Adobe Announces native Dragon support in Premiere Pro

[Gabe Conroy]

I'm not a lawyer, but this legal reasoning makes zero sense. Blackmagic Design releases new versions of DaVinci Resolve with new features for free every year. I'm not talking about the Lite version. I'm talking about the full version that costs $1,000. I bought it at v8 and got v9 for free and now v10 is going to also be free. There's also plenty of apps on the Mac App store that provide free updates with new features within the same version. FCPX is a prime example of this. It's very different compared to the day it was first released, yet we've only needed to pay for it once.

Blackmagic Design is an Australian company though.

 

[Mike Smith]

I'm still a little perplexed as to who these video professionals are who are buying a $50k camera but can't afford $50 a month...

Gavin, I'm disappointed in you. You normally are a straight shooter. But to use such inflammatory talk is a bit off for you... "can't afford"? The arguments against the rental model have nothing to do with being able to afford it or not. It's a moral issue. If you don't get it, well I don't think anything I say will sway you so I won't waste my time.

NukeX BTW now costs nearly $9,000 and maintenance is more than twice that of Creative Cloud.

And does NukeX disappear when you stop paying maintenance?

 

[Will Keir]

What exactly is the problem with CC?

Count me in on that.
I removed 4 master suites and made the switch to Smoke and FCPX. It will take a long time until I will have a look at Adobe products again...

 

[Will Keir]

Mike,

Would you explain to me exactly what the moral issue your objecting to? I appreciate people taking a stand for what they believe in, just could use a little clarification, thanks.

Gavin, I'm disappointed in you. ... If you don't get it, well I don't think anything I say will sway you so I won't waste my time.

 

[Mike Halper]

Blackmagic Design is an Australian company though.

They have a US presence and must follow US laws when conducting business here. However, I we don't know if their entity in the US falls under that particular act. Either way, Apple is a US company and provided free updates adding new features to FCPX numerous times with no need for paying for them.

 

[Mike Smith]

Mike,

Would you explain to me exactly what the moral issue your objecting to? I appreciate people taking a stand for what they believe in, just could use a little clarification, thanks.

Sure. Go read my post #118.

 

[Stacey Spears]

I'm still a little perplexed as to who these video professionals are who are buying a $50k camera but can't afford $50 a month for an entire production suite's worth of software.

Right now it is one company, but what if ever piece of software you used started doing it? Pay a monthly fee for your OS, Office suite, Adobe, etc... Soon that $50 a month could be several hundred a month.

 

[Gabe Conroy]

They have a US presence and must follow US laws when conducting business here. However, I we don't know if their entity in the US falls under that particular act. Either way, Apple is a US company and provided free updates adding new features to FCPX numerous times with no need for paying for them.

Since the law in question regards share holders, I think that would fall under Australian law.

Prior to CC, it seemed pretty obvious that Adobe created CS5.5 pretty much just for Warp Stabilizer and Content Aware...I'm not sure anything FCPX has added is on that scale, although I could be wrong since I don't use it. I believe though it's more on the level of things like Red footage support which is something Adobe added to CS for free as well.

 

[Mike Halper]

Since the law in question regards share holders, I think that would fall under Australian law.

Prior to CC, it seemed pretty obvious that Adobe created CS5.5 pretty much just for Warp Stabilizer and Content Aware...I'm not sure anything FCPX has added is on that scale, although I could be wrong since I don't use it. I believe though it's more on the level of things like Red footage support which is something Adobe added to CS for free as well.

They never added it officially until CC. It was always an in-development preview they offered that was cumbersome to install and needed to be reinstalled after every update.

There are some significant features Apple added to FCPX, including video output, source and program monitoring, Red support, Roles, and some others. It's a very different editing software compared to when it was first released.

 

[chris morgan]

haven't gone the CC route, and not going to.

specifics of the argument aside, adobe's implementation of this strategy, handling (or lack thereof) of the backlash from loyal, avid customers, and near disdain from some of their "advocates" toward those same once-loyal customers has made me despise the company

not to mention the THREE separate sales calls i've received (two of which were from salespersons who i quite truly had a difficult time understanding) trying to get me to sign on to CC despite asking to be removed from any and all correspondence in future.

all i see is a company executing every last strategy to suck as much money as possible from whoever they can, and that's not a company i want to support.

on the tech side, they're one of the best innovators out there. that's the sad part.

best of luck to those happily powering on with CC.

 

[Phil Holland]

Long, long time Adobe customer and user here. A few thoughts and at the end a question.


I'm one of those users where the price of the CC model makes sense as I've promptly upgraded my Production Suite Premium immediately pretty much annually to stay up with the times, which wasn't always so cheap. CC is indeed less expensive if you consider that mindset and history. I also use a great deal of the applications found within the Creative Cloud.

Now I know many, many people out there who still work with CS2, CS3, CS5, and now CS6 to this day. This works for a lot of folks in different situations. However, there's things that those older packages just won't do and they never will without an upgrade.

I wonder from an outsiders mindset and a long time customer and supporter of Adobe products if there's a specific number that would appease the customer base that is upset about the subscription model.

Per month: $50? $40? $30? $25? $20? Less?

Or is it the principle of the model that's really scaring some away? Even at $10? $5?

This also begs the question at some point.... How valuable is the software to you? How are you using it? Is this a professional endeavor or something else? That's where the scales are tipped and the lines are really drawn. For me I make a living using these tools and I actually prefer using them over what else is out there. So that comes into my decision making process. The workflow is genuinely streamlined and smart. And apparently getting better all the time.

There's likely a magic number in there somewhere that will increase the customer base enough to make it make sense and also maybe penetrate into the land of those who don't pay for the software at all.

Adobe has in it's corner something that nobody else is really providing at the moment. That's regular and forward thinking updates that effect workflows in a variety of outlets. That's also worth something.


So is it the new subscription model that's unattractive or is there a number in there where the deal would be too difficult to turn down?

I'm curious and I'm sure Adobe is as well.

 

[Mike Smith]

For those asking if there is a specific number, monthly charge - $40/month, $10, 50 cents... you're completely missing the point. Maybe I'm a bit molly-coddled from dealing with a company like Red that has great integrity. Adobe's model is the antithesis of Red's. I was going to say it was Obsolescence Guaranteed, but it's much worse than that. Sony and the likes do that and you know what to expect from them. That's fair enough. It's "normal". What Adobe has done is "Obsolescence sneaked up on you just as we have gained your respect and trust."

Phil, read the post just before yours from Chris. You don't garner that kind of hatred by being a company with integrity.

Adobe should have kept the purchase and update model alive. That was what built them. By all means also play in the sandpit of rentals if you want to for a decade or so and see how it goes. If I want to stop paying every month for however long, my software should keep working. EVERY other piece of software works this way including antivirus. All the legalese previously mentioned as an excuse applies equally to everyone else.

Adobe dropped the customers that made them when they saw a way to make some quick cash. It's all about short-term gains for the stock market, not the future well being of the company or goodwill with their loyal customers. Look how their stock has surged recently. Because the rental model brought in cash they wouldn't otherwise have had. But it's sitting on top of the large influxes of income they gained from regular releases. That's gone now. What will Wall Street say to Adobe when their rental model levels out as it inevitably will? Making good money isn't enough for Wall Street. You have to show growth. So rates will have to go up. As high as Wall Street wants them. But that's a couple of years off yet. And the current CEO will have made his/her fortune. What do they care.

 

[Will Keir]

I hear what you are saying...

In addition I've always had trouble understanding their overseas tech support but there software is done well. I am hoping they step up their customer support.

Does FCP X have warp stabilizers?

haven't gone the CC route, and not going to.

specifics of the argument aside, adobe's implementation of this strategy, handling (or lack thereof) of the backlash from loyal, avid customers, and near disdain from some of their "advocates" toward those same once-loyal customers has made me despise the company

not to mention the THREE separate sales calls i've received (two of which were from salespersons who i quite truly had a difficult time understanding) trying to get me to sign on to CC despite asking to be removed from any and all correspondence in future.

all i see is a company executing every last strategy to suck as much money as possible from whoever they can, and that's not a company i want to support.

on the tech side, they're one of the best innovators out there. that's the sad part.

best of luck to those happily powering on with CC.

 

[Robert Hart]

My mindset is somewhat illogical, primitive and far from a valid business model. For that same reason, I still own and use a Nokia 5110 phone and have stuck with the same provider. Why? I simply resent being "managed" as a cashcow by opportunists. When my CS2 disk got the bitrot and I could not do a clean re-install, Adobe's solution was not to say "oh how sad, now what can we do to help you", instead telling me to upgrade to CS3 was my only option. Did they tell me there was a legacy archive? No. I became quite cross with Adobe when they did their thing with CS4 and allegedly with-held the SDK. Was it a genuine technical hiccup or did they want it all back then? Maybe there was something else in it, maybe not but my thinking was coloured by a notion which was around that Adobe was after establishing a single video standard along the same model as their Acrobat product and its cross-platform .pdf files. I am on CS5 and was seriously considering upgrade to CS6. I even downloaded it but did not install as the computer needed upgrading to cope and the cash was a bit short as I had the property rates to pay off. It may well be that there is a more consistent if perhaps smaller gross from the rental model alone versus the older purchase model and rental model combined. Maybe fewer humans are required to run the rental model. Maybe it is less troublesome overall to sool off the smaller players who buy every second or third generation, tend to be under-resourced, run the software on penny/halfpenny non-qualifying hardware and howl publicly when it goes pear-shaped. Eggs in one basket and a rental-only gameplay could be bad for Adobe's health. Panavision isn't doing too well right now. Has anyone heard of Xerox lately? Adobe of course has diversity of product but within the confinement of the software industry. How much can a festering resentment towards a brand cross over into another market. One decent hiccup and Adobe could be in a bit of strife along with all those customers who have committed to the model. It is a wonderful product at CS5 level. It took me a while to get there with it. It wasn't bad at CS2 and I could also assemble 3D in that, a feature set taken away in subsequent iterations. CS6 and the C.C. version are vastly improved by all accounts here on this forum and elsewhere. I am probably cutting off my snout to spite my own face but I am sitting this one out for a while to see if Adobe and C.C become the feather duster of this decade or the "must have no other" enduring industry standard Acrobat became for the company.

 

[Stefan Scherperel]

I switched over to the CC model over a year ago and still find it comical how many people have such a big issue with adobe and CC. I just don't understand the thought process of "if I stop paying for my software it ceases to function". In my mind, the only reason I'd stop paying for the software is if I stopped using it, and stopped working. Therefore I would have no use for the software. I can't believe how many people have a "moral" objection to this? Honestly, if you are making money using the software there is no reason that you would stop paying.
Again, the only people that I see having issues with this are people that stayed 2 to 3 versions behind and then complained that they weren't given the same upgrade possibilities as people that stayed current.
As I look at it, I'm saving money by using the CC program. Not only do I spend about the same as I would on upgrading my software each release, but I also get the entire Adobe collection and additional feature upgrades at a more rampant pace. I no longer have to wait for all programs to be upgraded on a schedule, now each one can upgrade and add new features individually.
Quite frankly, if you don't like how adobe does things, then fine, find something else that works for you. But seriously people, quit complaining and beating this dead horse. This isn't something new, it's been here for a while.

 

[Robert Hart]

Maybe it boils down to a personal value-system conflict and many people living on the fringe, not the mainstream industry perhaps? Once us oldies have shuffled on, the younger generation will know no difference anyway so as a real world thing, it probably does not really matter. As you rightly state - take it or leave it - a simple choice. ------ As for dead horse. If you've had one die on a farm, there's a lot of hard work involved in dealing with it, especially if you do not have a tractor, mechanical digger or a lot of firewood close-handy and homestead is downwind. There's plenty to complain about for a good stretch after the horse dies until it is finally put to rest. This simmering debate will be around for a while yet. Maybe Adobe got fed up with the disenchanted dissing their product and repositioned itself to limit the problem. Who knows? I don't. I just know I am cranky that I can't have my own way.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Gavin, I'm disappointed in you. You normally are a straight shooter. But to use such inflammatory talk is a bit off for you... "can't afford"? The arguments against the rental model have nothing to do with being able to afford it or not. It's a moral issue. If you don't get it, well I don't think anything I say will sway you so I won't waste my time.

Moral Issue? Please. Children starving is a moral issue. Drug patents is a moral issue. Mental health services and the homeless is a moral issue. Software as a service is a small change in pricing. Either it's worth $30-$50 a month... or it isn't. I have no moral right own Photoshop and Premiere. I either pay the price that it costs or I don't. That's the "straight shot" on CC. If you upgraded once every 2 years or so... the price hasn't changed. If you upgraded once every 4 years the price has gone up slightly. If you upgraded once every 8 years... you weren't a customer Adobe cares about since you didn't spend enough to be worth their attention.

If you include original purchase cost it's really a price drop for everyone.

Old price for CS6 $2,600
Upgrade price (every 18 months) = $600

Let's say you will upgrade every 3 years. That means the first 4 years will cost you $3,800. Compare that to $600 per year and it means you would need to pay for Creative Cloud for 6 years before it made more sense to just buy it outright. Adobe already had scaled upgrades such that it didn't actually save you any money to upgrade. So if you waited 3 years instead of waiting 18 months you just paid $1,200 instead of $600 to upgrade.

For the sake of thoroughness let's look at it another way. Let's say instead of complaining about the lease model you were about to buy CS"7" anyway and you took that $2,600 for the master collection and just put it into stocks. The first year on average would be $150 for the introductory price for a subscription ($300 for the first year but you can invest immediately and only pay once a month so the amount you can invest is equivalent to -$150). On average you should get about 8% return per year. So you should be getting about $184 per year. Your first year only costs $300 so your first year of Adobe creative cloud is $116 after your stock returns. Adobe is in essence loaning you $2,600 at 0% interest. That's $2,600 you can now put to work investing in your business or stocks.

 

[Emin Mihat Hye]

Amazing. Kudos to Adobe for always delivering.

 

[Mike Halper]

Not everyone wants or needs the Master Collection. For example, the Adobe apps I personally would use include only Premiere Pro, Photoshop, After Effects, Illustrator, and Acrobat. Acrobat and Illustrator I'd use maybe once a year at the most, and I haven't actually touched either of those in probably 3 or 4 years, so I don't need them. After Effects is a rarity for me. I don't do vfx as there's people out there who are much better at it than me. Photoshop I'd use maybe once a month at the most as I don't do a lot of photo editing. As far as Premiere Pro goes, I'd likely use it only for my own projects, because right now no one else is using it. In time that could change just like it did for FCP, but when I talk about Premiere Pro with established editors they laugh at it. I know it might not be fair since Premiere Pro is very different now and is a lot better, but that's what it's like out there right now. There's already more higher profile shows being edited on FCPX than Premiere Pro, so it's still an uphill battle for Premiere Pro to get there.

As an editor, I've had the option to use Premiere Pro only once on a project I was hired for. Everything else they want FCP or Avid. As a colorist, I've never had anyone deliver a Premiere Pro project for color correction. Everything has been Avid, FCP7, and actually a couple smaller FCPX projects. As a DIT, I've never seen a post house or editor decide to use Premiere Pro.... not even one. Everything has been FCP7 and Avid, and I've had one feature where they wanted to use FCPX.

So I'd be paying $50 per month for Master Collection which I don't need, let alone Premiere Pro which wouldn't get used very often. I haven't even used it for a real project in nearly 6 months. Sure I could pay the $20/month for a single app, but I see that as a waste for a program that I won't use for 6 months, or to have to pay $20 just to open a project for one day, and then not use it for the rest of the 30 days.

The other issue is that you could subscribe to CC for 3 years at $50/month which totals $1,800. At the end of that 3 years if you decided you didn't want to continue with the subscription you end up with nothing. No software you can still run, even though you paid $1,800. I think that's about the price (or a little more) for the old Production Premium CS, where you own the software. You could use it for a year and upgrade or you can use it for 3, 4 or even 5 years before you upgrade. Point is, you paid for software and you own it. You could even sell it if you want. With CC, you pay for something that you'll never own.

So being that I don't really need Premiere Pro, why would I commit myself to paying $50/month or even $20/month when I can buy FCPX for $350 (adding Compressor to compensate for AME) and get free upgrades until who-knows-when, especially when I'm coming across a lot more projects using FCPX than Premiere Pro? I wouldn't. I'd choose FCPX. Simple as that. And I think that's the mentality of a lot of people.

 

[Les Dittert]

Red users are a tiny fraction of the Adobe customer base. Most users of Photoshop and the other tools use cameras that do not need updates to handle manufacturer updates such as going from 4K to 5K to 6K.
So there in lies the trouble. A majority of Adobe customers are fine with the tool set as is. Photoshop is pretty maxed out as it is. So the paid updates were starting to dwindle.
Why would I want to update Photoshop if it does everything I could possibly need right now ?
Adobe could see where this was going. So they want the users to keep paying forever with a rental type of agreement. For a class of pro users such as Red users this is not such a big deal. For more "mom and pop" users it is.