FORUMS: list search recent posts

Creative Cloud going forward.

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 3:58:16 pm

So this is worth a read.

http://timelapse.org/2013/05/adobes-creative-monopoly/

Its the last four or five paragraphs that really stick out though. It gets pretty unnerving. I've pasted them below, but the whole article is really worth reading. This isn't going anywhere good at all.


----------------


As the dominant supplier of applications for creating content, Adobe’s “Creative Monopoly” now creates substantial risk to the millions of creative individuals who have little choice but to use Adobe’s products. Their dominance gives them the power to decide the cost of entry into the world of digital creativity, and the decision to eliminate the perpetual license will likely have a lasting and significantly harmful effect. It creates a foundation from which Adobe can very easily (albeit unintentionally) starve innovation from others and from within.

Adobe will continue to innovate, but at a much slower pace. They won’t need innovation to drive sales of upgrades or acquire new customers, and the costs of innovating on such mature products becomes more costly and yields fewer results. Eventually most people will migrate Adobe’s subscription model, most likely due to new technologies coming along that will break CS6. Things like new RAW formats on new cameras. Adobe will support them for subscribers but not for perpetual license holders.

For Adobe, much of the work of moving people to the subscription becomes an exercise in patience. Innovate in small ways, but mostly wait.

Adobe will scale back their massive R&D efforts to boost revenues while they patiently wait for the migration.

And it’s when they do that – when they stop updating and innovating – that we’re going wish we didn’t have to keep paying Adobe month after month, year after year for a product that’s basically complete.


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


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 5:33:11 pm

[James Daugherty] "I am working with lawyers right now. If we can get a class registered then it will cost Adobe millions. "

So...you're going to try to sue Adobe based on what a blogger says they will do once their evil plan takes effect?

...it's not like they did it in the middle of a cycle, pulling back issued perpetual serial numbers...you own all the applications you've paid for. Adobe's contract with you was based on the version you own now...and they haven't changed any of that.

How can you sue a company for manufacturing a product you don't want to buy (and haven't bought)? That makes no sense, particularly for video editors who may be the one segment of all Adobe's creative customer base who clearly have the most alternatives relative to say...Photoshop.

Do you really think that Adobe, a multi-billion dollar public company with the number of patents and copyrights and licensing deals and contracts of every conceivable kind will suddenly say "Oh, gosh! We never thought of having our battalion of attorneys check our plan for a complete overhaul of the way we sell our entire line of software products..."

Please...

I thought we'd seen some ridiculous exchanges on this, but a class-action?

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Tom Daigon
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 6:08:58 pm

Pusherman: Hey little editor. Here's a free taste. You will like it. But remember you better keep buying from me or no editing for you :D

Tom Daigon
PrP / After Effects Editor
HP Z820 Dual 2687
64GB ram
Dulce DQg2 16TB raid
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com


Return to posts index


Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 6:22:25 pm

[Tom Daigon] "Pusherman: Hey little editor. Here's a free taste. You will like it. But remember you better keep buying from me or no editing for you :D"

Tom...the arrangement is pretty clear, and as much as this analogy just never gets old...

...how do you sue Adobe for the product that you haven't bought because you are aware of what that product is...and thus does not affect you, as a customer who has freedom of choice?

I am not a fan of Windows 8...but not buying it is the extent of my considerable influence over Microsoft...Steve Ballmer would not take my calls.

Again...this type of bumper-sticker content may make you feel better...but I see very little in the way of productive conversations or suggestions if what you wish to do is influence Adobe vs annoy them.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 6:25:08 pm

[Tim Kolb] "I thought we'd seen some ridiculous exchanges on this, but a class-action?
"


It's getting a little batty out there.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 7:36:12 pm

I want it on the record that i am pursuing my genreal ranting only.

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


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 7:47:36 pm

I do not believe you have ever, in any of your grand arias (even when hitting and holding the highest note) threatened to sue Apple because you didn't like what they were doing.


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 7:49:54 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I do not believe you have ever, in any of your grand arias (even when hitting and holding the highest note) threatened to sue Apple because you didn't like what they were doing."

I was responding to the second post in the thread, not the first.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 7:57:44 pm

[Tim Kolb] "[Chris Harlan] "I do not believe you have ever, in any of your grand arias (even when hitting and holding the highest note) threatened to sue Apple because you didn't like what they were doing."

I was responding to the second post in the thread, not the first.
"


Oh yes, I know. Mine was an aside to Aindreas. We go way back.


Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 2:34:05 pm

[Tim Kolb] "I was responding to the second post in the thread, not the first."

Which was yours, which has, so far, been the only one to reference any kind of legal action in this thread so far.


Return to posts index

Ryan Holmes
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 3:04:03 pm

[Gary Huff] "Which was yours, which has, so far, been the only one to reference any kind of legal action in this thread so far."

Tim was referencing another thread which I can't find (maybe it got deleted). In that thread the gentleman was discussing getting a class-action lawsuit together to sue Adobe. If I can find the link I'll post it.

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 3:06:38 pm

[Ryan Holmes] "Tim was referencing another thread which I can't find (maybe it got deleted). In that thread the gentleman was discussing getting a class-action lawsuit together to sue Adobe. If I can find the link I'll post it."

I've seen that from the FCPX forum before this one opened.


Return to posts index


Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 6:03:41 pm

[Ryan Holmes] "Tim was referencing another thread which I can't find (maybe it got deleted). In that thread the gentleman was discussing getting a class-action lawsuit together to sue Adobe."

James Daugherty's post was deleted from this thread in the transfer to this new forum...the Cow may have some legal concerns about that sort of thing being propagated on it's site...I don't know.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Ryan Holmes
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 10, 2013 at 2:36:30 am

[Tim Kolb] "the Cow may have some legal concerns about that sort of thing being propagated on it's site"

Entirely possible. That makes sense. I had read earlier in the day what you were referencing, but I just couldn't find it later...

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost


Return to posts index

Ryan Holmes
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 8:11:54 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "hey won’t need innovation to drive sales of upgrades or acquire new customers, and the costs of innovating on such mature products becomes more costly and yields fewer results."

Just because Adobe moves it's licensing to the CC doesn't mean they exist in a software vacuum. They are still competing against Apple, Avid, Autodesk, Sony, etc. If Adobe's products go downhill as quickly as this article's rant seems to imply then people will likely jump ship for other NLE/design software (just like people did with Apple a few years ago). Adobe's CC model doesn't mean they are immune to customers leaving. They still have to compete with the other products out there. CC is no guarantee of infinite future money.

There's too much "the sky is falling" right now....Apple went through the same thing 2 years ago. People got up in arms about it signed petitions, created "bring back FCP7" social media campaigns. Ultimately, some left, some stayed put, some switched to X, but Apple was/is committed to X as it's NLE paradigm. So your choices were essentially get on the train and ride or this is your stop and thanks for riding. It seems like Adobe has the same long term approach for the CC. Where it's different is that Adobe is only changing the licensing model, but making the software much, much better. Apple kept the licensing model and released a clunker of an app (it's better now, but still not there yet IMO....2 years later!).

I think a deep breath and some time to give everyone perspective will help this conversation. Unfortunately, time/patience isn't really something social media excels at!

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost


Return to posts index


Peter Jay Gould
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 10:05:00 pm

[Ryan Holmes] "Where it's different is that Adobe is only changing the licensing model, but making the software much, much better. Apple kept the licensing model and released a clunker of an app (it's better now, but still not there yet IMO....2 years later!)."

But look at the difference: customers didn't like FCPX, so they stayed with 7. And they didn't PAY for FCPX if they didn't want to, which put pressure on Apple.

In the CC world, if Adobe comes out with their version of FCPX at some point, you can stay with the previous version - but you WILL PAY JUST AS MUCH as if you'd taken the revision and been delighted with it. This puts Adobe under much less pressure to fix it than Apple was under.

Can you go to another platform? Well, if you have a ton of existing projects that consist of nests of Premiere, AE and Audition project files that are linked together and that use layered Photoshop and Illustrator files, probably not very darned easily, because nothing else is going to open them. So it's much, MUCH harder to migrate than under the current system where you could continue to use, say, CS6 while you got up to speed in something else and eased off over time. Here you'd have to continue paying Adobe AND whoever the competitor was, as long as you needed the ability to access your existing projects.

And in the end that's what this is all about: to strip the customer base of their traditional power to vote with their wallets as to whether a new release is worth paying for, and ultimately whether to migrate platforms. It gives almost all the power in the relationship to Adobe instead of the customer.


Return to posts index

Ryan Holmes
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 10, 2013 at 2:34:28 am

[Peter Jay Gould] "But look at the difference: customers didn't like FCPX, so they stayed with 7. And they didn't PAY for FCPX if they didn't want to, which put pressure on Apple."

Honestly, having the perspective of the last 2 years.....I don't think it exerted much pressure on Apple at all. They had a plan for the product (and still do) and since they derive less than 1% of their revenue from Pro Apps they really don't get "scared" by social media outrage over FCPX. I'm sure many "pros" abandoned FCP. But thousands more joined up. Thousands more continue to download and use it. Apple has stated that FCPX's interface/paradigm will be their basis for editing for the next decade. Their gonna keep at it whether I buy in or not.

[Peter Jay Gould] "In the CC world, if Adobe comes out with their version of FCPX at some point, you can stay with the previous version - but you WILL PAY JUST AS MUCH as if you'd taken the revision and been delighted with it. This puts Adobe under much less pressure to fix it than Apple was under."

I agree with you that paying for access to an earlier version sounds backwards, especially if you can't upgrade to the newest version for whatever reason - mid-project, hardware limitations, 3rd party support, etc. But again, Adobe isn't competing in a vacuum. They will have to continually elevate their products. Otherwise, customers will leave for Vegas, FCPX, Smoke, Media Composer, Lightworks, etc. Adobe does not have a monopoly on the market. A "service" provider will have to maintain an acceptable standard for its user base or the user base will go elsewhere.

[Peter Jay Gould] "Can you go to another platform?"
Yes. Yes you can. I did it 2 years ago after spending nearly 8 years working exclusively in Final Cut, Motion, Compressor, DVD Studio Pro. Was it painful? Yep. I think it sucks if your situation is as you describe with nested sequences galore and dynamic linking out the wazoo. Personally I hope to never have to move again. But knowing how companies change products/service, if they come out with something I don't want to be apart of I'll pickup shop and move again.

[Peter Jay Gould] "And in the end that's what this is all about: to strip the customer base of their traditional power to vote with their wallets as to whether a new release is worth paying for, and ultimately whether to migrate platforms. It gives almost all the power in the relationship to Adobe instead of the customer."

You don't have to signup for the Cloud. Nobody is forcing you. I'm serious....if you don't like what they're offering don't pay for it. That will speak the loudest to Adobe.

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost


Return to posts index

Steve Brame
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 10:39:22 pm

Avid Media Composer
Sony Vegas
Grass Valley Edius
Editshare Lightworks


Hardly a "monopoly".

Asus P6X58D Premium * Core i7 950 * 24GB RAM * nVidia Quadro 4000 * Windows 7 Premium 64bit * System Drive - WD Caviar Black 500GB * 2nd Drive(Pagefile, Previews) - WD Velociraptor 10K drive 600GB * Media Drive - 2TB RAID5 (4 - WD Caviar Black 500GB drive) * Matrox MX02 Mini * CS6.x Creative Cloud
-------------------------------------------
"98% of all computer issues can be solved by simply pressing 'F1'."
Steve Brame
creative illusions Productions


Return to posts index


walter biscardi
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 10:41:37 pm

[Steve Brame] "Avid Media Composer
Sony Vegas
Grass Valley Edius
Editshare Lightworks"


Media 100 is still kicking...

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media

Foul Water Fiery Serpent, an original documentary featuring Sigourney Weave...
MTWD Entertainment - Developing original content for all media.
"This American Land" - our new PBS Series.
"Science Nation" - Three years and counting of Science for the People.

Blog Twitter Facebook


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 11:35:03 pm

Lightworks
FCX

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Tom Daigon
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 11:44:38 pm

CS6

Tom Daigon
PrP / After Effects Editor
HP Z820 Dual 2687
64GB ram
Dulce DQg2 16TB raid
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 12:31:28 am

I finish on Media 100 2.1.3 (latest). Very clean, fast, and ultimately stable on the Mac, especially for long form documentaries. Red RAW and 4k support. But you have to admit, of all the systems mentioned, Avid is the only competitor that has a sizable share of the mid to high end, and their finances have not been looking that good. In that strata, I think FCP 7 with holdovers is still ahead of X. But that could change now.

The way it is looking, I will stay on CS6 as a front end and export ProRes to Media 100 for finish. Had hoped to do more with Premiere, but unless I can own it, it's a non-starter. Lightworks could definitely be coming up now, especially when the Mac version is released. But no one really has the market power of Adobe in creative software. That is what is so frustrating about this change.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1,Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1, Premiere Pro 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Avid MC, Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 8Gb SSD, G5 Quadcore PCIe


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 8, 2013 at 11:12:54 pm

[Steve Brame] "Avid Media Composer
Sony Vegas
Grass Valley Edius
Editshare Lightworks


Hardly a "monopoly"."


I think the "monopoly" conversation has a bit more traction for Photoshop/InDesign users...remember that it's all one "product" now.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Steve Brame
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 12:59:31 am

[Tim Kolb] "I think the "monopoly" conversation has a bit more traction for Photoshop/InDesign users"

OK...

Quark
CorelDraw
Microsoft Publisher
PaintShop Pro
Photo-Brush
Creator Professional
Corel Ventura
Adobe Pagemaker!!!!

The M-word gets tossed around way to often without a thought to it's implications.

Asus P6X58D Premium * Core i7 950 * 24GB RAM * nVidia Quadro 4000 * Windows 7 Premium 64bit * System Drive - WD Caviar Black 500GB * 2nd Drive(Pagefile, Previews) - WD Velociraptor 10K drive 600GB * Media Drive - 2TB RAID5 (4 - WD Caviar Black 500GB drive) * Matrox MX02 Mini * CS6.x Creative Cloud
-------------------------------------------
"98% of all computer issues can be solved by simply pressing 'F1'."
Steve Brame
creative illusions Productions


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 1:25:13 am

[Steve Brame] "The M-word gets tossed around way to often without a thought to it's implications."

Yeah...I'm telling you where I've been hearing it from...not that I'm endorsing it.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Steve Brame
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 12:24:05 pm

[Tim Kolb] "Yeah...I'm telling you where I've been hearing it from...not that I'm endorsing it."

Understood. I was addressing the article. Though we've never met I've always found you to be a solid voice of reason, as you are in this instance.

Asus P6X58D Premium * Core i7 950 * 24GB RAM * nVidia Quadro 4000 * Windows 7 Premium 64bit * System Drive - WD Caviar Black 500GB * 2nd Drive(Pagefile, Previews) - WD Velociraptor 10K drive 600GB * Media Drive - 2TB RAID5 (4 - WD Caviar Black 500GB drive) * Matrox MX02 Mini * CS6.x Creative Cloud
-------------------------------------------
"98% of all computer issues can be solved by simply pressing 'F1'."
Steve Brame
creative illusions Productions


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 1:45:49 pm

I appreciate that Steve, thanks.

Everyone's views on their own situation are legitimate. The slippery slope comes when our response is due to our assumptions of motivation on another's part.

I can respect someone who says 'this new system really ends up screwing me', but we get very unproductive and arbitrary once the conversation is about 'greedy Adobe came up with this system to screw me'.

Two completely different scenarios there...and the second one offers almost zero chance to remedy the problem.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 2:41:40 pm

[Tim Kolb] "I can respect someone who says 'this new system really ends up screwing me', but we get very unproductive and arbitrary once the conversation is about 'greedy Adobe came up with this system to screw me'."

The concerns are legitimate even if the language is hyperbolic. After all, even if Adobe *wasn't* intending to screw anyone, but was deeply motivated by a sincere desire to do something "next gen" with their toolset...

but their server goes down, or your Cloud license "expires" though it is kept up-to-date with payments, or any other number of issues that could stem from this model...well, the end result is the same, isn't it?


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 6:28:36 pm

[Gary Huff] "fter all, even if Adobe *wasn't* intending to screw anyone, but was deeply motivated by a sincere desire to do something "next gen" with their toolset...but their server goes down, or your Cloud license "expires" though it is kept up-to-date with payments, or any other number of issues that could stem from this model...well, the end result is the same, isn't it?"

With the difference that a user can't really have any input if Adobe's actual intent was to have an adverse affect on that user, right?

If Adobe is a business trying to figure out how to continue to serve customers because that's how they financially continue to exist, then how you go about communicating the issue most effectively would change right?

On the Cow, I see something less than a dozen people tossing around everything from "See? their stock went down today!" to "I'll use CS6 forever" to "Now I love FCPX"...and of course "It's corporate greed" etc, etc...

It's not helping anyone...it's just reactionary, and in some cases, bordering on juvenile.

The most power any of us have as a customer is to take our money elsewhere, and how many people do that will be the only factor in assessing if this was a good move for Adobe or not.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

Peter Wiley
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 12:36:18 am

Here's what Adobe itself said to the SEC and investors in their March 10Q

"In May 2012, we launched Adobe Creative Suite 6 (“CS6”) which is at the center of Adobe Creative Cloud, our new subscription-based model for creating and publishing content and applications that was also released in May 2012. The launch of CS6 included major updates to all of our core Creative Suite (“CS”) point products as well as four suite versions. Late in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2012, we launched Creative Cloud for teams, a platform for teams and workgroups to access all applications and online services in the Creative Cloud. Over time, we expect Creative Cloud to transform our business model and drive higher revenue growth through an expansion of our customer base by acquiring new users through a lower cost of entry, as well as keeping existing customers current on our latest release. This model will drive our revenue to be more recurring and predictable since revenue is recognized ratably. We continue to implement strategies that will accelerate the adoption of our Creative Cloud subscription model, causing our traditional perpetual license revenue to decline. We currently plan to continue to offer the perpetual licensing model as we transition our customers to this new subscription-based model."

Like it or not, they've bet their business (and maybe a lot of other people's businesses) on the subscription model.


Return to posts index

Peter Jay Gould
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 9, 2013 at 9:53:17 pm

I agree with Tim Kolb that there's no basis - today - for a class action suit. However, I do agree with all the negative observations. The customer/vendor relationship exists in a balance. In the traditional model, if, and ONLY if, the vendor produces an upgrade with features that excite the customer, at a rate the customer is willing to pay, the customer buys it. Otherwise they stick with the version they have. Win-win: the customer gets innovation; the company gets revenue. Adobe's current effort turns that on its head, since it can derive revenue whether it innovates or not (or they shut off your system) - and if a competitor shows up, Adobe simply buys it.

I've written the letter below to my members of Congress. Anyone who is so inclined is welcome to take it, tweak it how you like, and send it to your legislators as well. Maybe it will go somewhere and maybe it won't, but I'm convinced we will all end up in a VERY bad place if the entire industry decides it can turn software into a utility that can be shut off at will.


Dear ______________:

I would like you to consider the need for possible new legislation similar to that which was used to break up Bell Telephone - and for similar reasons. Since its founding, Adobe Systems (maker of the popular computer software packages Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere and many others) has acquired more than 60 other companies, to the point where it has effectively bought up its entire competition in the marketplace.

Now that there is no effective competition, the company has just announced that it is abandoning the traditional software license. Instead of selling software licenses to its customers and allowing them to use the software until the company offers an upgrade that excites the customer base, Adobe is moving to a rental model in which customers must pay $50 per month (or whatever amount Adobe demands in the future) in perpetuity for "permission" to use its software - whether it continues to innovate or not. Stop paying and the customer's CURRENT software is deactivated by Adobe. There is no option to purchase a perpetual-use license and no ability to continue to use one's software without paying a continuous license fee. Adobe expects this to be the "new normal" for computer software.

If software companies are permitted to move in this direction one will pay a monthly fee for Windows, one for Quickbooks, one for anything Adobe, and on and on. Stop paying and your computer becomes a boat anchor. Under this model the customer owns nothing and the company has the ability to physically prevent the customer from using software that they may have paid for over the course of many years, representing an investment of thousands of dollars (we have probably paid Adobe $20,000 or more over the course of our relationship – and under this model they can shut off everything we have if we stop paying a monthly fee).

Adobe has been able to reach this point because it has been allowed over the years to buy up an entire industry. Actually multiple industries: print production, video production, web development, etc., etc. There simply is no competition for Adobe's product line - and when one springs up, Adobe promptly buys it.

In the short term this trend will be extremely harmful to individual consumers and small businesses that are forced into a more expensive model with no end in sight. Run behind on monthly payments due to a difficult economy or slow paying customers and the software shuts off, disabling the small business.

In the long term the negative effects will be on everyone. The software vendor / customer relationship exists in a balance. Software companies are motivated to innovate because only a new software release, reasonably priced and with exciting new features, influences customers to buy. Thus, to keep up revenue, companies must constantly innovate and reinvent themselves in order to develop value for their shareholders. The rental model turns this on its head since customers must pay whatever amount the software company dictates simply in order to keep using the software they already have. This significantly reduces the company's incentive to continue innovating: it can halt development on a mature product and just sit by and collect the rents. For consumers, this is a particularly ominous development.

It is also quite similar in nature to the situation that was allowed to develop with Bell Telephone many years ago, which became "the only game in town" for telephone service and thus felt itself empowered to raise prices to intolerable levels without sufficient innovation to justify the costs. Instead of fueling innovation, the money simply went into the pockets of shareholders. Congress intervened then and it should do so now, and, as I said above, for the same reasons.

I hope you agree that this deserves Congressional intervention. If you're on Facebook, I would encourage you to visit the Adobe and the Adobe Creative Cloud pages and read message upon message from one outraged customer after another - all ignored by Adobe which is proceeding full speed ahead with its anti-customer money grab.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I suspect that I am not the only one you will be hearing from.

Very truly yours,

YOUR NAME HERE


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Creative Cloud going forward.
on May 10, 2013 at 12:21:16 am

[Peter Jay Gould] "Adobe has been able to reach this point because it has been allowed over the years to buy up an entire industry. Actually multiple industries: print production, video production, web development, etc., etc. There simply is no competition for Adobe's product line - and when one springs up, Adobe promptly buys it."

Um...huh?

What video editor has Adobe bought (since it bought Premiere)?

What effects software has it bought since it bought CoSA (After Effects)?

What image editing competitor to Photoshop has Adobe purchased?

InDesign is dominant, but I don't believe that Adobe is, or will be interested in purchasing Quark any time soon...in fact, unless you assume that Adobe bought Macromedia to protect GoLive (pardon me a snicker here...) I think the monster swallowing up the innovators, or somehow keeping them out is a tough case to make, and has no actual history to back it up.

There are more than enough NLE applications available for those who want to switch...most Avid users still sneer at me when I tell them what I edit on...hard to call that a monopoly.

Corel has several image editing and drawing software options...and there are others. It's not like Adobe has patented and is now licensing oxygen here...

Web design, compositing, video transcoding...I just don't see how the monopoly thing even approaches the Bell telephone analogy where they owned all the infrastructure and therefore could simply refuse to rent access to competitors...you'd have a better chance suing Apple to bring FCPX to Windows.

...users who don't like this should start seriously looking at something else. For most of you, your complaints and threats are targeted at a product you've already pledged never to buy...therefore I have no idea how you get legal recourse for a transaction that doesn't exist.

Buying a competitive product will send the most obvious and clear message to Adobe versus letters to legislators, quoting 2 year old layoff reports or one-day trends in the stock market hoping for some sense of vengeance, or just plain old schadenfreude...

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

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