FORUMS: list search recent posts

Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>

Rainer Schubert
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 12:27:35 pm

All the same:
They are nearby monopolists, want to earn more and more continuous income and their apps are mature - new features hard to bring in.
Telling and selling us, what a overwhelming sugar pink and must have that would be.
Must have without any option. And without any buyout.
And without any document if we don´t pay and pay and pay.
Thanks a lot.


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 2:09:57 pm

Announced a month ago, surprised it took this long for someone to crow about it.

Yes Autodesk is doing the same thing, and for the exact same reasons Adobe is doing it. They own lots of irreplaceable formats and platforms, they've bought out competitors and dominate their market, so they can do whatever they want, whether it's in all of their customers interest or not.

I cant conceive of celebrating these developments, even if subscriptions were the perfect choice for me, I would be very wary of the negative impact on colleagues and other members of my industry.


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 2:19:01 pm

[Chris Pettit] "someone to crow about it.
"


Crow about it????


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 2:25:57 pm

Based on Autodesks subscription pricing CC looks like a bargain!


Return to posts index

Dave LaRonde
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 4:59:41 pm
Last Edited By Dave LaRonde on Oct 24, 2014 at 7:41:27 pm

[Steve Connor] "Based on Autodesks subscription pricing CC looks like a bargain!"

I guess it all depends on what you view as a bargain.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought Autodesk video applications were ALWAYS sold with 1-year licenses. In effect, you weren't paying a monthly rental fee, you were paying an annual rental fee.
Furthermore, you had to run your Autodesk software on Autodesk-mandated platforms, using a limited, select set of Autodesk-approved third-party hardware: Autodesk already knew how the various combinations would work because they were limited in number and they could test them all in advance. No surprises.

In return for doing so, and paying the annual 5-figure rental fee, you could count on virtually-bulletproof tech support. On the other end of the line was somone who'd solve your problem, who wouldn't keep you on hold for scores of minutes, and would actively walk you through troubleshooting, and who would help expedite replacement of defective hardware... try THAT one, Adobe!

There's alo this: while Adobe once positioned itself as the standard-bearer of multimedia software for Everyman, Autodesk always had the aura of being multimedia software for a limited market of high-end users.

Frankly, I don't see this announcement as much of a departure for Autodesk: they were already halfway there in the first place.

Perhaps MY longtime perception of Autodesk is incorrect. Please feel free to point out where I got it wrong.

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


Return to posts index


Rainer Schubert
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 7:21:49 pm
Last Edited By Rainer Schubert on Oct 24, 2014 at 8:15:13 pm

Not 100% correct.
The times, when professional 3D software - like Alias Wavefront - was only sold as a yearly subscription on dedicated systems is long ago.
But it´s true - when 3D Graphics was (and could only be) done oh High End Silicon Graphics machines, years ago, you could only rent the software on yearly contracts.
The company I worked for at that time, payed nearby 50,000+ $ / per year and seat.
But - just like Adobe it´s competitors - Autodesk bought Alias Wavefront, when it run out of business 2005.
The most popular 3D Apps of Autodesk could formerly and can still be bought as perpetual licenses (Maya, 3DS Max,...).
They will change this next year or latest in 2016.
(Don´t know, why they announce it - may be, they will wait and see, if Adobe gets away with it´s strategy.
Adobe didn´t announce that. They rather promised, CS 6 will be the only version, which can be updated in future and THEN changed/cut the product without any announcement)
But also, a 9200 $ single Suite like Maya Complete isn´t really comparable with the Prices of Adobe Apps.


Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 2:51:05 pm

[Steve Connor] "
Crow about it????"


Sorry, you're on record as strongly supporting Adobe's subscription only model, I assume you think this is a good thing. Are you saying you support Adobe's move but oppose it when Autodesk does it? Maybe I misunderstood your point.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 3:24:18 pm

Just pointing out someone else is going down the same road, I don't think it will be long before others follow.

For the record I think CC is a great idea, however I don't agree with it being the ONLY option.


Return to posts index


David Mathis
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 3:50:35 pm
Last Edited By David Mathis on Oct 24, 2014 at 6:17:10 pm

[Steve Connor] "
For the record I think CC is a great idea, however I don't agree with it being the ONLY option."


I have no problem with a subscription model as long as there are other options or an off ramp. In its current state Adobe offers neither, and I respectfully disagree with the current model.

Avid at least has a buyout option, curious to know why Adobe does not offer the same. Just hope that BMD does not follow the same path, look forward to seeing Fusion as part of their product offering. Subscription only and I start in search of viable alternatives. My two cents, whatever it is worth.

camera operator | editor | production assistant

Blackmagic Cinema Camera | FCP X | Motion 5 | Compressor 4 | Resolve 11


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 3:46:05 pm

[Chris Pettit] "Announced a month ago, surprised it took this long for someone to crow about it."

I was thinking the same thing.

camera operator | editor | production assistant

Blackmagic Cinema Camera | FCP X | Motion 5 | Compressor 4 | Resolve 11


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 5:35:10 pm

Maybe I'm missing something but at least according to the Autodesk website it doesn't look like anything has changed. They still offer a perpetual licenses with a "maintenance subscription" option as well as subscription plans similar to Adobe's.

http://www.autodesk.com/subscription/overview


Return to posts index


David Mathis
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 6:21:11 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Maybe I'm missing something but at least according to the Autodesk website it doesn't look like anything has changed. They still offer a perpetual licenses with a "maintenance subscription" option as well as subscription plans similar to Adobe's."

Just went to the Autodesk website and saw the same thing. Perhaps it was me that missed something so I decided to edit my original post.


Egg on face with a bacon mustache!


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 6:36:53 pm

Autodesk "is set to" move subscription-only in the 12-24 months.

(Redshark says 24, but Bryant Frazer had this story a few weeks ago, and his strikes me as the better coverage.

So I would expect the Autodesk website to reflect the current state of things (identical to Avid: if you buy, you're also subscribing to a support contract, period) for quite a while longer.

David, stop playing with your food. :-)


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 6:41:43 pm
Last Edited By David Mathis on Nov 2, 2014 at 3:16:56 pm

[Tim Wilson] "David, stop playing with your food. :-)"

LOL, guess the egg on face remark was asking for it. :-)


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 24, 2014 at 8:53:51 pm

[Tim Wilson] "(Redshark says 24, but Bryant Frazer had this story a few weeks ago, and his strikes me as the better coverage. "

Ah, thanks for that Tim. I just skimmed the article in the OP and missed the half-a-sentence where it said the changeover was happening over the span of a year or two.


Return to posts index

Florian Sepp
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 25, 2014 at 8:57:09 am

wow maxon will like it.... they will get so many users... first softimage and now subscription.

Florian Sepp visual arts
http://www.floriansepp.com


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 27, 2014 at 6:21:48 pm

[Florian Sepp] "wow maxon will like it.... they will get so many users... first softimage and now subscription."

Don't be surprised if Maxon follows suit... subscription has been a VERY hot topic in the software business for nearly a decade. My prediction (minus my personal feelings) is that subscription software is here to stay, and perpetually licensed software will mostly come from very small niche players and hardware/service subsidized applications. Time will tell.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 28, 2014 at 10:52:34 pm

[Shawn Miller] "My prediction (minus my personal feelings) is that subscription software is here to stay, and perpetually licensed software will mostly come from very small niche players and hardware/service subsidized applications. Time will tell."

Maybe.

But on the other side, the fact that we now have a global marketplace with near zero distribution costs - makes it much easier to have excellent economic success with a low price and wide adoption sales strategy as well.

When it costs potentially so little to acquire customers (social and viral marketing, etc) and almost nothing in terms of overhead to distribute it. The fact that the margin is slim and it's only an occasional sale (compared to on-going revenue) makes it possible for small software players to put together a pretty robust revenue model without rental. Plenty of small concerns do it via App store sales at a buck or two. And there are plenty of high quality programs like Pixelmator and the like that seem to do really well with the old fashioned "sell it today - charge for an update when that provides more value to the customer" model.

Yes, it creates MORE revenue to do the rental thing. Rental has always worked that way. You expect to pay more. But typically for a tool or item you see as a temporary need. This concept of lifetime rental as the defacto standard is a bit odd to me. I'd previously encountered it really just in stuff like Heavy Equipment where the initial cost is so prohibitive and the resale market so fickle - that the asset couldn't really be put into the standard depreciation capital cost re-capture system all that well.

Then again, I'm no expert at this. My experiences with equipment leasing and renting is that they were things I always tried to get OUT of the moment I realized that I'd have on-going needs for the item.

Maybe I'm just behind the times in this particular area.

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

Rainer Schubert
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 29, 2014 at 4:02:24 pm
Last Edited By Rainer Schubert on Oct 29, 2014 at 4:04:24 pm

I´m going a step further.
Would say: If a company is going on subscription only - it´s an indicator for "This company isn´t innovative enough, any longer".
Have a look on the companies, which have done this step...
MS with it´s office 365. There isn´t any big innovation in this software suite. The updates made the software more and more unusable than better in the last years.
Adobe? Clearly can be seen, that they want (let´s see if they get it) more income rather than giving us innovation. The innovation comes by bought competitors.
Autodesk? Mature. Stable. And many users don´t want to pay for updates, which are not worth the price.
So I think, all these have the trouble, that their products are mature, innovation is hard to find, but they have to show WallStreet 10+ % of growth.
Innovative little companies (like Pixelmator) will sell their products as perpetual SW (until they are disturbing the big ones and bought by them).
So markets are changing, but I don´t think, that future is dominated by SW as subscription only.
It´s up to us: Accept it or not.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 29, 2014 at 6:59:59 pm

[Bill Davis] "But on the other side, the fact that we now have a global marketplace with near zero distribution costs - makes it much easier to have excellent economic success with a low price and wide adoption sales strategy as well."

Well sure, if an application doesn't cost very much in the way of development time, testing, support and marketing, and it has a somewhat wide appeal, then perpetual licensing makes a lot of sense.

OTOH, if an application costs a few million dollars to develop, test and market, then subscription makes a lot of sense, especially if that application has to compete with software that is subsidized by the hardware or services sales of a competitor.

That's why I say that the only ones who will be able to offer perpetual licensing in the future will be smaller, niche developers (less than ten person shops) and companies that can subsidize the cost of developing high quality software.

I look at Motion and Hitfilm as examples (purposely skipping over Resolve). If Motion was developed by a few folks working in their basements, I don't think it would be a one time, $49 download with free updates. Conversely, if HitFilm was sold by HP as a way of getting its DCC base to buy more Z1 workstations, I imagine they could or would sell it for less than $100, as well as bundling free copies with new Z1 or Pavillion desktops.

Lastly, let's not overlook the cost of updating and supporting software... that's not an inexpensive proposition, especially if you have a lot of users. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 30, 2014 at 6:55:22 pm

[Shawn Miller] "
Well sure, if an application doesn't cost very much in the way of development time, testing, support and marketing, and it has a somewhat wide appeal, then perpetual licensing makes a lot of sense."


So does this presume that Adobe is spending "vastly" more to develop Premier than Apple is spending to develop X and this is the reason the two companies require a different sales strategy?

Does it feel to you that Adobe has to go rental in order to cover higher development costs compared to Apple? Doesn't seem that way to me. Seems to me that Apple's goal is to keep crack engineering and coding and creative talent in house and spread their brand message as innovators. And while Adobe also does all these things, they do have a particular emphasis on the more basic business goal of maximizing profits. (Which of course is EXACTLY what all corporations are duty bound to do.) And it's cool that they have to do profit via software since Adobe doesn't have any of the monster hardware cash cows that Apple has created over the past generation.

One interesting thing to me is that Apple appears to spend damn near ZERO to market X. I've NEVER seen an ad for it, nor a sponsored event for it, or anything remotely on the level that Adobe's been promoting CC over the past couple of years. It kinda flies in the face of ALL the conventional business wisdom. Two major companies in head to head in competition on a recently revised major product - and yet Apple stays off the field and appears to concentrate on NOTHING but the product development effort itself. Leaving it to the press and the user base to do the rest.

And yet it seems to be doing really well with virtually no marketing dollars in support. It's so strange.

I know a lot of that is the Apple "halo" effect, where people just like their stuff and are loyal to it. (which describes me pretty well, I'll admit.)

But the other side is a matter of company focus. What's the top down company priority.? It's clear that the Premier CC team is VERY engaged in product improvement. But that's equally true of the Apple team. But I see Adobe spending everywhere to promote the CC brand - and I don't even see FCP X swag giveaway pens and coffee cups around. Odd, huh?

It all cool, I guess, since one aspect of this is that whichever team you support, you get the benefits of focused ongoing development effort. And that's pretty good thing right there.
.

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

Shawn Miller
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 30, 2014 at 8:10:11 pm
Last Edited By Shawn Miller on Oct 30, 2014 at 8:24:08 pm

[Bill Davis] "[Shawn Miller] "
Well sure, if an application doesn't cost very much in the way of development time, testing, support and marketing, and it has a somewhat wide appeal, then perpetual licensing makes a lot of sense."

So does this presume that Adobe is spending "vastly" more to develop Premier than Apple is spending to develop X and this is the reason the two companies require a different sales strategy?"


Nope, I'm not presuming to know how much each company spends on development, R&D, licensing, support, etc. (though I suspect that it costs somewhere north of a few million dollars a year to keep each team going). My point is that a software company like Adobe, has to make money from licensing software, a hardware company like Apple doesn't. Apple could give FCPX away for free and never feel it, not so much in Adobe's case with Premiere Pro (I'm guessing). If Apple spun it's pro apps division off to a separate entity, do you think the price of FCPX, Motion, et al would remain the same? I'm not so sure they would. In fact (and I'm making this part up), I would be VERY surprised if an independent company the size of Apple's pro apps team (plus business, IT, operational/admin support teams .etc) could offer a perpetually licensed version of FCPX for less than $900(ish)... or maybe around $600 if they were willing to work with a slimmer margin, Motion (in my mind) would be somewhere between $549 and $900... I'm guessing... and I don't think major updates would be free. :-)

[Bill Davis] "Seems to me that Apple's goal is to keep crack engineering and coding and creative talent in house and spread their brand message as innovators."

So... how is this different from Adobe, or Oracle, or IBM, or Microsoft? Incidentally, you're conflating software development and marketing, with (I think) a greater focus on marketing...

[Bill Davis] "And while Adobe also does all these things, they do have a particular emphasis on the more basic business goal of maximizing profits."

I'm not sure I follow here... are you saying that Apple is less interested in maximizing profits than Adobe?

[Bill Davis] "One interesting thing to me is that Apple appears to spend damn near ZERO to market X....

I know a lot of that is the Apple "halo" effect, where people just like their stuff and are loyal to it. (which describes me pretty well, I'll admit.)"


I think you may have answered your own question. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 30, 2014 at 8:42:44 pm

[Shawn Miller] "I'm not sure I follow here... are you saying that Apple is less interested in maximizing profits than Adobe?"

Nope, just that their view has always been that as long as the company is overall profitable at a level that sustains high investor interest, they don't need to scorecard every single item in the catalog to maximize it's contribution to the bottom line.

We talked about that before in another thread. Given the well over 1,000,000 paid seats out there for X (maybe approaching 2,000,000 for all we know) that means the ProApps re-boot has put (AT LEAST) well north of 300 million bucks in the Apple coffers. Clearly enough to comfortably support a software development effort that seemingly requires NO advertising or product distribution money - so the effort should be self-sustaining in a financial sense for the foreseeable future. Particularly because as I noted, it has the excellent side benefit of keeping world class software design, coding and implementation talent on the campus, ready to pitch in anywhere they're needed.

So the two efforts are built on VERY different business models. The fact that none of the first 3 year revs of FCP X has had an upgrade price attached it is, I"ve come to believe, a reflection of this. There's been no need for Apple to ask FCP X customers for more money, so they don't.

That contrasts with models that set pricing as a simple metric that should be constantly pushed upwards toward the crossover point where raising it higher costs them just too many customers to make sense.

But again, this is amateur speculation. I'm not a retail expert in any way, shape or form.

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

Shawn Miller
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 30, 2014 at 10:36:30 pm

[Bill Davis] "
Nope, just that their view has always been that as long as the company is overall profitable at a level that sustains high investor interest, they don't need to scorecard every single item in the catalog to maximize it's contribution to the bottom line."


I'm not sure how any company is different from Apple in that regard. Almost every company has a product or two in the lineup that doesn't perform (financially) like the flagship product(s)... I think it's at the point where those average or lower performing products start costing money or resources that a business has to re-evaluate continued support and development of those products. If that weren't true, we would still have Adobe Ultra and XServe. :-)

[Bill Davis] "We talked about that before in another thread. Given the well over 1,000,000 paid seats out there for X (maybe approaching 2,000,000 for all we know) that means the ProApps re-boot has put (AT LEAST) well north of 300 million bucks in the Apple coffers. Clearly enough to comfortably support a software development effort that seemingly requires NO advertising or product distribution money - so the effort should be self-sustaining in a financial sense for the foreseeable future. Particularly because as I noted, it has the excellent side benefit of keeping world class software design, coding and implementation talent on the campus, ready to pitch in anywhere they're needed."

Note that I didn't say that FCPX wasn't turning a profit. My point is that at $299.00, Apple isn't exactly charging what it costs to develop a program as complex as FPCX, Motion is an even better example. You pretty much agreed earlier: "they don't need to scorecard every single item in the catalog to maximize it's contribution to the bottom line.". All FCPX has to do is help sell Macs... do you disagree?

[Bill Davis] "So the two efforts are built on VERY different business models. The fact that none of the first 3 year revs of FCP X has had an upgrade price attached it is, I"ve come to believe, a reflection of this. There's been no need for Apple to ask FCP X customers for more money, so they don't. "

That's my whole point... Apple can offer perpetual licenses because hardware sales enable them to give the software away for little or nothing, it's nice if it makes a profit, if not, it's not the end of the business. Again, do you think a smaller, independent company could offer a perpetually licensed FCPX for $299 with free updates? What about Motion? Personally, I don't think so.

[Bill Davis] "
That contrasts with models that set pricing as a simple metric that should be constantly pushed upwards toward the crossover point where raising it higher costs them just too many customers to make sense."


Isn't that how Apple sells it's hardware and subsidizes it's software? :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 29, 2014 at 4:30:29 pm

[Shawn Miller] "subscription software is here to stay"

Absolutely. The last hurdle is corporate accounting. They have to change their accounting practices and that takes time with the IRS and GAAP and SEC, so that they can classify software as expenses and not capital. This will matter for a number of things, like depreciation. But the gains are tremendous. Right now Microsoft still controls the whole ball of wax. It's hard to imagine how many workstations are running Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Internet Explorer, and Outlook.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Next to go subscription only...... Autodesk
on Oct 29, 2014 at 7:13:24 pm

[Richard Herd] "It's hard to imagine how many workstations are running Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Internet Explorer, and Outlook."

My understanding is that there are probably over a billion MS Office users (only MS really knows)... not too surprising considering that there are probably nearly 2 billion Windows users. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

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