Adobe Creative Cloud, I just don't trust you... cancelled CS6 Upgrade...

[Dave Blackham]

I called the UK office to specifically ask how this can be implemented for two large sites wanting to use Adobe. The cant forward the call as they have a no name policy so effectively you speak with any one at Adobe as their switchboard wont forward calls. Its been some while since I can across a company so unlawful and obstructive for a sales enquiry. So as far as Im concerned my advice to clients will be to avoid Adobe unless this gets turned around very quickly.

 

[Brice Ansel]

God help me... does this mean that I will have to seriously consider FCPX?

Rob I'm afraid, a lot of us will have to. :-(

 

[Brian Pascale]

Not a bad deal if you use a lot of Adobe software. Terrible if you use it once in a while. I do the benefits of doing it this way, but I also see the downside. I was waiting for CS 7 to upgrade my CS 5.5 but I think I will go Avid or FCPX now. Even if Adobe ends up being the best solution for me, I don't want to encourage this model. Perhaps it is the future, then the future sucks. Maybe we can change the future is we reject the model of corporations digging into our wallets every month. We want more choice not less. I am sick of monthly fees and have been trying to cutdown or eliminate them, not add more. I already gave up cable, now I am going to give up Adobe. I DON'T WANT ANOTHER MONTHLY FEE! Can I be any more clear about that? Adobe are you listening? This is like the initial FCPX announcement all over again. First very excited to try the new software, and then passing on it all together.

 

[John Bellari]

but guess what next years aniticipated ADOBE SECRET TOOL TO FORCE UPGRADES in 2014:
h.265 will be cloud only and CS6 will be forced to upgrade to CC
in order to use and support h.265 4K camcorders and compression for delivery...

Brilliantly "evil" plan...

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

The writing has been on the wall for some time. Adobe is the first, many will follow.

You either earn your money with hardware like Apple or BM and your software is there to drive the hardware or you do it only with software like Adobe, Avid and Autodesk.

The latter 3 As have a problem with piracy, the general race to the bottom, shifting target groups and R&D costs which somehow must be re-financed. I don't think that its utterly wrong to say that 50% of Adobe users don't use regular licenses, be it the student license for a paid job or cracked versions. Avid is not as wide-spread and the user base is certainly more professional. But just recently Avid had to bring down prices significantly to compete in the market. Same happens with Autodesk's finishing softwares such as Flame or Smoke. They all rely heavily on subscription fees and payed updates.

It's obvious that the software industry needs new marketing strategies. If you are in the market of a Flame, for instance, you have to buy the whole package Smoke, Lustre, Flame. But you might need only Flame. In half a year it happens that you need additionally 2 Smokes but only for 3 months plus 2 seats of Maya for 6 months. Currently such scenarios are not possible. In our budget-concious times streamlining the pipelines, increasing and shrinking resources as needed is vital.

Adobe is already doing this. And frankly I like it. Since half a year we are renting via creative cloud. It's scalable and it's cheaper for us.

Hans

 

[Angelo Lorenzo]

Hans, I agree this is where the industry is moving. As a freelancer, I find the subscription model far more appealing. The subscription is a known cost I can more easily plan for and it's a better write-off for my taxes.

I feel like the free market will prevail. Someone will develop a solution that allows Premiere Pro Projects to be opened in other NLEs, much like Xto7 and 7toX popped up after FCPX came out.

FCPX, I have a feeling will be dropped. Apple hasn't been aggressive with development and the application isn't a must have to the point where it drives substantial hardware sales. Avid is on shaky ground financially and may be forced into selling assets if it doesn't turn around. Autodesk seems like a suitable buyer but Autodesk is the old folks home of software: applications will be maintained enough to be a slightly viable purchase.

Adobe will need to keep it's ear to the ground and be more flexible for hobbyists as well as people and institutions who refuse to connect a workstation to the internet - the latter may be solved by intranet level license management.

Adobe isn't a monopoly. It's not the only supplier of creative software, it's not buying out competitors, and it doesn't have the power to raise prices market-wide. If someone doesn't like how Adobe runs their business then there are other suitable products with different licensing structures, prices, and feature sets.

The writing has been on the wall for some time. Adobe is the first, many will follow.

You either earn your money with hardware like Apple or BM and your software is there to drive the hardware or you do it only with software like Adobe, Avid and Autodesk.

The latter 3 As have a problem with piracy, the general race to the bottom, shifting target groups and R&D costs which somehow must be re-financed. I don't think that its utterly wrong to say that 50% of Adobe users don't use regular licenses, be it the student license for a paid job or cracked versions. Avid is not as wide-spread and the user base is certainly more professional. But just recently Avid had to bring down prices significantly to compete in the market. Same happens with Autodesk's finishing softwares such as Flame or Smoke. They all rely heavily on subscription fees and payed updates.

It's obvious that the software industry needs new marketing strategies. If you are in the market of a Flame, for instance, you have to buy the whole package Smoke, Lustre, Flame. But you might need only Flame. In half a year it happens that you need additionally 2 Smokes but only for 3 months plus 2 seats of Maya for 6 months. Currently such scenarios are not possible. In our budget-concious times streamlining the pipelines, increasing and shrinking resources as needed is vital.

Adobe is already doing this. And frankly I like it. Since half a year we are renting via creative cloud. It's scalable and it's cheaper for us.

Hans

 

[Thomas Mathai]

Xto7 and 7toX require and XML exported from the FCP 7 project. I don't know if Adobe allows developers to access the Premiere project file.

You obviously haven't been paying attention to the FCPX because Apple has released 8 updates since the initial release. Apple won 't be dropping FCPX anytime soon.

Autodesk owns the 3d world and Flame & Smoke is mostly popular with bigger facilities. Autodesk revamped and price dropped Smoke for Mac just so they can get a wider user base.

Adobe isn't a monopoly but Photoshop and After Effects are hard to replace.

Hans, I agree this is where the industry is moving. As a freelancer, I find the subscription model far more appealing. The subscription is a known cost I can more easily plan for and it's a better write-off for my taxes.

I feel like the free market will prevail. Someone will develop a solution that allows Premiere Pro Projects to be opened in other NLEs, much like Xto7 and 7toX popped up after FCPX came out.

FCPX, I have a feeling will be dropped. Apple hasn't been aggressive with development and the application isn't a must have to the point where it drives substantial hardware sales. Avid is on shaky ground financially and may be forced into selling assets if it doesn't turn around. Autodesk seems like a suitable buyer but Autodesk is the old folks home of software: applications will be maintained enough to be a slightly viable purchase.

Adobe will need to keep it's ear to the ground and be more flexible for hobbyists as well as people and institutions who refuse to connect a workstation to the internet - the latter may be solved by intranet level license management.

Adobe isn't a monopoly. It's not the only supplier of creative software, it's not buying out competitors, and it doesn't have the power to raise prices market-wide. If someone doesn't like how Adobe runs their business then there are other suitable products with different licensing structures, prices, and feature sets.

 

[Taylor F.]

Oh the irony

Oh the irony

I gotta say that I find this whole debacle with Adobe kind of ironic.
They snatched up a huge number of new paying clients thanks to Apple's fumbling with FCPX, and now they're taking those same clients (who are just getting comfy and relaxing from feeling deeply disgruntled) and shafting them.
One would think they would have learned from Apple's mistake.

I think it comes down to not having a choice. Lots of folks seem to like the CC option, many more seem to despise it. But it doesn't matter what you think, you don't get to choose what works best for your business.

Apple seemed to think they had a revolutionary new way of editing (and I won't dispute that, FCPX has its fans), and I can understand their logic in trying to influence the industry to do things a "better" way. But I believe the whole FCP disaster could have been avoided if they had taken the new FCPX guts and powered an interface much like FCP7 with it, and simultaneously released FCP8 alongside FCPX. This would have kept the bulk of their users loyal, probably upgrading to 8, and many would have also given X a go, at their leisure. Gently and happily they might well have convinced a majority of users to adopt X as their main tool, if it is indeed better.

The parallel I see with Adobe is that they think they have a great idea and have decided to take away our option to choose our path. And I guess I'm pro-choice.
This will lose them a lot of goodwill, and that means customers looking elsewhere. Adobe doesn't have a monopoly on innovation, and where there is a gap in the market, someone will swoop in to fill it -- just like Adobe did with FCPX.
And I guess I'm looking forward to that.

 

[Ben Scott]

Sooo.... How's Lightworks coming along?

 

[Mike Smith]

...We want more choice not less. I am sick of monthly fees and have been trying to cutdown or eliminate them, not add more. I already gave up cable, now I am going to give up Adobe. I DON'T WANT ANOTHER MONTHLY FEE! Can I be any more clear about that? Adobe are you listening? This is like the initial FCPX announcement all over again. First very excited to try the new software, and then passing on it all together.

Absolutely agree Brian. The only monthly bills I want are for real-time services. Such as electricity or 'phone where you are paying for something you are consuming. Not software that used to work but is now hobbled so it can only work for an ongoing fixed fee regardless of use. This is the sort of "protection money" concept I expect from the Mafia, not from what was a highly respected software creator.

I´m having a ridiculous amount of trouble holding my paid subscription up and running. I lose allot of work each day just verifying and sometimes re-installing programs...
Been talking to support allot lately and is sort of fed up after just one month of being in the cloud

I don´t know any other applications like after effects (been using it for 10 years) or else I would probably switch.

...My worst fear about the cloud was realized when
I go to log in to Premier says there is a billing issue and wont launch the software just when i am approaching a deadline. I called customer service and they could not accept my EU debit card
cause this account was setup with a US address...long story short there was no way they could take a payment and nothing they could do despite my desparte
situation. I was locked out of my edit suite...

These indicate this service is not ready for primetime professional use. If you're renting out professional software, you better be ready to provide first class 24/7 worldwide support with instantaneous fixes - with a single 'phone call - for subscription issues regardless of where in the world the money is coming from. The money Adobe will save on development better be spent on something much more substantial than a call center manned by operators reading from a script.

 

[David Kuhn]

I think the value (or lack of value) of the subscription depends on how many of Adobe's packages you use, and how often you upgrade. I've been upgrading Photoshop and Premiere Pro individually for years, as well as Flash Pro and Acrobat periodically. I never went back and figured out the overall cost but I suspect it averaged out to $300 a year or so for just those packages. Now for $600 a year I get those along with another dozen or so other tools. Seems like a decent deal to me.

Didnt the Creative Suite cost something like $2500? (and another grand every 2 years to update). It would take quite a while to reach breakeven if you're an 'update every time' user.

 

[Mike Smith]

I think the value (or lack of value) of the subscription depends on how many of Adobe's packages you use, and how often you upgrade. I've been upgrading Photoshop and Premiere Pro individually for years, as well as Flash Pro and Acrobat periodically. I never went back and figured out the overall cost but I suspect it averaged out to $300 a year or so for just those packages. Now for $600 a year I get those along with another dozen or so other tools. Seems like a decent deal to me...

Correction David... for $600 (currently - rents always go up...) you are renting those tools. Stop paying rent, your tools are gone. Not the case with your bought software.

 

[David Kuhn]

Correction David... for $600 (currently - rents always go up...) you are renting those tools. Stop paying rent, your tools are gone. Not the case with your bought software.

True, so if you prefer to stay with a tool for a number of years instead of keeping it up to date then you're better off buying. I've just found myself upgrading with every new Adobe release... and if your'e in that situation (and expect to continue in that mode) then the subscription is a pretty good deal.

Even though it's a decent deal (for me), there are some things I don't like about it... There's a 2 install limit and I've got workstations at work and home as well as an HP8770 for mobile work. I'm the only one who uses ANY of those machines but when I asked about getting another install (they've done that for me in the past for individual tools) they said "buy another subscription" (a big FU to a reasonably dedicated Adobe user). For other expensive subscription services (MSDN) when you let your subscription lapse they lock you into whatever version of their toolset was released at that time - that would seem to me to be a more graceful way to leave users than shutting them off (but of course then you wouldn't have the strong arm tactic of losing access to your content to keep them renewing).

 

[Mike Smith]

David, you make arguments against the cloud model better than I do. ;-)

I think there's a place for software rental. And if, as you suggested, you maintained your software where you stopped renting (maybe for those that previously bought and own the software), it would be a reasonable deal. But to take away the choice is what I object to so strongly. Besides, I'm not too impressed with the "service" others have experienced when they've had issues with the rental model. (See post #30.)

 

[David Kuhn]

David, you make arguments against the cloud model better than I do. ;-)

I think there's a place for software rental. And if, as you suggested, you maintained your software where you stopped renting (maybe for those that previously bought and own the software), it would be a reasonable deal. But to take away the choice is what I object to so strongly. Besides, I'm not too impressed with the "service" others have experienced when they've had issues with the rental model. (See post #30.)

So they do have an option for those who hate monthly payments... I bought a year at a go on Amazon.com. I have to fill out paperwork for transactions like this and there was no way I was going to submit an expense report every month for Adobe... so the yearly billing was the only way they were going to get me to try the subscription.

Another negative is that I've noticed that their login server is VERY unreliable (I've not been able to connect 2 out of 3 days I've tried this week), so I'd be very nervous about having to be able to connect to get authenticated regularly - luckly you just need to do it once a month (according to Adobe).

 

[Mike Halper]

So they do have an option for those who hate monthly payments... I bought a year at a go on Amazon.com. I have to fill out paperwork for transactions like this and there was no way I was going to submit an expense report every month for Adobe... so the yearly billing was the only way they were going to get me to try the subscription.

Another negative is that I've noticed that their login server is VERY unreliable (I've not been able to connect 2 out of 3 days I've tried this week), so I'd be very nervous about having to be able to connect to get authenticated regularly - luckly you just need to do it once a month (according to Adobe).

And after a year of using the software you won't own the software. If you cancel the subscription (not renew it) you'll have nothing. Paying for a year all at once doesn't get rid of the issue of renting software, which is ludicrous. No one will ever own the Adobe software they're paying for and using, even after paying $3,000 over the course of 5 years, you'll own nothing. Adobe is treating it like it's a service.

 

[John Bellari]

Hi Al & David from Adobe,

I believe the Adobe CC is an incredibly bad idea, frought with tons of legal implications to be thoroughly litigated.
I have another post, but i'll add the question here since you joined this forums recently.
Your CEO thinks it wise to host apps, project files and footage from Adobe's Cloud,
so please respond in regard to these 3 scenarios in regard to privacy:

Scenario 1:
I am an editor cutting a news story where our cameraman just shot footage of a Chicago police officer
striking an unarmed female college student at a protest. In Illinois, it is illegal to film a police officer,
having to do with antiquated wiretapping laws.

The cameraman uploads the footage to the Adobe Cloud.

Question 1. Does Adobe turn over the footage in the Cloud to the Illinois state police as evidence,
and offers no protection to the cameraman or editor who uploaded to their own cloud space?

Scenario 2:
College students shoot footage in a major city subway without permit for an independent feature or school project, uploads to the Adobe Cloud, and
the camera man is later arrested for shooting in the city without permit. For a temporary track, the editor uploaded a U2 track
while cutting the scene.

Question 2: Does Adobe turn over the files to the police or FBI as evidence for violation of copyright and film permit laws?

Scenario 3: The above 2 scenarios take place, yet neither the cameraman or editor were never prosecuted by the authorities. 2 years later,
the Adobe Cloud account is hacked and the footage is leaked online. The authorities now request the footage from Adobe and who stored it.

Question 3a. Does Adobe notify the parties their account has been hacked?
Question 3b. In what countries are the files stored under what legal jurisdictions, and does Adobe deny authorities access?
Question 3c. Does Adobe cooperate with the Authorities to locate all the people who touched the files at any point without notifying them they are being investigated?

I just think people need to know whom the cloud serves first, and do you allow every legal entity the right to search projects
without notifying us...