FORUMS: list search recent posts

Version issues

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Chris Pettit
Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 2:25:33 am

From the Adobe FB page:

Benjamin Bernard I just don't understand.... there was no CC 2013?? My applications folder is a mess and i have to re-install all my plugins... I feel lied too... The main sales pitch at NAB 2012 was no more upgrades or new installs for future software 50 dollars a month and all apps... your 2 for 3... CC was supposed to be CC... forever... This is just CS8 stop the lies... Now its like what do you have the 2014 version or the CC version or CS6 what a mess... Still qualify this as a epic fail...
11 minutes ago · Like
Benjamin Bernard I also did not mean for saving files to older versions... I meant for opening older versions in the latest CC version... Was that lost somehow??? That was possible forever... All I wanted was to click update and have it do just that... update my software to the newer version... not download a whole new suit and a boatload of compatibly problems...


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 3:50:04 am
Last Edited By Gary Huff on Jun 19, 2014 at 3:51:52 am

[Chris Pettit] "I just don't understand.... there was no CC 2013?"

He doesn't understand this? Is Adobe not allowed to decide to differentiate product by year now because he doesn't understand?

[Chris Pettit] "My applications folder is a mess and i have to re-install all my plugins."

Boo hoo.

[Chris Pettit] "I feel lied too"

I would say that him not understanding how software has to work doesn't equate to "lied to."

[Chris Pettit] "he main sales pitch at NAB 2012 was no more upgrades or new installs for future software 50 dollars a month and all apps."

Sounds like he didn't quite grasp the concept, unless there is a link to be provided to a pitch that says exactly how this is interpreted. Which I think not, as we've been on this merry-go-round before.

[Chris Pettit] "CC was supposed to be CC... forever..."

Forever is a long time, plus, this can't be how it works. Let me explain it to anyone reading who might be confused as to why this has to be the case.

There are certain people on here who have commented in the past that they don't like to have upgrades "forced" on them, since they don't use CC and don't know how it works. Now, if you don't want to "force" upgrades on people, that leaves a sticky situation. At the very least, there will probably be some updates that are required for, say, a new OS, whether that be OSX Yosemite at the end of this year or Windows 9 next year. Given the nature of software development, and this goes for everyone (Adobe is not being singled out here), there are inherit pitfalls associated with even a basic update to make sure everything is compatible when a new OS comes out. Those pitfalls are bugs. Now, because of this, not everyone updates when a new update is released, and that is smart. However, if you continue CC forever, you are opening a huge can of worms because you will have an entirely fragmented user base based on who has installed what updates. You could end up with a user who has never installed a single update three years in, and thus will call and complain about hours of on-hold with tech support and will obstinately refuse to install any updates.

There has to be a dividing line to keep the balancing act between people who don't install their updates promptly, or even after an understandable amount of time has passed for any bug fixes, and continued updates, some which will equal a massive change from the version that came out last year. Adobe has decided to call this CC XXXX. Whether or not you like the nomenclature is beside the point. There has to be version numbers, and the year probably simplifies it for people who don't want to keep track of which apps are at which current version numbers.

I realize that some people still won't get it, and I expect this line to be touted for the next 6 months or so.

[Chris Pettit] "This is just CS8 stop the lies."

That's rather dumb to say. Adobe can call their software whatever they want. If they decided to call it "Super Awesome Creative Suite Number 1021.4" that's their call. They decided to brunt the antagonism of a decaying software development market, of which we seem to be speeding in one of two directions: software as a service (i.e. rental) or ad supported. It's quickly becoming unsustainable otherwise for anything that requires more than a handful of developers.

Look, Microsoft is going in that direction. They backtracked because that's their modus operandi these days, but make no mistake, they are pushing Office 360 as the future. You have to have a subscription to use it on a tablet, for crying out loud. Once they have more software activations via subscription than by perpetual, you will see the latter option go away for anyone other than Enterprise clients.

Software licensing as we know it is dead, and a lot of you here helped kill it by sticking with software 2-3 generations old, instead of paying that perpetual license fee to help fund continued development. Development cannot be supported on any kind of scale anymore. Otherwise you get Pixelmator and Lightworks, and we see how many of you have switched to that already...

[Chris Pettit] "Still qualify this as a epic fail."

Another dumb statement, since they have hit their subscriber goals to the point where CC is here to stay for the foreseeable future, despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth both on here and randomly around the FB page. I would love to epically fail in that way.

[Chris Pettit] "All I wanted was to click update and have it do just that... update my software to the newer version... not download a whole new suit and a boatload of compatibly problems..."

You will always have compatibility problems as long as software marches forward. There are no two ways around it. To expect otherwise is laughably naive.

Software isn't magic.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 4:40:07 am

Didn't we just have an entire thread about this? If Benjamin is confused it's because he incorrectly assumed what was going on as opposed to listening to what Adobe stated was going on. Versioning of apps has been there since square one. Right in Adobe's FAQ it specifically mentions that previous major versions of all the apps will be available to CC users. If Benjamin doesn't want the older versions of the apps cluttering up his Applications folder than just uninstall what you don't need. Problem solved.

Right now on my laptop I have apps from CS5.5 (perpetual), CS6 (via CC), CC and CC2014. Why? Because they all function fine installed next to each other and it's actually more work to uninstall the older apps. I put apps I need in the dock or I pull them up using Spotlight. Lord only knows what my Applications folder looks like because I rarely need to actually go into my Applications folder to start an app.

What's still absolutely hilarious about this is no matter what Adobe does the same people will still complain that Abode is doing it wrong. When they think there is no more versioning they complain about the lack of versioning. When they are informed that there actually is (and always would be) versioning they complain that 1. Adobe lied to them (seriously?) and 2. that *not* having versions would've been better.

Ugh.


Return to posts index


Chris Jacek
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:38:30 am

While I agree that this probably is the way it has to be, Adobe has definitely changed their message, and have gone back on their sales pitches from the recent past. When they went Cloud only in 2013, one of the main selling points was that it was a better system because they would not need to be burdened with making major releases every year, but could rather release new features as they were ready. This is definitely a backtrack.

That said, I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing. Many would argue (myself included) that the philosophy espoused above was flawed. As an educator, I had major problems with such a concept. Quite frankly, I am much happier with the state of Adobe and CC than I was one year ago. Thus far, I'm pleased with the rate of of development, which seems about the same as in the CS days.

But to suggest that this was a part of a clear plan the entire time would be laughable. The marketing and PR missteps have been fairly consistent for 2 years, and I'm sure that there are still a few to come. I do, however, have a little more respect for a company that recognizes past mistakes, and is willing to change course when more evidence comes in. I don't believe that competitors like Apple do this any more.

The most important thing remains the quality of the product. At least as far as Premiere and After Effects are concerned, I can definitely say that I've been satisfied.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:48:18 am

[Chris Jacek] "While I agree that this probably is the way it has to be, Adobe has definitely changed their message, and have gone back on their sales pitches from the recent past. When they went Cloud only in 2013, one of the main selling points was that it was a better system because they would not need to be burdened with making major releases every year, but could rather release new features as they were ready. This is definitely a backtrack. "

Versioning has been there since the beginning. It's been in Adobe's CC FAQ and it's been specifically addressed in this forum by Adobe representatives.

A main selling point was that feature upgrades were no longer limited to just once a year, wham-bam, this is all you get until next years release. If a new feature is ready for the June 18th 2014 release it will be included in the June 18th 2014 release. If it's not ready until August 2014 then it will be released in August 2014. In Pre-CC days if a feature wasn't ready for the 2014 release it wouldn't show up until the 2015 release.

It's the difference between getting gifts only on Christmas and getting gifts year round including Christmas.

Naming each iteration by year is new (hence just CC originally instead of CC 2014) and thankfully they did that because remembering that I'm using CC 2014 apps is a lot easier than trying to remember the specific version number for each app.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 1:57:46 pm

[Chris Jacek] "When they went Cloud only in 2013, one of the main selling points was that it was a better system because they would not need to be burdened with making major releases every year, but could rather release new features as they were ready. This is definitely a backtrack."

What are the amazing new features of Premiere CC 2014?


Return to posts index


Chris Jacek
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:28:35 pm

[Gary Huff] "What are the amazing new features of Premiere CC 2014?"

There certainly aren't a ton of them. I specifically like the integration of masks, and editing AE text presets.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:51:15 pm

[Chris Jacek] "There certainly aren't a ton of them."

Exactly. No need.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Version issues
on Jun 20, 2014 at 3:01:10 am

And that is worth paying forever to have access to your work?

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, Blackmagic Teranex, 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

Gary Huff
Re: Version issues
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:04:24 pm

[Jim Wiseman] "And that is worth paying forever to have access to your work?"

I just payed $250 to have the connection to the electrical grid I need to have access to my work. I also just spend $1000 for hard drives and RAID 1 enclosures to maintain access to my work. And one day, perhaps sooner or later, one of these drives may fail and I will have to purchase another one to maintain access to my work. I will also buy Blu-ray discs at $2.50 to $5 a piece to backup files so that I have access to my work. I may also one day spend $3500 plus the cost of tapes to go to LTO to maintain access to my work.

And I don't need access to my work forever. I may end up going primarily FCPX or Motion or Lightworks or something else. Whichever becomes best for my needs, if something comes along that can supplment the Adobe suite that is the best overall fit for me at this point. And then I'll cancel my subscription and pay $30 if a client ever needs to have something re-edited that can't be done with a simple master (highly unlikely, but still an option).

And I will increment that cost into the bill I present.


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:09:00 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Didn't we just have an entire thread about this?"

I'm not endorsing his conclusions, or the tone of his post, I gave no indication that I was. My point was that actual CC users are, in some cases, feeling blindsided by the new approach. Regardless of what you think we all "should have" known, there was a wide spread impression that "cloud" software meant no more version and version compatability issues. Whether that was realistic or not, and I think it actually was not, is not the point.

When you include the word "CLOUD" in the name of your product, it creates certain expectations, amongst those is a more cohesive, compatable, up to date and SINGULAR software experience.

Versions, good or bad, is quite simply the OLD Adobe way of doing business, and a lot of people are surprised by it. What on earth is so radical about what I've just said?


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 4:20:44 pm
Last Edited By David Mathis on Jun 19, 2014 at 4:21:30 pm

[Gary Huff] "[Chris Pettit] "I just don't understand.... there was no CC 2013?"

He doesn't understand this? Is Adobe not allowed to decide to differentiate product by year now because he doesn't understand?


[Chris Pettit] "My applications folder is a mess and i have to re-install all my plugins."

Boo hoo.



On point one, personally I like the idea of using a year or a month year way of identifying what version you have as opposed to the traditional way of numbering versions. Of course one can always see when they installed it by going to the finder or when it was created.

As to the second point, whenever there is going to be a major update to anything I go with a clean install, from the ground up when possible. Yes, this does take longer but it can prevent some common issues from popping up. When there are minor updates available I simply install those.

I am do some house cleaning with regards to the hard drive. Go through the folders I created, perhaps move stuff around, delete files, projects and such that are no longer needed. Just a few minutes a day can help keep things organized, not lead to a mountain of stuff you have no idea what it could be. In the process I backup important documents, projects and such before a clean install.

My two cents, whatever it is worth.

I try to slay as many glitch gremlins as possible before and during production yet they to love to multiply not to mention love wreaking havoc in post.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 2:09:39 pm
Last Edited By Franz Bieberkopf on Jun 19, 2014 at 2:15:19 pm

Recent history, Scott Morris of Adobe was pretty keen and effective in his message:

http://www.cnet.com/news/five-reasons-adobes-cs6-subscription-is-smart/
April 2012
"… programmers who make the software are less confined by the constraints of building a giant, monolithic release. When a feature is done, it can be added in an update distributed online immediately instead gather dust for a year or two awaiting the next major release. ….[But] continuous updates can make it harder for companies that must ensure various software packages get along together."

http://www.cnet.com/news/adobe-kills-creative-suite-goes-subscription-only/
May 2013
"One of the profound shifts for subscriptions is that software typically is continuously updated. … software makers can release steady improvements as they're ready rather than holding them back until ready to release a major paid update."
[…]
"... customers should stop expecting massive, across-the-board updates, [Scott Morris, senior director of product marketing] said. Features will arrive when they're done for the most part, though Adobe might synchronize some updates across related packages like After Effects and Premiere Pro or align some release schedules for events like Adobe Max."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthof/2013/05/06/adobe-halts-new-software-r...
May 2013
"The move is intended to speed the pace of innovation at Adobe, replacing one-year product cycles with continual updates online."

http://www.designntrend.com/articles/4195/20130506/enter-adobe-who-needs-pr...
May 2013
"So what does this mean? Adobe will now replace its one-year product cycles with continual updates online."

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/cloud/381652/adobe-ditches-creative-suite-for-c...
May 2013
"The move also means Adobe will ditch the yearly release cycle in favour of continuous product updates."


Anecdotally, Adobe seems to be on a schedule of 3 updates per year for flagship software in CC; it will be interesting to see the impact of the renewed focus on "milestone" release versions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_After_Effects
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Photoshop
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Premiere_Pro

Franz.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 2:42:55 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "t will be interesting to see the impact of the renewed focus on "milestone" release versions."

There won't be much of an impact at all. Just some people quoting Adobe's Marketing arm to say what they are not actually saying. The last three quotes aren't from Adobe at all, but from the person writing the article (and they are all rather exact in their wording). Only the second one says what has been said all along.

Now, if some update was held back for Adobe CC 2014, can you specify which one(s) was/were other than the ones that were ready for a June release that coincided?


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 4:13:52 pm

[Gary Huff] "Now, if some update was held back for Adobe CC 2014, can you specify which one(s) was/were other than the ones that were ready for a June release that coincided?"

Gary,

If I'm understanding you correctly, you think the updates to PPro, AE, etc. were a serendipitous co-incidence with CC2014 - a marketing date that fortuitously lined up with updates that were ready for June anyway?

Franz.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:30:35 pm

People hear "subscription" and "cloud" and assume that Adobe's apps will now be forced update, cloud-only services like Dropbox or Google Docs. It's amazing the conclusions that people will jump to based on the tiniest crumb of information. I've even seen people in other forums wondering how they are going to upload all of their raw footage to Adobe's servers so they can edit in the Cloud... ugh.


Franz,
I appreciate the effort you put in to finding links but I don't think they are helping your position much. ;)
For example, one of your links quotes an Adobe PR person saying they might have simultaneous releases for scheduled events and the Design & Trend, Forbes and ProPC articles all think Creative Cloud is a cloud-base suite of software (like Google Docs). At least the writer of the c|net article (first link) understood that CC wasn't actually cloud-based versions of Photoshop et al.

Did Adobe help cause this confusion by jumping on the Cloud buzzword bandwagon? Yes, but people (especially journalists) really need to read up on things before jumping to conclusions.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:50:47 pm
Last Edited By Franz Bieberkopf on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:05:25 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I appreciate the effort you put in to finding links but I don't think they are helping your position much."

Andrew,

What's my position?

But, more seriously, I think the pointed question (that I've put to Kevin in the other forum, and one that has been posted here before) is what is the difference between the CC2014, CC2015 etc. iterations and the CS5, CS5.5, CS6 iterations.

I think it's uncontroversial to state that the idea of "continuous updates" has been touted as a major reason for the move to rental software.

I'm waiting for a coherent statement on how yearly (?) milestone versions is rationalized into that model. Is this not back to the "deadline development" model?

As to the links:

There's this: "... customers should stop expecting massive, across-the-board updates, [Scott Morris, senior director of product marketing] said.

Then there's this: "Introducing 14 all-new versions of your favorite apps — including Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign — plus new Adobe mobile apps, all connected to Creative Cloud."
http://www.adobe.com

Edit: additional copy:
"Everything new is new again. The 2014 release of Creative Cloud includes 14 all-new versions of your favorite desktop apps — with hundreds of new features. Do everything you do more efficiently using the latest innovations and modern standards."

... but, I'd agree, plausible deniability is an important marketing tool.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:26:12 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "But, more seriously, I think the pointed question (that I've put to Kevin in the other forum, and one that has been posted here before) is what is the difference between the CC2014, CC2015 etc. iterations and the CS5, CS5.5, CS6 iterations."

The difference is what comes in-between. (Also, I think the nature of new features being developed is changing for the better, targeting existing user pain points instead of "shiny" features to try to sell new licenses, but that's a separate topic.)

Under the CS model, no new features were released in between major versions. Under the CC mode, features are released as they are ready, including in between major versions.

Instead of a single massive update every year or two, you get a series of smaller updates every few months. In practical terms, this means that users don't need to wait months and months for ready-to-ship features.

If you look at any of the announcements for point releases of CC products between last May and this April, you'll see features getting out to users that would have been held for CS8 under the old model.

This doesn't strike me as incompatible with the idea of major releases, which are still make sense to me for larger architectural changes.

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


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:36:35 pm
Last Edited By Franz Bieberkopf on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:39:18 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I think the nature of new features being developed is changing for the better, targeting existing user pain points instead of "shiny" features to try to sell new licenses, but that's a separate topic."

Walter,

"I couldn't be more excited to introduce the 2014 release of Creative Cloud. And in this release you're going to see that we have updates to all three major pillars of Creative Cloud. … major innovation that we'll be sharing with you today. … a major set of updates to all our key desktop apps."
David Wadhwani, https://creativecloud.adobeevents.com/ccnext/

I'm interested - what sense do you make of the event and marketing around CC 2014?

Edit: to be clearer, I guess the claim is that there were no development deadlines for CC 2014?

Franz.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:50:18 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "I'm interested - what sense do you make of the event and marketing around CC 2014?"

Why do you think that major releases are incompatible with Creative Cloud's "continuous update" idea? It's not like CC customers have always been running nightly builds.

Do you think that major releases are a bad thing?

How would you prefer to see versions handled?


[Franz Bieberkopf] "Edit: to be clearer, I guess the claim is that there were no development deadlines for CC 2014?"

The claim is that the teams were free to release features on their own schedules in advance of CC 2014, and that they did so.

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


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:00:52 pm
Last Edited By Franz Bieberkopf on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:03:20 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Do you think that major releases are a bad thing? How would you prefer to see versions handled?"

Walter,

I think major versions are important, even essential. They also provide clear and well-developed opportunities for perpetual license. CS6 is already the template for this.

[Walter Soyka] "The claim is that the teams were free to release features on their own schedules in advance of CC 2014, and that they did so."

So you feel that those PPro, Photoshop, AE updates for CC2014 were just a happy coincidence this week? ... they were neither rushed to deadline, nor held-back?

Franz.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:32:49 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "So you feel that those PPro, Photoshop, AE updates for CC2014 were just a happy coincidence this week? ... they were neither rushed to deadline, nor held-back?"

Before, you had one chance to release a feature: with a major Creative Suite update.

Now, the teams can update their products outside of this single-release schedule.

Obviously this release was coordinated, but if a feature was almost-but-not-quite ready, what's the big deal? The team can leave it out for now and include it in a new release in another couple months when it's ready. It's no longer the case they have to ship it now or wait another year or two. The teams have also been releasing other features all year long.

I get that you are looking at this and thinking, "This big release is evidence nothing has changed" -- but this is only a "big" release in a marketing sense. There's a lot of evidence that I think you're ignoring that shows the feature rollout has been as-promised. This would have been a "big" release indeed if it had all the features that have been delivered off-cycle over the last year.

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


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:44:21 pm

[Walter Soyka] "... this is only a "big" release in a marketing sense."

Walter,

I'd agree.

[Walter Soyka] "Before, you had one chance to release a feature: with a major Creative Suite update."

This is also true - only in the marketing sense.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:27:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "The claim is that the teams were free to release features on their own schedules in advance of CC 2014, and that they did so."



"We've taken bold steps with this milestone release, fast-tracking new features to industry-defining tools like Photoshop and InDesign, ...," said David Wadhwani, senior vice president, Digital Media, Adobe. http://library.creativecow.net/wall_kylee/Adobe_Creative-Cloud-June-2014-updates/1

I do wonder what "fast-tracking" development means.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:52:05 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "I do wonder what "fast-tracking" development means."

I would assume it means prioritizing them for development, rather than simultaneously developing more features which would require a later release date.

This is fully consistent with the pattern of more frequent releases with fewer new features per release that CC has delivered to date. As a CC customer, I just don't see all these facts as the inconsistencies that you and the rest of my friends here seem to.

That said, I think it's time for me to respectfully bow out of this conversation. I am not and do not intend to be Adobe PR, and I'm not particularly keen to re-hash every point of every debate we've had in the last year.

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


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 8:08:16 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I would assume it means prioritizing them for development, rather than simultaneously developing more features which would require a later release date."

Walter,

That's what I would assume too.

I also assume this more or less consistent with CS development patterns - certain things had to be "fast-tracked" and others delayed.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Mike Chambers
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:04:28 pm

>I'm waiting for a coherent statement on how yearly (?) milestone versions is rationalized into that model. Is this not back to the "deadline development" model?

We will still release updates and new features through the year (as we have been doing). Sometimes multiple apps will have releases at the same time, and sometimes we may make a big marketing push around that (as we did yesterday).

Once a year, we designate a milestone version. These will be archived to make it possible to install old versions.

Currently, you have the option to install:

CS6
CC
CC2014

There is no change in policy or practice on how we develop and or release applications.

mike chambers

mesh@adobe.com


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:11:10 pm

[Mike Chambers] "Once a year, we designate a milestone version. These will be archived to make it possible to install old versions. ...There is no change in policy or practice on how we develop and or release applications."


Mike,

This seems to imply that the "milestone" versions are essentially arbitrary, and, for example, feature compatibility will be case by case and not tied to CC 2014 , CC 2015 designations.

For example, project formats could change at any point, or be compatible with older versions; and this will differ from application to application.

Correct?

Franz.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:16:52 pm

[Mike Chambers] "There is no change in policy or practice on how we develop and or release applications."

Thank you Mike.

It sounds like only change is in how applications are sold.

This confirms what many of us have been saying from the start.

Please let your managers know that millions of customers like myself would gladly purchase your CS2013 applications with a perpetual license. And we'd be comfortable doing this every year for a reasonable price.

Win-win.

_______________________
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

Mike Chambers
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 8:18:45 pm

>"There is no change in policy or practice on how we develop and or release applications."

>It sounds like only change is in how applications are sold.

No. I was referring to how we have done app development and releases in Creative Cloud. The updates made yesterday do not indicate any change in how we develop and release software.

Sorry for the confusion...

mike chambers

mesh@adobe.com


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 9:03:54 pm

[Mike Chambers] "No. I was referring to how we have done app development and releases in Creative Cloud. The updates made yesterday do not indicate any change in how we develop and release software."

Mike, Thank you for the the clarification.

This of course does not address The Elephant in the room, but I understand why your position prevents comment.

_______________________
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

Jim Wiseman
Re: Version issues
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:54:02 am

^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, Blackmagic Teranex, 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

Jim Wiseman
Re: Version issues
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:45:22 am

This is absolute poppycock. All that has happened is you still have a yearly milestone release, except that now people are locked into paying forever. Have you ever read 1984 or Brave New World? Newspeak anyone?

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, Blackmagic Teranex, 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

Gary Huff
Re: Version issues
on Jun 20, 2014 at 7:02:18 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "If I'm understanding you correctly, you think the updates to PPro, AE, etc. were a serendipitous co-incidence with CC2014 - a marketing date that fortuitously lined up with updates that were ready for June anyway?"

If it was ready to go May 29th, and they held off on releasing it until June 14th, is that really such a horrible thing?

You will notice that not every app was updated in a whiz-bang way, unlike the traditional model.


Return to posts index

Chris Walsh
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:05:32 pm

Am coming late to the party, since I was logged out of CC updater for some reason, and didn't read the press release well enough.

While new versions aren't the end of the world and I don't feel "lied to," I do feel the warm sticky embrace of what I can only call "the old Adobe." I've enjoyed CC so far because it was a relatively smooth and seamless experience vs. previous Adobe releases. No discs or serial numbers to backup, carry, copy. Finding the original install to authorize the upgrade etc. Moving to a new machine/platform was painless.

But now it feels like we are headed toward a future where I may have 3 or 4 different versions of the same application on a single machine. The old "more is more" version of Adobe. I don't care that they all function fine, I'm still going to have to update them all, and the plugins and make sure that I know which machine created which version etc. It's more maintenance for me. Again, not the end of the world, but if it happens every year or two it will get tiresome. Adobe is still flush with the growth of new subscribers, I hope they are also watching their churn rate, the most important number for subscription businesses, what percentage of subs are leaving and why. Why add exhaustion to the list of possible suspects.

Chris Walsh

http://www.musicfog.com
Silver Spring, MD
Final Cut & AVID MC5
Former Windows User and edit* lover


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Version issues
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:44:25 pm

[Chris Walsh] "But now it feels like we are headed toward a future where I may have 3 or 4 different versions of the same application on a single machine. The old "more is more" version of Adobe. I don't care that they all function fine, I'm still going to have to update them all, and the plugins and make sure that I know which machine created which version etc. "

The software was always going to get versioned. The alternative is forced updates so that everyone is always running the exact same version of the software and that sounds like a horrible nightmare. I never touch production software with a 10 foot pole that didn't let the user control updating and versioning.


[David Lawrence] "Since CC2014 is an entirely new set of applications, doesn't that mean it's a new code base than CC2013?"

Why would it be a new code base? FCP Legend was the same code base for it's entire existence.

[David Lawrence] "Will CC2013 get the same feature updates as CC2014? Or just bug fixes like CS6?"

Presumably just bug fixes.

[David Lawrence] "If CC2013 is no longer getting feature updates and lives as a separate application suite on the user's HD, why can't it now be offered with a perpetual license?"

Because Adobe would need a subscription plan like Avid's to pull it off. And, honestly, with how convoluted Avid's options are I think I see why Adobe wanted to avoid that rat's nest (and Avid only has a handful of products as part of the subscription plan)

This 'clean break' does make it straight forward if Adobe wanted to offer a loyalty buyout option though.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:30:29 pm

So many questions:

Since CC2014 is an entirely new set of applications, doesn't that mean it's a new code base than CC2013?

Will CC2013 get the same feature updates as CC2014? Or just bug fixes like CS6?

If CC2013 is no longer getting feature updates and lives as a separate application suite on the user's HD, why can't it now be offered with a perpetual license?

I think you know the answers...

_______________________
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 Jacek
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 5:40:24 pm

Why, it's almost as if you're taking the cynical position the their motivation is profit.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 23, 2014 at 4:24:05 pm

[Chris Jacek] "'re taking the cynical position the their motivation is profit"

One has to say "BINGO!" (and by that I mean prima facie justified belief). ;)


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:00:41 pm

[David Lawrence] "If CC2013 is no longer getting feature updates and lives as a separate application suite on the user's HD, why can't it now be offered with a perpetual license?"

To be clear, Todd has argued here before that a perpetual license release would drain resources from development of CC:

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/4677
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/1282

But if CC2013 has been "frozen" as a version, then it can't be draining development resources.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:18:25 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "But if CC2013 has been "frozen" as a version, then it can't be draining development resources."

How could that be anything but %100 true?


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:25:51 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "But if CC2013 has been "frozen" as a version, then it can't be draining development resources."

Nor could it receive bug fix updates, as we have discussed in some depth in the past.

Note that CS6 hasn't been frozen. It has received bug fixes, which means it has been consuming development resources.

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


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:33:49 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Nor could it receive bug fix updates, as we have discussed in some depth in the past."

Walter,

I don't understand this argument - presumably CC2013 has achieved some form of equilibrium re: bugs (or at least as much as any piece of software does. FCP7 is still widely used.). But ... previous link:

[Todd Kopriva] "Committing to crucial bug-fix updates is a much more constrained commitment than developing and releasing new features under both models."

Franz.


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:34:43 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Note that CS6 hasn't been frozen. It has received bug fixes, which means it has been consuming development resources."

So sunset the bug fixes.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:34:46 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Note that CS6 hasn't been frozen. It has received bug fixes, which means it has been consuming development resources."

So I guess that means in addition to devoting resources to CS6, they now need to devote resources to CC2013, CC2014, and presumably CC2015.

Remind me again why the CC development model was supposed to be more streamline then CS...

_______________________
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: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:38:36 pm

[David Lawrence] "So I guess that means in addition to devoting resources to CS6, they now need to devote resources to CC2013, CC2014, and presumably CC2015. Remind me again why the CC development model was supposed to be more streamline then CS..."

It is not my expectation that CC2013 will see any additional development, but I don't know for sure.

And I don't think the argument here has ever been that CC is a more streamlined development model than CS -- just that CC on subscription alone is more streamlined than CC with subscription plus PL.

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 6:59:31 pm

[Walter Soyka] "And I don't think the argument here has ever been that CC is a more streamlined development model than CS -- just that CC on subscription alone is more streamlined than CC with subscription plus PL."

I don't have time to find the links, but my understanding is that one of the primary reasons given for eliminating a perpetual license option was the problem of maintaining parallel development resources and tracking release schedules.

The fact that CC2014 is a completely different release than CC2013 takes this argument off the table.

More questions:

Will dynamic link work between CC2014 and CC2013? I'm guessing not.

_______________________
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

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:02:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "And I don't think the argument here has ever been that CC is a more streamlined development model than CS -- just that CC on subscription alone is more streamlined than CC with subscription plus PL"


... relevant question from July 2013:

[David Smith] "How difficult would it be, with exactly the new model you described above, to also take versions of all the software, with features and updates where they are at, and freeze it in time once every say 18 months or so, package it up, and sell it with a perpetual license?"
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/4261

[Todd Kopriva] "It would require us to maintain multiple aspects of everything, from development/testing branches to sales/marketing campaigns to support services."
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/378/4278

How does CC 2013 now fit into this?

Franz.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:25:42 pm

[David Lawrence] "I don't have time to find the links, but my understanding is that one of the primary reasons given for eliminating a perpetual license option was the problem of maintaining parallel development resources and tracking release schedules. The fact that CC2014 is a completely different release than CC2013 takes this argument off the table."

With CC on subscription only, all development is forward-oriented. The argument against parallel tracks was avoiding the effort of back-porting and testing new fixes (without features) against prior versions.

(I'm not saying this is ideal, because I am sympathetic to your position -- but this is all still consistent with everything we've been discussing for the last year.)


[David Lawrence] "Will dynamic link work between CC2014 and CC2013? I'm guessing not."

Dynamic link is an interesting technology that does require some coordination between the Ae and Pr teams. In my mind, major releases is a good thing for users in this regard.

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


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:30:03 pm

[Walter Soyka] " In my mind, major releases is a good thing for users in this regard."

Walter,

Mike's statement above seems to imply that "milestones" will be simply an arbitrary delimitation.

Franz.


Return to posts index

David Smith
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:43:01 pm

I am now more convinced than ever that the only reason Adobe isn't offering perpetual licenses is because they believe forcing subscription as the only option will make them more money. That's the elephant in the room no Adobe employee is willing to acknowledge.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:55:58 pm
Last Edited By Gary Huff on Jun 19, 2014 at 7:57:15 pm

[David Smith] "I am now more convinced than ever that the only reason Adobe isn't offering perpetual licenses is because they believe forcing subscription as the only option will make them more money. That's the elephant in the room no Adobe employee is willing to acknowledge."

Of course, because sitting out on full release versions in the past made it an untenable position to continue forward that way. Same with Microsoft and Office.

All of you who sat on 2-3 generation old software helped kill it.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:56:53 am

Duh! Fire the CEO!

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, Blackmagic Teranex, 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

Andrew Kimery
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 19, 2014 at 11:56:00 pm

David and Franz,

You guys are confusing two different, though similar, scenarios. Having CC 2013 'locked' (i.e. no more feature development) but still available isn't the same thing as developing both CC and Perp versions of the same apps at the same time (which is the argument from before).

For example, at launch both apps, PPro 7.0 CC and PPro 7.0 Perp, are the same. After the first round of upgrades though both apps are no longer the same. PPro 7.1 CC gets bug fixes and new features while PPro 7.0.1 Perp gets only bug fixes. And these differences just compound with each feature upgrade. So what happens if the new features in PPro CC make project files incompatible with PPro Perp? Now we have users running the same major version of an app (PPro 7) and they might not even be compatible with each other. Now expand this out to every app Adobe sells and how is this not a horrible mess waiting to happen?

Avid avoids SOX problems and has concurrent subscription and perp license avenues by charging all non-subscribers a $300 annual maintenance fee. If you do not re-up every year you get your version of Avid 'as is' and if you want to upgrade you have to pay full price again. AFAIK the maintenance fee is good for 12 months from date of purchase so be careful when you hop on that wagon. For example, Avid MC 9.0 comes out while you are still covered, later your coverage lapses and then 9.1 comes out with bug fixes and feature upgrades. You'll get the bug fixes but you won't get the feature upgrades. So now there are different versions of Avid MC v9. If you want to get recent again you have to pay full price even though it just takes you from 9.0 to 9.1. Now just imagine hundreds (thousands?) of users that signed up at different times so, potentially, each new feature update could create another subset of users all running different 'variants' of Avid MC 9. People have come to expect potential problems when going between major versions but

It will be interesting to see how Avid deals with this. At least Avid only has to worry about MC where as Adobe has over a dozen programs to worry about.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 12:53:45 am

[Andrew Kimery] "You guys are confusing two different, though similar, scenarios. Having CC 2013 'locked' (i.e. no more feature development) but still available isn't the same thing as developing both CC and Perp versions of the same apps at the same time (which is the argument from before). "

Andrew, there's another scenario you're not considering -

Allowing users to purchase a feature-locked perpetual version of CC2013, just as they can do with CS6.

_______________________
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

Lance Moody
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:03:19 am

I was surprised that new versions were installed. I did not realize that this was the way the update was going to work. But I didn't freak out.

Did anyone besides me delete the old CC (2013) apps? I uninstalled all of them and don't plan on looking back.
I love the new features and look forward to more.

The process of getting my extensive plugins over to the new version took about a half hour.

I am fairly certain (at least as certain as those claiming the opposite) that "millions" of users would not be interested in installing perpetual licenses of the 2013 version of the apps.

Lance



Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:54:03 am

[Lance Moody] "I am fairly certain (at least as certain as those claiming the opposite) that "millions" of users would not be interested in installing perpetual licenses of the 2013 version of the apps."

Lance, I believe Adobe released the the actual numbers - 2.3 million worldwide CC customers this quarter if I recall correctly.

As opposed to (what was it?) 12 million or so worldwide perpetual customers up to this point?

I'd say there is still wide demand for perpetual licenses and the fact that Adobe offers no choice in the matter is a clue as to their real intent.

_______________________
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

Lance Moody
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 4:54:33 am

Well, you could be right. But the question is whether millions would sign up to buy an out of date version of the software--particularly at the price Adobe would conceivably offer.

The 12 Million wasn't the number of folks with up to date CS6 licenses, was it?

Was it actually anyone with any perpetual license for any package? If so, that isn't really a number that fits into this scenario.

I am happy with the CC offering and I suspect that there isn't going to be the kind of change you desire. I'm not against it, it just seems exceedingly unlikely. The new yearly label on the CC releases makes it even less likely, in my opinion.

Lance



Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:50:06 am

Thank you, David!

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, Blackmagic Teranex, 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

Ben Mullins
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 12:55:35 pm

Of all the complaints about Adobe's CC behaviour (and several are legitimate I think) this seems like a more trivial one. If they version CC yearly but still choose to add features as and when it's really just like adding a marker on a timeline so that users have a reference point. There may be some resulting compatibility issues here and there but that's the case with all software - some people are happy to stay with a version several years old, some people are desperate for the shiny new one. At least this system gives people a reference point so that a common version can be found. In the case of two separate parties needing to collaborate but running different versions of CC apps it might even be preferable to have a subscription-only model as if one party needed to upgrade their version it wouldn't cost them anything extra. Although they would still be getting raped by the corporate beast of Adobe year-round for the rest of their life. So there's that to consider too.



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:06:22 pm

[Ben Mullins] "Although they would still be getting raped by the corporate beast of Adobe year-round for the rest of their life."

Thank you for doing your part in trivializing a horrific crime by making this comparison.


Return to posts index

Ben Mullins
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 2:20:58 pm

Well that's a ridiculous over-reaction Gary. I wasn't drawing a caparison between Adobe's subscription-only model and an actual rape, rather than making a sarcastic comment highlighting the over-the-top venomous nature in which some people choose to critice Adobe regardless of the issue at hand. Not that I'm a particular fan of Adobe but in this case I was actually arguing in their favour. I would have thought you'd be pleased that someone here agreed with you for once. I suppose you just like to argue.



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 3:10:21 pm

[Ben Mullins] "I suppose you just like to argue."

So you're saying I have no legitimate point at all? Thanks for that.


Return to posts index

Ben Mullins
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 3:12:27 pm

No I can see your point, it's just quite an over-reaction that's all.



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 3:15:20 pm

[Ben Mullins] "No I can see your point, it's just quite an over-reaction that's all."

In your opinion. But if you're insistent that you should get to use "rape" as the term you picked without comment, then by all means, continue.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 6:22:15 pm

[David Lawrence] "Andrew, there's another scenario you're not considering -

Allowing users to purchase a feature-locked perpetual version of CC2013, just as they can do with CS6."


I considered it the first time you mentioned it but through my infinite posting wisdom I accidentally replied above your original post rather than below it. ;)

I still like the idea of some sort of loyalty buyout option as it give both parties what they want. Maybe after a year of full priced CC subscription you get to the option to buy a perp license of the old version (in this case CC2013) at a discounted rate and the discount could compound if you don't use it. For example, 1 year of CC gets you a 1/4 discount on a perp license but if you have CC for four continuous years you get a perp license for free. This entices people to get onto CC (which is what Adobe wants) while still providing an off ramp.

Though selling old versions of CC for full price with no upgrade discounts seems like a win/win for Adobe too though I don't know how well that would go over with users.

FWIW, I've submitted ideas like this to Adobe on a couple of occasions. Just because I think you and Franz are wrong in how you remember some events doesn't mean I think Adobe is right. ;)


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 7:00:27 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Though selling old versions of CC for full price with no upgrade discounts seems like a win/win for Adobe too though I don't know how well that would go over with users."

They would hate it, and come on here and complain about Adobe being Hitler.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 7:16:14 pm

Hitler had more sense...
Not so good with positioning his tanks, though...

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, Blackmagic Teranex, 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

Gary Huff
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 20, 2014 at 9:38:30 pm

[Jim Wiseman] "Hitler had more sense..."

Hitting subscription goals means Adobe doesn't have sense? Just because you don't like it doesn't mean squat when it's doing the company well overall.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: The Elephant In The Room
on Jun 23, 2014 at 6:06:26 pm
Last Edited By Jim Wiseman on Jun 23, 2014 at 6:12:03 pm

From what I have been reading on the net, a lot of their kicks have been wide of the goal posts, with I guess, what, about 10 million users…

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, Blackmagic Teranex, 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

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