FORUMS: list search recent posts

CC From A Business View

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
David Mathis
CC From A Business View
on Jul 11, 2015 at 8:39:45 pm
Last Edited By David Mathis on Jul 11, 2015 at 11:44:16 pm

After reading various threads in this forum, from the very beginning, decide it was time to share a few thoughts. This will be from a business view not the philosophical type as it has been discussed very often.

From where I see things Adobe had no choice but to go subscription only. Not sure of the number but there are those who seem content with whatever version with no need to upgrade as a result. There also those who upgrade on a somewhat regular basis, mainly skipping one or two upgrade opportunities.

The reasons for that are various and complex. What comes to my mind is hardware, OS and other logistical issues. Other reasons would be funding, at least from an individual standpoint. Not everyone has a large cash flow or cash reserve. I get that and respect that. Back when everything was offered at a permanent license, the short term cost (up front) was a bit on the expensive side. With rental only the cost can be high over the long term if business is not good or for someone at the hobby level.

I thought at first small business would be impacted in a bad way but have given that thought additional consideration. The cost per month can vary depending on what one chooses. Right now Photoshop and Lightroom are $10 per month for a one year term, not including any sales tax which will vary. For those that ask a reasonable rate from their client and have a sizable client base, the subscription cost is not going to have any significant impact on overall cost.

Something else to consider is the cost of research and development, especially when there is a more frequent update cycle. That will cost money. There is no way around that.

Granted, like everyone else I would like to see some type of buyout option but that is not likely given on reason stated above. The reason for Adobe going rental only is a bit more complex than what I have described here. There are many reasons for this move and why other software companies are considering making the same move.

If cost is a factor with rental only, the same goes for a permanent license. Perhaps either one is in the wrong business or their business model needs adjusting. Just my two cents, please carry on the debate.



Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 11, 2015 at 11:43:52 pm

Chris:

You seem like a nice person as well. Your comment is well taken and so I am going to edit my original post leaving out the comment at the end. It was not meant to offend anyone but rather call attention to what I perceived as somewhat of a "problem" that sometimes occurs in this forum. Hope no offense was taken as that was never my intention. I agree that my statement was a bit of an oxymoron.

Tim:

Sorry for being a bit harsh with that statement and hope all is well. I have gone back and deleted the last part of my original post.

Back to other things like figuring out the meaning of life. :-)


Return to posts index

Morten Ranmar
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 12, 2015 at 8:52:13 am

Adobe has successfully bought up the competition, and the software has reached a level where new features don't bring a lot of extra value to the users needs. Who needs another blur filter in Photoshop, or another shape in Illustrator?

My guess is that this factor forced Adobe go into the renting model, because not everybody necessarily needed to update their suites every time.

In the video arena things are a bit different, because of the diminishing use of FCP, which Adobe is now trying to harvest. At the same time this is the area where Adobe is experiencing most serious competition form eg. Avid and Blackmagic. This is why Adobe has put so much nice effort into Premiere - but as in all speeded software development - is now paying the price with buggy software.

We should be happy that there are competitors that can force Adobe to keep the subscription prices attractive. Just look what is happening in the Autodesk camp, where Perpetual licenses are now also going to disappear. Autodesk has few high-end competitors, and can keep a high price target.

So let's not get too comfortable, keep evaluating the competition, and firing up the debate on this forum...

- No Parking Production -

Adobe CC2014, 3 x MacPro, 3 x MbP, Ethernet File Server w. Areca ThunderRaid 8


Return to posts index


David Mathis
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 12, 2015 at 3:47:35 pm

As of now, there is no real competition for After Effects which is a bit disappointing. Motion only works on Mac platform and lacks a few advanced features such as expressions. Fusion is more suited for a single scene due its node based workflow.

As for Final Cut Pro X, it is gaining a user base though a bit slow to do so. Resolve could be a game changer but we won't know until the new version is available.

I agree with everything you are saying. As long as subscription rate is low, things are good. The minute Adobe decides to pull a price hike there is a strong possibility the subscriber base will decrease. What happens after that is yet to be seen.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 13, 2015 at 12:36:37 am

[David Mathis] "As of now, there is no real competition for After Effects which is a bit disappointing"

I think there are certain applications, which simply don't have viable competition in the professional market. That includes Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, ProTools, and Resolve. Yes, there is competition, but that competition falls into smaller pockets and islands. It's their market to lose as it were. As good as Motion can be, Apple hurt their cause, because now it's largely perceived as an effects-creation tool for FCP X.

[David Mathis] "As long as subscription rate is low, things are good. The minute Adobe decides to pull a price hike there is a strong possibility the subscriber base will decrease. What happens after that is yet to be seen."

The subscription model also changes the equation. Software is no longer an asset, but rather a business expense, like electricity, web hosting, etc. Unfortunately that price is a bit elastic. For example, you get a lot more in your Adobe CC subscription than you do in an Avid or an Autodesk subscription. I hope they don't, but there is margin within which Adobe could bump up the rates and not suffer too badly because it would still be a better deal.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 13, 2015 at 8:34:50 pm

yes. in the sense that they're positioning themselves as a business utlity of a sort - there's no way they haven't mapped out medium term price increases.

the thing that confuses me is the near desperate ring fencing of the rock bottom PS+LR subscription. That felt almost plaintive as a come hither.
I don't know when they can start making doctor evil style muahahahas and begin stabbing the increase the subscription big red button, but you'd feel it's probably not imminently soon.

I'm still presuming they're supposed to hit something like - steady state all they're going to get - subscription churn in the next 24 months tho.
Sooner or later the subscription price increase to profit logic has to come home to roost. Increasing profits with a subscription = increase subscription price well ahead of inflation. That's just a mortal lock.

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


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 13, 2015 at 10:54:28 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Increasing profits with a subscription = increase subscription price well ahead of inflation. That's just a mortal lock."

I'm not sure about that. Apple lowered their price from $1200 + an upgrade now and again to $249 forever. How have they made the money? Volume on NEW customers.

(Okay, and downloads from FCP customers who may have initially been no more than curious, if not hostile but incredulous it could really as bad as all that. BUT STILL.)

That seems likely as the heart Adobe's plan: volume on NEW CC customers. And unlike Apple, keep them spending more by ensuring their continued delight with the pace and nature of improvements.

And especially for enticing longstanding CS customers who might otherwise be the deepest pool of new CC subscribers, they're going to have to do a LOT to establish that the future is predictable.

I know that many folks here understand that the whole thing hinges on new customers., which is why we regularly debate the meaning of the numbers of NEW subscriptions that indicate to us individually whether it's working or not. We also debate whether Adobe can ever do ANYTHING to provide assurance that CC customers remain on solid ground in the future.

Making a subscription price increase no more inevitable for Adobe than for somebody like Avid. Here's why.

First, I think the price for subscriptions has stabilized, every bit as much as the price for boxed software had stabilized for over a decade -- until Avid and Blackmagic led dramatic charges downward.

Perhaps somebody WILL roll the dice on raising subscription rates someday, but I think that to the extent that the whole model is built on low barriers to ENTRY for NEW customers, NEW customers also have ZERO barriers to EXIT.

Anyone who sees an increase coming at the end of their current subscription will squirrel away XMLs like nuts for winter, and plan on how to make their move to Resolve, Fusion, Media Composer, or...what's that you say? FCPX and Motion? Sure, why not.

If anything, the pressure on subscriptions is downward, just like the prices for boxed software had been. The price that Adobe and Avid are watching in their rear view mirrors is somewhere between $249 forever and zero forever, with $1000-ish as the outer limit. People whose subscription price sensitivity has overrun their delight will do what some of you have been doing: stick with CS or bail.


[Aindreas Gallagher] "the rock bottom PS+LR subscription...felt almost plaintive as a come hither. "

Perhaps, but in the photo space, competition is brutal. Even lower-to-middle end professional photographers are shooting more and more on their phones. It's certainly been Apple's current iPhone campaign.

For years though, maybe even before the introduction of Instagram, Adobe's primary competition has been whatever piece of nonsense is built into your phone. But if you haven't looked beyond selfies to the professional community on Instagram, I think you'll be dumbstruck.

Just for grins, go to your local app store, iOS or Android, and pop "Photoshop" into the search engine. DOZENS of options, only one of which is from Adobe. Here's a sample from the Play store just now, with all the apps free save one. Guess which one.



Which is to say, I'm not entirely disagreeing about the "come hither" nature of this, but I don't think it's anything sly or sinister. It's their attempt to respond to market pressure that has made ANY "price" a risky one.

Getting back to the larger question about the risk of price increases at the CC level, I do agree completely that one does well as a customer to watch for worst case scenarios, always, with any vendor partner.

But I see prices being pushed ever downward, with nary an example in this industry of any increases since...when?

I think the last time we saw an increase in this space was the move of Final Cut Pro into the Final Cut Suite in 2003, which of course added considerable juicy goodness besides FCP. Otherwise, what?

And yes, I understand that for some people, a $49 subscription is an infinite increase from the zero they were planning to spend on upgrades in the foreseeable future. Entirely true, no debates from me.

But apart from that, seriously, where in the industry have you seen any company doing anything but slash prices?

At most, Adobe could roll out incremental increases over a long stretch, an eventuality that also will surely be noted with a scowl by the new customers who are Adobe's sustainable future, and who've already waited two years to see if there's another shoe to drop.

And it will be greeted by MORE than a scowl by existing customers who'd now feel TWICE bitten, and will do what some of you have done: depart, or stay on the box of CS that you've been using in these intervening years.

What am I missing? Not asking that rhetorically or pugilistically, but genuinely curious how you see that this wouldn't risk imploding the entire plan?

Again acknowledging that there are other reasons to object to a subscription model than price, ANY increase, much less a substantial one, doesn't feel imminent at all. Quite the contrary. Adobe's primary battles are against people who keep dropping prices, if they still charge anything at all.


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 12:58:17 am

Interesting and spot on perspective. Perhaps the reason Adobe is keeping prices reasonable at this point is to keep the subscriber base happy and keeping a majority from bailing ship to swim to an island of competitors. Resolve could be a game changer though we will not know until people have gotten their hands on it. This eager beaver is wanting to get his paws on it.

I don't think Adobe has to worry about competition for After Effects, at least for now. Fusion be a different beast, nodes not layers. Both have their place and neither is one size fits all. Motion is not really a competitor, aside from the obvious point that it is tied specifically to Apple hardware.

As far as Photoshop, very little competition from what I see. Sure there is Acorn and Pixelamator along with another new kid on the block. None of them I consider competitors at his point, merely alternatives. Of course the tide can change.


Return to posts index

Morten Ranmar
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 7:24:52 am

In regards to Photoshop competition, take a look at Affinity Photo for Mac. Really impressive feature set for a initial release, and could easily replace Photoshop in my facility - but there are other things keeping me to CC subscription as long as prices are fair: primarily Premiere and After Effects.

- No Parking Production -

Adobe CC2014, 3 x MacPro, 3 x MbP, Ethernet File Server w. Areca ThunderRaid 8


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 6:27:10 pm

yes I thought affinity was really eye catching - some of it looks like how you dreamed photoshop would develop. the meshwarp and the relighting tool kick the ass off the equivalent in PS - I think lots of things in it do. Also they operate in the canvas.

Photoshop is such a mess of non-modal and pop-up liquefy style mode box interfaces it's not true.

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


Return to posts index

Burt Hazard
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 24, 2015 at 5:34:19 pm

[Tim Wilson] "'m not sure about that. Apple lowered their price from $1200 + an upgrade now and again to $249 forever. "

?

FCPX=$299 Motion 5=$49 Compressor 4=$49
Full "suite"=$397



Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 24, 2015 at 6:08:53 pm

Thanks for the correction! $249 was a typo, but you're quite right, I forgot about the others....


Return to posts index


David Mathis
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 13, 2015 at 10:54:43 pm

One reason the rate is low for the time being is because of competition on the video side of the equation. The new Resolve looks solid but we will know soon enough. Then there is that tempting psychedelic mushroom called Fusion. What once was a bit expensive is now more widely available, especially given the free version. Soon to be on Mac she is. Might as bloody well give it a spin. I signed up for Photoshop, a year plan. See what the price is when the bridge that is to be crossed is on the horizon. A crazy world we live in.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 10:16:15 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Sooner or later the subscription price increase to profit logic has to come home to roost. Increasing profits with a subscription = increase subscription price well ahead of inflation. That's just a mortal lock."

Offering less but charging more will almost certainly start a death spiral. (See also: Quark.) There's another way: offering more and charging for it.

Look at Adobe Stock (as in photos, not shares):
https://stock.adobe.com/plans

Look at TypeKit (you can get more than what's included in your CC subscription):
https://typekit.com/plans

Look at Adobe Add-ons (like the App Store for CC):
https://creative.adobe.com/addons

I think this is the model for how Adobe will make more money on the long game. In fact, they're already doing it, having just invested almost a billion dollars in this model with the purchase of Fotolia.

Adobe is building an ecosystem with CC. Raising prices on the core offering and spooking their main customer base risks their entire business. If customers start leaving en masse, Adobe is toast. There's no backup plan. They bet the company on this strategy.

Instead of squeezing their customers until they're gone, Adobe can continuously monetize their subscriber base by layering additional products and services on top of the core CC offering, for additional fees. They can make more money by making their customers happier, providing them more of what they need and want.

Apple didn't succeed by raising pricing on iPods or iTMS. They said, "Oh, you like our music player? Maybe you'll like our phone. You like our phone? Maybe you'll like our computers. And our tablet. And our watch. And apps for all of them!"

The key is to make the offering so valuable that everybody wants to pay for it, then to expand that value outwards so customers are happy to pay more to get more. Adobe can play this same game in the professional design space, and both Adobe and their customers can win.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 11:24:48 am

"offering more and charging for it"

With each new release, Adobe is stressing more the added value of Creative Cloud. To them it's clearly more than only the collection of applications. Hence, the libraries and integration with mobile apps.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 7:04:53 pm

[Oliver Peters] "To them it's clearly more than only the collection of applications."

Walter used the word "ecosystem," and I think "platform" may be equally applicable.


[Walter Soyka] "Adobe can continuously monetize their subscriber base by layering additional products and services on top of the core CC offering,"

You're right, and I completely missed this. They spent $800 million cash on Fotolia, obviously thinking they could both pay for it and turn it into a new revenue stream in short order.

Your observation about supporting apps is spot on. I don't think anyone can argue that there are swaths of essential features missing, but if you need more, you can get more, and Adobe will take their slice of the sale, exactly as Apple does. There are 69 pages of them in the Adobe Add-ons section you linked to.

For Apple, I assumed that there would be a lot more for FCPX. Not just plug-ins but extensions that would be presented as part of FCPX's native feature set. This seemed especially likely to me because FCPX seemed to be shipped underbaked. No problem, just sell a codec pack or proper Pro Tools hooks. Apple's model has clearly become "We have other ways to monetize you besides add-ons and upgrades" and "If we're not doing it, you don't need it."

Not that there's anything wrong with that if it works for you.

But I think that Adobe is banking on the combination of attracting new and converted CS users with low prices for subscriptions that if anything, are more likely to sneak down over time than up, and monetizing existing CC customers with stock media, fonts, and other add-ons. I suspect that there will be a lot more than 69 pages of them in short order.


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 7:46:27 pm

As long as the prices do not escalate to a point of Adobe risking losing a great part of the subscriber base there is no need to worry. I don't think Adobe would do that. They are taking a calculated risk as it is. I agree with Uncle Timmy here. I think the days of discounts are over, at least for now and I believe the price has actually decreased rather than the opposite.

So long as there is a great deal of competition, Adobe will have to continue to innovate and keep the cost of subscription within reason. They fail to do that and the picture is not pretty. As much as I prefer a buyout option or a permanent license, the Photoshop Lightroom bundle is not bad. Going to try for a year then decide. Not ruling out other options nor will I do so.


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 8:30:07 pm

All said Is fine and dandy but at the end of the subscription i want the progrm to be mine.

ricardo marty


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 15, 2015 at 12:49:32 am
Last Edited By Tim Wilson on Jul 15, 2015 at 2:09:29 am

[Ricardo Marty] "All said Is fine and dandy but at the end of the subscription i want the progrm to be mine.
"


Unfortunately, that's the one thing that can never happen, not with Adobe, not with Avid, not anyone.

At least not in US. This is where we start to get into the Sarbanes-Oxley law, which says that everything has a value. If Adobe is taking money for a subscription, they have to deliver you 100% of the value of the subscription.

Which means that you're giving Adobe ZERO percent for the "sale" of the software at the end of the subscription! So if Adobe were to hand you a permanent license at the end of the subscription, they'd have to write off the full cost of the permanent license as a loss!!!

The same is true for a discount. The only way they could provide a discount as a "reward" for your subscription is if they SUBTRACT the amount of the discount from their revenue.

This will never happen.

Avid's solution is the only realistic solution currently available. Subscribe until you stop. Even if you subscribe for 1000 years, if you want to keep the software, you must pay full price for a new unit, no discounts.

This is more of an answer than you were looking for, Ricardo, but it's important for this small part of the discussion.The idea of buyout, or applying subscription dollars to free or discounted ownership, is the one option that cannot happen, even if Adobe were to reintroduce software for sale.

And behold, my friends: a fully on-topic and on-point discussion of Sarbanes-Oxley. I assure you, I'm as surprised as anyone else.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 15, 2015 at 10:33:29 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Avid's solution is the only realistic solution currently available. Subscribe until you stop. Even if you subscribe for 1000 years, if you want to keep the software, you must pay full price for a new unit, no discounts."

Have to disagree, Tim. Avid's solution isn't the only possibility and Sarbanes-Oxley is a red herring. Don't take my word for it, let's look at a recent announcement for another big software company:

https://blogs.office.com/2015/07/09/office-2016-for-mac-is-here/

"Here are a few different ways to get Office 2016 for Mac today:
  • Already an Office 365 customer? On your Mac, just browse to your account page (office.com/myaccount), sign in and follow the installation instructions. If you have Office 365 through your organization, go to portal.office.com/OLS/MySoftware.aspx.
  • Are you a student? You may get Office 2016 for Mac for free or at a substantial discount. It takes only 30 seconds to find out at office.com/student.
  • Otherwise, go to office.com/mac or buy an Office 365 subscription at your local retailer.
Office 2016 for Mac will become available as a one-time purchase option this September."


Adobe could just as easily offer perpetual copies of their desktop applications for sale along side their subscription offerings. Just like Microsoft.

They're leaving a lot of money on the table. Wall Street won't be patient forever.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 15, 2015 at 10:53:28 pm

[David Lawrence] "Office 2016 for Mac will become available as a one-time purchase option this September."

Adobe could just as easily offer perpetual copies of their desktop applications for sale along side their subscription offerings. Just like Microsoft."


But that's a one-time purchase. Presumably non-upgradeable. You are purchasing a separate and new product. Adobe offered that with CS6. Apple offers that with all App Store software. By this method, Adobe would have to make you re-purchase the software as a new version with each update. Or charge an annual support contract, which is one of the Avid options.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 15, 2015 at 11:23:59 pm

[Oliver Peters] "But that's a one-time purchase. Presumably non-upgradeable. You are purchasing a separate and new product. Adobe offered that with CS6. Apple offers that with all App Store software. By this method, Adobe would have to make you re-purchase the software as a new version with each update. Or charge an annual support contract, which is one of the Avid options."

True. But it's an option that currently isn't on the table but easily could be. Also, AFAIK, there's no law preventing Adobe from offering discounts to existing customers if they decide to re-purchase a new copy of a new version of software.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 2:42:31 am

...took the words right out of my mouth.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 3:25:09 am
Last Edited By Tim Wilson on Jul 16, 2015 at 4:05:24 am

Before I start, David, I'll note again that you and I agree on Sarbox having nothing to do with whether a company can offer both subscriptions and purchases. Companies do it all the time.

The ONLY thing Ricardo mentioned, and the only thing I replied to while invoking Sarbox is the matter of applying subscription dollars to discounted purchases.

Now then...


[David Lawrence] "AFAIK, there's no law preventing Adobe from offering discounts to existing customers if they decide to re-purchase a new copy of a new version of software."

There is. THAT'S Sarbox. At least in practice, in the world we live in. That's why nobody does it. Nobody. Including Microsoft.

I checked their website to verify this, and because it's you, my dear friend David, I took TWO extra steps.

I used Microsoft's little chat window AND I CALLED THEM. On the phone. I can't remember the last time I spoke to anyone on the phone. LOL Freakishly old school.

Both the chat-person (or bot) and the person I spoke to on the phone told me the same thing: subscribe for as long as you subscribe, but when you want to buy, you get no discounts based on your previous status as a subscriber.



To be specific, Sarbox says, any discount you offer, you subtract as a loss to your overall revenue.



Read that again.

Discounts are applied as LOSSES. And the company CANNOT use money collected from subscriptions to offset that loss.



So you would have to imagine a world where a company would gladly subtract the amount of the discount as a LOSS to revenue, while ALSO offering you the option to never pay them again.

Come on. No way. Which is why nobody does it.

Because Sarbox is crystal clear, and because I want to be clear that I'm only opening the Sarbox for this one, very narrow point:

You can't give people discounts without counting them as losses, and you can't apply subscription dollars as revenue to offset those losses.



That's actually what took Avid off the stock exchange. They gave away a FEATURE in a "bug fix" release, but they failed to deduct the value of that feature from their bottom line.

(Oversimplified, but by less than you'd think.)

That's why millions of transactions had to be recalculated one at a time, by hand. Because Avid failed to report a "free" feature as a loss.

Because discounts are losses.

Avid to look at purchases one a time, because maybe an individual user got that one unpaid-for feature for free with the "bug fix release" (Sarbox says those HAVE to be free, but "features" can only be free if they are reported as LOSSES), or maybe the customer got it with a paid release, including a new purchase....but you can't know which is which until you look at the actual records.

It's also why Avid's solution is to never allow standalone upgrades again, ever. You don't buy upgrades. You subscribe to s service contract, which INCLUDES upgrades.

So Avid never has to worry whether every feature is paid for against every user. They KNOW it has. Because of the subscription.

And when you're ready to buy, you buy at the going rate. No discounts based on subscriptions. True for Avid. True for Microsoft.

So there's Sarbox in a nutshell. Don't cross the streams, or things will blow up.

Which is also to underscore what you and I agree on, David, that Sarbox says NOTHING about whether or not subscriptions or purchases can exist side by side. Of course they can.

But the streams can't cross.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 4:56:53 am

[Tim Wilson] "[David Lawrence] "AFAIK, there's no law preventing Adobe from offering discounts to existing customers if they decide to re-purchase a new copy of a new version of software."

There is. THAT'S Sarbox. At least in practice, in the world we live in. That's why nobody does it. Nobody. Including Microsoft.

I checked their website to verify this, and because it's you, my dear friend David, I took TWO extra steps.

I used Microsoft's little chat window AND I CALLED THEM. On the phone. I can't remember the last time I spoke to anyone on the phone. LOL Freakishly old school. "



LOL, wow, Tim. Impressed and appreciate your efforts! :)

Yep, looks like we're indeed in agreement but maybe talking about two different things. I should have said:

"AFAIK, there's no law preventing Adobe from offering discounts to existing perpetual customers if they decide to re-purchase a new copy of a new version of software."

All they would need to do is change a couple of bytes in their current line of desktop applications and give them a slightly different name. I'm sure they could think of something. ;)

Then perhaps they could do something like this:


So yes, Sarbox may impact subscriptions, but subscriptions are not the only possible way to sell software and make a profit. Sarbox does not prevent a separate perpetual option.


Last word from Egon:






_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 5:09:28 am
Last Edited By Tim Wilson on Jul 16, 2015 at 5:29:12 am

[David Lawrence] "Sarbox does not prevent a separate perpetual option."

Right.


[David Lawrence] "All they would need to do is change a couple of bytes in their current line of desktop applications and give them a slightly different name. I'm sure they could think of something. ;)"

Forget everything else I just said. ^^^ THAT ^^^ is what Sarbox is designed to prevent. LOL

But to circle back:

[David Lawrence] ""AFAIK, there's no law preventing Adobe from offering discounts to existing perpetual customers if they decide to re-purchase a new copy of a new version of software.""


I don't follow. Are you asking for a route that goes:

  • I purchase Creative Box 2015
  • I then subscribe to Creative Cloud for a couple of years
  • I now wish to purchase Creative Box 2018. Please give me a discount because I own Creative Thing For Sale 2015.


Yes?

I'm actually very comfortable with my layman's take on the law regarding upgrades as I described above....but this is getting fuzzier for me.

Let me take a run at it from Avid's policy. I think they've been well-incentivized to read the law pretty conservatively. :-)

My summary:

  • You bought Media Composer 2015.
  • You now want to subscribe for a couple years.
  • You now want a new permanent license of MC 2018 at a discount because you own MC 2015.


Here's the thing, though. I don't think there needs to be a discount, because you've owned it all along. That is, you bought MC 2015, and you subscribed to a service contract, which delivered unto you MC 2016 and MC 2017. The thing you now hold in your hand is the most recent version of the same box you purchased in 2015.

You're already home, Dorothy! LOL

Or am I misunderstanding the question?


[I just made my second edit to this post in my perhaps futile quest for clarity. Maybe wait a sec to respond to see if I edit it again? LOL Or not. I'll try to keep up.]


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 10:23:21 pm

[Tim Wilson] "I don't follow. Are you asking for a route that goes:

I purchase Creative Box 2015
I then subscribe to Creative Cloud for a couple of years
I now wish to purchase Creative Box 2018. Please give me a discount because I own Creative Thing For Sale 2015."


[Tim Wilson] "Or am I misunderstanding the question?"

Yep, you're misunderstanding, lol.

I purchase Creative Box 2015.
I wish to purchase Creative Box 2015.5 for a discount.
I wish for my Creative Box 2015.5 software to still run on my computer if I decide to not purchase Creative Box 2016.
I now wish to to purchase Creative Box 2017. Maybe I get a discount and maybe I don't.
But at least Creative Box 2015.5 still runs on my computer.

That last point is the most important one.

Make sense?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

David Smith
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 17, 2015 at 1:34:15 am
Last Edited By David Smith on Jul 17, 2015 at 1:34:55 am

[Tim Wilson] "My summary:

You bought Media Composer 2015.
You now want to subscribe for a couple years.
You now want a new permanent license of MC 2018 at a discount because you own MC 2015.



Here's the thing, though. I don't think there needs to be a discount, because you've owned it all along. That is, you bought MC 2015, and you subscribed to a service contract, which delivered unto you MC 2016 and MC 2017. The thing you now hold in your hand is the most recent version of the same box you purchased in 2015."


My question is, under this scenario, let's say in 2018, you decide to stop subscribing... do you still hold the most recent 2018 version, or does it revert back to the 2015 version? This is a critical difference.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 21, 2015 at 12:27:20 am

[David Smith] "My question is, under this scenario, let's say in 2018, you decide to stop subscribing... do you still hold the most recent 2018 version, or does it revert back to the 2015 version? This is a critical difference."

If you license Avid via the perpetual license/annual support plan method then you get the most recent version of Avid available when your support plan ends. For example, if Avid MC 12.0 comes out Jan 8th, 2018 and your support plan ends on Jan 9th, 2018 you will have a perpetual license for Avid MC 12.0. When Avid 12.4 comes out six months later though you will *not* have access to that version under you existing 12.0 license.

If you license Avid via their subscription plan then it's just like subscribing to CC. When you stop paying your software stops working.


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 21, 2015 at 1:01:34 pm
Last Edited By Rainer Schubert on Jul 21, 2015 at 1:04:41 pm

With the "little" difference (so important for many) that you can open and edit all your projects, you created till the end of your subscription.
With full access to all features you had at the momentum of creation. Different with CC: You have to subscribe (pay) again for that.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 21, 2015 at 4:40:04 pm

[Rainer Schubert] "With the "little" difference (so important for many) that you can open and edit all your projects, you created till the end of your subscription.
With full access to all features you had at the momentum of creation. Different with CC: You have to subscribe (pay) again for that."


Right, Avid's perpetual license/annual support plan model is basically the traditional 'upgrade' model but tweaked so Avid can release feature upgrades at any time w/o running afoul of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Comparing apples to apples though the subscription model for both Avid and Adobe are the same in that the software stops working if you stop paying.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 21, 2015 at 9:10:06 pm

[Tim Wilson] "You can't give people discounts without counting them as losses, and you can't apply subscription dollars as revenue to offset those losses"

But they could call it a microloan, "credit card" situation, of which the monthly subscription is a monthly payment. ;)


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 14, 2015 at 8:42:26 pm

[Tim Wilson] "But I think that Adobe is banking on the combination of attracting new and converted CS users with low prices for subscriptions that if anything, are more likely to sneak down over time than up, and monetizing existing CC customers with stock media, fonts, and other add-ons. I suspect that there will be a lot more than 69 pages of them in short order."

yes fair enough really, that's got a ring to it too - and as walter said, it's does kind of look to be what they're thinking of doing. 800 million can't be a whim?

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


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 21, 2015 at 8:54:16 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Walter used the word "ecosystem," and I think "platform" may be equally applicable.
"


also "converged architecture"


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 15, 2015 at 1:14:11 am

Major bummer dude. The only response I can think of. I can call square a circle but it still be a square.


Return to posts index

Paul Neumann
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 15, 2015 at 4:12:00 am

I just want to contribute the line of thought about where Adobe is actually making money with the CC offering. By no longer having the hammer of ship dates etc. hanging over their development teams they've been able to innovate, integrate and release more products than ever. And when all your people are busy doing good things faster than ever, then the money will follow one way or another.

And that's what I want. Say what you will, but that's what you want too. We're the ones who demanded the end of the 12-18 month major release of "the apps I feel are most important to me." We did it when we validated the App Store. We did it when we clicked away from a page that didn't load quick enough. We did it when we skipped the ads on our DVRs.

I know they do a yearly thing still. That's marketing, but they also do whatever whenever. That's very different from Creative Suite. Hue? Awesome. Clip? Very nice. Type Kit, Brush, Color, Shape, Document Cloud...that's all some major development happening on your behalf.

We weren't all the same, but we were certainly asking for the same thing: make the apps that I use better and do that quicker too, please. How many times was a new version of After Effects delayed because the InDesign folks weren't ready? I don't know personally, but I know I'd be howling if it was happening and I knew about it. Or a Dreamweaver delay because of the Premiere Pro team not being ready to ship.

The subscription model has removed an incredible amount of constraint on the entire organization, and not having people waiting for the next guy to be ready brings immense cost savings in terms of development.

It's not all about the price of the subscription. Adobe acted in perfect harmony to what we were asking for. We just didn't think we were ready for it.


Return to posts index

Dave LaRonde
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 2:42:52 pm

I don't know about that spectre of ship dates having no sway. I get the feeling some of the application development in CC 2015 were rush jobs to meet a date mandated by the Adobe marketing department.

If there no more due dates necessary, individual applications could receive updates as the were completed. But in the case of video-related applications, where a big change in one can affect several different applications, you need a due date for several apps at once. Some may be completed well in advance, others may be rush jobs.

I get the feeling the due date is issued by Adobe's marketing department, which is still feeling out how to coordinate interrelated applications' completions.

And there's also the, "It's New!" "It's world-changing!" aspect of software hype. The marketing weasels can't really use such phrases unless a lot of apps change at once, and on a periodic basis which STILL seems to parrot the periods from the old installation disk days.

Dave LaRonde
Promotion Producer
KGAN (CBS) & KFXA (Fox) Cedar Rapids, IA


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 4:47:46 pm

^^^ Bazinga! ^^^

The latest version of Premiere Pro feels very much like a rush job, at least on the Mac platform. Was going to give it a try but installation was a minor pain due to a Transport Log 2 error message. Then it decided to crash a couple of times. Same error when uninstalling the application. Had to log out then log back into my computer just to uninstall the software. Not a major ordeal but a bit annoying. Bug fixes should be top priority not some shiny new toy (feature). Once bugs are squashed then new features, please.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 6:38:49 pm

[David Mathis] "Bug fixes should be top priority not some shiny new toy (feature). Once bugs are squashed then new features, please."

I would encourage everyone to file bug reports [link] when they find bugs, and I would encourage Mac users to use Adobe's Crash Reporter when apps crash to send information back to Adobe.

There's a pretty good thread about how Adobe uses bug reports here:
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/3/914034

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 7:51:45 pm

[David Mathis] "The latest version of Premiere Pro feels very much like a rush job, at least on the Mac platform. "

I'm not sure that's true. In general, I've had installation issues with every new build of Premiere and SpeedGrade. Usually it's very flaky on the first few launches until things settle down. Almost like the app has to find everything and put it in its place. It gets a lot worse if you have a ton of third-party plug-ins. Plus certain plug-ins are just problematic.

In the case of CC 2015, I had a lot of issues when previous CC / CC2014 versions were left installed. So, since the first time I ran into this, I now let it blow away all other versions. Things are smoother that way.

I've now installed it on several machines with similar experiences. The only issue I have now is that SpeedGrade via Direct Link is pretty close to unusable. Real performance issues.

I just did an installation today and that machine had a Decklink 3D card. SG will finally pass through these cards via Mercury Transmit, but when that's enabled, playback drops to 0. You get a picture, but that's all. Of course, with the way the new Lumetri Color effect works, I simply can't see myself ever using SpeedGrade again. It's good enough for 90% of the projects, and if I need more, I'll structure the project to go to Resolve.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 8:16:58 pm

There were no previous versions on my system. Before upgrading to the new version of Resolve I am going to a clean install. Just feel better doing so.


Return to posts index

Paul Neumann
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 8:28:54 pm

I'll be loading it onto a brand new PC workstation in a couple of weeks. Anxious to see how it all comes out. Been on mac exclusively for 5 years now. Also switching from 2015 on a new mac to 2014 on an older mac with different clients so my performance baselines are all screwed up now.


Return to posts index

Paul Neumann
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 16, 2015 at 8:33:02 pm
Last Edited By Paul Neumann on Jul 17, 2015 at 1:07:40 am

I think 2015 is the least stable release so far, by a long shot. The economic changes a SaaS model opens up for a development group are not to be overlooked. My favorite quote from a guy (not an Adobe guy, one of my tech clients) before they went SaaS (and full Service Virtualization), "My main problem is my quarterly releases are only happening 3 times a year."


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: CC From A Business View
on Jul 19, 2015 at 3:39:05 am

[Paul Neumann] ""My main problem is my quarterly releases are only happening 3 times a year.""

That's all well and good when the software works, but software working is not simply a matter of sheer willpower. Sometimes things simply do not work. There is no magic bean that makes software release on time and with only minimal bugs. How do you want it? Good? Fast? Cheap? Pick two.

Frankly, I feel that there clearly an imperative to get software out the door because of attitudes like this. So when you wonder why something that's buggy gets released to the public at large, look in the mirror. You're the reason.


Return to posts index

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