-
The New Adobe
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I can understand his frustration. It seems to be the same argument, over and over.”
Pardon me if, having been out of town for a few days in Dallas watching my son’s team win the Final Four, I come a little late to this party.
If Adobe, and their employees, including [Jeremy Garchow] “I can understand his frustration. It seems to be the same argument, over and over.”
Pardon me if, having been out of town for a few days in Dallas watching my son’s team win the Final Four, I come a little late to this party.
If Adobe, and their employees, including Al Mooney, expected a different reaction at NAB, after watching the FCPX roll out debacle that directly led to the advancement of PPro, then they are, how shall I phrase this nicely — imbeciles: blind, arrogant and foolish – or as Bugs would say “real ultra-moroons.”
There is an implied relationship between a software vendor and it’s core users – not written, not legal, not binding, but still there none the less. When a vendor chooses to break that bond typically all hell breaks loose – the larger the customer base, the more significant the software is to that base’s income, the bigger the change, the hotter the furnace.
This does not mean a company doesn’t have the right to do anything they want with their products, it just means acting all surprised and huffy when the heat gets turned up makes you seem like a clown — what did you expect would happen when you deliberately dumped about 4 million users? Parades and balloons? If over the long run it works out for Adobe they will be a more profitable company. Both they and their employees should be happy with that, “love” from the adoring millions is somewhat out of the question.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “If Adobe, and their employees, including Al Mooney, expected a different reaction at NAB, after watching the FCPX roll out debacle that directly led to the advancement of PPro, then they are, how shall I phrase this nicely — imbeciles: blind, arrogant and foolish – or as Bugs would say “real ultra-moroons.”
“Welcome back Herb!
Steve Connor
Class Bully
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “This will probably bother you, but we just signed up for Office365. It allows us access to Office on many more machines/devices than buying it outright. Also, the price is right.”
This doesn’t bother me in the slightest. I’m happy that Microsoft is offering you options, I’m happy that Quicken offers the same type of options in accounting software. I was happy when Adobe offered the CC as an option a year ago. When I go to buy a car I have the option to rent or lease – and I get to choose what works best for me. Personally, I always buy and it works for me because I generally keep a car about 7 years and drive more than 12000 miles per year.
I am curious to know what Microsoft’s plan is if you stop renting 365 – any off ramp? Oh yes, of course, you could at that point simply buy it. Or save all your files to earlier formats and use your older programs to open in up. Jeez, under those conditions I can see where a rental strategy would sound reasonable if the price were right.
While your biggest issue seems to be keeping the current CC price down, for me it’s the uncertainty of the future price. Let’s say I use CC for the current season, which is my intention, and then drop it for Lightworks next year. To re-open old CC projects it currently costs just a months subscription – no big deal. What if, and I don’t think it’s unlikely, Adobe in the future does away with month to month rentals and has as a minimum a 6 month or 1 year rental. Now it’s $300 – $600 to open a project. Suddenly it does become a bigger deal.
It’s true that if Adobe would get the monthly price down based on a smaller package of software, even a yearly rental wouldn’t scare me off, but so far I see no indication of either happening, so Al Mooney is just gonna have to continue hearing the complaints.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “This does not mean a company doesn’t have the right to do anything they want with their products, it just means acting all surprised and huffy when the heat gets turned up makes you seem like a clown — what did you expect would happen when you deliberately dumped about 4 million users? Parades and balloons? If over the long run it works out for Adobe they will be a more profitable company. Both they and their employees should be happy with that, “love” from the adoring millions is somewhat out of the question.”
Again with the millions. Could we prove that a perpetual model would have signed up millions for CS7. It’s easy to say, I don’t think it would have been done. I guess if Adobe let’s those numbers out, we could see how many new CS6 licenses were purchased vs CC.
If that was the case, I think Adobe would have kept the buy now model and staggered release schedule and forgone all the frustration.
I’m not saying Adobe’s model is the best for me, clearly I have issues with it if you read through this long thread. From what we have learned from Adobe employees, is that the subscription model is better for development. If it is better for development, it will be better for me, now we just have to make on getting the deal a bit better, financially, for us.
As Andrew Kimmery said, not everyone needs the Master Collection. I don’t either, so I don’t really want to pay for it. Right now, there is no other option.
For me, it’s not about the money of a constant rental plan, it’s about the money that I don’t need to spend on products I don’t use. I think this is a better fight to fight as there could actually be an outcome instead of stalemate. We have a working example of it, as does Adobe.
-
[Herb Sevush] “While your biggest issue seems to be keeping the current CC price down, for me it’s the uncertainty of the future price. Let’s say I use CC for the current season, which is my intention, and then drop it for Lightworks next year. To re-open old CC projects it currently costs just a months subscription – no big deal. What if, and I don’t think it’s unlikely, Adobe in the future does away with month to month rentals and has as a minimum a 6 month or 1 year rental. Now it’s $300 – $600 to open a project. Suddenly it does become a bigger deal.”
I think keeping the price down, and also offering more temporary microtranscation options.
Like .99 for 24 hours of InDesign (or whatever it is you need).
Right now, Adobe CC is a whole lot of software, not a lot of service.
[Herb Sevush] “I am curious to know what Microsoft’s plan is if you stop renting 365 – any off ramp? Oh yes, of course, you could at that point simply buy it. Or save all your files to earlier formats and use your older programs to open in up. Jeez, under those conditions I can see where a rental strategy would sound reasonable if the price were right.”
If the price is right, I won’t mind paying a little money to use the service. You have to remember I won’t have been paying anything while I wasn’t using it.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Again with the millions. Could we prove that a perpetual model would have signed up millions for CS7.”
There were Adobe published numbers that showed something like 4 million current CS users vs a desire for 2 million CC subscribers. While you are correct that not all those CS users would have subscribed to CS7, they might have waited till 8 or 9, but most would have eventually moved on when their workflow / clients required it.
I have 3 different versions of Photoshop, 2 of AE and 3 of PPro – since it was never my main tool I upgraded irregularly but I did upgrade. Adobe was NOT dying without CC, their users were upgrading, just not as frequently and predictably as Adobe thinks they can get with CC. But yes, there are millions of users that Adobe has lost with CC. Adobe knows it, they’ve made the calculations, and they’ve moved on. But let’s not pretend that those folks are not there. That’s why Mr. Mooney is getting an earful.
[Jeremy Garchow] “For me, it’s not about the money of a constant rental plan, it’s about the money that I don’t need to spend on products I don’t use. I think this is a better fight to fight as there could actually be an outcome instead of stalemate. We have a working example of it, as does Adobe.”
I believe both battles are worth waging, I don’t see either one as more winnable than the other. Lower prices now can very easily be rescinded when the heat dies down.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “I believe both battles are worth waging, I don’t see either one as more winnable than the other. Lower prices now can very easily be rescinded when the heat dies down.”
Due to the legalities of the perpetual license, I think perpetual is dead in the eyes of Adobe.
I guess I am foolish in taking that to heart, but I’d rather follow the path that has already been trailblazed by photographers.
-
“It’s creamier.”
-
[Dennis Radeke] “Indeed. Mistake made, apology offered, nothing else to do but move on. To those of you who know Al, he is without doubt, one of the most sensitive people I know. NAB for a vendor is also pretty stressful. That’s not an excuse nor does his retracted statement reflect Adobe’s commitment and passion to our customers. He said something in the heat of the moment and quickly said, “I said something really stupid the other day, and I am really sorry. Thanks for calling me out. Normal service is resumed.”
’nuff said,”
Unfortunately this like discussing the Obamacare website. The underlying problem still exists with the program itself.
I’m not trying to be flip, but the unhappiness is with the subscription model and no misstep or apology takes that away. The problem is still there.
If you don’t believe me, look at what happened at the SuperMeet at NAB. Virtually no applause when Al came out. Damn little applause during his presentation, and damn little when he left. It was quite frankly, painful to watch… I felt bad for the guy. Lots of people left when he started. Almost no one had left up until then.
Is this because everyone is still mad at Al. I can’t speak for others, but I’m guessing not. I think that unfortunately his comment has made him the defacto poster boy for the subscription model. You’re right about Al… he’s a really nice guy. Anyone who has spent time around him knows that. I just think that this has become a case of “killing the messenger” so to speak…
Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.“Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” – Winston Churchill
-
I’d like to apologize, specifically, to everyone.
It’s not that I want Adobe to “win” and grind us in to the ground. I don’t want us to “win” and grind all of Adobe in to the ground. It’s not that I don’t think the current CC model is the way of the future, nor do I think perpetual licenses are silly.
I want what is best for everyone (including Adobe, so that we can foster a healthy market), and I don’t want to take away from what you guys think is the best way to do this. This usually involves compromise.
If having an Avid style exit ramp, that costs more money in the long run is something that is of interest, fair enough. That is completely valid and it seems like it’s something Adobe could do, and really, it would be great for Adobe, less great for me (it’s $1300 to turn the subscription back on instead of $50).
I think that the long term price (and I hope to have a long career yet) is where I am looking. And in the long term, $50/mo forever for a ton of shit I don’t use is not a good deal. I don’t care about the rental model, I don’t care if I “own” the software, I just want to be able to use what I want, when I need it, and get charged a fair rate. Yes, it’s more complicated for Adobe. So what? As Lawrence points out, they are the seventh largest “software and programming” company in the world, they should be able to figure this out.
So, I’d like to apologize and reiterate that I’m on the end user side. I DO want what is best for us, collectively, even if we may disagree on the best way to accomplish that goal.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up