Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yeah, Apple - and I'm an Apple user (except for smartphones) - has a big problem going forward given where the majority of their revenue comes from. I wouldn't say their days are numbered but I think they have certainly peaked.
ReneMurea wrote:
Adobe reminds me of Apple and their arrogant "I'm the only player in town" attitude asking $600-800 for an iPhone. Or Netflix that thought they can charge more because people didn't have another choice. None of them ended well.
iPhone pricing started off at standard levels (pretty much the same cost as flagship smartphones had been for years) and only started shifting recently when Sony and later Google decided to launch their flagship phones are far more reasonable costs (and yes, Sony was the pioneer, bringing the Xperia's down to $3-400 retail cost for specs that were $600 everywhere else. Google quickly followed with the Nexus 4)
Lol...I'm no apple fanboy..at all. I hate the OS X UI, I think it's an abomination.
But you can't compare them to Adobe as far as innovation goes. Adobe is more like microsoft back in the windows 98 days, or apple back in the pre OS X days. Just coasting along. Incrementing things up slowly, playing it safe, buying competitors and killing them. They make good software, but the innovation is not really there. Imho!
So I use Acrobat, After Effects, Dreamweaver, Illustrator, Lightroom, Premiere, & Photoshop. How many months of CC would I get for the price of all that, especially if I wanted to keep everything at the latest version? It's a good deal for some people *shrug*
What are the viable alternatives to all those programs, anyway?
It was quite incredible that Apple brought out a phone at all, let alone that they captured such a big market share. Few would have thought. It would be akin to Adobe bringing out a camera - even a small mirrorless one, with built-in software to reduce shake and provide all kinds of processing tricks, rather than making such a lame move with their decades-old software.
Lee Saxon wrote:
So I use Acrobat, After Effects, Dreamweaver, Illustrator, Lightroom, Premiere, & Photoshop. How many months of CC would I get for the price of all that, especially if I wanted to keep everything at the latest version? It's a good deal for some people *shrug*
I think the biggest sticking point for most people is that all of these programs create their base files in a proprietary format that collates your data that is held in a freely accessible format into a black hole. While at the end of the day you may be able to export to a format you can open in another application you will never be able to access your editing process to tweak things unless you re-open your master file in Premiere or After Effects.
I have an awful lot of legacy data that I can still access because I still have the original applications to open the master files (dating back over 20 years now).
Under the rental scheme Adobe have adopted once you stop renting you will have no access to your master files.
ReneMurea wrote:
Adobe reminds me of Apple and their arrogant "I'm the only player in town" attitude asking $600-800 for an iPhone. Or Netflix that thought they can charge more because people didn't have another choice. None of them ended well.
Except for Apple, of course. The difference here is that Apple manages to charge $600-800 for an iPhone, even though there is lots of competition around. Adobe only managed to charge us so much, and to force draconian EULAs down out throats, because there is no real competition.
Lee Saxon wrote:
So I use Acrobat, After Effects, Dreamweaver, Illustrator, Lightroom, Premiere, & Photoshop. How many months of CC would I get for the price of all that, especially if I wanted to keep everything at the latest version? It's a good deal for some people *shrug*
I strongly believe that it won't be a good deal for long.
Adobe isn't doing this for convenience, or because it makes development simpler. They are doing this because the software they make has hit maturity, and it is getting harder and harder to justify to customers to pay for the overpriced upgrades. There are many, many people who skip versions, and Adobe knows this. Just like the second-hand market is Leica's strongest competitor, so the perpetual licenses are Adobe's strongest opponent. Why upgrade when what you have does the job?
CC is Adobe's attempt at reining these people back in, and getting the fees back up. They have made CC an incredibly good deal for people who need the software for their jobs, especially those who use several packages. Irresistibly good. So good that the rights grab and the non-openable data files upon subscription termination are getting swept under the rug. It is the single-app user who is getting the shitty end of the stick. They are paying too much under the new plan.
Adobe has miscalculated. The exact people who are meant to make the money balance after giving a good deal to the professionals are the people who can step out of the cycle the easiest, and right now, CS6 offers the best deal on Adobe software the single-app user will ever get. These people will stop buying, by and large. The price hike is too large, and the terms too ominous.
This leaves Adobe and the pros, and remember that the pros are paying much less than before. This means that Adobe will earn much less than before. Guess how long this situation will hold, and what will change?
simonw wrote:
I think the biggest sticking point for most people is that all of these programs create their base files in a proprietary format that collates your data that is held in a freely accessible format into a black hole. While at the end of the day you may be able to export to a format you can open in another application you will never be able to access your editing process to tweak things unless you re-open your master file in Premiere or After Effects.
I have an awful lot of legacy data that I can still access because I still have the original applications to open the master files (dating back over 20 years now).
Under the rental scheme Adobe have adopted once you stop renting you will have no access to your master files.
+100 I don't think Adobe's scheme will be widely adopted until they provide customers a viable solution (one that does not require continuous, non-stop life-long renting) to this major issue. I believe there are enough current users, including professionals, who have thought this through and will not adopt CC until this is changed.
Adobe reports financial results quarterly. In 3 months, one will have no need to speculate on the success or failure of the new plan. Adobe would have been extremely foolish to have bet the store on guessing the appeal of the subscription model. I think it's obvious Adobe's internal subscription numbers met or exceeded their goals, or they would have continued the dual (subscription & box software) business model.
What should be Adobe's concern, is the unknown. What will be the retention rate of current subscribers after the initial year, and how much can they increase the base?
grahamb3 wrote:
Adobe reports financial results quarterly. In 3 months, one will have no need to speculate on the success or failure of the new plan. Adobe would have been extremely foolish to have bet the store on guessing the appeal of the subscription model. I think it's obvious Adobe's internal subscription numbers met or exceeded their goals, or they would have continued the dual (subscription & box software) business model.
What should be Adobe's concern, is the unknown. What will be the retention rate of current subscribers after the initial year, and how much can they increase the base?
I suspect it will take longer - perhaps at least a subscription cycle. Wouldn't Adobe's internal subscription numbers up until the CC announcement be based on those customers who subscribed knowing they had a choice/ fall back option which they now know they no longer have? It's one thing to subscribe to something knowing you have an alternative option should you decide to stop the subscription but quite another to be forced to or else...
carstenw wrote:
This leaves Adobe and the pros, and remember that the pros are paying much less than before. This means that Adobe will earn much less than before. Guess how long this situation will hold, and what will change?
Having done the math, the Pro's are not saving money, in fact a pro using Master Collection who upgrades with each release will be paying around 50% more over 10 years for CC than for CS master upgrades (assuming they already have a Master Collection license).
The only people not losing money are the occasional users buying a month of access when needed and those who have no CS5/CS6 licenses and are looking at Master Collection, and the latter actually come out behind by a marginal amount.
As far as I am aware Adobe also have not clarified what happens to CC applications once they decide to discontinue them. There have been several Adobe apps that have been unceremoniously dumped in the past (once they have outlived their short term usefulness).
In the new rental regime would they shift discontinued apps across to always on? Or would they simply switch off your ability to access them at all?
If they turn discontinued apps off then that would be the death of Adobe as users would quite rightly lynch them. On the other hand if they simply turned discontinued apps on forever then I fail to see why they can't accommodate users that would prefer always on apps from the get go.
Sure, it's a great deal until you decide not to pay, and you realize you've built up no equity over time. And then there are those terms and conditions that no one with a conscience would agree to, but since there is NO alternative, many will have to. This is a majorly fucked up situation.
The problem with the scheme is that you pay and pay and pay and in the end, the day you stop paying you have nothing. Nada. If I buy CS5 and am happy to keep this and never upgrade then I may at some day have outdated software but if I am happy with that, that is OK for me. In the new scheme you have nothing unless you keep paying forever.
zoomo wrote:
The problem with the scheme is that you pay and pay and pay and in the end, the day you stop paying you have nothing. Nada. If I buy CS5 and am happy to keep this and never upgrade then I may at some day have outdated software but if I am happy with that, that is OK for me. In the new scheme you have nothing unless you keep paying forever.
Perhaps not everybody who signed up for the lower trial rate for the first year even realizes that and will be in for a rude awakening once that year is over: pay up at the full price (going up every year), or find another profession/hobby.
>>increasingly more of us are locked into Lightroom, making it an obvious candidate for the cloud.
Makes me really pissed off that I have locked up so much of my photography efforts into LR. Obviously there is a point where I will be a complete hostage. At least with PS, you just used it as an editor and all your photography was seperate. With LR, your work, your organization, everything is all integrated into a single Adobe product. If they slap this bullshit scam on LR, how you recover if you don't pay
you: I'm just looking at the shift how adobe is selling software
Phillip: Ok.
you: since CS6 is the last standalone software suite, what about LightRoom?
you: ARe there plans in the future to make that monthly fee based software as well?
Phillip: Well, we do not have future information as of now.
Phillip: Yeah, Lightroom 5 version is on its way..
you: ok, so if I continue to use your software, I can expect the possibility of getting locked into a monthly fee based agreement to access all the work I have in Lightroom now?
Phillip: Yes, Its an annual plan where you need to pay every month. You can use the subscription as long as you want.
you: That seems like a big risk. If there is an operating system update that will not run my copy of Lightroom, everything I've done in the software will be lost unless I sign up for your monthly fee.
Phillip: :-(
you: I am a photographer and managing my photos is a lifelong project. I was looking for certainty when I shifted to LR. Now I don't know what to do.
you: I'm interested in long term planning.
Phillip: Yes, I can understand, however, now the current trend is subscription.
So I take this as a pretty clear signal that we will be held hostage by Adobe to continue to access the work we have already done in LR.
I'll continue to use Lightroom as long as it's standalone, as I prefer the way it catalogs and processes images. But, if a time comes that it goes subscription only as well, and I have a camera that isn't supported by the last standalone version, I won't have any problem going to C1. Their cataloging capabilities are OK right now, and hopefully will continue to improve, and their conversions are generally very good (though I tend to prefer LR's conversion on portraits).
