Andy Patterson
Forum Replies Created
-
[Ben McCarthy] “The 18 core CPU alone costs $2000 on these bad boys, coupled that with a Vega GPU which will be $1000 +, factor in a 5K monitor with this quality that’s another $1000, that’s without Motherboard, RAM, Powersupply, Case, Mouse and keyboard and Apples design.
A Microsoft Surface Pro costs which has a quad core processor:
• 6th Gen Intel Core i7, 16GB RAM
• Ultra-thin 28-inch adjustable PixelSense Display
• Surface Pen, Keyboard and Mouse included
• Windows 10 Prois $5500 Australian
I’d take the iMac Pro for $6500 anyday of the week”
I think you are referring to the Surface Studio. It depends on the users needs. For some an iMac might be the best option but for others the Surface Studio might be a better option. Keep in mind The MS Surface Studio will probably get a revamp in December or January. I imagine they have a certain amount that needs to sell before revamping can occur. That is not to say Asus, MSI or HP cannot replicate the Surface Studio with better specs by the time the new iMacs start shipping. Having said that Coffee Lake will be here by the end of the year.
-
[Scott Witthaus] “[andy patterson] “If I charge$1000.00 to build a website and my potential client find someone to do it for less I loose the business. ”
But wait, FCPX costs less than CC in the long run. So is Adobe losing business to Apple in this model? Pure cost?”
There are a lot of Youtubers that use Macs that have ditched Premiere Pro in favor of FCPX. I don’t blame them. Cost is the only real factor for most the YouTubers since most of them could just use iMovie. I admit a post production house is not going to be as concerned about the cost as opposed to workflow paradigms.
[Scott Witthaus] “For me, and probably many others, I use Pr (when forced to), PS, AE and some Illustrator. That’s it. I don’t need, nor want, the bloated CC package of, what, 15-20 some-odd softwares. So really I should be paying about $10 – $15/month for the five I want (maybe that is where you got your $14.99 number). If I need more, I pay more a la carte. But at $49/month I am being forced to pay for the development of software I will never use. At least in Avid-land, one can assume the monthly fee is going to something close to the core editing software.”
That is my point. Adobe may loose some CC members to the competition. I like what I see from BMD. In fact BMD fulfilled my marker request. Adobe ignored it. I have heard Premiere’s new Essential Graphics Panel and Markers will get more features. I hope so because the updates from Adobe at NAB 2017 were kind of weak.
-
[Michael Gissing] “Fascinating that it’s a post about Autodesk and no-one is talking about Autodesk.”
It is about subscription based software.
-
[Oliver Peters] “I looked it up and when Adobe started introducing the Master Collection as a subscription option, the monthly rate was $129/month for an annual subscription.”
You have to ask how many people bought into at that price?
[Oliver Peters] ” So, Adobe has actually reduced, not increased, the subscription rates.”
Probably because of competition. I have already stated competition is a good thing and we may see Adobe rethink the CC.
[Oliver Peters] “When you had to purchase the Master Collection, it was $2600 (rounded off) and upgrades after that were $900 (rounded off).”
The Master Collection could be bought for $2400.00 and they have holiday specials to get the Master Collection upgrade for 10-20% less. That is when I make the upgrades. Having said that some of the other Creative Suite upgrades were under $600.00 and that is why some say with the CC they pay more and get less.
[Oliver Peters] “Obviously you can argue the relative value for what you are getting, as well as a cost comparison with FCPX/Motion/Compressor/Logic or BMD Resolve/Fusion, but that’s a separate issue.”
I think After CS 6.0 Adobe knew it would be hard to constantly make the same big of upgrades as they had been.
DR and FCPX have to be part of the equation. I don’t just benchmark Adobe against Adobe nor should anyone else. BMD has upgraded DR a lot over the last two years. Some CC user might jump ship.
Once again I am not saying the CC is super expensive but then again the upgrades are not all that great compared to the past.
-
I was wondering about the future of the Mac Mini.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Since Adobe is a publicly traded company in the US that would be illegal under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act unless Adobe deferred total recognition of the revenue for six years, in which case the company would most likely fold before the six year mark comes around. Apple, on the other can, and easily defer the revenue from FCP X as long as it wants since it probably only makes up a fraction of a percent of their total annual revenue. BMD isn’t a publicly traded company in the US so it doesn’t have to follow accounting regulations like SOX.”
Adobe can change it’s structure as well. They could go back to the CS days although I know they will not.
[Andrew Kimery] “If you want more info on how the Sarbanes-Oxley Act pertains to the discussion at hand just search for “Sarbanes-Oxley Act” or “SOX” in the forum or the Adobe Creative Cloud Debate forum (it’s been addressed multiple times) and you’ll find out more about accounting rules than you probably ever wanted to know. ????”
I know they have to be accountable to the stockholders. Having said that Adobe owns the market for Photo editing yet they bundle Photoshop and LR for $9.99. Why not AE and Premiere Pro for $9.99. Adobe does not own the market for video editing. In fact there is a lot of competition for the video editing market. Adobe needs to rethink things.
[Andrew Kimery] “[andy patterson] “Phone companies have dropped their prices form 2 years ago and offer better data plans. ”
Yet my cable bill is more than it was two years ago even though my plan hasn’t changed at all and Apple is still selling 4yr old tech a near top dollar pricing. What do phones and rigged data plans* have to do with Adobe again?”
Only certain cable companies are avialabe in certain cities. The phone companies are every where.
[Andrew Kimery] “[andy patterson] “If we have to be on the perpetual treadmill and there are no DVDs the price should be less than the old school CS upgrades but they are not.”
DVD blanks cost a fraction of a cent. The cost making the software dwarfs every aspect of producing and distributing discs at the scale that Adobe was doing it.”
I agree but we are still getting less.
[Andrew Kimery] “[andy patterson] “BMD has offered free upgrades for DR.”
Apples to oranges as BMD has a totally different business model than Adobe.”
Apple to oranges is a non issue because BMD’s DR is competition for Adobe.
[Andrew Kimery] “[andy patterson] ” If I charge$1000.00 to build a website and my potential client find someone to do it for less I loose the business. ”
Only if you can’t convince them that you offer a superior product and experience which is worth the extra money. Reminds me of the old joke about two competing barber shops that were across the street from each other. The owner of one shop put out a sign that read “Today only, $5.99 hair cuts”. The owner of the other shop responded with a sign of their own, “We fix $5.99 hair cuts”.”
You bothered to respond? My point was Scott’s analogy was bad. Having said that there are people in other countries that design websites for free and only charge for the hosting. Some people would prefer to hire someone local even if it costs more. Others will opt for the less expensive options. Competition is always good for the consumer but not the business owner. Perhaps Adobe will restructure the CC. Any five programs for $19.99 or any ten programs for $29.99. Who knows?
-
[Scott Witthaus] “Just curious to know that if a client of yours asked you to cut your rate by well more than half because they thought you were making too much profit, would you agree to do that? Probably not. So why would Adobe? A publicly held company like Adobe is not going to simply give up huge revenue.”
That is a very bad analogy Scott. I am talking about competition. If I charge$1000.00 to build a website and my potential client find someone to do it for less I loose the business.
[Scott Witthaus] “I think you will see the rate increase in the future, not decrease. Probably small tick up. Or, what I would like to see, Adobe might consider offering an a la carte option for CC. Say $25/month for any five products in the cloud.”
Your a proving my point and I do hope we see Adobe change it’s paradigm but it will not be because of anything I said or you said but because of the competition.
-
[Oliver Peters] “Andy, come on! Your price point keeps shifting. It doesn’t seem like you have any knowledgeable justification for the numbers you are suggesting, other than simply a desire to pay less.”
Adobe could charge $14.95 a month and still make money. They could charge $24.95 and make more money. The more people that are on the cloud the lower the price can be. Phone companies have dropped their prices form 2 years ago and offer better data plans. If we have to be on the perpetual treadmill and there are no DVDs the price should be less than the old school CS upgrades but they are not. We pay for upgrades even if they are not that great. I highly doubt we will see as big of upgrade from CS 4.0 to CS 5.0 again. BMD has offered free upgrades for DR. Having said that regardless if Apple and BMD both make hardware their software is direct competition for Adobe. If Adobe were like Apple we would pay $950.00 for the CC and get free updates for 6 years. And yea, I am aware Apple and BMD sell hardware but competition is competition. Look at Google Docs VS MS Office. It is a competitive world.
[Oliver Peters] “And no, I don’t see CC as any more buggy than CS. All software is always buggy.”
There are definitely more bugs since CC. I say if we are all going to be beta testers lower the price. I agree all software has bugs but we get more of them now. Adobe has gotten rid of the paid beta testers.
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “ow did you arrive at $14.95? I’d like Adobe to offer different application bundles for less, but $14.95 for everything just seems like a very low, and arbitrary, number. Avid’s annual subscription price is the same as Adobe’s yet with Adobe you get significantly more bang for your buck so should Avid charge $1.99 for MC?”
Adobe and Apple offered an inexpensive alternative to Avid. Apple still does.
[Andrew Kimery] “Better or not, the traditional software business model is disappearing and I don’t see that course changing. Also, don’t forget that towards the end of CS’s life Adobe changed the upgrade policy so that upgrade pricing only went back one version. So if you were on CS 5 you could get an upgrade discount to CS 6, but if you were on CS 4 and wanted to upgrade to CS 6 you would have to pay full retail for it. Creative Cloud or not, the Adobe was ending the ability for customers to ‘coast’ via the upgrade policy.”
I agree Adobe got greedy.
[Andrew Kimery] “Just speaking for myself, I’m less concerned with saving a few bucks today and more concerned with the long term health of the industry that makes the tools that I use to make a living.”
If Adobe offered the CC for $19.99 a month they would still make millions but Adobe wants to make billions.
[Andrew Kimery] “I’d much rather pay a subscription to Adobe for CC than for Adobe to copy BM’s game plan and release Adobe brand I/O devices and Adobe Brand control panels that are tied to their software.”
Adobe doesn’t have to make I/O hardware devices.
[Andrew Kimery] ” I think users are best served when they have the freedom to choose what they think is the best hardware and best software for their needs, even if that means mixing and matching hardware and software from different venders.”
I agree.
I am not saying the CC is horrible or way over priced but since we must use the cloud a price of $24.99 would be more reasonable. The CC is more buggy than the CS versions.
-
[Oliver Peters] “[andy patterson] “I myself would not have upgraded this year and with the CS paradigm I would not have to.”
Precisely the reason Adobe felt they had to move to subscription.”
That is why I say we pay more and get less. I do hope the competition makes Adobe lower the price of the CC to $19.99 a month. That would be a fair price for the customer and Adobe.