software vendor rent *forever* or lose the ability to open the proprietary project files containing my creative property, how does that give me, the user, ALL the power? What if I’m an artist with years of investment in creative work done with the tool? What if my work is completely non-commercial with no client to bill? How do I just walk away from years of investment in the ecosystem?”

Traditional media artists have consumables that they must pay for, even if they’re non-commercial. How do they do it?

(I understand you will argue that software is not a consumable, and that it’s more akin to a tool like a brush. I’m not sure there’s really a good analogy here at all. Software doesn’t get used up like paint, but brushes don’t require strenuous on-going development like software for continued relevance in the market, either. I’m just pointing out that others have ongoing costs to manage.)

I still don’t entirely understand why you are arguing for “open” access to your applications instead of true open access to your data. Folks were scared of Microsoft’s format dominance in the 90s, and they were selling perpetually-licensed products. Now you’re asking for that?

[David Lawrence] “Let’s pretend that every application on your personal computer required monthly rent *forever* or it stops running. How many applications do you have on your machine? I have over 200. Even at a buck a month it’s untenable. How about five bucks a month for the more specialized apps? See where it’s going? Is this the kind of digital world you want to live in? Would the personal computer revolution have happened if it started with the rental model for software?”

With perpetual licensing, I don’t buy apps I can’t afford. With subscription, I wouldn’t subscribe to apps I couldn’t afford, but at least I’d gain the option of renting them for a limited time without the upfront cost.

Let’s imagine a world were subscription software were the norm, and pretend that some vendor started offering a new perpetual license. From that frame of reference, paraphrasing your argument:

“Let’s pretend that every application on your personal computer required a big initial payment or it never even runs once. How many applications do you have on your machine? I have over 200. Even at $50 each, or $10,000 upfront, it’s untenable. How about $1000 for the more specialized apps? See where it’s going?”

Also, people would be suspicious of the upfront fee as a cash grab, and of the perpetual license as a lack of commitment from the developer.

I don’t know what the personal computer revolution would have looked like under a different sales model. Maybe the more even cash flow of a subscription model would have benefited independent developers and made for a more sustainable software industry.

Would that be worse than the devalued app-for-a-dollar (or free app-for-your-private-data) world we live in now?

As always, David, I respect your argument. I understand why you believe perpetual licensing is always better for the consumer. I believe that subscription can sometimes actually provide a better product, though. While it’d be nice to have both, I think that the hybrid “options” development/sales model within a single product necessarily reduces benefits to subscribers.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Jeremy Garchow]

I don’t know if you are directly calling differing points of view on this forum inapt, sir, or insinuating we are not capable of making adult decisions? If so, that is pretty out of character and I’m not sure if I like the new Tim. It has been said that I wasn’t comparing CC to MoviePass, and even pointed out the differences.

By the way, Creative Could is more than $29/mo. And if you’re paying $29/mo today, you won’t be paying that for much longer. Of course, if you have more than a few seats, you are paying more than $29/mo today. Eventually, you will be paying $600/yr per seat. Are you paying $600/year per seat, yet? This more than we have ever paid for Adobe products. I guess the argument could be made that we are getting more? I’m not so sure about that. I didn’t need or but the Master Collection when it was available, and I don’t need it now. The Production Bundle was just fine, and there is no equivalent CC tier.

Since we seem to not be able to get away from Adobe CC;

You, Walter, Andrew, and now Dennis, keep working on the short term. Besides Andrew’s totally apt defense of software rental, this is not about the short term.
This is, what I would hope to be, a long term relationship. After all, these are careers we are talking about, not monthly open mics at the community center.

I always thought that telling customers to walk away was bad business. To tell me that one of my options is to walk away does not feel like we are sitting down to hash out a mutual agreement, it’s telling me, politely, to f**k off. Sorry, I’m using adult words here.

Perhaps this is inapt. The deal seems to be, that I must accept the terms, all of them, or I get nothing except a quick buzz around the Creative Cloud tower before being dropped back down on the ground.

I have always said, this is not about the money. David Lawrence has said it too, and might I offer, much more capably than I.

This mutual agreement is pretty much about the power. Adobe work files are so prevalent in this business, that it feels like there isn’t a choice. That seems to me to be a pretty decent example of power. I think it takes an adult to realize those implications.

Let’s move to Avid, for example. There is residual value when signing up. It is a support contract, you get a little something out of it by keeping what you’ve worked on even after you’ve stopped paying. Those finished projects will remain fully editable and working as long as you can keep them around.

Our shared storage, on top of the hardware purchase, has a support contract. If the support contract lapses, we still can use our shared storage, we just can’t update to the newest version, which sometimes means we can’t update to the latest OS. I am not against subscription. It does keep a level of skin in the game for the provider, but being told to fuck off does not help the case.

If for whatever reason my shared storage provider told me to take a hike, I could find another one, and probably with a little reset, I could find another contract with another company. Since none of my work is tied up in the original provider, this process would be relatively painless, especially since my storage con tunes to work until I can find a replacement.

Since MoviePass and CC are different subscription models, I guess we can compare CC to a cable subscription. As soon as you stop paying, you lose the service. When I deliver projects to my clients, all of that really hard work, hopefully, goes on to make them money, or raise awareness, or help someone. That is how we keep getting work, because the services that we have provided and delivered have residual value, and the client enjoyed the process. Adobe CC’s new model, which is new to the company, and nearly new to the industry, does not follow what I would consider to be a value proposition of client services. This is not spending money for my entertainment.

So, I don’t know if this is a simile or not, but whatever. I originally linked to the article because I thought it laid out how subscriptions, mostly, benefit the provider, and if the company is successful, that benefit is long term. In the case of MoviePass, the company is trying to solve the problem of empty theaters, by hoping the theaters remain mostly empty of paying MoviePass subscribers. I have a choice to either take them up on the offer or not, but I can still go to the movies despite my decision.

In something like Adobe CC, there is no residual value. I’m told I can walk away, or choose something else. In the actual reality of production, if I need to keep putting food on the table, I don’t have much of a choice as I have to use Adobe products. Adobe has smart people, they know what they are doing, and they know that most professional adults need to autopay perhaps more than what it is subjectively worth.

In the CC scenario, if I choose to walk way, I can’t go to the movies anymore. Not going to the movies is no fun. I do not hate fun.

Adobe engineers are doing a great job. They have taken Pr to a full functioning and highly competitive NLE in a very short time, and keep improving the other mature applications in the suite. There’s no doubt that Adobe engineers are hard at work, earning the subscriber keep. But look at the deal, look at the big picture, look at how I have to make a living, and unless your post gigs are temporary and you can let your subscription lapse to cut off service, then CC doesn’t really mirror any sort of decisions that we have to make to run a business.

It would be great if I could force clients to autopay, but I can not. I also can’t let the good ones walk away.

[Andrew Kimery]

I understand both sides of the argument though I obviously see there being more upside than downside which is why I subscribe to CC (at least for now). I’m not worried about paying Adobe ‘forever’ because the odds are exceedingly slim that people will never move away from Adobe. Who were the major players in print, GFX arts, video post production, etc., in the ’80s? The ’90s? Today? Any bets are what the field will look like in 2030?

[Walter Soyka] “I still don’t entirely understand why you are arguing for “open” access to your applications instead of true open access to your data. Folks were scared of Microsoft’s format dominance in the 90s, and they were selling perpetually-licensed products. Now you’re asking for that?”

This is something that I think gets lost in the hyperbole even though it’s one of the most important things to think about. How do you keep your data ‘fresh’? It’s certainly not by buying into a particular ecosystem. I think we should take a cue from archivists. When it comes to physical media for archiving you want something that will last 50, 75, 100 years, but when it comes to digital archiving longevity isn’t the goal. The goal with digital archiving is to refresh the data and the storage medium every 5-10 years so that it all stays compatible with current hardware and software. For example, what would I do with a stack of 5 1/4″ floppy disks or a bunch Lotus Notes files today?

[David Lawrence] “What if I’m an artist with years of investment in creative work done with the tool? What if my work is completely non-commercial with no client to bill? How do I just walk away from years of investment in the ecosystem?”

Transition to an affordable, modern ecosystem that hopefully has an easy way to share project data between other applications (XML for example). What if the artist still used linear editing gear from 30 years ago and was bemoaning the death of analog video tape and how hard it is to get decks and SD CRT monitors serviced? Anyone using technology is going to have to prepared to adjust as changes happen.

I worry too about everything going subscription and it’s not just because of Adobe. Fore example, Apple’s App Store prohibits charging for upgrades. Since most businesses can’t survive on a “sell it once, support it for free forever” business model we are seeing a rise of applications that either make money from ads (i.e. the user is the product, not the customer), make money from micro-transactions (the freemium model) or make money form subscriptions (usually a free app with limited function that becomes fully functioning if you subscribe).

[David Lawrence] “You’re right it’s about power. But I must disagree that it’s about giving ALL the power to the user. It’s actually the exact opposite.
“

It power doesn’t solely reside in either camp. The power has shifted but I think it’s a more lateral type shift. Depending on individual situations, some users feel more empowered by the shift and some users feel less empowered by the shift. I would still like to see an off ramp, more price tiers from Adobe (similar to the different CS packages), and more services included with the subscription price.

[Tim Wilson]

[Jeremy Garchow] “I don’t know if you are directly calling people on this forum inapt, sir, or insinuating we are not capable of making adult decisions? If so, that is pretty out of character”

Thanks for acknowledging that that would be out of character.

Note that my post was agreeing with Walter (not to say that he would he agree with anything I said),and specifically NOT disagreeing with you, for exactly the reason you point out, that you think the simile is in-APT, ie, not applicable.

This is completely different from, and not all related to, in-EPT, ie clumsy or incompetent.

That would be me.

I sincerely apologize for my overly casual language and overreaching tone. I agree that they were inappropriate, making me both inapt AND inept.

Apologies again.

[Walter Soyka]

[Jeremy Garchow] “You, Walter, Andrew, and now Dennis, keep working on the short term. Besides Andrew’s totally apt defense of software rental, this is not about the short term. This is, what I would hope to be, a long term relationship. After all, these are careers we are talking about, not monthly open mics at the community center.”

I’m actually most interested in subscription because I think that taken holistically, a subscription model offers some of my preferred software a better future over the long term than the perpetual license model did.

Discussing the economics of subscription is just touching on one aspect of a pretty complicated issue. It’s not about the money for me, either.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Tim Wilson] “I sincerely apologize for my overly casual language and overreaching tone. I agree that they were inappropriate, making me both inapt AND inept. “

Nope. No no. There is no apologizing necessary. I really enjoy your posts, a whole lot actually.

This forum is, what I think you have described before, a full contact forum. Speaking frankly helps others to understand the stakes. I just wanted to be sure I was understanding what you were saying, and I appreciate being able to say what I need to say and have colleagues who will attempt to understand, even if they don’t agree. That environment is a bit of rarity these days and thanks for keeping it going.

[John Davidson]

[Glenn Grant] “They have something close to that. Instead of the spouse you get an ex-wife and it’s called alimony and the ex gets it all.
“

The worst part is you can’t use the ex after you cancel.

John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Dennis Radeke] ” You are not compelled to subscribe,”

are you joking under god. you just all broke us under your knee. you used every leverage you had to break your previous customers into tenants. you literally constructed a scenario where you could hear each arm bone break.

those bones break. mine did. congratulations to you: a constructed olive oil for adobe software there.
your days must be filled with the sound of human arms breaking.

such grand royal days for adobe.

half point: i pushed that angry as far as you could – this is quite some cow barn.

–

*edit* – ok possibly overly florid language used there but well…

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Andrew Kimery]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “those bones break. mine did. congratulations to you: a constructed olive oil for adobe software there.
your days must be filled with the sound of human arms breaking.”

The don’t call him Dennis “The Enforcer” Radeke for nothing.

[Dennis Radeke]

[Andrew Kimery] “The don’t call him Dennis “The Enforcer” Radeke for nothing.”

And here I was hoping that I would be able to leave my former WWF career behind me! Drats, I’ve been discovered!

Merry Christmas to all,
Dennis – The enforcer 😉