CNET running a survey about CC...
If you want to take part in a survey that CNET is running about CC then you can check out their story (and survey link in 3rd paragraph) here:
This article was posted today (12/4/14) so it appears that they are trying to get a year-end look at where things stand with users (or soon-to-be ex-users) of Adobe products.
The survey isn't long (only about 9 questions). CNET is trying to find out what users are doing about the CC development.
The comments below the article are interesting too.
Key passage from the article:
...But don't expect the company to break out how many subscriptions were for the full CC suite, how many were for the less expensive Photoshop Photography Program and how many for other single products. Another question is how many are individual subscriptions compared with the more expensive but more elaborate team-oriented version that costs $70 per month.
More discounts. More "sign up now" deals. After years. Constant ubiquitous web advertising (I'm being hounded on team offers). Continued resistance to being forced into subscriptions while signing up lots of newbies ("NEW CREATIVES" anyone?) and part time users to subscriptions of questionable long term value. Continued revenue from CS sales skewing the quarterly numbers. Diminished profits overall.
I talked to a designer the other day that subscribes just to get CS6 for crying out loud. When I asked why in the world he wouldn't download CC2014(since he's paying for it) he said he really doesn't need the upgrades that much, just doesn't want to spend the full cash for CS6 at the moment, particularly when he doesn't know whats going to pop up next in terms of tools. Here is a long term Adobe user (he owns many versions of individual apps like PS and AI), but he is NOT a long term subscriber. Eventually he's going to do what he's always done, what most of us do, invest in tools he can rely on and OWN regardless of business cycles and fluctuations.
And all while Adobe refuses to give any indication how many of their millions of subscribers are actually:
1. full price
2. long term
3. true believers in the value the 'subscription only' model and the value of promised "cloud" services that don't even exist yet
Still not buying it...
Good luck Adobe.
As of now I only need Final Cut Pro X and Motion. Waiting for Fusion to make it over to the Mac platform and seeing how it might integrate with Resolve, time will tell. I think once Resolve becomes a better and more viable option for an NLE as well, curious to see what effect this will have on market share going forward.
A subscription model may benefit some but should not be the only option. My two cents.
Even if Resolve and Fusion has tight integration, FCP X, with Motion as well, will be part of my tool set. Based on needs the most "appropriate" tool will always available.
For quick, simple stuff FCP X and Motion are a good mix despite the lack of "Send To Motion". Something more complex Resolve is starting to look good now that Universe is supported. Green screen work and more complex compositing will be done with Fusion. Might even consider Fusion for processing stills. Like to hear what other options that others are considering. A healthy, civilized debate is a good thing. Look forward to hearing thoughts from others.
They are hiding it very well, but you can have a look at the numbers (Page 9 from this PDF):
Script of Q3/2014 PDF
In Q3/FY13 81% of the 1,037 m Subscriptions were Full Products (= 839,000).
In Q3/FY14 64% of the 2,810 m Subscriptions were Full Products (= 1,790,000).
That´s because the "Cloud"-Vendor decided to mollify the Photoshop Community with the PS/LR-Subscription, I think.
And also to show more pink subscription amounts.
From the 2.8 mil. Creative "Cloud" Subscriptions only 1.79 are Full Product users!
So the amount just doubled within a year, while if you hear the "Cloud"-vendors words, one might think they raised nearby 3times.
Remember: There were more than 12 m paying Users before, who used a fair perpetual license.
Regarding to their Business Script, (Financial Results Q3/2014 Page 1) only 63 % of Q3 revenue came from recurring resources - That´s Creative "Cloud" & Marketing "Cloud".
Means: There still must be users who are buying perpetual (and I know an agency, which bought 5 MasterCollections last days - A solution which is not supported by the "Cloud"-Vendor any longer & Years old)
Also: Marketing Cloud is running better than expected. And without this income the financial results would look very, very poor.
Their NetIncome is on horrible (2009-) Level. Wonder, if they made their math with giving the discounts they have to (second time this quarter, prices where lowered here in EU).
As the "Cloud"-Vendor did a lot at the enterprises to get them on the "cloud" - Now it´s time to grab the more resistant "small users" (who have to take more care about money, files, access and dependency). That will be hard work.
One of the questions in a survey was "…what will you do, when you get a CC File from your client?".
That´s the strategy behind, I think. And also what they call "...moving people aggressively into the cloud".
OK. Every company has to earn money. That´s absolutely not my concern.
But they can´t ignore the needs of their customers in the long run.
Adobes strategy (and communication) for those, who don´t like a lifelong dependency is horrible (not only in my eyes, believe me).
Let´s wait and see how things go on.
As long as the good old and fair CS-Solutions will be supported by the actual OSs, I don´t think it will die. The XP of Adobe.
(And I hope the "Cloud"-Vendor has not enough impact in MS & Apple to change this)
I can´t see that much innovation in CC since the good bye of a fair licensing model (Maybe the Video- and Web-Tools, but Graphic Apps & PS not).
May be - in the end - Adobe has to learn (like Microsoft), that most of us don´t like this kind of business.
At least, these Apps are very mature, stable and it´s hard to bring in new and usefull functionalities.
Competitors are raising and Adobe is looking for a way, to bind it´s users & to get the most money ever possible.
Astonishing how many people are willing to avoid Adobe's excellent (and always improving) tools because of this subscription. The latest Premiere/Audition/After Effect's combination saves us hours of work. If you are someone who loved FCP 7...Premiere CC 2014 is FCP 8 on steroids. The time saved alone pays for the monthly subscription . If this is a business tool, it's far less expensive than your phone, electric or rent bills (BTW most people don't "buy" their cell phone....they lease it...the companies make you feel like you're buying it and build the "subscription" or finance lease into your usage bill...until it's outdated or a new must have model comes along)
It seems as if those most against the subscription are constantly waiting for the holy grail editing app that will trump Adobe's offerings
Do you seriously think a company will invest the manpower and hours in a product that won't even let them break even for all their R and D?
Even Apple's dirt cheep FCP 10 and Motion aren't sending Apple's profits to the moon...but it sure helps them sell profitable Tower's Imacs and Macbook Pros.
Would I prefer a perpetual license? Sure....Do i like the constant updates and improvements under this system? No question, yes
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852
most of us would not mind a subscription if at the end ee could keep a full funcioning suite, granted with no upgrade option without subscribing again as a new user. but since greed is more important to the moderen business i wont be part of it. if i wanted a business associate he/she would need to bring in somthing not just a promise.
Richard I'm assuming you run a business or work for one...if the business doesn't generate consistent profits and then some... to support constantly improving and updating your product, your company will eventually fail and a competitor will grab your clients.
Adobe saw that there's no future in a finite set of users who aren't consistent return customers.
Imagine your grocery store sold you a cow for milk.....you never need to shop at the store again and it goes out of business. They come out with Cow 2.0 - more, better healthier milk. You're not interested...you're just fine with the old cow. But when your cow eventually gives out. (the new milking machine OS won't work with it), .you go back to the store to buy a new cow..but sorry, the store's out of business....
I use Adobe's excellent tools to make money. The operating cost whether it's a yearly upgrade (we did that every year because the product got better, faster, easier and more profitable to use - time=money) or subscription doesn't matter. It's passed on to the client in an hourly or per project fee.
When another company creates something that makes my job as a producer/director/editor easier.....i'll give it a look - and Adobe then has the incentive to stay ahead of the competition in price and performance.
Sure it would be great to have an "exit" ramp....but increasingly they and most other software developers aren't offering one. You can chose to stay and use the tool and find a way to generate your own profits from it....or move to something else.
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852
[Andy Field] "Adobe saw that there's no future in a finite set of users who aren't consistent return customers. "
Let´s say, you bought your wonderful, glorious, pinky, so overwhelming Cow 2.0. Are happy, with the milk, that´s only healthy, if you don´t stop to pay for Cow 2. Regardless what the Vendor will take for it in the future. Regardless, that he can take some of the ingredients out.
And all of your body parts (Files in that case) get more and more dependent to Cow No2.
Now, a new Vendor starts it´s business beside your overwhelming Cloud-, no, Sorry, Cow-Vendor. Much healthier milk. Better ingredients. Superb taste. You would like it. A lot. But your body is dependent on Cow 2. Without loosing important parts (archive) you can´t get it. The longer you are on Cow 2 the harder it will be (Why I´m thinking of drugs at that moment?). Or you still have to pay for both: Cow 2 & 3.
BtW.: Most of other software developer aren´t offering one ?
Do we live on the same planet? Simply not true.
When I read your lines, it gives the impression, that you totally agree with, that Cow 2 takes it´s chance (as nearby a monopolist) to threw off al that clients, who will not or are not able to be consistent customers. You agree to a system of software distribution, which will stop the access to your files if you are not willing or able to pay continuous to the end of all days. Without any guarantee of future costs.
I think - yes - Adobe saw there is no future. Hard to bring in features that are worth to pay for the updates. Only a matter of time, when competition will offer real alternatives over the complete range of products. And now they took their chance to get the most out of it.
Without their Marketing-Cloud Business - I don´t think, they would have done this.
For most of us price isn´t the concern. And even Microsoft had to learn, that users don´t like a O365 without THE CHOICE.
And I also think, that many of us would use that so called "Cloud" if they can trust.
And the Exit ramp would be a part of the confidence.
And I also think, they wouldn´t loose anything with a fair, maybe expensive, buy out.
(Sorry - I have to correct: Wouldn´t have lost - Because the Image disaster is already done. Adobe isn´t seen as the company it was before)
That survey was too broad. Too few questions for too broad a user base. They needed to narrow it to the Photographers, graphic designers, motion graphics, video editors, web designers...etc. And I still find it VERY odd that if you are a video editor, and get the CC, you get all those other apps for all the other professions that you simply don't use. Clutter.
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def
[Shane Ross] "you get all those other apps for all the other professions that you simply don't use. Clutter."
I don't use Indesign, Flash, Dreamweaver, Muse, or the Edge apps. I don't "use" Illustrator, but I have to have it because I am routinely getting .AI and .EPS files for company logos and heaven forbid I try to get the client to have that file converted for my use.
[Rainer Schubert] " Only a matter of time, when competition will offer real alternatives over the complete range of products."
Will it? That's an awfully big "if".
For the most Apps of their product range there ARE competitors.
(As you don´t use all the Apps, may be you only think of Video?)
[Andy Field] "Adobe saw that there's no future in a finite set of users who aren't consistent return customers."
Finite? You're kidding right? New art students being generated like Doritos every day, until recently bred on a steady diet of Adobe "milk". Adobe has (over time) established themselves as the standard for creative development, and then completely dominated the formats for those creative assets and the education of new participants in the use of those formats. All they had to do is NOT be lazy. Continue to innovate. All they had to do was LEAD. Instead, their new market strategy is brute force. Leverage the formats. (Make AI CC immediately incompatible with AI CS6 for example). Force developers into subscriptions against their will. Establish a foothold with Enterprise customers and then force small businesses to fall in line of be left out because of format incompatibilities with those enterprises. Buy out smaller competitors. Such Vision....
[Andy Field] "hey come out with Cow 2.0 - more, better healthier milk. You're not interested...you're just fine with the old cow. But when your cow eventually gives out. (the new milking machine OS won't work with it), .you go back to the store to buy a new cow..but sorry, the store's out of business...."
Right... Adobe would "go out of business" if they didn't force mandatory subscriptions on the creative community like it or not. And thats on top of the fact that many customers like myself have supported them with every upgrade along they way. And just so I can be accused repeatedly of not supporting this software giant with my money and my loyalty. I still liked their "milk" - and payed for it...which made the "cow" really FAT BTW. But that was until they poisoned the milk with mandatory subscriptions. This is the same perplexing argument I've heard before. Adobe is not going out of business, not today, not tomorrow, whether they ultimately offer an off ramp or not. I think they will eventually lose serious market share because of their arrogance, but they aren't going out of business either way.
[Andy Field] "I use Adobe's excellent tools to make money. The operating cost whether it's a yearly upgrade (we did that every year because the product got better, faster, easier and more profitable to use - time=money) or subscription doesn't matter. It's passed on to the client in an hourly or per project fee."
I have no opinion whatsoever if you choose to turn over control over your work to perpetual subscriptions. I wouldn't do it, but I sure wouldn't criticize you for choosing to. In what way does it hurt your process if I find mandatory subscriptions to be unacceptable for my workflow and access to work?. Either you haven't read a single post on this forum for 2 years or you are deliberately ignoring what you already know about the issues surrounding access to work. ACCESS. Not price. Agree or disagree with our conclusions, but it is not about amortizing costs over time or the ability to survive in business. I've been doing that for a very long time.
whan adobe was finite it had 12 million users now its infinite and has maybe 3.2 million users. its only making money with cs6 continuing purchases and the marketing cloud. so what kind of finite is better?
had they continued to be finite the woulld have probably added many millionsmore apple refugues who i am sure would have added many more eager
i guess greed blinds
[Ricardo Marty] "whan adobe was finite it had 12 million users now its infinite and has maybe 3.2 million users. its only making money with cs6 continuing purchases and the marketing cloud. so what kind of finite is better?"
Those 3.2 million users are providing Adobe with a yearly average revenue of about $19 million. How many of those previous 12 million users were required to gain Adobe a revenue of $19mil on a yearly basis? I bet it's not in any way even.
iam sure that most of those 3.2 million were the ones doing the yearly upgrade.
now they have those but not the other buyers. just imagine 3.2 million subscribers pluus at leat 18 million buyers (mostly apple refugees).
all adobe is doing is giving the competition time to develope counter products.
[Ricardo Marty] "iam sure that most of those 3.2 million were the ones doing the yearly upgrade."
How are you sure about that? Just a gut feeling?
Because the Cloud-Vendor first grabbed the enterprises term agreements
(...what´s clearly documented in their investor sheets and part of the strategy to establish this "Cloud").
That are those who don´t have to care that much about money and access to their files.
For smaller business it´s not that easy.
I know a lot who don´t want to get dependent to that kind of business.
(Not guaranteed future costs / File incompatibilities / Paying double if you want to use other software AND archive / and so on)
But they also got many PS/LR Users with the 10 Bugs deal.
Only 61% of (today announced) 3.4 M Subscriptions are Full Product Users (roundabout 2 M).
only 61%, wow thats a drop, wonder how many of those are the special deal signups.
Enough to get their business targets. Sigh.
Wall Streets lucky.
But I think, the hard work for Adobe isn´t done.
[Rainer Schubert] "That are those who don´t have to care that much about money and access to their files. "
I care about both, so there goes that argument.
Chris, you sound pretty angry for my expressing my opinion.
If you don't like the rental model, find something better...yelling at Adobe isn't going to change anything. A mass exodus to a better product that sells licenses the way you like it might change their minds ...but it's been nearly 2 years now and what's the alternative for editors? AVID and FCP X. If you like those, great..problem solved...but you must like Adobe products or you wouldn't be castigating me for accepting the subscription as the cost of doing my business.
And yes there IS a finite number of people who will UPGRADE EVERY year. Sell a product and then have 80 percent of your customer base never upgrade isn't a prescription for a viable profitable company.
Do you know how much the R and D costs to constantly upgrade a product?.....if you can't get a return on investment, why do it...they aren't a charity..they are a shareholder owned, for profit company...just like most of entrepreneurs who use their products to make a living...If this doesn't/isn't working for them, they will cease to exist as a business.
Again...as I mentioned before you decided i was the most convenient piñata for your anger at Adobe. "would i like an off ramp and perpetual license? Sure... but am i going to abandon a tool that saves me time and makes me money? Of course not...until something better comes along that works for us.
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852
[Andy Field] ".but it's been nearly 2 years now and what's the alternative for editors? AVID and FCP X. If you like those, great..problem solved...but you must like Adobe products or you wouldn't be castigating me for accepting the subscription as the cost of doing my business."
I repeat my previous comment, you obviously haven't been reading a lot of the previous discussions, I've clarified those issues as it relates to me personally and many others many times prior, so I wont bother to do it again now.
In short, access to your files and projects, and an off ramp with working software that doesn't break the bank. Something we had with perpetual licensing. It really is quite simple.
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
[Jim Wiseman] "In short, access to your files and projects,"
I still have access to mine. Stop with making it a black and white issue like this. There is an incredible amount of nuance to this simple statement that you are intentionally leaving out.
You only do not have access to opening your Premiere project file, which you can always pay $30 to open it temporarily. If you cannot afford that, you are in the wrong business.
You can always export an XML and bring it into another NLE. You will have to adjust for the difference, naturally, but you would have to do that regardless if you switched to another NLE anyway.
You do not lose access to your files. Please, stop this nonsense.
Gary, we all know, that - yes - you have the possibility to access your files, if you pay to the end of your lifetime.
It seems, you are working on projects, that, once done and delivered, will never be opened again.
But that´s not typical for all jobs.
Especially not, as this so called "Cloud" is compareable to the former MasterCollection. Not only a Video Tool.
There are Graphic Designers, Web Designers, etc. who have to open and edit their files all the time and again and again.
Sometimes for years. Think about Web-Sites which have to be edited, catalogues…
CC files are still not compatible with CS Software and the Cloud-Vendor isn´t interested in holding things compatible (or do you think so?).
(Just no way to open Illustrator CC Files with FULL functionality in Ill. CS. Same with Premiere. And Also InDesign is not fully compatible...)
So you can´t easily open and edit your files, like it was with former, fair perpetual licenses.
You have to pay for it. That´s the difference.
There is no given guaranty, what the Cloud-Vendor will take as fee in future.
If you want to change your software (and competition is growing) you have to pay for both - this so called "Cloud" and the new Software also.
So, if your situation is different. And you don´t need continuos access to the work you have done.
Don´t project this situation to others.
May be the real wording would be "I loose access to my files without foreseeable costs", but loosing this access is an very important argument.
For many (Think for the most).
[Rainer Schubert] "Gary, we all know, that - yes - you have the possibility to access your files, if you pay to the end of your lifetime."
No, that's not true. I have access to my files at all times, no matter what. I merely lose the ability to open project files.
[Rainer Schubert] "But that´s not typical for all jobs. "
Nor is it typical to constantly go back to old work, especially not outside of grabbing a shot or two from an old project, which you can still do regardless of your current payments to Adobe.
[Rainer Schubert] "There are Graphic Designers, Web Designers, etc. who have to open and edit their files all the time and again and again. "
And there is a lot of competition out there that can read PSDs, EPS, etc.
[Rainer Schubert] "(Just no way to open Illustrator CC Files with FULL functionality in Ill. CS. Same with Premiere. And Also InDesign is not fully compatible...)"
Common problem for anyone who was working in a version one or two releases ahead of someone else. World didn't end with that either.
[Rainer Schubert] "There is no given guaranty, what the Cloud-Vendor will take as fee in future. "
Nor how much milk and bread will cost tomorrow.
[Rainer Schubert] "And you don´t need continuos access to the work you have done. "
I do want continuous access to my work. Why is it all or nothing with you? Just because I cannot open my Premiere Project if I stop paying doesn't mean I am dead in the water if I plan for it. That's like saying that since hard drives die, there's no sense in ever putting your data on a hard drive.
[Rainer Schubert] "Don´t project this situation to others. "
You and a select others are the ones primarily doing the projection 'round these parts.
[Rainer Schubert] "May be the real wording would be "I loose access to my files without foreseeable costs", but loosing this access is an very important argument. "
Not even close. You lose access to the software that can work with certain elements of your files...project files for one. For PSDs and PDFs and others, you may or may not have limited functionality compared to Photoshop/Acrobat/Illustrator that can work with those files, but they can still be accessed and used by a number of third-party software. You can export XMLs of Premiere projects and there are even utilities that let you do that with After Effects, but again, if you decided that FCPX + Motion was where it was at anyway, you would be in the same boat trying to convert over. Or to AVID, or anything else.
Plus, you don't lose access to your "files"...the raw data you used to craft your work. I think that's where the argument has its popularity, helping to convince lurkers that they would lose access to their actual footage who haven't looked into it enough to know what a load of crap that statement is.
[Gary Huff] "Plus, you don't lose access to your "files"...the raw data you used to craft your work. I think that's where the argument has its popularity, helping to convince lurkers that they would lose access to their actual footage who haven't looked into it enough to know what a load of crap that statement is."
Nonsense. It has nothing to do with raw assets. The issue is project files (what some of consider our true digital "masters") and Adobe-specific files that do not open perfectly in other applications.
Happy Holidays All!
[Chris Pettit] "I have no opinion whatsoever if you choose to turn over control over your work to perpetual subscriptions."
That's not accurate at all. Neither Andy Field nor myself have turned control over our work to anyone. It's just a convenient argument for you to make that doesn't actually have an application in the real world.
The sad thing about this is how much of it is about perceptions of risk that may only graze the edge of reality.
I count myself among those who make choices based on those perceptions. For me, if the CC package turns out to be as good as many are saying, I would be very comfortable subscribing indefinitely. But the perception that I risk being caught in a backwater eddy in which Adobe holds me hostage for much higher rent if I want to continue using a program in which I have worked hard to become proficient, is simply too big a concern right now.
However, because there is significant competition, the likelihood of that scenario actually happening is probably very small, so my decision may be based on a false or exaggerated sense of risk.
Likewise, Adobe executives’ apparent perception of the risk of offering some kind of off-ramp for those who are retiring or moving on is probably just as overblown.
If the company’s message of continued creative development of its tools is true, then the risk to Adobe that people who have taken the time to learn those tools will actually abandon them in significant numbers is probably insignificant.
So it may be that Adobe’s intransigence about not providing an off-ramp may just be a control-freak’s fatal flaw of ignoring the opportunity to give users just a small perception of freedom, which would cost Adobe next to nothing compared to the value of the additional customers who would sign up.
However — here come perceptions again:
If you expect that Adobe’s execs have long since explored the above argument that a robust development program would make a goodwill-generating off-ramp dusty from lack of use, then the alternative explanation for the determination to keep the off-ramp closed gets a little uncomfortable.
Under this second scenario, the policy — which many in the corporation must know has cost a huge amount in lost goodwill even among many subscribers — is a rational result of something Adobe knows that we don’t: that its business plan requires a dramatic slowing of the present pace of innovation, and that Adobe’s future depends on fully locking us in, because the winter of our discontent has already been written.
My perception of the likelihood of the latter scenario is what drives my own caution. I'm probably wrong, but it would be nice if Adobe would prove it. An off-ramp would do the trick.
[Mike Parfit] " But the perception that I risk being caught in a backwater eddy in which Adobe holds me hostage for much higher rent if I want to continue using a program in which I have worked hard to become proficient, is simply too big a concern right now. "
I used to worry about that too but with how quickly the landscape can change I no longer do. I now pick the tools that are best for the job at hand and maybe I'll still be using it in 3-5 years and maybe I won't. Lots of people got caught flat footed when Apple switched to X (even myself to a degree) so I'm trying to make sure I'm not overly dependent on any one tool.
Aaah, it doesn't matter, anyway. As long as you have XML files, you're impervious, right?
On, wait... that's only true for video editing application project files.
KGAN (CBS) & KFXA (Fox) Cedar Rapids, IA
Right or wrong, Adobe has chosen subscription only as their business model. A few, quick observations I want to make here.
First, is access to your files. Yes, the project files that still remain on the hard drive can be accessed. Opening them is another matter entirely. Should one choose to stop their subscription for any reason, that file can no longer be opened, at least that is my understanding.
Second, the reason that many choose not to subscribe is not because of many but rather control. No off ramp is a big minus for me. Avid at least offers that but once you leave the train then decide to jump back on at a later date will be expensive. Adobe does not offer an off ramp, hoping that will change.
Third, there are plenty of alternatives out there. Keeping an eye on with happens with Resolve and Fusion. This could prove interesting and time will tell. Considering adding Resolve as an NLE but also have FCP X, being too dependent on one editing software is probably not a good idea. Having options available, much better approach. Same goes for compositing and motion graphics as well.
Fourth, there is a slight risk with subscription only. What if certain pieces of core software or services are no longer available? Perhaps they might be replaced with something that is inferior. Not saying that this will happen but is always a possibility. Furthermore, prices can increase in addition.
Finally, go with what works for your needs and budget. At the same time keep an open mind. I have not entirely ruled out Adobe, but without an off ramp, all other options are on the table.
Happy editing with whatever road you choose. Do not let others discourage you and keep an open mind, never know when a big opportunity will present itself. My thoughts, observations and words of wisdom.