FORUMS: list search recent posts

Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 25, 2013 at 11:07:35 pm

It might occur to you that nearly every query put to adobe on a software issue results in kevin or the rest of the guys telling us to go to the willy wonka go wish submission form.

Adobe have said this is a service. They are now claiming that they are provisioning a service. That they are not selling complex tools to professionals - rather they are provisioning a set of services to subscribers for a monthly fee.
How is it a service, per se, when its continued progression is so reliant on a feedback loop? Where the subscribers are continuously exposing flaws in the "service" as they also simultaneously set the course for future features of the "service"? (Adobe have been explicit about the weighted excel sheet for future feature suggestions.)

how many services, that you can think of, are so intrinsically reliant on customer roadtesting, as well as the formulation of potential features?
Because the point is that we are not customers offering feedback on a product anymore, we are subscribers to a service.

can you think of any service that operates like this? british gas? netflix? ESPN bug testing? NY times site fixes for valued subscribers?
does no one at all smell the mile of cow manure here?

we are choosing to partake in the classical process of pro customers engaged in feedback and refinement of a complex pro tool, without the basic handshake of ownership of that tool.

we don't in any sense have secure ownership of the tool, but we are expected to continue to bug test, refine, and suggest future directions for the rental service we are tenants of.

how, in the hell, does that meet any definition of service provision?

It's lunacy. but more basically, and I really cannot overstate this point - this is not a service.
they thought multicam worked - it did not. if you want to get funny about it, we ourselves are providing a continuous crowd sourced service to the programmers at adobe.
are we going to get fractional service payments to our account as software refinement service providers?

christ, the one fig leaf they had for service provision of managed file sharing has been dead for months now.

it's a joke this. honest to god- its gets worse every time you think about it.

#oneMoreRant
#adobe2014
adobe2014.tumblr.com

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 25, 2013 at 11:30:45 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "how many services, that you can think of, are so intrinsically reliant on customer roadtesting, as well as the formulation of potential features?
Because the point is that we are not customers offering feedback on a product anymore, we are subscribers to a service."


A lot of them? Cell phone companies add features and improve services based on customer feedback. Dropbox has section of its site where users can submit (and even vote) on feature requests. Vimeo has a feature request section on its forums. DVRs and streaming apps are only becoming common offerings from cable/sat companies because of consumer demand. I'm sure Panavision responds to user feedback though I can't say that for sure as I haven't worked with Panavison before.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point, but I don't think there's anything inherent in being a service provider that prohibits you from interacting with your customers and improving your services based on their feedback.




Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 26, 2013 at 12:05:39 am

maybe - I mean maybe. It's hard to recall a scenario where dropbox, (now charging 600 dollars a year), dumps out a new file sync service (ala multicam) that in certain scenarios catastrophically fails, and results in situational corruptions that demand the user, on their own initiative, interrogate every possible failure point in the new feature, say transcode all files, all while protecting their livelihood by masking the issue to their clients.
A dropbox failure, as it were, that never hits the press, and causes no shareholder damage to the company.

there were full failures of the multicam feature that were absorbed by a pro customer base. I'm not certain that the examples you cited there with cell phone providers would play out exactly the same way. I can rant about a cellphone service failure. No editor can rant about premiere tool failure to a client.

by calling us subscribers, adobe are falsely putting us downstream on a link in the chain where we don't live. We have none of the benefits of the position, but adobe have plenty. Adobe are degrading their customers with a completely false argument, and it's incredibly irritating.

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


Return to posts index


Todd Kopriva
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 26, 2013 at 2:18:03 am

I'm confused.

Are you saying that you do not want us to solicit feedback from you about what we can improve?

I'll give one example of where the feedback has helped tremendously: the Crash Reporter.

We are very grateful to people who enable the Crash Reporter, because we used the feedback that we got through this system to in After Effects CC (12.0) fix over 90% of all crashes that occurred in After Effects CS6 (11.0).

On another front, the bug reporting system (Choose Help > Send Feedback in After Effects or go here: http://adobe.ly/ReportBug ) lets us know what problems are really affecting people.

The same form can be used for feature requests, which I personally read every one of for After Effects (and then summarize, like here). I use the numbers of requests that come in there to change the priorities of what we work on, and this direct connection with what real users are asking for helps us to make something that converges to what y'all want and need.

So, what's the complaint?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Kopriva, Adobe Systems Incorporated
After Effects quality engineering
After Effects team blog
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 26, 2013 at 7:06:21 pm

I'm saying that a service where we need to keep telling you what's wrong with the service, when it regularly has critical unforeseen bugs ala multicam, a service where we opt in to continuously help guide future features, is not a service, Todd.

You're forcing us to rent our tools, that we had effective ownership control over. you're not providing a service, and calling yourselves a service is a bad joke.

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


Return to posts index

Paul King
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 27, 2013 at 4:28:10 pm

Yes Todd

Customers paid for CS6. There were bugs and they were fixed in CC, not in CS6.
No support for paying customers.



Return to posts index


Todd Kopriva
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 27, 2013 at 8:17:15 pm

> Customers paid for CS6. There were bugs and they were fixed in CC, not in CS6.
No support for paying customers.


We're working on bug-fix updates for CS6 applications now. I'm personally working on one for After Effects, and the Premiere Pro team is working on one for Premiere Pro.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Kopriva, Adobe Systems Incorporated
After Effects quality engineering
After Effects team blog
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 27, 2013 at 8:39:25 pm

[Todd Kopriva] "We're working on bug-fix updates for CS6 applications now."

right. the exact same thing you have always done.

you're still not a service provider with subscribers - although you are spinning it as hard as you can.

You are exactly the same, flawed, complex pro tool provider you were, exactly as reliant on the forgiveness and responsiveness of pro tool customers.

the only difference is that, leveraging near monopoly, you are demanding perpetual rent for an incredibly broad array of tools from millions of people.
And you are making a bad joke of it all being an incredible new cloud subscription service.
that is, needless to say, a complete and utter lie.

no professional software provider should have the latitude to turn all their pro customers, by fiat, into their own software land tenants on this scale.
It's the population of a small to medium sized european country.

It's as bad and as old an idea as it sounds, Todd.
This venture into feudal ownership of mass tools deserves to fail, and it is supposed to fail.
It might take a few years - but this, by free market rights rights, should be the failure point for adobe.

I personally hope it is anyway.

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


Return to posts index

Paul King
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 29, 2013 at 3:53:56 pm

One bug fix is a small step.
Are these bugs that also appear in CC? Or were they fixed first?


Thanks




Paul



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 26, 2013 at 3:04:33 am

Adobe is trying something new. It may blossom into something awesome. It may not. It's too soon to tell. Besides Behance and the cloud storage there isn't much about Adobe's current software as a service approach that feels like a traditional service situation. I don't understand people saying Adobe must behave exactly like a traditional company that sells software or the must behave exactly like a traditional company that sells a service. Let them experiment and let's see what happens.

For all the people that say they skip every other version or two just buy CS6 and wait a couple of years (just like you normally would even if Adobe didn't go the CC route). Personally, I see it as a win/win. Either Adobe's plans take off and they end up with something unique and valuable to users or the plan doesn't take off and opportunities open up for competing software to get a toe hold in previously 'Adobe-only' territory. Either way, consumers (we) win.

I don't know Dropbox's history, but I know when Vimeo did a massive upgrade last year it screwed things up for a lot of people (videos not playing, videos taking days to upload and days to converter, etc.,). There also seems to be a big problem with embedded videos from Vimeo not playing back properly on Android devices. But the software Adobe is offering is infinitely more complicated than anything provided by Vimeo or Dropbox or Spotify so the comparison isn't really valid.

For the show stopping multicam feature problem... if you don't want to step on a scary bug, don't be an early adopter. It's been like that since the dawn of software and it's never going to change.




Return to posts index

Paul King
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 27, 2013 at 4:35:12 pm

But it did change, they stopped selling it and started renting it.
So now it's a different ball game.

If I buy something, it has warranty. Once that warranty runs out I'm on my own.

If I rent something, I'm being provided a service and if the service fails, they have to fix the issue or not charge for the service.



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 26, 2013 at 4:57:17 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "how many services, that you can think of, are so intrinsically reliant on customer roadtesting, as well as the formulation of potential features?
Because the point is that we are not customers offering feedback on a product anymore, we are subscribers to a service.

can you think of any service that operates like this?"


Panavision.


Return to posts index

David Smith
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 26, 2013 at 7:30:43 pm

[Richard Herd] "Panavision."

I remember that Panavision only rented their cameras, but there was big a difference. After you were done shooting the film, you never needed the camera again to manipulate that film stock. You had the exposed film and could proceed to use whatever else to edit the film. With Adobe, you still need the software to manipulate the project files after they were created with the software.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 27, 2013 at 12:28:21 am

You said, "after it was done."

And that's the issue, right? What does "it's done" mean? For principal photography it means delivering the footage to the post house.

When editing is done, it means delivering the file/tape to the exhibitor/distributor/producer -- whoever is controlling it.


Return to posts index

David Smith
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 27, 2013 at 10:33:53 pm

What I can tell you is that after I run the film through a panavision camera, as far as using that film, I am definitely done with the camera. I do not need to and actually can't use the film with the camera again.

The same can't be said for the software. I still need the software to manipulate the project files. When a person is done with that will be different for everyone. It could move on from editing, and then suddenly go back.

The point is that there is a huge difference between renting a camera with a definitive output that never needs the camera again and a piece of software where the output is not so concrete and constantly needs the tool.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 30, 2013 at 12:40:14 am

I'm not sure I understand, here, still. Sorry.

When you finish shooting you're done with the camera.

But when you finish editing, you're not done with the software.

If it's done, actually done, why do you need to open the software again?


Return to posts index

Sandeep Sajeev
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 30, 2013 at 8:42:27 am

[Richard Herd] "I'm not sure I understand, here, still. Sorry.

When you finish shooting you're done with the camera.

But when you finish editing, you're not done with the software.

If it's done, actually done, why do you need to open the software again?
"


Because quite often, you're not done until you're done. And there can be various points at which everyone thinks you're done, but then a few days/weeks/months later the client rep is on the phone asking for the Pack shot to be changed, or the Legals to be changed, or for another language version to be run.

The majority of the time, a re-shoot is the more expensive option. And when you re-shoot, you are handing off exposed film/tape/cards etc for further manipulation. Whereas in Post you are delivering a finished piece for broadcast/web etc.

Part of dealing with this sort of thing is to always export out clean versions as we did in the Tape Delivery days - but complete project archival for re-access at a later point has always been a pain in the neck. Being unable to lock down your software is another hassle in what can, on occasion, be a pretty painful process.


Return to posts index

Paul King
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 31, 2013 at 12:29:07 am

We've had issues where someone in shot has died and the family wants them removed.

There are many reasons why you have to go back to an edit and this make rental a bad model. Especially if you have decided to go with Avid down the track and you have to open a legacy Premiere project. You end up having to by both pieces because you never own Premiere.

Rental is bad for software.


Return to posts index

Dustin Lawhorn
Re: Adobe as a service, that service being tools, and subscribers optomising those tools for free.
on Jul 31, 2013 at 3:21:50 am

[Paul King] "We've had issues where someone in shot has died and the family wants them removed."

We've had that problem too. In the end we had to go in and rotoscope the person out--what a PAIN! Thankfully, we had shot a clean room for that shoot--we already had the set lit and we were really rolling for Nat Sound. Man! we were thankful that we did that nat sound shot with the lens cap off because it was a locked shot on a locked set--it served as a plate. The headaches came from the people moving between that person and the camera--that's where we were rotoscoping like mad men.

Anywho... good point Paul!

-dl


Return to posts index

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