FORUMS: list search recent posts

Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Gerry Fraiberg
Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 1:05:47 pm

Here's an interesting blog view...

http://notesonvideo.blogspot.ca/2013/05/why-subscriptions-are-bad-for-adobe...



Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 3:29:00 pm

I can't say I really disagree with anything stated in the article. I would add that the subscription model will also generate their own competition in the form of software companies who see an opportunity by not following the same model.

Photo editing software that no one would have considered previously because of Photoshop, or vector software no one would have looked twice at because of Illustrator, could make inroads because some consumers will look anywhere but at the cloud model for pricing.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 3:51:34 pm

I disagree. If Adobe doesn't offer compelling reasons to keep using Adobe software people will find other options. This is true with a perpetual license as well as with a cloud subscription. $50/mo is no where close to a lock in price. I mean, years ago many users and facilities with 10's (if not hundreds) of thousands of dollars invested in Avid gear found ways to leave Avid and switch to FCP Legend.


I also disagree with the idea that subscription equates to a monopoly. I've seen other people make this same leap and I don't understand why. Did Avid need a subscription plan to gain near monopoly status in the TV/film parts of the industry and ultimately rest on it's laurels? Did Microsoft? If Adobe doesn't make compelling products a competitor will rise up, people will look elsewhere and eventually leave. That's the bottom line.




Return to posts index


Mark Dobson
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 4:16:01 pm

You could say that at any stage a customer having second thoughts could just cancel the subscription however the most cost effective subscription is a yearly one. If you cancel that you will pay 50% of the balance owing for the year in question and that penalty is a pretty good incentive to not cancel.

Abode could have avoided a lot of fuss by being more generous with their opening offers for the CC subscription rollout.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 4:55:52 pm

The pricing is just off. For me, a previous Master Collection owner, it is right in line with the upgrade pricing for that on a yearly basis. I've been on the cloud for a year and for me the cost was fine. I upgraded every year, and this actually smoothed out the costs, and with the first year at $29m/mo it was still cheaper than upgrading every two years, and you stayed up to date and had a few extra features over the box set. They added Lightroom for example which wasn't in the master collection box. For me it was a easy choice.

But if you have the production bundle and only updated every other update, that first 2 years will cost $960 instead of maybe $400 for a single production bundle update.

I thought things were supposed to be cheaper when you signed a contract or opted for something like a subscription? But I guess not when the company takes away all other options.


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 5:32:33 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "If Adobe doesn't offer compelling reasons to keep using Adobe software people will find other options."

Like what exactly? If you rely on After Effects and Illustrator for your work, what exactly "other options" are you going to move to? With the previous model, you could subsist on a version until you could afford an upgrade. Now you are forced into the upgrade, or forced into obsolescence.

When Avid facilities moved to FCP Legacy, it was already a maturing application. What are the illustrator and After Effects equivalents?

As I said before, I think this cloud model will produce competitors, but only because their upsetting the entire ecosystem which before was content to always use CS products for design and graphics. I just don't know personally of any comparable Illustrator competitors. You could make an argument for Motion as a competitor to After Effects, but we all know that Motion only covers a portion of what After Effects does. So where do the people who've so completely relied on CS products go?

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index


Brett Sherman
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 7:52:48 pm

Let me just say how I'm going to respond to this pricing. I'm an occasional user of After Effects, Encore, Photoshop and Illustrator. Our organization currently owns two versions of Production Premium installed on two workstations and two laptops.

I will probably upgrade to CS6 permanent license for both. Likely, I will keep using that license as long as possible. When it becomes necessary to upgrade After Effects for new features, I will probably buy a single CC license for that one program. I will keep the remaining computers permanently on CS6. I do not foresee a feature in Photoshop, Illustrator or Encore that will require me to upgrade. After all I have CS3 on my personal laptop and have never felt I lacked anything.

While I'm just two licenses, the result is Adobe will probably earn less money from me over the coming years. I'm happy with FCP X, but this makes me less likely to consider Premiere.



Return to posts index

Paul Neumann
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 9:40:33 pm

I get what you're saying about the programs. If that's what you think is best for you then who's to say different? But I think only talking about Creative Cloud in terms of the programs is pointless when you don't consider the other features that come along with your subscription (and the things that are still to come).

You wanna get to the App Store? You're gonna need an Apple device. You wanna get to the Creative Cloud? You're gonna need a subscription.


Return to posts index

Joseph W. Bourke
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 1, 2013 at 11:38:51 pm

The CC is an interesting beast already...I haven't paid a cent, other than owning the CS6 Master Collection on DVD, and I have access to the Cloud (had to sign up for it, of course). I've already downloaded Edge Animate, the replacement for Flash Catalyst. It's a freebie, and it is for graphic designers who don't want to become programmers, but need to create HTML 5 and interactive content for the web and interactive documents:

http://html.adobe.com/edge/animate/

I think that CC is going to be forging ahead with all sorts of breakthroughs of this sort, as the subscription base grows. I'm not quite sold on the subscription model, but I'm open to seeing how it develops.

Joe Bourke
Owner/Creative Director
Bourke Media
http://www.bourkemedia.com


Return to posts index


Dave Gage
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 2, 2013 at 2:03:26 am

[Joseph W. Bourke] "it is for graphic designers who don't want to become programmers, but need to create HTML 5 and interactive content for the web and interactive documents:

http://html.adobe.com/edge/animate/"


Interesting. I wish there was a video demo for this. I'm still using a proprietary video/audio player I bought from ESA years ago for the Members Area of one of my websites. I add code to this Flash player so that it has fallback to HTML5 for iPad and iPhone users. At the moment, HTML5 still does not seem overly robust.

It will be interesting to see where it all goes, but at this time I still need to be able to serve up both Flash and HTML5, and it appears about 80% of my users are still using web browsers with Flash.

Dave


Return to posts index

Joseph W. Bourke
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 2, 2013 at 3:50:49 am

Dave -

There is a whole series of tutorials and informational pieces on Adobe TV, not to mention the fact that the software is free (or at least was when I downloaded it a month or so ago):

http://tv.adobe.com/show/learn-edge-animate/#/show/learn-edge-animate

I've been watching the whole HTML5 discourse and development, and I think it is still far from being the fully developed standard it will become. I still deliver clips to my website in Flash, although I'm starting to transition them to H.264 Quicktime, for better compression vs quality reasons.

Joe Bourke
Owner/Creative Director
Bourke Media
http://www.bourkemedia.com


Return to posts index

Dave Gage
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 2, 2013 at 4:52:39 am

Joe,

I don't have the time or need at the moment to make any changes in web video delivery, but I appreciate the link and will bookmark it for down the road. I think I can ride out the next year or two with what I have.

[Joseph W. Bourke] "I still deliver clips to my website in Flash, although I'm starting to transition them to H.264 Quicktime, for better compression vs quality reasons."

I'd be happy to share more info if you'd like via email, but what I'm doing is using the x264 codec via Compressor on the Pro Res export from FCP X and creating two files for the Flash Player, one is an .MP4 and the other an .M4v file. The Flash player uses the .MP4 and then the HTML5 fallback uses the .M4V. I've not had a single problem in the last year or two with this system and any browser or mobile device. Let me know if you'd like more specifics.

Thanks,
Dave


Return to posts index


Brett Sherman
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 2, 2013 at 2:42:23 pm

[Paul Neumann] "But I think only talking about Creative Cloud in terms of the programs is pointless when you don't consider the other features that come along with your subscription"

Given that I only use Adobe software occasionally, I'm not sure what possible "features" would be helpful to me. The 20GB of storage is practically useless for AE and Pr users. And I get 100GB with Dropbox for $8/month that I can use for whatever, not just Adobe projects.

Part of the problem with the CC model is that it presumes all users use Adobe apps all the time. That simply is not true.



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 2, 2013 at 5:03:08 am

[Andy Neil] "Like what exactly? If you rely on After Effects and Illustrator for your work, what exactly "other options" are you going to move to? "

Are there options to switch to tomorrow? Maybe not, but there will be down the line if it does turn out to be a sizable percentage of users that are upset and want to change applications.




Return to posts index

Mike Smith
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 2, 2013 at 10:19:24 am

xara is a very strong illustrator alternative - better in lots of ways - albeit Windows only ..


Return to posts index


Nicholas Zimmerman
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 2, 2013 at 6:09:56 pm

Well I'm leaving AE for Nuke, but I'm in school so I can still get their killer student pricing. I also prefer Motion for Mograph because of its real time playback and adjustments.

Shoot sh*t, Edit sh*t


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 2, 2013 at 7:32:20 pm

[Nicholas Zimmerman] "Well I'm leaving AE for Nuke, but I'm in school so I can still get their killer student pricing. I also prefer Motion for Mograph because of its real time playback and adjustments."

Good choice. The problem with AE - which will eventually dawn on more users - is that it's not as quick as Motion for mograph and not as powerful as Nuke/Shake/Fusion/whatever for compositing.

Up to now students like you have fuelled the AE boom - that's what they were taught - all they were taught - and that's what they have been comfortable with.

Too comfortable in my view ...

I once worked with a very talented mograph designer who said she never wanted to work in anything other than AE, and never saw the need to work in anything other than AE. What a waste of talent!

AE is great, fantastic and a lot of fun - but there is a world elsewhere.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 3, 2013 at 3:30:42 am

That´s why I call them a monopolist.
And a monopolist shouldn´t be allowed to act like this.
- - - - - - - - - - -
CC = Cash Cow = Terminating the word "Archive" in future of digital work = Lifelong dependency = NoGo. Never Ever.


Return to posts index


Ronny Courtens
Re: Why subscriptions are bad for Adobe
on Jun 3, 2013 at 7:07:49 am

It's always good company policy to have options and Adobe does not have any monopoly anywhere, certainly not in the professional A/V world.

We have a number of CS6.5 Master Collection licenses and we have decided to not further invest in Adobe software. Not specifically because of the CC debacle, that's not really an issue for us. But mainly because at NAB I haven't seen anything that can justify spending more money on Adobe apps.

Since last year we have developed a new workflow around FCPX/Motion, Smoke 2013 and Resolve for national broadcast work in our 2 post houses and so far our creative people as well as our clients have been extremely satisfied with it. These apps work perfectly together and with every update the workflow gets stronger. Smoke was a no-brainer because we already have a Flame station in-house and the workflow as well as the features are very similar. Motion 5 is a perfect companion to FCPX and if Apple brings seamless integration between FCPX and Motion they will have a winning combination for realtime on-edit mograph jobs.

Even with the coming updates Adobe doesn't offer anything that we cannot already do better in our current workflow, so I cannot justify any further investment in their software at this time.



Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]