FORUMS: list search recent posts

Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 2:32:03 pm

might explain why some of the adobe reps were a bit rattled.

https://twitter.com/oddernod/status/453734513193918464

to be fair, I don't think I'd go booing someone giving a presentation - that seems a bit low, but it sounds like quite a few people were. there's stuff out there that reps were taking it in the neck on the NAB showfloor as well.

Whether adobe care at all is open to question, but that kind of reaction has to have some kind of impact. It's also notable that virtually every other provider introducing subscription is retaining a license model for those who need it. Even putting on my devils advocate hat, it still feels like adobe have gone too far.

I thought avid's model was interesting in that they are introducing subscription and retaining license - for the license holders, there is a 299 service and update charge which allows them to bypass sarbannes oxeley for both groups.

the obvious thing to point out here is that this gives the lie to adobe's insistence that retaining licenses would have meant bifurcating development, I always felt they were lying there, and well, they were lying there, avid has trivially introduced a reasonable fee cost for perpetual license holders to remain in train with subscription upgrades. Adobe lied about all that.

More than anything it is the sense of dishonesty with adobe's position that bugs me. They were never truthful about their motivations for moving to enforced subscription, or the reasons for dropping licenses. They have effectively lied with numbing regularity to everyone's faces about both things. We know they're lying, and they pretty much know we know. it's dysfunctional.

I think al mooney was expressing frustration in his tweet, but as herb suvesh pointed - in heat there is truth. Adobe, or at least large parts of adobe simply don't care about the lying, or the ignoring loud customer dissatisfaction thing. that said, them getting actively booed on stage by their own industry audience is a new turn of events.

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


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 3:45:31 pm

Well said. I really don't like the direction Adobe is taking but for a group of people to interrupt a presentation shows a lack of respect, in my opinion. I would have simply walked on by, not go in there and act like a two year old because they can't get that new, expensive toy. Adobe has made a business decision but one that I respectfully do not agree with. There are plenty of options out there with exception to maybe After Effects, so I have found some options that work for me. I am still watching to see if Adobe will give us some type of exit strategy. Until then, no thank you Adobe, your products, while great, simply do not fit or satisfy my needs.


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 4:16:18 pm

There are plenty of options?

May be in the field of Video Tools...
In the graphical Industry Adobe is a Monopolist (or nearby). Dot behind.
Many People build their Workflows on Adobe-Products (and bought expensive AddOns like Databases or PDF-based Printing Solutions, etc.).
Or are simply dependent on the workflows of their greater clients (Freelancers - Agencies)
There are Alternatives to Photoshop & Illustrator... Maybe... Really?
(Rest is replaceable, if you have CashCow-clean workflows to related companies)
As I´m moving away from Adobe, I know, there are some, but it´s hard to find and work.
Still happy, that I own my CS licenses for many cases.
Hard to know that investment in education is useless and has to be spend again.

Nothing against the Adobe products.
But a monopolist who abuses its market-might is something different.
I can understand the concerns and motivation of these "interrupters".
Adobe did this change with flat out lying and a horrible arrogance.
They simply ignore eligible needs of their customers.
Take it or leave us.
Behavior of the 3 apes.
May be not a 2 years old child, but ice cold business in the cloth of "Creativity".
Not even a cent better than what these people have done.
Other Dot behind.


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 2:46:06 am

Just to clarify…

A - the crowd reaction came at a point where in Al Money's Demo he had specifically paused rhetorically after making an early CC reference - essentially seeking the audiences feedback. So it was in no way an impolite shutting of him down. The audience was attentive to his overall presentation and it was an isolated moment.

B - yes it was a mixed response, but no where near a total jeer. There were certainly positive noises mixed in with the backlash stuff, but to deny the negative reaction would be to deny the truth.

C - that moment passed and Al was able to finish his presentation just as every other presenter. Al is a solid pro and wasn't thrown off stride in the slightest. Plus he wore a t-shirt with a cute cat on it - so there's that.

D - I'm been vocal about how on the FCP-X original presentation 3 years back, the general mood in the room was one of appreciation and interest - and it was only on the internet that the "meme" of the terrible disaster of the FCP-X launch grew into the stuff of legends. It would be GROSSLY unfair in my opinion for the same thing to happen to ADOBE in this case.

For what it's worth.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 3:39:27 am

[Bill Davis] "D - I'm been vocal about how on the FCP-X original presentation 3 years back, the general mood in the room was one of appreciation and interest - and it was only on the internet that the "meme" of the terrible disaster of the FCP-X launch grew into the stuff of legends. It would be GROSSLY unfair in my opinion for the same thing to happen to ADOBE in this case."

Great clarity there Bill, thanks for posting


Return to posts index

Dave LaRonde
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 4:56:27 pm

It will be interesting to see if this incident is reported here on the COW. I see that the link to the tweet is two days old, and a quick check of COW news reveals not a peep.

Perhaps it wasn't as big a deal as the tweets would lead one to believe.

Your opinions?

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


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:59:58 pm

Hard to say, other people in that tweet thread seem to have been aware about it. On the other forum someone who was there said there was no applause when al got on stage and there were walk outs during the presentation. It was described as being painful to watch. That said they didn't mention active booing.

Either way it's a pretty visceral reaction. That's bad blood. Again - I'm not really sure adobe care at this point, but you'd think it would register on some level. That was them getting the middle finger from a core NAB crowd.

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


Return to posts index

Jim Cunningham
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 2:43:55 pm

I was there at Supermeet for Al's presentation, and although there was, at best, tepid reception to his comments, I didn't hear any booing.

Cheers,

Jim



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:04:58 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "the obvious thing to point out here is that this gives the lie to adobe's insistence that retaining licenses would have meant bifurcating development, I always felt they were lying there, and well, they were lying there, avid has trivially introduced a reasonable fee cost for perpetual license holders to remain in train with subscription upgrades. Adobe lied about all that."

The point about multiple development branches was about releasing, say, Pr 7.0, then releasing 7.1a with bug fixes plus new features for subscribers, and also releasing 7.1b with bug fixes but without new features for non-subscribers.

If you're going to charge for new features (whether on subscription or some kind of perpetual maintenance) and if you're also going to provide bug-fixes for perpetual-only licensees for free, you need multiple development branches: one for features and bug fixes, one for base version bug fixes only.

If commit to a single development branch, you have to give up either new feature releases or non-new-feature bug fixes.

Where do you see the logic above falling apart that makes this a lie?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:08:33 pm

The lie is, that they said it´s not possible.
(Not: It´s much more difficult)


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:19:29 pm

[Rainer Schubert] "The lie is, that they said it´s not possible. (Not: It´s much more difficult)"

But... it's not possible to deliver features and bug fixes to one set of customers and bug fixes only to another set without two development paths.

I think you are mis-remembering.

Adobe did split development for a year with CS6/CC sold side-by-side, and at MAX they said they wanted to commit to a single development path instead of splitting resources. They have done it both ways and have made a choice about how to do it moving forward.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:26:54 pm

They did and decleared, otherwise they couldn´t deliver (fast updates).
They didn´t declare as "We don´t want to develop two ways".
BtW: Can´t see, why they have to develop twice... They only have to deliver two ways.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 2:55:53 am

It's too complex to deliver into the rental model AND a standalone model?

*cough* Lightroom *cough*

This is pure BS, IMO.

I'm way behind schedule with my tax finling this year working on it this weekend. So I went to buy my TurboTax download as always - only to be met with a circular web trap that kept pushing me to their cloud filing system - instead of the stand-alone product I wanted to buy. They have also bumped the standalone version to $119 verses the "cloud" version at $79. Think about that. In the cheap one, they store and control my access to my record essentially locking me into my historical data. In the downloadable version I'm trying to get - I can open my past years anytime and I have both he program and access to all my data whenever and wherever I like on my local system.

Yet I found that impossible today, so I'm back to starting from scratch.

Off to Costco tomorrow - but the "we desperately want to LOCK you into our system" sure sounds familiar.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:20:01 pm

[Walter Soyka] "If you're going to charge for new features (whether on subscription or some kind of perpetual maintenance) and if you're also going to provide bug-fixes for perpetual-only licensees for free, you need multiple development branches: one for features and bug fixes, one for base version bug fixes only."

Is that what Avid is doing?

_______________________
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

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:31:19 pm

[David Lawrence] "Is that what Avid is doing?"

I don't know. But if they are doing new features but not maintaining multiple branches, then they cannot offer bug-fixes only.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:39:46 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I don't know. But if they are doing new features but not maintaining multiple branches, then they cannot offer bug-fixes only."

The solution is simple - charge a maintenance fee that covers both bug fixes and new features. Stop paying the maintenance fee and keep the software with no further updates. It's not rocket science.

_______________________
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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:48:04 pm

That is exactly correct. And as suggested here before when discussing modifications to cc - if you step off the service update train with avid, there are severe penalties. You keep the avid software you have of course, but if you want to step on again, you are paying full sticker price for media composer all over again.

So if you step off, getting back on again sets you back 1299. Avid are heavily incentivising staying in the tent, but they're not locking all the doors, to mix metaphors.

There are multiple ways for adobe to get this done that cause them no harm and end a situation where they are cumulatively poisoning the well with their customers. None of this shows signs of going away. Adobe are doing real long term damage to their brand and industry perception.

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:39:06 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "There are multiple ways for adobe to get this done that cause them no harm and end a situation where they are cumulatively poisoning the well with their customers. None of this shows signs of going away. Adobe are doing real long term damage to their brand and industry perception."

Absolutely correct.

I'm neither surprised nor particularly upset. I mean, what did Adobe expect would happen? That they'd be greeted with applause and ovations?

People hate losing choice.

People hate being forced to rent.

Frankly, as much as I'm a champion of civil dialogue and feel nothing but respect for the Adobe reps on the front line, I hope this happens every time Adobe goes out in public. Adobe management made a business decision. They have every right to do so, but that decision has very human costs and consequences. Adobe corporate management needs to face the human side of their decision.

Loud public pressure is the only way we have any chance of moving the needle on Adobe's "take it or leave it" position. I feel awful for the good Adobe people who must bear the brunt of this - I'd much rather it be Shantanu Narayen - but perhaps if it happens enough, Mr. Narayen and his board will figure out that they need to "tweak" their offerings. They've already said as much, but a year later, we're still waiting...

_______________________
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

Chris Pettit
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 10:57:12 pm

[David Lawrence] "Adobe management made a business decision. They have every right to do so, but that decision has very human costs and consequences. Adobe corporate management needs to face the human side of their decision.

Loud public pressure is the only way we have any chance of moving the needle on Adobe's "take it or leave it" position. I feel awful for the good Adobe people who must bear the brunt of this - I'd much rather it be Shantanu Narayen - but perhaps if it happens enough, Mr. Narayen and his board will figure out that they need to "tweak" their offerings. They've already said as much, but a year later, we're still waiting..."


+100


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:53:59 pm

[David Lawrence] "The solution is simple - charge a maintenance fee that covers both bug fixes and new features. Stop paying the maintenance fee and keep the software with no further updates. It's not rocket science."

David, I understand this, and I don't disagree.

I am not arguing the business model with you guys. Perpetual license plus maintenance is a way to deliver features that has been practiced for years with other software, and it's a totally valid alternative to subscription.

Although I'm happy with subscription and I think it has changed the focus on development for the better for users like me, I would like to see some option that would make you happy, too. I think you'd really like the software.

But we are confusing the business model with the development model here. The one has consequences on the other. Nobody lied about that.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:27:27 pm

[David Lawrence] "The solution is simple - charge a maintenance fee that covers both bug fixes and new features. Stop paying the maintenance fee and keep the software with no further updates. It's not rocket science."

Zing! Avid has the strategy right. Someone decides to jump off the train the cost of admission is as the same when you first got on board. This helps keeps a loss in revenue to a minimum. Worst case for the user is the higher fee but there is an exit strategy. Something that is missing from a competitor.


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:31:10 pm

...and you are not left in the rain, when jumping of the train.
Can use your own files.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 9:23:15 pm

What Avid is doing
http://www.avid.com/static/resources/common/documents/datasheets/Media_Comp...

Subscribe or Buy and Subscribe for updates.
A difference being if you Buy and don't continue the annual subscription, you keep what you buy.
If you want to come back after you unsubscribe for a year, you pay full price again so you can simply opt out for a year.
Key difference is you have a vehicle to walk away with a working program.
All updates and upgrades are subscription.



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 10:23:38 pm
Last Edited By Aindreas Gallagher on Apr 10, 2014 at 11:10:29 pm

adobe at this point actually have to ... [*edit* no - overcooking it.]


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:35:35 pm

[Walter Soyka] "he point about multiple development branches was about releasing, say, Pr 7.0, then releasing 7.1a with bug fixes plus new features for subscribers, and also releasing 7.1b with bug fixes but without new features for non-subscribers."

[Walter Soyka] "If you're going to charge for new features (whether on subscription or some kind of perpetual maintenance) and if you're also going to provide bug-fixes for perpetual-only licensees for free, you need multiple development branches: one for features and bug fixes, one for base version bug fixes only.
"


the thing is you're completely wrong about all of that walter - if you listen to avid discussing it - by applying the 299 service and upgrade annual fee along with the initial perpetual license sale - they can side step sarbannes oxely and provide an identical continuous upgrade experience for both subscribers and perpetual license holders.

that is why I say adobe were lying when they said there would by necessity be an unsustainable bifurcation of development. They were lying - it was trivial for avid to setup a reasonable maintenance and service fee structure to provide a single development and upgrade path across subscription and perpetual licenses.

with respect walter - you parrotted adobe's line on this around a million times. They were lying - they had, and still have trivial implementations that would allow for the continuation of perpetual licenses allied to a maintenance and feature upgrade annual fee structure that keeps the software in development identical across perpetual and subscription.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 5:49:07 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "with respect walter - you parrotted adobe's line on this around a million times. They were lying - they had, and still have trivial implementations that would allow for the continuation of perpetual licenses allied to a maintenance and feature upgrade annual fee structure that keeps the software in development identical across perpetual and subscription."

Aindreas, I am not arguing that non-perpetual subscription is the only way to deliver new features.

In fact, quite to the contrary, I am on record on this very forum hoping for exactly such a model -- perpetual license plus maintenance -- as done by MAXON and Autodesk. Behold:

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/3/938291

The split-development problem comes if you want to offer bug fixes to non-maintenance, non-subscriber customers. This is simple logic, and this is where the duplication of resources and effort is required. Surely you're not suggesting Adobe should abandon support for non-maintenance, non-subscriber customers? Then two branches it is!

As a subscription customer, I'd rather they spend those resources working on stuff for me! I have been really quite happy with the different direction that development has been taking since the CS/CC switch.

I really can't understand why this is even still a conversation. It seems clear as day to me that if you want to release two fundamentally different builds of the same product, you need two development branches. After having done split development, Adobe made a choice to eliminate the need for one of these branches by eliminating perpetual licenses. Where on earth do we disagree?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:08:30 pm

"The split-development problem comes if you want to offer bug fixes to non-maintenance, non-subscriber customers. This is simple logic, and this is where the duplication of resources and effort is required. Surely you're not suggesting Adobe should abandon support for non-maintenance, non-subscriber customers? Then two branches it is!"

No no - you can stop right there thanks Walter. That is quite obviously exactly what I'm suggesting. Perpetual can only exist in conjunction with a service upgrade fee component. That is exactly avids approach, a very good suggestion, and ends all the lies and hot air from adobe about the impossibility of bifurcation development yada yada.

No one ever suggested what you are saying Walter. I have never baldly argued for solo perpetual licenses. Adobe just lied through their teeth that any form of retained perpetual licensing was an impossibility that would require bifurcation. They were lying. It's really easy to do, avid have just done it.

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:20:14 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "No one ever suggested what you are saying Walter. I have never baldly argued for solo perpetual licenses. Adobe just lied through their teeth that any form of retained perpetual licensing was an impossibility that would require bifurcation. They were lying. It's really easy to do, avid have just done it."

In fact, they're already doing it. If you know where to look, you can see it in the code. All they have to do is pull the trigger.

_______________________
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

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:21:21 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "That is exactly avids approach, a very good suggestion, and ends all the lies and hot air from adobe about the impossibility of bifurcation development yada yada."

Do we agree that the business model and the development model affect each other?


[Aindreas Gallagher] "Adobe just lied through their teeth that any form of retained perpetual licensing was an impossibility that would require bifurcation. They were lying. It's really easy to do, avid have just done it."

Ok... citation for this lie, please?

I really think you are missing the nuance here. If we do this, then it has this consequence. If we do that, then it has that consequence.

Here's Todd on why Adobe wants to release bug fixes for non-maintenance customers, as well as a description of when they were running both branches:
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/4278

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 7:01:39 pm
Last Edited By Aindreas Gallagher on Apr 10, 2014 at 8:29:59 pm

[Walter Soyka] "[Aindreas Gallagher] "Adobe just lied through their teeth that any form of retained perpetual licensing was an impossibility that would require bifurcation. They were lying. It's really easy to do, avid have just done it."

Ok... citation for this lie, please? "


give me a break for the love of god. Adobe trotted out that line about having to have an unsustainable twin development path at any opportunity. you repeated it yourself often enough - you even tried to do it there just now again. let's agree that isn't raised again. Or sarbannes bloody oxely seeing as how avid just waltzed through that unbreakable barrier as well.

the point, to be clear, walter is that adobe were lying about the reasons for the shift to subscriptions. they were lying about the impossibility of retaining permanent licenses. they were lying about it meaning a twin development track. They created a false argument to justify a decision based on monetary reasons.
As in they wanted to take away our licenses and make us lifetime subscribers - for the slow people in the back.

The reason I know this is because avid just met exactly the same scenario, and they have constructed an easy access 50 dollar a month subscription, just like adobe, while still maintaining and selling permanent licenses that work transparently and are upgraded in tandem with the subscription base.

Adobe lied about pretty much everything associated with the move to subscription, they lied about the motives, the mechanics, the alternatives, the impossibility of twin track approaches - they all lied about the whole thing. Dennis Raedeke lied, Todd Kopivra lied, Mike Chambers lied, and Al Mooney lied. They lied because they had to - because the company was selling a lie.

That's why I said above it was a bit depressing and dysfunctional. Pretty much everyone perceives the lie in their position at this stage. that they are constructing false narratives for the move, and lying about the alternatives available to them. They're lying, they know they're lying, and we know they're lying.

It's bad walter.

*edit* some of that came off a bit harsh - I'm not having a go at you walter, you are only offering arguments.
but I'd argue that adobe are engaged in the big lie.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 8:31:18 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "give me a break for the love of god. Adobe trotted out that line about having to have an unsustainable twin development path at any opportunity. you repeated it yourself often enough - you even tried to do it there just now again. let's agree that isn't raised again. Or sarbannes bloody oxely seeing as how avid just waltzed through that unbreakable barrier as well."

Aindreas, it is and has always been my position that these were choices. Adobe had other options available to them. That doesn't mean that then explanations of the benefits of CC are unique to CC, or that the presence of other options makes them lies.

I don't think anyone from Adobe has ever said that a multi-branch path was "unsustainable;" just that fewer branches allow them to allocate more resources to new stuff. (I'll add there are still actually multiple branches, as Adobe is still delivering bug fixes for CS6.)

Likewise, SOX was not "unbreakable." CS, which only offered new features on paid upgrades, was also able to blithely ignore it on perpetual licenses.

Sidebar: I'm hoping to make a trip out London this summer. Maybe we could meet up for a pint, debate this properly, then sing songs of the legend of FCP?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 8:58:33 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Sidebar: I'm hoping to make a trip out London this summer. Maybe we could meet up for a pint, debate this properly, then sing songs of the legend of FCP?"

yaaayy. yes please soyka. I'll try and dig up mr. ubsdell sure?

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 5:00:42 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "yaaayy. yes please soyka. I'll try and dig up mr. ubsdell sure?
"


You have to make this a UK COW meet, would be a riot!

Steve Connor

Class Bully


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 5:08:06 pm

[Steve Connor] "You have to make this a UK COW meet, would be a riot!"

I'd love to meet the dulcet tones and the class bully, too! I'll touch base with you gents if this trip happens; if not, I hope you'll carry on without me.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 8:31:36 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "They're lying"

Just to parse things a bit more. A lie entails an intent to deceive. Without an intent to deceive, the "lie" is a delusion. You've pretty solidly pinned down the issues and one ought to note which entities in the Adobe hegemony are deceitful and which are deluded.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 12:17:56 am

they set out to construct a lie richard. a big deliberate company wide lie about motivation and intent. A lot of the problem here is that all of their representatives are stuck with the lie. adobe were very comfortable constructing it, and they seem bloody minded about holding on to it.

somebody pointed out that in an intimate industry like post - and you only have to check out the aotg live feeds to get a sense of that intimacy - there is a kind of handshake between vendor and customer. people tend to be nice people, we're not bankers, and the problem is that adobe are aggresively lying to everyone on a grand scale.

they are also flushing around 5 million future avid style license to-license-with-tied-subscriptions down the toilet.

looking at it with hindsight - and avid's come hither to license holders of avid software to come into the license ownership with tied subscription , it also looks so stupid and unnecessary on adobe's part. To my understanding, from scott simmon's interview, avid are holding this open to all previous avid license holders.

in the end, on adobe's part, this feels like a destructive machismo lead management experiment to prove the point that they could construct a false premise in order to brutalise an entire base of license holders into forced open ended subscription. it's starting to feel crass, unnecessary and moronic.

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 2:25:26 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "in the end, on adobe's part, this feels like a destructive machismo lead management experiment to prove the point that they could construct a false premise in order to brutalise an entire base of license holders into forced open ended subscription. it's starting to feel crass, unnecessary and moronic."

Well said.

Again, here's a reminder of the kind management we're talking about:






_______________________
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

Chris Pettit
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 3:02:01 am

[David Lawrence] "Again, here's a reminder of the kind management we're talking about:"

Why is it that every time I see that video I'm just as disgusted and appalled as the first time I saw it? As you said David, all due sympathy for the front line people at Adobe (most of them anyway). But how can anyone watch this video and not be shocked at what Adobe management has become and the corporate culture they've fostered?

Classic Frankenstein tale here. We helped create this monster with our dollars, our loyalty, our devotion to the tools, the ecosystem and formats and our advocacy. When I think of my own evangelism for that same ecosystem over the last few years I could kick myself for trusting these people...

And now look at where we are.

"Power corrupts - Absolute power corrupts absolutely"


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 8:20:10 am

[Chris Pettit] "Classic Frankenstein tale here. We helped create this monster with our dollars, our loyalty, our devotion to the tools, the ecosystem and formats and our advocacy. When I think of my own evangelism for that same ecosystem over the last few years I could kick myself for trusting these people..."

Exactly right, Chris.

You may remember around this time two years ago when I wrote this article for the COW:

http://library.creativecow.net/lawrence_david/CS6-Premiere-Pro_First-Impres...

I was quoted on Adobe's website in the "Industry Reviews" section for Premiere Pro CS6

I evangelized Premiere Pro CS6 to everyone I met in the industry, including colleagues, teachers and students. Anyone who worked with FCP Legacy.

I ended that article saying this:
"Finally, I'm confident in Adobe because of Adobe's unprecedented transparency and open communication. I can't think of another technology company of this size and reach where the actual managers directly involved in product development - guys like Dennis Radeke, Dave McGavran, and Todd Kopriva - actively and publicly converse with their customers, answering questions and asking for feedback on a regular basis. By openly communicating, respecting my professional expertise and listening to my professional needs, Adobe has earned my business and my trust."
Oops.

Funny how things change.

I still have the highest respect for all the guys I name checked, but I'll never trust the Adobe Corporation again.

Now instead of being an evangelist, I do everything I can to steer anyone interested away from CC. I make sure people understand that with CC in its current form, you pay rent to Adobe forever and if you ever stop paying rent, you lose the ability to open your native files. Once people get it, their reaction is almost always the same - compete disgust with the business model. (I do let them know that they can still buy CS6 but strongly encourage looking outside the Adobe ecosystem).

Now multiply this kind of word-of-mouth by thousands of people like me. Long term, I can't imagine this will work out the way Mr. Narayen and the Adobe board expect.

It's really a shame on so many levels.

_______________________
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

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 9:38:55 am

[David Lawrence] "I make sure people understand that with CC in its current form, you pay rent to Adobe forever and if you ever stop paying rent, you lose the ability to open your native files."

Native files? Surely that's not how you are phrasing it, because to me that sounds like you can't open your AVCHD, XDCam EX, ProRes, WAV, AIFF, ect. files.

But I guess that sounds more ominous than "the program won't launch unless you re-subscribe"?


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 11:49:46 am
Last Edited By Rainer Schubert on Apr 11, 2014 at 12:08:50 pm

You can´t open many Adobe-Files with full support of all functions with Non-Adobe Appications.
You can´t open a premiere CC file with any other software than Premiere CC (Even CS6 can´t).
You have to convert your project (but it´s not possible to keep all functionalities by doing so).
No Application, that can open Photoshop-Files with FULL functionality (Without baking 3D or Layers....)
Flash, Illustrator, InDesign... There are ways AND problems!
And regarding to it´s EULA Adobe can change this (ability to be opened by other Applications) to make it completely impossible whenever they want to.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 5:44:20 pm

[Rainer Schubert] "You can´t open many Adobe-Files with full support of all functions with Non-Adobe Appications.
You can´t open a premiere CC file with any other software than Premiere CC (Even CS6 can´t).
You have to convert your project (but it´s not possible to keep all functionalities by doing so).
No Application, that can open Photoshop-Files with FULL functionality (Without baking 3D or Layers....)
Flash, Illustrator, InDesign... There are ways AND problems!
And regarding to it´s EULA Adobe can change this (ability to be opened by other Applications) to make it completely impossible whenever they want to."


This. ^

_______________________
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

Chris Pettit
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 3:50:01 am

[David Lawrence] "I evangelized Premiere Pro CS6 to everyone I met in the industry, including colleagues, teachers and students. Anyone who worked with FCP Legacy."

Sorry I didn't respond earlier David, crazy week, even worse day.

I actually had not seen this article previously, I really enjoyed ready your insights! Puts my previous comments about evangelism to shame frankly. In my little pond it has been all word of mouth only. Your contribution to Adobe's success is much more wide spread.

I would think that Adobe would be particularly worried about perspectives like yours David, having contributed so much to the wide acceptance of their ecosystem.

Here's to hoping Adobe has the sense to re-acquire you as an ally.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 14, 2014 at 6:29:25 am

[Chris Pettit] "I actually had not seen this article previously, I really enjoyed ready your insights! Puts my previous comments about evangelism to shame frankly. In my little pond it has been all word of mouth only. Your contribution to Adobe's success is much more wide spread.

I would think that Adobe would be particularly worried about perspectives like yours David, having contributed so much to the wide acceptance of their ecosystem."


Chris - many thanks for your very kind words.

In the bigger scheme of things, I don't know if my influence is all that great - especially with Adobe management - but I will say that when I wrote that article and until May 7 of last year, I was incredibly excited and happy about the direction of Premiere Pro and Adobe; and made sure to tell every video maker I knew. It was especially nice feeling enthused and positive after my disappointment with FCPX. Premiere Pro CS6 made it easy for me (and I think many other Legacy devotees) to move on and feel good.

This thread has generated a lot of heat for a reason. In one fell swoop, Avid demolished many technical and legal rationalizations for Adobe's highly controversial move to subscription-only licensing. Avid shows one way it's trivially simple for Adobe to create a win-win situation. There are others as well.

I hope we'll see some sort of win-win "tweak" from Adobe soon, so we can go back to talking about great software and workflows, rather than debating business models!

Tim - your guidance is always appreciated, many thanks for providing us this forum for debate.

_______________________
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: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 14, 2014 at 7:05:14 am

[David Lawrence] "This thread has generated a lot of heat for a reason. "

On that, there's no debate from me.


[David Lawrence] "In one fell swoop, Avid demolished many technical and legal rationalizations for Adobe's highly controversial move to subscription-only licensing. Avid shows one way it's trivially simple for Adobe to create a win-win situation. There are others as well."

And there we have a sharply observed summary of the entire thread.


[David Lawrence] "I hope we'll see some sort of win-win "tweak" from Adobe soon, so we can go back to talking about great software and workflows, rather than debating business models!"

And THERE we have a sharply observed summary of the entire history of the forum.


[David Lawrence] "Tim - your guidance is always appreciated, many thanks for providing us this forum for debate."

Thank you, David. You're very generous. I post here and in the FCPX Debate forum as much as I do because I LIKE mixing it up. I'm a very emotional guy, loud and profane. I enjoy what happens when creative people with strong opinions differ. I know how hard it is to keep conversations like these productive, and I appreciate how rarely they run off the rails.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 14, 2014 at 10:09:37 am

[David Lawrence] "In one fell swoop, Avid demolished many technical and legal rationalizations for Adobe's highly controversial move to subscription-only licensing."

Demolished? How?

We've seen the dual licensing option (perpetual and subscription) before. Adobe themselves did it. We've discussed this here at length.

We've seen maintenance before. There is a long history of maintenance on professional software, from companies like Autodesk and MAXON. We've discussed this here at length, too.

Adobe and Avid have chosen paths for faster feature delivery and faster revenue recognition with a different sets of benefits and costs to their customers.

What Avid is doing shows there are other ways, which we already knew to be true, but it doesn't show that anything that anyone from Adobe has claimed is untrue. Making Creative Cloud subscription-only was a choice that Adobe made, and I don't think anyone here has ever claimed otherwise. I asked Aindreas to put up or shut up on this point above.

Going subscription-only has both advantages and disadvantages for Adobe's customers. We have covered the disadvantages in considerable depth here, but there are advantages. For the sake of argument, I'll limit my discussion of advantages and disadvantages to the Avid comparison (which makes this a partial list on both sides).

Adobe customers have no choice in licensing model. There is a greater emphasis on new feature development and delivery. Nearly all development resources are dedicated to moving the software forward, and there is no increase in the number of different versions to support with development resources.

Avid customers will have greater choice in licensing than Adobe customers. There is a greater emphasis on new feature development and delivery. One of two outcomes also necessarily follows: Avid will either support non-subscription/maintenance customers with bug fixes, taking resources away from the development that subscription/maintenance customers are presumably paying to see, or Avid will no longer provide bug fixes to non-subscription/maintenance customers, devoting all development resources to subscription/maintenance customers and leaving non-subscription/maintenance (but paid!) customers with less support in a buyer-beware scenario.

These offerings are different, and they have different advantages and disadvantages.

The "technical and legal rationalizations" around new feature releases -- multiple development branches and SOX -- are real. Ask Avid how real SOX is with respect to recognizing revenue around new features [link].

We continually talk about Creative Cloud as if it were only a sales model. It is not. It is a strategy that affects the marketing, design, development and sale of the creative products and services offered to us.

To me, this is Adobe's biggest failure in the CC launch. Adobe has flat-out failed to differentiate CC from CS on anything other than sales terms. Adobe has failed to show how CC can provide value that CS was not. As long as CC looks so much like CS, we'll keep arguing about it as if it were just new versions of the same old offering.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 14, 2014 at 12:53:54 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Avid will either support non-subscription/maintenance customers with bug fixes, taking resources away from the development that subscription/maintenance customers are presumably paying to see, or Avid will no longer provide bug fixes to non-subscription/maintenance customers, devoting all development resources to subscription/maintenance customers and leaving non-subscription/maintenance (but paid!) customers with less support in a buyer-beware scenario."

again - this is all incorrect to the point of being obfuscatory. You are deliberately creating straw men here. Avid's position is perfectly clear, the difficulties you are trying to create, again and again again in repeated replies exist solely in your head walter. You keep clinging to imaginary non maintenance licenses so you can keep parrotting adobe's line on bifurcation of effort. You actually need to stop doing that Walter. Seriously.

Avid have a clear goal - to transition their license base to license with maintenance subscription upgrade annual fee, in conjunction with a compelling fifty dollar a month subscription service. It's what is commonly termed a win win. They are not flushing millions of license holders down the toilet, and they have all the exact same advantages to hand that adobe espouse - timely delivery, avoidance sarbannes oxely, reliable revenue streams.

you can keep distorting the situation adobe faced and their reaction to it until you are blue in the face walter - there is absolutely no getting around the contrast and significance of the comparative approaches taken by adobe and avid. Or the likely truth or otherwise, in hindsight, of the justifications given by adobe in voiding all the licenses.

[Walter Soyka] "I asked Aindreas to put up or shut up on this point above."

Well as i recall it I broadly shut you down walter... but I'll keep at it as necessary ;)

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 14, 2014 at 3:02:58 pm

Aindreas, perhaps I am miscommunicating something, because this all seems straightforward to me.

If we should continue this discussion, please indulge me: what is it that you think my point is? What is the argument that you think I'm putting forward?

I think that your argument is a strawman. I think that you are claiming that Adobe has claimed CC was necessary, and that Avid's recent moves disprove that.

However, I don't see anywhere where anyone from Adobe has made such a claim that their solution in CC was the only possible one, or that the benefits of CC are exclusive to a subsription-only. What exactly is the claim you are saying Avid is disproving?

I think it's very straightforward that CC was a choice Adobe made, and I think we've discussed some of the implications (pro and con) of that choice. Where do we disagree?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 14, 2014 at 3:29:59 pm

Adobe declared, their change was made with max. Advantages for the customers.
And that their solution is (if not the only...) the best way to deliver fast updates.
Now we see (AVID), there are solutions (may be not as profitable), to bring in these advantages, but without all the lags like the missing exit.
All the advantages and with respect to customer needs. All that would make this whole discussion unnecessary.
That gives the declarations a very bitter taste.
Also showing, that Adobes big change of distribution and image was not driven by max. customer satisfaction (as they stated).
Or?


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 14, 2014 at 1:37:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Avid will either support non-subscription/maintenance customers with bug fixes, taking resources away from the development"
Ey, come on... These bugfixes are developed anyway. They only have to deliver in two ways. May be it takes some resources, but I can´t imagine, that´s relevant compared to the advantages, you´ll get with it:
Freedom of choice
Ability to use projects after subscriptions without further costs
You are not left in the rain, after quitting

[Walter Soyka] "We've seen the dual licensing option (perpetual and subscription) before"
Avids Thing is different. It´s like buying CS & a fee for CC simultaneous Updates. It´s dynamic.
OR: CC with an Exit-Door (so many are missing).

[Walter Soyka] "but it doesn't show that anything that anyone from Adobe has claimed is untrue"
If not untrue (I remember statements like "...otherwise we are not able to deliver upgrades that fast - but I haven´t the time for searching), then their way of communicating this item is XXL-misleading.
" and I don't think anyone here has ever claimed otherwise." I´m one of these anyones who really thought they couldn´t do it an other way in the beginning of this discussion.
Phrases like "You will never lose access to your files!", The name "Cloud" (what´s really cloud computing here?) and so on... also nebulizing.
"Buy CS6 - it will be the last upgradeable-version to the next version" (how to describe without forbidden words - which, I got it, are necessary)...?

[Walter Soyka] "We continually talk about Creative Cloud as if it were only a sales model. It is not. It is a strategy that affects the marketing, design, development and sale of the creative products and services offered to us."
Yes ...and also a strategy (first in my eyes) that offers advantages to Adobe.
It affects the customer binding, the choice someone has to leave this so called cloud (to change the product), the dependency on Applications.
Last not least it affects the behavior of other distributers, if it comes to a financial success - which (Adobe is Nr 7 of software developers worldwide) can take effect in software distribution in total.

[Walter Soyka] "Adobe has flat-out failed to differentiate CC from CS on anything other than sales terms. Adobe has failed to show how CC can provide value that CS was not."
Funny. Sales terms: Financially there are no benefits, as nothing got cheaper (and everyone is on MasterCollection Level now - if necessary or not).
And Value: Yes, may be, fast delivered updates are an advantage for some, but...
I can´t imagine, they only forgot to tell us...
and also, that this is as big, that it can justify the whole thing (for most of users - never had a problem with upgrade periods).

[Walter Soyka] "As long as CC looks so much like CS, we'll keep arguing about it as if it were just new versions of the same old offering."
In my eyes it is a new version of the same old thing. And why is CC still looking like CS (?) as Adobe had so much time to change this(!).
Apps are the same. Cloud functions are like adding a few syncs and a little bit online storage, etc.
There was no real product change other than the product updates before (OK - & may be a little bit more than before ...but only for the Video-Users).
Only faster delivered. And a different distribution.
Btw: I can´t understand why Adobe wasn´t able or willing to make all this Apps more familiar through the last years.
Every Apps behavior is so different (Like the layers in PS, InDesign, Illustrator,... PathHandles, GUIs).
You can still feel, that they are all developed by other companies and only bought by Adobe.
There were only little modifications made, to make them a real big, familiar thing.
(Bridge? Hm! ColorMgmt? OK. And further?)
Fast delivered updates are not enough, in my eyes, to see a fundamental change here.

[Walter Soyka] "Adobe and Avid have chosen paths for faster feature delivery and faster revenue recognition with a different sets of benefits and costs to their customers."
...and costs/profits for themselves.
OK. Every company is looking for profit and should do so.
But their financial reports state simply and clear, that this move has financial motivated roots (like higher profit & a more foreseeable income).
OK. Nothing against that.
But without the appropriate benefits for users (OK, OK, there are some very lucky, having their party on this cloud... But please don´t ignore that there are also some for whom this is simply not acceptable, standing with two feet on the ground), might be a risky game.

Time will tell if these benefits are appropriate or not...


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 12:43:16 am

[Walter Soyka] "What Avid is doing shows there are other ways, which we already knew to be true, but it doesn't show that anything that anyone from Adobe has claimed is untrue. Making Creative Cloud subscription-only was a choice that Adobe made, and I don't think anyone here has ever claimed otherwise."

Allow me to put up, on behalf of all of us who have been told to shut up ;)



http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/6616

[David Lawrence] "Bingo. The Sorbane-Oxley argument is a red herring."


http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/6620

[Todd Kopriva] "
No, it's not. It's a central factor.

It's late at night here, and I don't want to retype all of the explanations that have already been typed on this forum that you're dismissing. All that I can say is that we were _severely_ restricted by these accounting regulations before, and now we are not... entirely because you are no longer paying for a specific version of software; you are paying for a subscription that gives you access to whatever software we have available. This allows me to talk publicly with you about the future versions in detail and it allows me to release a feature when it's ready, without needing to go back and restate my earnings for the entire quarter in which you paid for the software."



http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/4257

[Todd Kopriva] "US law and accounting regulations that are consequences of those laws make it so that we were previously very strictly prohibited from releasing features for a product for which you had already paid in full...

...If you don't want to believe me, I can't make you. I can just say again that as someone who makes software and wants to give the greatest value to the greatest number of people, this has taken the chains off of us, and we are happily and freely doing the work that we've wanted to do for a long time."



http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/2132

[walter biscardi] "Further update, and thanks to Ryan Holmes for pointing this out to me. The law I refer to in my blog post is the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (I'm updating the blog now) and both Apple's App Store and Adobe Creative Cloud get around the law. "


http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/1223

[Todd Kopriva] "I'm afraid that it may have been missed in the middle of a long post, so I'll urge everyone to read Walter's paragraph about Sarbanes-Oxley, above. He nailed it. This is the main reason that we on the After Effects team are so happy with this change.

Now, we can deliver features whenever we choose, and we can communicate more freely about it, without running afoul of accounting and legal issues related to revenue recognition."




There are more posts like these, you get the drift. The implied argument being Sarbanes-Oxley forced Adobe to go with the current CC model - subscription-only with no perpetual exit.

Pay rent forever or your software stops working. Don't like it? Move on.

Avid just demolished this argument.

There's only one reason Adobe chose to not allow a fair, perpetual exit strategy for their customers.

It has nothing to do with Sarbanes-Oxley.

It has nothing to do with dual development and support.

It has nothing to do faster development or lower prices.

It's simple really.

It's because the seventh largest software corporation on Planet Earth wants to guarantee recurring revenue to shareholders by locking in all customers.

Subscription-based delivery is an appropriate and fantastic option for many people and organizations. I don't think anyone denies that. But no software company in history has ever tried to force its entire user base - up to 12 million users, in this case - to rent forever or lose access to their programs and work.

Pay rent forever or your software stops working. Don't like it? Move on.

These terms are unacceptable to me and millions of other former Adobe customers.

Avid demonstrates a simple way for Adobe to win us back. It can happen tomorrow if Shantanu Narayen and his board of directors want it to.

_______________________
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: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 12:50:29 am

agree 100%


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 2:20:43 am

I am having a tough time with comparing Avid Perpetual + maintenance to Adobe CC, perhaps because I don't understand the full extent of it.

The way I am thinking about it, Avid hasn't really demolished anything. Avid support maintenance and Adobe CC are very different products and solve different issues.

Adobe CC is made up of a lot of different programs. I think It is safe to assume that these programs don't have the same developers, development strategies, development goals, and certainly don't have the same development schedules. CC allows all of these disparate teams to develop the features as needed, or what's best for the development process, and release them when they are ready. The CS model did not allow for this.

Avid, on the other hand, is closer to one product (Media Composer and now Symphony) and then they have a bunch of third party partners that help fill in gaps with encoding, effects, etc, that are bundled with MC. You receive the lite versions, but you can upgrade to other versions.

This is a very interesting read if you haven't read it:

http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/faq/Media-Composer-8-FAQ#1

And here's the license and support contracts spelled out in further detail:

http://www.avid.com/static/resources/common/documents/datasheets/Media_Comp...

Avid ALSO lists development as an advantage to the support license subscription to release what's ready when it's ready instead of waiting for the next big version.

What is confusing to me, is how they can get around SOX, and be able to release features that haven't been accounted for, unless they aren't really selling a perpetual license, but a yearly rental that expires, and the customer gets to keep it at the end of the rental period.

If I am a new Avid customer, I can't sign up for $50/mo unless I'm in for a year. Alternatively, I have to give Avid, $1300, and $299/year after that if I want to maintain the updates, or sign up for $75/mo for a month-to-month, cancel at any time (but I don't get to keep the software).

So, obviously, this could have been an option for Adobe. But perhaps they thought this wasn't enough value? This means that new customers would have had to buy the Master Collection, and then pay a yearly fee to maintain the updates. I am complaining now about having to pay for a bunch of things I don't want in CC. If Adobe offered perpetual + maintenance, hypothetically, I would have to pony up for the Master Collection at $2600, and then have a yearly maintenance fee. If and when I stop my subscription, I would have a big slew of products with various version numbers depending on when I choose to stop the maintenance plan.

When I work with other artists that use CC and share project files, we would have to compare versions of all the applications and figure out how to get everything on a version that will open everything we need.

CC alleviates all of that as everyone is always current with everything.

I'm not saying that Adobe couldn't have offered perpetual + maintenance support, I'm sure they can, but it seems to me that Avid subscription and Adobe subscription need to solve very different issues, and true Avid MC software subscription and CC are exactly the same, with Avid being $25/mo more expensive on a month-to-month plan.

Perhaps another reason Adobe didn't do this means that they'd have to setup an honest to goodness support system. Perhaps they knew the system they have now isn't worth the money. Sorry Adobe, the support line is a maze of uncertainty every time I have used it.

Let's say Adobe DID do this, would we be better off?

What am I missing?

Jeremy


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 3:25:06 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Adobe CC is made up of a lot of different programs. I think It is safe to assume that these programs don't have the same developers, development strategies, development goals, and certainly don't have the same development schedules. CC allows all of these disparate teams to develop the features as needed, or what's best for the development process, and release them when they are ready. The CS model did not allow for this."

Yes, but this doesn't change the fact that removing a perpetual option is a choice, not a requirement in a subscription-model.

[Jeremy Garchow] "This is a very interesting read if you haven't read it:

http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/faq/Media-Composer-8-FAQ#1

And here's the license and support contracts spelled out in further detail:

http://www.avid.com/static/resources/common/documents/datasheets/Media_Comp.....

Avid ALSO lists development as an advantage to the support license subscription to release what's ready when it's ready instead of waiting for the next big version."


The perpetual option looks like a great deal. All the benefits of the subscription option, only $100 more expensive after three years, and most important of all, you get to keep the software after you stop paying.

It's not rocket science. The only reason Adobe isn't offering the same thing is because they don't want to.

[Jeremy Garchow] "What is confusing to me, is how they can get around SOX, and be able to release features that haven't been accounted for, unless they aren't really selling a perpetual license, but a yearly rental that expires, and the customer gets to keep it at the end of the rental period."

I'm not a tax lawyer, but my guess is they're selling fixes and features as a service. The only difference is the software keeps working after you stop paying for the service. Adobe can start doing this tomorrow.

[Jeremy Garchow] "When I work with other artists that use CC and share project files, we would have to compare versions of all the applications and figure out how to get everything on a version that will open everything we need.

CC alleviates all of that as everyone is always current with everything."


As long as you're on the same major release (CC 7, 8, etc.) all dot releases will be compatible.

But major releases are a different matter. Are you really gonna make a major upgrade to your mission-critcal systems in the middle of production? I don't think CC alleviates anything in actual practice.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Perhaps another reason Adobe didn't do this means that they'd have to setup an honest to goodness support system. Perhaps they knew the system they have now isn't worth the money. Sorry Adobe, the support line is a maze of uncertainty every time I have used it."

So true!

[Jeremy Garchow] "Let's say Adobe DID do this, would we be better off?

What am I missing? "


I sure think so!

_______________________
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

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 3:59:07 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Apr 17, 2014 at 9:46:07 pm

If you want to continue this subthread, please join us here:

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/7570



Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 4:29:00 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[long example scenario] or offer the suite as a service"

Jeremy,

I'm not sure why you're willfully ignoring counter examples of needs, assessments, and values, but the way you frame this as either/or seems particularly tone deaf to the ongoing discussion.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 4:41:23 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Apr 15, 2014 at 4:42:26 pm

You can't give people the Master Collection for one $50 payment. We can agree on that, right?

Avid can't give you Media Composer 8 for one monthly $75 payment.

The general sentiment here is that Adobe is lying (sorry Tim). Or that SOX is the ONLY reason that they couldn't offer some sort of perpetual + maintenance license. I haven't found anything to back that up. The links that Lawrence posted to Todd's posts said it was a central factor, not the only factor.

In fact, if you actually if you compare the two subscription models of CC and Media Composer, they are really very similar. Avid is actually more expensive to new customers at $75/mo (AND YOU DON'T GET TO KEEP THE SOFTWARE).

I thought that I have suggested, many times over, that this isn't the only way that Adobe could have presented their model, but it is merely a logical way.

I will maintain that Adobe CC clients and Avid clients have different needs. Adobe's suite is huge and services a vast amount of differing disciplines, and with that, comes a different need in order for Adobe to service those clients.

Avid's customers also have different needs.

I hear the concerns that video editors have with Adobe CC. I am one of those voices.

I have asked, on my first response, what I am missing. So I'll ask again, what am I missing? Or are you simply saying you don't agree with me?

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 4:54:45 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "The general sentiment here is that Adobe is ..."

Jeremy,

The general sentiment here is that there is a desire for alternatives to perpetual rental, and that there seem to be viable alternative models.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 5:09:07 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "The general sentiment here is that there is a desire for alternatives to perpetual rental, and that there seem to be viable alternative models."

And I am tone deaf to that? How so, please?

I explained, if Adobe follows Avid's Maintenace model:

The method I have laid out, is $2700 for the Master Collection for a year's worth of use, and $400-$500/yr renewal.

This entitles you to a year of Adobe support, a year of updates, and a download of all states of Adobe CC apps at the end of your contract.

Remember, you are renewing a support contract in this case. With the support contract comes software updates.

Have you ever called Adobe support?


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 5:18:23 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I explained, if Adobe follows Avid's Maintenace model ..."

Jeremy,

Your particular arbitrary choices in the given example aside, I am confident that the teams in management at Adobe will be able to come up with something to address the issue.

... if they put their minds to it.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 5:40:01 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Your particular arbitrary choices in the given example aside, I am confident that the teams in management at Adobe will be able to come up with something to address the issue.

... if they put their minds to it."


Wait.

The sudden gold standard of subscription is Avid. Lawrence has referenced it, Gallagher has referenced it, others have referenced it.

The above was my reaction, putting it in to words as to what you are really paying for, and what you really get.

Here it is again, this time shorter and to the point:

If you aren't signing up for the Avid Media Composer subscription plan, which is very similar to Adobe CC (and more expensive), you are then buying a yearly support contract. Adobe CC does not offer ANY support contracts for single users, Avid has always offered support contracts. They have a business model that is centered around monetized support. Adobe has contracts for enterprise/teams CC, and per incident packs of support for CS.

How is this arbitrary?

Please, if you don't mind, offer an alternative to the Avid maintenance subscription option.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 5:55:47 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "The sudden gold standard of subscription is Avid."

Jeremy,

I'm no connoisseur of rental options, but I'm not sure referencing something is the same thing as establishing a standard. Who is trying to establish a gold standard of rental options?

[Jeremy Garchow] "If you aren't signing up for the Avid Media Composer subscription plan, which is very similar to Adobe CC (and more expensive), you are then buying a yearly support contract."

Is there a reason you don't want to discuss purchasing a perpetual license from Avid?

[Jeremy Garchow] "They have a business model that is centered around monetized support."

Well, according to Oliver and Craig, they have a business model that is centered on selling hardware (personally, I'm more swayed by the hardware argument). But in truth, as they've not really told anyone anything in a while, we can't really say what their current business model is.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Please, if you don't mind, offer an alternative to the Avid maintenance subscription option."

You could try the Avid forum? Or write Avid directly?

Most in this forum are advocating for an alternative from Adobe's perpetual rental model, usually involving some sort of perpetual license purchase, often called an "off-ramp" strategy.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:09:55 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "I'm no connoisseur of rental options, but I'm not sure referencing something is the same thing as establishing a standard. Who is trying to establish a gold standard of rental options?"

I would encourage you to look back at the threads, noting that Avid is consistently mentioned as offering a viable alternative to the Adobe CC model.

I decided to check out what exactly it is you are paying for and applied that model to Adobe CC using CS6 prices.

Is that stupid? What am I missing?

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Is there a reason you don't want to discuss purchasing a perpetual license from Avid?"

Are you saying I haven't discussed it? I'm pretty sure I have. I laid out the maintenance subscription plan, I laid out the Media Composer plan, and linked to Media Composer pricing.

I offered why Adobe might not want to offer a perpetual license plan due to the differing numbers of versions they'd have to keep up. Walter has commented on that before, so rather than re-hash all of that, I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that you have read what he has to say, and what Adbe has said about maintaining perpetual and subscription. That forced me to look at the two companies offerings. Avid and Adobe offer different services to different markets, so therefore, I can hypothesize that Adobe chooses not to offer the same options as Avid.

[Franz Bieberkopf] "You could try the Avid forum? Or write Avid directly?

Most in this forum are advocating for an alternative from Adobe's perpetual rental model, usually involving some sort of perpetual license purchase, often called an "off-ramp" strategy."


I feel like we are chasing our own tails. I have laid Avid's off-ramp out, plain and simply, to the best of my knowledge, comparing it to what Adobe CC is offering because people in this forum and others keep comparing Adobe CC to Avid. It is a different product from Adobe CC.


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:18:48 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Most in this forum are advocating for an alternative from Adobe's perpetual rental model, usually involving some sort of perpetual license purchase, often called an "off-ramp" strategy."

Not true: Being silent is not equal to "most people in this forum", which mainly comes across as a place where "advocating" rhymes with moaning.

I always regret ticking the option for notification here, as it just ends up being an endless stream of depressed owners of CS6 having the same crawl over old ground.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:41:31 pm

Not most users on this forum?
And how to take all silent members into account?
There were several surveys about subscription versus perpetual.
So: Most users in total.
If to decide between your "deep depressed" versus "Simply let them do whatever they want to..."
hm?


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 8:35:52 pm

As I said: I always regret ticking the option for notification here, as it just ends up being an endless stream of depressed owners of CS6 having the same crawl over old ground.

And as I said in a separate reply to you; surveys doesn't count for much if they cover less than 0.02% of the customers and doesn't really show wide enough area of the global user base....

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 3:05:02 am

You have a better idea?

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1, Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Pro X 10.1.1, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.5, Premiere Pro CS 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K, Avid MC, 2013 Mac Pro Hexacore, 1 TB SSD, 64GB RAM, 2-D500: 2012 Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 16GB RAM 250GB SSD


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 5:16:11 am

Hey Jim,

[Jim Wiseman] "You have a better idea?"

For what? Maybe "opinion" would be a better word to use in that question ;-)

As I have said elsewhere; the market will dictate whether Adobe's new model is successful or not. Adobe are the only ones who are getting a real-time status and who (I hope) knows whom their clients are. So any amount of minuscule independent surveys will not cut it.

I am sure that you for one would agree that if you put a link in this forum to a "How happy are you with the Adobe CC initiative", it probably based on the majority of vehement outbursts in here, would not come out in favour of Adobe?

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 5:23:00 am

I think it is pretty apparent that most are not satisfied with the current model, and not just on this section of the cow. A huge number of users are not subscribing to CC and forced rental. Work that disappears when you quit paying is just not acceptable.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1, Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Pro X 10.1.1, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.5, Premiere Pro CS 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K, Avid MC, 2013 Mac Pro Hexacore, 1 TB SSD, 64GB RAM, 2-D500: 2012 Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 16GB RAM 250GB SSD


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 5:40:32 am

Hey Jim,

In all fairness, you need to define "most" - who are they? Mostly I only see the same few people in here that keeps on bashing the same issue.

The number I'm more interested in is the there used to for every one licensed copy of Adobe, there used to be approximately 8 pirated versions in the market. Have this number been reduced? And will those users that didn't like to pay, now be inclined to pay for using the software?

Also, I agree that it is a pain that you can't open projects once you stop the subscription. However, you are able to pay on a monthly basis so it will always be possible to open and access those files, which in effect means that none of them would disappear. The question is whether you build in to your T&C that your client(s) have to carry the cost, should they wish you to open old projects?
Do keep in mind that your source footage should still be accessible, and so could any masters that you may render out - and those could be done out in a clean and a dirty version, just like the good old days of mastering to tape.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 10:21:19 am

Define most?

There were/are 12+ Mil registered perpetual users (who have paid for the Software)
[...and (if I trust your words) you have to multiply with 8 (the pirates) to get the total amount of perpetual Creative users = 96 Mil* LOL]
There are 1.8 Mil. Subscription (Marketing Cloud & Creative Cloud) users (1.2 Full product / 0.6 Single Products).
This so called "Cloud" is available since early 2012.
Before they killed the option of perpetual in 2013 there were only 480 k, who were interested in this.
(Not sure if they liked the distribution or just loved the (felt) low entrance price)
Since you are forced to buy this so called "Cloud" product (not because you like it - there simply is no other UpToDate Software available without subscription), there are a few more buying it.
And that under the condition of never ending discounts. Adobe salesforce did a lot for that at the enterprises.
It´s not an overwhelming success in my eyes, that 2 years after the introduction of this so called "Cloud", there are still nearby 50% of revenue based on a two years old perpetual software (!!!).
Software which may be useless with one of the updates of the next generation OS.
People, who like advantages like the ability to open files (they have created) without any additional costs, whenever they want.

That´s my definition of most.
May be, you can explain, why the users are not buying Adobes "Solutions" like hell (if "most" of them like it that much...)
Why Adobe (really) had to kill the choice?
So I simply don´t need any survey to know, if people like it or not.
And my personal contacts - as I have written - tell me the same (in a way I would call "Image Disaster").
People who jumped on the train, did it, because they felt "they have to" or "must".
It´s so obvious what´s the game here...
It´s so obvious that it´s financial driven (financials of Adobe)
It´s so obvious that it brings dependency (hard to carry - and without future guaranties)
And I wonder, what happens, at the moment, when their transition is completed & enough users in the boat (cloud).
The moment, it isn´t necessary any more, to give discounts, hold the things compatible, deliver that amount of updates...
Time will tell.
The next one to two years will show.

And btW: It simply doesn´t matter WHO is paying for additional costs (my client or me), for the ability to open and edit my own creations.
It matters, that there ARE costs.
Your examples of Master-Files and final Renderings belong to the Video Tools only - Not transferreable to Print- or Web- Apps.
And also: Most (or some (?) - don´t want to explain again : ) people want FULL access to their archived files.

On this note - best to you also.

*)PS.: I´m not alone with my opinion, that Adobe "used" piracy to reach his nr. one market position. And ignored (more than they should) for a long time.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:23:41 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "I am confident that the teams in management at Adobe will be able to come up with something to address the issue."

What? Really? Or are you just using the hypothetical future as pretend evidence and position? Folks 'round these here parts been rantin' against the managers at NASDAQ:ADBE for pert-near a year. I guess a bit of faith-restored ain't so shabby. ;)


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:43:38 pm

[Richard Herd] "What? Really?"

Richard,

Well, the conditional phrase would be the key here.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Kevin Monahan
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 5:23:43 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Perhaps another reason Adobe didn't do this means that they'd have to setup an honest to goodness support system. Perhaps they knew the system they have now isn't worth the money. Sorry Adobe, the support line is a maze of uncertainty every time I have used it."

[David Lawrence] "So true!"


Hi guys,
As the DV Support Lead for Adobe, I'm sorry to hear that our support has let you down in the past. For that, I apologize. However, I ask that you contact support if you ever have needs for support in the future.

I've seen a lot of positive change in the support realm as of late. Our video support queue is really awesome, so if you are having trouble getting your problem solved by our first tier agents, please ask to be escalated to the video queue. They will get you sorted in a hurry.

Feel free to contact me personally if you ever have any trouble getting support for Adobe digital video products.

Thanks!
Kevin

Kevin Monahan
Online/Social Customer Success Lead DVA
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe Systems, Inc.
Follow Me on Twitter!


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 5:44:52 pm

Kevin-

Avid has a really good idea about offering support contracts with yearly update fees.

It allows customers to keep their software at the end of the contract.

Perhaps as lead of Digital Video Adobe Support, you can ask Adobe management about this option as an alternative to Adobe CC?

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:12:33 pm

Hey Jeremy,

I for one would say; that you do not want to go down the route of Avid support contracts.

I would also add that IMHO like for like, the Adobe PPro only subscription is cheaper than an Avid with support contract. Avid is currently killing off products such as the Softimage DS and moving towards a networked strategy only - this enterprise model started a few years ago and I can't see how an owner/operator / SME facility fits into Avid's future.

Adobe have already put it where their mouth is; And this is something no-one is moaning about on this forum, which is that the stream of upgrades, and the frequency of those and bug fixes, have completely out-performed that of their old ways when box shifting was on the agenda. Feel free to correct me on this, but I cannot remember so much excitement about Adobe Premiere PRO as we are currently seeing with the CC.

I can understand users being upset about the form of distribution - but no-one is getting short-changed by Adobe when it comes to functionality and bug fixes. As long as they keep that up, they'll do just fine for me.

Dare I say it "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" And the CC model is not broke, far from it.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:19:30 pm

[Mads Nybo Jørgensen] "I for one would say; that you do not want to go down the route of Avid support contracts. "

OK. Now we are getting somewhere.

Since Avid has been offered as a viable alternative to Adobe CC, yet, you mention that Avid's method isn't viable.

Where does that leave us?

[Mads Nybo Jørgensen] "Adobe have already put it where their mouth is; And this is something no-one is moaning about on this forum, which is that the stream of upgrades, and the frequency of those and bug fixes, have completely out-performed that of their old ways when box shifting was on the agenda. Feel free to correct me on this, but I cannot remember so much excitement about Adobe Premiere PRO as we are currently seeing with the CC."

I hear you and I completely agree. Adobe engineers have worked very hard on Adobe CC. I think pretty much everyone recognized that and isn't taking that away. I think people really want some sort of way to hold on to a version of their software should they want to stop paying for it.

[Mads Nybo Jørgensen] "I can understand users being upset about the form of distribution - but no-one is getting short-changed by Adobe when it comes to functionality and bug fixes. As long as they keep that up, they'll do just fine for me.

Dare I say it "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" And the CC model is not broke, far from it."


I think the purpose of this forum is that not everyone agrees with this statement. I think Adobe has some options here. Today, I am focusing on Avid as it has been brought up that Avid's methods have "demolished" what Adobe CC is offering in reference to SOX laws.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:28:56 pm

Hey Jeremy,

[Jeremy Garchow] "Since Avid has been offered as a viable alternative to Adobe CC, yet, you mention that Avid's method isn't viable"

Avid's business model is to deal with large scale post operations, whether commercial/features, sport and/or news + the odd Broadcast. They have sold most of their low-end crown jewels off, such as Pinnacle and they have got rid of a lot of their local sales and support staff in various international markets. They had to do this to survive against the likes of FCP, Blackmagic, and now Adobe.

The question is, does Avid align themselves with the likes of Quantel and Discreet? Or do they become software only and end up 6ft under ferociously digging there way out with the likes of Lightworks?

I have done many quality edits on Avid, but I'm not sure that they will survive in a world where their main clients for product and 24/7 support (the broadcasters) are more and more relying on citizens to provide the content.

If you are only into editing and don't need the rest of the Adobe suite, then Avid would be my next choice. But I would not want to pay for support, unless it is local.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:47:47 pm

[Mads Nybo Jørgensen] "The question is, does Avid align themselves with the likes of Quantel and Discreet? Or do they become software only and end up 6ft under ferociously digging there way out with the likes of Lightworks?"

Or, a third question, since they have just announced that they can now focus more on development, similar to what Adobe has done with CC, does Avid have a chance of developing new features more quickly that apply to a broader audience?

If you haven't read the Media Composer license FAQ, it really is a decent read if you are at all interested in these matters on any level.


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 8:19:51 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Or, a third question, since they have just announced that they can now focus more on development, similar to what Adobe has done with CC, does Avid have a chance of developing new features more quickly that apply to a broader audience?"

Maybe, but Avid will need deep pockets to catch up with Adobe's toolbox. The saviour for them, as I see it, is to keep developing on Pro-Tools and try and integrate the DS feature set into the Media Composer package.

However, the more likely scenario is that a bigger shark will eat Avid - my bet is that Dolby will be the best candidate for saving Avid. Imagine a package that takes you from Content out to the distribution chain.

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:46:07 pm

[Mads Nybo Jørgensen] "...excitement about Adobe Premiere PRO"

Post http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/7052
http://www.cnet.com/news/despite-complaints-most-adobe-creative-cloud-subsc...


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 8:30:20 pm

Oh dear Rainer,

You did it again; made quotes out of ignorance rather than something that can actually be based on statically facts across a broad section of users. The survey(s) you refer to have asked less than 400 persons out of how many million users?

Give me something that have surveyed 10,000 users and we can talk more.
In any case, Adobe is with CC taking the high-ground, and I'm sure that if their sales dip to far, that they will take appropriate action to rectify the situation. If anything, with the subscription base that they already have, they can afford to.

BTW: CS users can still get 40% discount on migrating to CC - so it is not all bad ;-)

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 10:05:04 pm
Last Edited By Rainer Schubert on Apr 15, 2014 at 10:35:42 pm

"Oh dear" Mat

I don´t trust surveys very much, also.
But they can show trends (sometimes).
If I have a look on colleagues and companies I´m related to, there are only very few on CC already.
And No One - really No one - of these people I know personally - is happy with this kind of distribution.
(the products themselves are OK. They were before the CC disaster & they are after. Nothing changed in this way)
Whether they are business or private users. And I also know users who changed the product.
That´s a more significant factor for me, and tells me, I´m not totally wrong (or to depressive).

No question, that Adobe will change it´s way if it hurts financially.

The never "soon" ending 40% discount, a good sign?
Without that discount - I bet - they wouldn´t have 1,2 mil. (Full product) Cloud users.
(Marketing cloud PLUS Creative Cloud, as far as I understand their minimalistic business reports right).
A Plus of somewhat 800.000 within a year. Also an indicator for customers satisfaction.

Price was never my concern
(but I can understand, that there are users, which are not happy to be forced on MasterCollection Level by the take all or nothing strategy).
I would have payed (very) much more for my MasterCollections.
The 62€ (=85,5$) / month is only a little bit more than a former always updated MC.
That´s fair for those who can handle all the Apps and need/can use them.
So the discount isn´t something that affects me.
And after all, I turned Adobe my back.
Have to use CS less and less.


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 7:05:28 am

Hey Rainer,

[Rainer Schubert] "And after all, I turned Adobe my back."
So why the ongoing outburst of negative energy if you've already found an acceptable solution(s) to replace Adobe?

Here is a thought for you:
1,2 million CC customers x $20 = $24,000,000/month x 12 = $288,000,000/year
If Adobe over the next 3 years was to quadruple that user base to $1,152 Billion then would be a good return for a company which major expenditure will be on R&D and marketing + a few pennies for the cloud storage - surely this is a win/win for the supplier (Adobe) and the client (me, sadly not you)?

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 10:20:57 am

[Mads Nybo Jørgensen] "If Adobe over the next 3 years was to quadruple that user base"

if


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 10:36:21 am

[Mads Nybo Jørgensen] "So why the ongoing outburst of negative energy"

So why still here, when happy on the cloud.

(I invested a lot in Adobe Products. And related Workflows. In Education of Employees.
The so called "cloud" is still not acceptable for me - espec. because of the missing exit.
(Don´t ask me why, don´t try to change me - explained a lot here & it´s my business decision)
Changing software was an great challenge and provocation for me - I can´t see any necessity (view of me as an customer) for the way they have done it.
That they are permanently declaring, it´s so good for us doesn´t make things better.
I used Adobe SW for more than 20 yrs - can say from the beginning.
As they were not CC I loved these products - Today I´m ashamed if I see their logo appearing on my screen, when I have to use CS.
So they have taken a part of my tools, what hurts. No question.
And may be, made me that (you would call it) "depressive".
And may be, I´m old-fashioned: I don´t like renting, unforeseeable costs and dependencies.
Adobe - together with MS - is on it´s way to change the distribution of software in total.
Something I don´t like.
I think it´s worth to spend some words on)


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 11:13:06 am

Hey Rainer,

This thread was highlighted in the latest COW news-letter and caught my curiosity. However, as with many of the other issues raised here, the "booing" sounds like someone trying to convert a feather into ten chickens - but since that has been cleared up, I should really get on with something worth whilst to do.

[Rainer Schubert] "Today I´m ashamed if I see their logo appearing on my screen, when I have to use CS"
Hope you don't mind me pointing out something glaringly obviously; but for someone who is ashamed to see "Adobe", you do write their name an awful lot of times in posts on the COW. As long as you don't turn into the Jack Torrance character in "The Shining", then I'm sure that you'll be just fine.

As this point, let's once again agree to disagree whilst I drift back on to my cloud and blue sky thinking... ;-)

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 12:11:38 pm

Hm...
Blue sky thinking, while there are clouds...
Wasn´t there something...
Trying to remember...

So have a nice drift back...

All the best
Jack Torrance


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 3:08:35 am

Plus one on this!

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1, Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Pro X 10.1.1, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.5, Premiere Pro CS 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K, Avid MC, 2013 Mac Pro Hexacore, 1 TB SSD, 64GB RAM, 2-D500: 2012 Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 16GB RAM 250GB SSD


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 5:12:24 pm

[David Lawrence] "The implied argument being Sarbanes-Oxley forced Adobe to "

Word of the day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthymeme


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 6:42:07 pm

[Richard Herd] "Word of the day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthymeme"

Word of the day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring :p ;)

_______________________
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

Brian Charles
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 10:45:16 pm

[Richard Herd] "
Word of the day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthymeme"


Richard, your references to Nicolas Urfe (who is Conchis in this meta-meta-narrative?), syllogisms etc. take me back to university and bring a smile to my otherwise gloomy countenance ;)



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 17, 2014 at 5:51:23 pm

I think Shantanu Narayen is Conchis. He's the one orchestrating the masque.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 17, 2014 at 11:27:16 pm

seriously - richard - you really are the paprika at times.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 2:30:51 am

Thanks for this post, David. Now I think I understand where our disconnect is on this.

You look at those conversations with Adobe people and see "If we want to release new features any time and comply with SOX, we must move to subscription-only." Therefore, you see Avid's move as a refutation.

I look at those conversations and see "If we move to subscription-only, we can release new features any time and be compliant with SOX."

"If A then B" and "If B then A" are not logically equivalent. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. All subscription plans may be SOX-compliant around revenue recognition and new features, but not all SOX-compliant sales models around revenue recognition and new features are subscription-only.

My problem with this thread is the repeated assertion by Aindreas and by you that somehow Adobe has claimed or implied that going subscription-only was necessary for compliance; that would be obviously false, and it didn't take Avid's announcement to show that. The only claim I think is being made here is that going subscription-only is sufficient for compliance -- which is true.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 8:15:41 am

[Walter Soyka] "Thanks for this post, David. Now I think I understand where our disconnect is on this.

You look at those conversations with Adobe people and see "If we want to release new features any time and comply with SOX, we must move to subscription-only." Therefore, you see Avid's move as a refutation.

I look at those conversations and see "If we move to subscription-only, we can release new features any time and be compliant with SOX."

"If A then B" and "If B then A" are not logically equivalent. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. All subscription plans may be SOX-compliant around revenue recognition and new features, but not all SOX-compliant sales models around revenue recognition and new features are subscription-only."


You're welcome and thank you, Walter for another thoughtful post.

I think there's an important piece missing from your argument -

If you look at the history of the Adobe controversy, the reason for the controversy isn't really Adobe's move subscription-only.

The reason so many customers are upset (hence the title of this thread?) is because Adobe has chosen subscription-only with no perpetual exit.

No perpetual exit is the white elephant in the room.

Why no perpetual exit?

Why piss off millions of former loyal customers who would love to spend their money on your product?

A lot of us have been loudly asking this question for close to a year and I have yet to hear a convincing answer from anyone.

I don't think anyone in the forum cares about SOX. The only reason it ever seems to come up is in defense of Adobe's subscription-only plan with no perpetual exit.

Can we agree that Avid takes the SOX argument for subscription-only with no perpetual exit off the table?

_______________________
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: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 10:22:44 am

^^^this


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 1:29:25 pm

[David Lawrence] "I don't think anyone in the forum cares about SOX"

A lot of us don't care about perpetual exit :)

Steve Connor
Mellowing slowly


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 3:35:10 pm

[Steve Connor] "A lot of us don't care about perpetual exit :)"

Touché Steve! ;)

_______________________
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

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 3:53:23 pm

[David Lawrence] "Can we agree that Avid takes the SOX argument for subscription-only with no perpetual exit off the table?"

Again, if you really compare the two strategies, they are completely different. Avid is offering something that Adobe doesn't have available, and Adobe is offering products that cover a lot more disciplines than video editing.

Avid is not offering a month to month subscription service + perpetual exit strategy.

I obviously failed to shed any light in my back and forth with Franz.

Avid also has a similar Adobe CC strategy. It has all the same rules and restrictions, and costs more money per month to new users vs Adobe CC.

Todd K, who you have quoted, is an Adobe QA engineer for After Effects. For him, Adobe CC means that the Ae team can schedule and develop After Effects like they have wanted to do for a long time. From his perspective, if Adobe CC is what management came up with to make that happen for him, all while trying to maintain and grow a profitable business, as well as maintain SOX compliance, why is SOX a red herring?

Also, Avid's method is as yet unavailable, and untested. We don't know if the level of development is going to compete with Adobe CC. As Mads mentions, Adobe has put their money where their mouth is in this regard.

My underlying point of all of this, David, is be careful what you wish for.

If Adobe adopts Avid's support contract model, you will pay ~$2700 every time you let your subscription lapse and need to add an update to your off ramped software.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 5:00:40 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "My underlying point of all of this, David, is be careful what you wish for.

If Adobe adopts Avid's support contract model, you will pay ~$2700 every time you let your subscription lapse and need to add an update to your off ramped software."


Jeremy, nothing would prevent Adobe from offering lapsed subscribers a new subscription at a appealing discount. I can see the banner ads already - "Come back to Creative Cloud! 40% off for past members for a limited time."

My point here is the rules are completely arbitrary, driven by the goals of management and marketing. If Adobe wants to include a perpetual exit tied to their new subscription-only offering, northing is stopping them. Can we agree on that?

_______________________
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

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 5:19:33 pm

[David Lawrence] "perpetual exit tied to their new subscription-only offering"

The details would be interesting. Does SOX imply the following:

during 2014 Adobe developed and made available CC software;

during 2015, we could buy the perpetual license of the 2014 CC developed software,

because the development and sales are in two separate years?

Or

Does it mean, we could only buy the perpetual license for the 2014 CC developed software in 2014?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 5:23:58 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Apr 16, 2014 at 5:24:43 pm

[David Lawrence] "If Adobe wants to include a perpetual exit tied to their new subscription-only offering, northing is stopping them. Can we agree on that?"

We can't 100% agree. I apologize, David I am not trying to be confrontational. Avid doesn't offer that either.

Could Adobe move to some sort of yearly support contract? Most likely.

Could Adobe figure out a way to lock customers in for long enough to pay what Adobe deems is enough for a full license, and the customer gets to keep it at the end? Maybe.

I don't think it's as easy as "Adobe could do this tomorrow".

Adobe has to protect themselves form someone turning on a month of CC and then shutting it off. This means the user gets the Master Collection for $50 (hence Avid's yearly support contract, and higher upfront cost which, basically, buys a year of updates).

Could Adobe figure something out that would appeal to both CC subscribers, and a new "CS Support plan" or similar? Probably. But that plan would not be Creative Cloud, and that what Walter is talking about when mentioning development paths.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 7:57:23 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Adobe has to protect themselves form someone turning on a month of CC and then shutting it off. This means the user gets the Master Collection for $50 (hence Avid's yearly support contract, and higher upfront cost which, basically, buys a year of updates)."

I don't know, Jeremy. Maybe they could use computers to figure out how long someone has been a subscriber and keep this from happening?

[Jeremy Garchow] "Could Adobe figure something out that would appeal to both CC subscribers, and a new "CS Support plan" or similar? Probably. But that plan would not be Creative Cloud, and that what Walter is talking about when mentioning development paths."

They can call it anything they want, I don't think anyone cares. Creative Cloud is a marketing term and has little to do with anything except Adobe's marketing strategy for locking in a recurring revenue stream.

There's no need for separate development paths. From a technical standpoint, CC software is essentially the same as it's always been in CS. It lives on the user's hard drive and the "cloud" features are pretty shallow and essentially optional. Creative Cloud is simply CS7, rebranded by marketing with some optional online sugar to sweeten the lock-in.

Perhaps this will change in the future, but I have my doubts that except for very specific scenarios - Adobe Anywhere collaborative workflows, for example - people will be using "The Cloud" as their host platform, rather than say their new Mac Pro Sizzle Tube.

If other companies like Avid have figured out how to make subscriptions with a perpetual option work, surely the people at Adobe are smart enough to figure it out too.

I guess, they'd rather lose millions of former customers in the short term, in hopes of making it up in locked-in subscribers in the long term. I personally don't think it'll work and that it sets a bad precedent for the software industry. There's lot of win-win possibilities. Avid's is just one of them.

_______________________
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

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 8:09:07 pm

What are computers?


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 10:27:55 pm







Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 17, 2014 at 12:16:56 am

If we need computers, I think it's time to call the University of Rhode Island.

Put on the electrodes and get the datar-out; all computerized (wait for it):







Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 17, 2014 at 12:38:41 am

[David Lawrence] "Can we agree that Avid takes the SOX argument for subscription-only with no perpetual exit off the table?"

I would say that SOX is an important part of understanding the subscription plan, but I would also agree with you that SOX does not require a subscription-only sales model.

Avid's move hasn't changed anything. SOX never forced the subscription-only move. That was a choice made after running perpetual licenses and subscription side-by-side.


[David Lawrence] "Why no perpetual exit? Why piss off millions of former loyal customers who would love to spend their money on your product? A lot of us have been loudly asking this question for close to a year and I have yet to hear a convincing answer from anyone."

I'm not sure you will ever be convinced, but that doesn't mean there isn't an answer.

Creative Cloud was re-launched in its current incarnation at the 2013 Adobe MAX conference, and Adobe execs talked about the decision. You can watch the videos here:
http://2013.max.adobe.com/sessions/online.html

Adobe drafted their open letter to the community that outlines the vision for Creative Cloud:
https://www.adobe.com/cc/letter.html

Contrary to the way we discuss it here in this debate forum, I don't think Creative Cloud is supposed to be a new way to sell Creative Suite. It looks like that today, but these are still early days. It will take time to get a compelling service layer going. It will take time to get 20-year-old desktop applications exploiting networking and connectivity.

I think this is like the initial introduction of Creative Suite. It took time to re-align development around the new direction. CS1 was really just a way to buy bundles of the products, but by CS6, disparate apps were really working well together.

I'm happy to discuss this in some more depth, but I think it deserves its own thread.

TIM W. ADMIN EDIT: AGREED! Please reply to this post on the new thread: http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/7550

Tim Wilson
Vice President, Editor-in-Chief
Creative COW


Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events




Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
NEW THREAD ABOVE, was Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 17, 2014 at 1:22:24 am

[Walter Soyka] "I'm happy to discuss this in some more depth, but I think it deserves its own thread."


Agreed! Fired one up here: http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/7548

I don't have access to the COW's innards (trust me, a good thing), so I don't know how to move posts from one thread to another within the same forum, so do me a favor -- construct any replies here as needed, then paste 'em in that new thread?

Apologies for needing your help in the handoff, but I think this is great stuff that is definitely becoming its own topic.

Best,
Tim


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: NEW THREAD ABOVE, was Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 17, 2014 at 1:48:41 am

Agreed! Please reply to this new aspect of the topic on the new thread: Adobe, Avid, Sarbanes-Oxley, can they / can't they, Subscription-palooza!

Thanks,
Tim


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 12:19:24 am

[David Lawrence] "I hope we'll see some sort of win-win "tweak" from Adobe soon, so we can go back to talking about great software and workflows, rather than debating business models!"

Amen David. I look forward to interacting with people regarding Adobe for all the positive reasons that were there a year ago. I love the tools, I respect the people who develop them, and believe strongly in the concept and the practice of the Adobe ecosystem.

Prior to Adobe's announcement, I wasn't in the habit of commenting on the business models the companies I buy software from however, that's new. This is not how I would prefer to spend my time, I know that most of the people on this forum feel the same way. this is an ugly mess, but not one of our own making.

Many of the people on this forum have been obligated through circumstances out of their control into becoming more activists than collaborators, our business futures potentially being at stake. It's messy, it's occasionally ugly, but it is what it is. In the meantime, I'm certainly hopeful that a civil and unrestricted dialogue can be maintained.

I am deeply grateful to the people who created the Cow and those who maintain it. It is unquestionably a unique community and resource, and I assume will always be so.


Return to posts index

Mads Nybo Jørgensen
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 7:59:21 am

Maybe dressing the CEO up in a suit and put him front of a hungry pack of "journos" was not the best thing to do. However, he was on message through-out which is that "Creative Cloud is the future for Adobe".

However, I do agree with the point about international pricing - big companies like Adobe and others like them, needs to explain their "conversion" rates when pricing Cloud services. Same goes for paying tax in the country of the sale being made - but that is an altogether different discussion involving the likes of Starbucks, Amazon etc ;-)

In case anyone have forgotten me, I do like what the Creative Cloud is offering me and very happy with the suite of products included. If anything, there are too many in there for me to get really good at one thing only.

This only group is for me a healthy reminder of my feelings when discreet (Autodesk) killed edit* - they had loads of excuses as to why they could not continue the product, or even re-engineer it. Lately they've killed off Softimage (formerly owned by above named Avid). I stopped subscribing to 3D-Max many years ago, simply because I did not want to pay money into the pockets of a greedy Autodesk - so I can fully understand the sentiments surrounding Adobe CC.

However, the vast improvements Adobe have made on Premiere Pro and its integration to other tools since taking it to CC, more than justifies the relatively smaller cost of CC than that of a box product.

My 5p

All the Best
Mads

@madsvid, London, UK
Check out my other hangouts:
Twitter: @madsvid
http://mads-thinkingoutloud.blogspot.co.uk


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 5:08:10 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "a big deliberate company wide lie about motivation and intent"

No shit sherlock. ;)

I guess you're experiencing something like Nicholas Urfe's disintoxication. Corporations, all of them, and more-so as their stock prices rise, orchestrate a series of masquerades. It goes all the way to Avid's crazy accounting issues. Corporate culture's workforce, the peons are mired in petty, internal agendas, office memoranda, email chains, CMAs -- all while living paycheck to paycheck, taking BART and CalTrain. Silicon Valley and San Francisco are bona fide schizophrenic places (to anthropomorphize). Some of the most impoverished communities in the US are in Hunter's Point; meanwhile, Google HQ, Facebook, Adobe, Apple are 10 miles away, or less, and the amount of venture capital lost is sickening to all but a few oligarchs. Web search a ridiculous failed company called Webvan. (I bet David L. remembers that silliness.) Before anyone can tell a lie, they have to delude themselves first -- usually some kind of cost/benefit analysis that the end will justify the means. And that end, the only metric that matters is stock price. The current CEO of Adobe started in 1998. Back then stocks and stock options were traded like baseball cards, and adobe was listed at $2/share.

When the CEO says things like "value to our customers," I hear Ingsoc style doublespeak. The editors, designers, photographers who use the software are not the customers. It's the people for whom the CEO delivers share price.

If you get 30 minutes to watch "Silicon Valley" on HBO or hbogo.com, do it. It's a brilliant satire of the culture.

What are we debating, here? Whether and to what extent corporations lie? I'm too crass. While I don't like the necessity of renting software, it does not appear to be going away. It is merely a matter of (wait for it...) internal rate of return. That's the accounting issue Mr. Sokya was swirling with his notions of two development paths. It's very plain that ADBE borrowed cash in two pools; one cash flow went to CS6 development and the other to CC. At the end of a series of periods, they did the math, and CC won.

The editor in me is saddened a bit, but the investor in me is stoked. So which customer am I? I'm investing in the company that rents me my tools. We should all now read Sonnet 121.


Return to posts index

Brian Charles
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 6:21:16 pm

Double plus good!



Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 10:24:12 pm

[Richard Herd] "The editor in me is saddened a bit, but the investor in me is stoked. So which customer am I? I'm investing in the company that rents me my tools. We should all now read Sonnet 121."

Careful Richard, the stock may be riding high now, but after the Wall Street con men finish pumping it up and decide to bail, you don't want to be left holding the bag! ;)

_______________________
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

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 11:00:53 pm

[David Lawrence] "the Wall Street con men"

Bill said it, not me:

SONNET 121

'Tis better to be vile, than vile esteemed,
When not to be, receives reproach of being,
And the just pleasure lost which is so deemed
Not by our feeling, but by others' seeing:
For why should others' false adulterate eyes
Give salutation to my sportive blood?
Or on my frailties why are frailer spies,
Which in their wills count bad what I think good?
No; -- I am that I am, and they that level
At my abuses reckon up their own:
I may be straight, though they themselves be bevel;
By their rank thoughts my deeds must not be shown;
Unless this general evil they maintain,
All men are bad, and in their badness reign.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 2:54:24 am

[Richard Herd] "SONNET 121"

lol, I'll be sure to quote that when the share price collapses. ;)

_______________________
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

Richard Herd
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 5:05:22 am

The meaning from Adobe CEO's pov is if we keep calling them names then the result is his evilness would know no bounds. I of course will sell before the collapse, like when I traded my Don Mattingly rookie card for a #1 Wolverine. ;)


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 12:17:03 am

Curves I like
(must lie if not - but again: Nothing against the Adobe People here...)
or may be the Wall Street man already bailing
or Exit versus Non Exit.
Not an expert in (these) curves, but may be Wall Street men...?

BtW: There was a new survey of Adobe send to me here in Germany today.
This time, the Survey didn´t stop, when I clicked on the checkbox of "I´m not interested in "Creative Cloud"".
They want to know exactly why & which things should be modified.
Hm?
May be, the deaf arrogance of Adobe comes to an end.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 9:15:54 pm
Last Edited By Aindreas Gallagher on Apr 13, 2014 at 1:54:12 pm

[Richard Herd] "I guess you're experiencing something like Nicholas Urfe's disintoxication."

I am bloody not! well maybe.

the point is there is a dissonance. they claim a great listening relationship and yet it was a ludicrously violent move. And they were less than honest about the reasons for the move.
they project a maximum of around 40-45% of their license holders after they put the entire license base through the meat grinder and see what subscriptions come out the other end. that's a lot of creatives on the butcher floor.

My issue is whether they could not have actually simply trusted the twenty year customer base, and tied reasonable locked subscription upgrades at 299-399 per annum for existing licenses licenses holders as avid are doing, as they moved forward with a core subscription track, as avid are doing.

In our bones we know adobe are horrible asses here. The bigger irritation is that they might have needlessly been horrible asses, from a pure profit perspective, given they are flushing around 5-6 million CS licenses down the toilet, when they could have simply offered a well communicated annual subscription component to those same 5-6 million licenses.

their front facing representatives, cloyingly close on all social forums, and industry meets, seem designed to foster an intimate relationship "we read every feature request, you are in our lives, we live and breath this, we love you guys" and yet the corporate entity has gone completely nuts making forced subscription sausage out of the herded license holders in real time as we speak. We're talking 12 million people. It's surreally aggressive corporate behaviour. its like someone pecking you on the cheek while they headbutt you.

this is not business as usual. It's a surreal situation where they are pushing false justifications, grinning at supermeets, and taking their entire licensed customer base behind the woodshed. less than one in two adobe license holders are walking out.

they are a crass, maybe pointlessly aggressive company, and that's not exactly what adobe was known for to this point.

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


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 13, 2014 at 2:32:23 am
Last Edited By Ricardo Marty on Apr 13, 2014 at 2:39:12 am

Adobe has not made any money on cc but the top executive responsible for it have cashed out millions. makes you think whose interest did these suites have when they did this.

Ricardo Marty


Return to posts index

Rainer Schubert
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 8:34:56 pm

If I could push the Like button more often - I would


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:09:25 pm

If avid can do it why not a company. Who is manny times larger and richer like adibe cant.

Ricardo Marty


Return to posts index

Vince Sanchez
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:18:03 pm

I was sitting about six rows back directly in front of the presenters and if there was any booing it was in the back and drowned out by the applause. I was listening too as I had read all the posts about Al's tweet and was wondering about how the crowd would react.
What was more telling was the dead silence when Autodesk announced the new subscription plan for Smoke.

Thanks,
Vince Sanchez
Intel 12 core Mac 2.66
Intel Dual Quad Core 3.0
AJA LHe
AJA LHi
OSX 10.4.11
FCP 7
Premerie CC


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 6:30:39 pm

I think that Autodesk might less of a problem since their target audience is high-end production. Then again, anything is possible. At least they mentioned something ahead of time, so I give them credit there.


Return to posts index

Gustavo Bermudas
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 8:10:42 pm
Last Edited By Gustavo Bermudas on Apr 10, 2014 at 8:18:01 pm

I was there in the first rows, and I remember hearing a few boo's when Al stepped in, but the kind of boo's that doesn't travel far, kind of muted, having said that, I didn't hear a standing ovation when Al announced 1.8 million subscribers to the cloud, as a matter of fact, he had to repeat it and said something like "it deserves an applause" or something like that, and then there were some claps.
I gotta say, I saw him in the corridors a few hours before the event started, and he looked extremely nervous, but to his credit, he's an awesome presenter, he can pull whatever when he's up on that stage


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 10, 2014 at 8:52:20 pm
Last Edited By Aindreas Gallagher on Apr 10, 2014 at 9:04:23 pm

I'd personally only say he's patently a good guy, any idiot could see it, and he did just wave a miraculous gandalf wand over premiere.

the boos - and if true on the other forum, the walk outs during the presentation, you could argue are more directed at the corporate stance deliberately voiding all permanent licenses and shifting to locked lifetime subscriptions.

I said it above, but avid's analysis of the same situation, and their solution makes complete liars out of adobe corporate maintaining that they - so tragically - had no choice but to dump the millions of permanent licenses in order to deliver the kinds of regular updates they wanted.
In our bones we knew that was a ridiculous lie, avid just served to make it irritatingly obvious.

the entire adobe company is lying about the reasons for doing what they did, and they are lying about the technical and legal issues around maintaining permanent licenses in locked tandem with subscription.

As Avid made plain in conversation with scott simmons - there are serious disadvantages to stepping off the maintenance software 299 cycle. yes you have the software when you step off, but if you want to get back on, you are looking at full 1299 to get back on again. that should be plenty incentive to stick with a company you know and trust. All adobe had to do was trust the basic relationship they had, trust the customer, incentivise staying on board, and massively dis-incentivise getting off the train.

Adobe did something different. they lied about their reasons for voiding the licenses, they lied about their inability to sustain software development for permanent licenses in tandem, when hilariously, the 299 avid upgrade service fee figure rounds out to very close to the .5 production premium upgrade cost. virtually all the legal and technical arguments look to be false at this point.

Adobe just lied to our faces about pretty much everything.

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


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 4:30:21 am

Didn't hear about the boos while at NAB. There were certainly no boos at the Adobe booth where it was pretty much standing room only at every presentation the entire week.

I was running Premiere on my pod in the AJA booth (my choice - I had X and MC7 too) and didn't hear any complaints about the CC model other than Adobe could make it less expensive for non-profits who have multiple subscriptions.

The vast majority of medium and large facilities including a plethora of household names I met with were either already on or making the move to CC - most leaving behind FCP7 (there were a handful small houses moving to Avid). Those already on CC were absolutely loving cutting in Premiere. But these were working pro's, not the wannabe punks who pollute the otherwise fun Supermeet and think the BMD Boombox Cam is the coolest thing ever and ready to put ARRI out of business - yes someone said that to me...

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 5:12:16 am

[Lance Bachelder] "There were certainly no boos at the Adobe booth where it was pretty much standing room only at every presentation the entire week"

Interesting. Wasn't there, so can't say. Just wondering why the frustration from Adobe staff? If everything went great, why freak out?


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 7:03:32 am

[Chris Pettit] "If everything went great, why freak out?"

I wasn't there, but having faced angry customers when I worked at Avid, I have a guess. Product managers dug deep to come up with a great release, but a lot of energy was being pushed into heated business model conversations that the product managers have nothing to do with. My guess is that some folks from Adobe were frustrated to have stuck the landing on the development side, and not get the chance to show it.

The irony about THIS forum vs. the OTHER debate forum is that on the product side HERE, I think people are really happy, and getting happier.

I think this gave the impression that people were feeling less strongly about The Debate, just because the focus had shifted toward actually using the software. For example, we got fewer posts in this forum in the MONTH before NAB than we did in some HOURS in the beginning. People's satisfaction with Premiere AS A PRODUCT is way way up....but it's not as if strong feelings about THE BUSINESS went away, and for most of the people at NAB, this was their first chance to say something about it to Adobe in person.

Unlike here in the COW, where members had a chance to cool off and gain a little empathy for Al -- and in some cases, people choosing to delete their own posts -- he and others were having to deal with that anger in real time at the show, with little opportunity for anyone to slow down.

As noted by others on this thread, people at the show DID eventually make their way to the booth to see about the PRODUCT more calmly, and were largely very impressed...but I wonder if Al got as many apologies and sympathetic reassessments in person as he did here in the COW.

I'm not trying to pass judgement, or say what your reaction SHOULD have been to any of this. I'm just making some neutral observations from my own experience. My experience as a product manager, and the reasons for our customers' unhappiness at that time were different than the situation here, but I THINK that the DYNAMICS of the two are quite similar.

A quick comment about there being no mention of this in the COW News section. That's where our PR partners post corporate press releases, so it wouldn't have shown up there.

As for our own coverage, which shows up in the COW library Features section, the COW has NEVER covered the Supermeet, nor do we plan to ever do so. Why would we? COW members at the show are reporting from events like that extremely thoroughly.

This gets to the heart of why the COW exists at all: our belief that the authority in this industry does not rest with institutions or website managers and their writers. YOU are the authorities. Our goal is to stay out of your way as much as we can, and let YOUR expertise be the final word on what happens and why.

Quickly-written first impressions have their place, mind you, and we've posted some of those. For some sites, that's all you're gonna get...but in general, I prefer that our writers take the time do better than that for you. That's why so much of our "official" show coverage has always happened after the show.

For the real time, belly of the beast, instant updates, though -- we have the forums for that. We count on you all to keep doing what you're doing: dozens of people reporting instantly, with hundreds of people responding across the COW. Our best contribution to that process is just staying out of your way.

So please don't take our lack of official coverage as lack of interest. The people who write for us about NAB are working media professionals, some of whom were working booths of their own when they weren't doing interviews and writeups for us. We're never going to be able to be in as many places as all of our members at the show, so my efforts as the COW's editor-in-chief are to direct our resources to places our members aren't already telling the story better than we could.

As always with anything, if you feel I should be handling this differently, please contact me directly using the link at the top of the page.

Best,

Tim

Tim Wilson
Editor-in-Chief
Creative COW


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 9:34:57 am

[Tim Wilson] "
As for our own coverage, which shows up in the COW library Features section, the COW has NEVER covered the Supermeet, nor do we plan to ever do so. Why would we? COW members at the show are reporting from events like that extremely thoroughly."


I was at the Supermeet, but didn't actually go into the presentation area (too busy shooting the shit otherwise).

I heard no boos, though one round of thunderous reaction to what I don't know.


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 12, 2014 at 4:44:24 am

[Tim Wilson] "
I wasn't there, but having faced angry customers when I worked at Avid, I have a guess. Product managers dug deep to come up with a great release, but a lot of energy was being pushed into heated business model conversations that the product managers have nothing to do with. My guess is that some folks from Adobe were frustrated to have stuck the landing on the development side, and not get the chance to show it."


Thanks Tim. Again, end of long day. Not much time to completely respond to all these valid observations.

Just to say: appreciate what Creative Cow does overall very much, I don't say that enough I suspect. It's a great resource, thanks!

And just to be clear, I have no particular issues with A.M. or most anyone else on front lines with Adobe. As David said, it's too bad the Adobe executives aren't there to absorb the angst a little bit at a show like NAB, it's frankly unfair to product managers.


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 6:28:11 pm

Try manning any type of product display at NAB for even just a couple of hours and you'll get "why the frustration". I love being a demo artist for AJA and am honored to be asked back year after year, but you do get the most frustrating and comical questions and opinions all the time - but unlike my sometimes Merlot fueled rants here on the Cow, I bite my tongue, smile and wait for a lull in the action when all of us can vent for a moment - though most of the time there's more laughing than frustration. There are definitely times, especially with the new CION camera introduction when you just want to tell people this obviously isn't the camera for you so move along - fortunately those were few and far between this year :)

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 11, 2014 at 6:58:26 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "Try manning any type of product display at NAB for even just a couple of hours and you'll get "why the frustration"."

Yes, I agree, and as said before very sympathetic. No matter what the circumstances, the front line guys didn't set policy. Just trying to get a gage on the depth of displeasure expressed at the show, conflicting analysis in that regard


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 13, 2014 at 5:46:00 am
Last Edited By Tim Wilson on Apr 13, 2014 at 5:48:19 am

Okay, Administrative Timmy stepping in.

I try to keep a very loose hand because of the nature of this particular forum and the strong feelings this subject engenders, but I cannot permit things to go so far outside our standards any longer.

Our Terms of Service at Creative COW specifically state that companies are protected from the same kind of "personal" attacks that people are. This has been a rule in these communities for nearly 20 years. (Nineteen years this month, in fact.)

We previously deleted posts with the word "scam" and "fraud," and have forbidden them since. I am now adding "lie," "lying" and the like to the list. Those words are now off limits in this forum for any reason. State your case about what Adobe should or should not be doing. Leave the inflammatory language aside.

This is not a request. It is a policy that will be enforced.

Please note that nearly every post made in this forum since it has opened falls comfortably inside our standard of conduct. It's a mere handful that have not. Since 99%+ of the posts here have been fair play, we believe that being more rigorous about enforcing our standards will serve only to limit noise while elevating signal, without otherwise changing the nature or direction of the conversations.

Please also note that this is not at all related to Adobe's status as an advertiser. We have taken the same action on behalf of non-advertising companies, and will continue to do so.

As always, please feel free to contact me directly if you have any issues with this using the contact link at the top of the page.

Best regards,

Tim Wilson
Vice President, Editor-in-Chief
Creative COW


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 13, 2014 at 1:51:02 pm

fair enough, I think I may myself personally have overdone - ***lying liars lying about lying*** about four times over.

but I'd only say that there maybe has to be some kind of valid discussion around the statements made by adobe when they announced the termination of all licenses and the complete shift to subscription.

they said there was an unsustainable split in development across licenses and subscription, and that sarbannes oxely prohibited them for delivering the updates they wanted when they wanted. these two things were repeated by adobe reps to the point where if I heard the words sarbannes oxely once more I thought i was going to lose my mind. these two things largely formed the basis of adobe's public justification for voiding the licenses and moving completely to subscription.

the fact that avid have now, with very little fanfare, produced a setup that retains all licenses in tandem with a subscription identical to adobe's, at the same price, negating sarbannes by virtue of a simple yearly upgrade and maintenance fee, puts adobe's arguments in a very funny light.

i won't use the word you don't want us to use regarding adobe's justifications for the forced shift to subscription - but i honestly simply don't believe adobe on this, I didn't before, and I really really don't now. And when you have someone repeatedly saying something that no one believes anymore, it's pretty dysfunctional.

One way or another a lot of us are in long term vendor relationships with adobe. To have such a staggeringly large.. lets say there is what could be viewed as a perceived dishonesty at the core of the relationship. I would argue that that is exactly what there is now, it is unhealthy, and it actually beggars my mind that adobe would be willing to trudge on with it this bloody mindedly.

Rightly or wrongly perceived dishonesty elicits strong reactions. It's human nature. People tend to have an urge to call someone on it.

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


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 14, 2014 at 3:02:29 am

I'll say again what I said in my previous post: if you have an issue with my implementation of forum policies that have been in place from the very first day, take it up with me offline.

I clearly mishandled this by letting things get so far out of hand, and I sincerely, with no irony or condescension, SINCERELY apologize for giving anyone the impression that this kind of language has ever been acceptable here. It's not.

I may also have mishandled this by leaving this thread open. There was enough energetic insight along the way that I let more basic standards of conduct slide. If I'd stopped the thread at the first rare sign of inflammatory language when it started, none of this would have gotten this far. That's on me....because before this one thread, I haven't had any administrative issues with anything anyone has said here in a very long time.

So I've told you at least two ways I think I've messed up, and I'm sure that some of you have an even longer list. I've always welcomed hearing it. Most of you have my email address already, and the rest of you can find it at the Contact link above. Let me know if you'd like to talk by phone, and we can do that too. I'll call on my dime, anywhere in the world.

In any case, that conversation won't be happening here.

Please don't hesitate to contact me about this. I'll coincidentally be working all night, and will be happy to hear from you.

Regards,
Tim


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 15, 2014 at 2:41:07 pm
Last Edited By Gary Huff on Apr 15, 2014 at 2:41:54 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Leave the inflammatory language aside."

Is " *insert company name* is literally Hitler!" still okay? :-p


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Adobe booed at the NAB supermeet
on Apr 16, 2014 at 2:35:40 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I thought avid's model was interesting in that they are introducing subscription and retaining license - for the license holders, there is a 299 service and update charge which allows them to bypass sarbannes oxeley for both groups."

Well...Avid is involved in some reporting issues currently...the primary cause they were dropped from NASDAQ. They are re-vamping years of financial reporting. Whether or not they are reporting in the same way Adobe is is something it would probably take an squad of forensic accountants to explain, but keeping in mind the sheer scale difference in company size and revenue between Avid and Adobe, I doubt that employing the split-product license strategy is anywhere nearly as costly for Avid with its dozen or so products as it is for Adobe.

As I've said in the past, saying that CC isn't for you is completely understandable.

However, this constant effort to try to paint Adobe as some sort of criminal organization just takes any productive discussion of the topic into the realm of faked moon landings and bigfoot cheating on his taxes...and creates the sort of juvenile mob mentality that leads a group of supposed professionals to actually "boo" the presentation of one of the sponsors making the event they're attending possible.

All kinds of companies do stuff I don't like all the time...a large number of users need to buy some other software and cast the ultimate vote and Adobe will change course as sales are what it's all about.

It's not a conspiracy...and it's certainly not complicated.

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Adobe Certified Instructor


Return to posts index

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