RANT: Adobe Marketing Has Won, Here Starts the Downfall
Discussion
21 replies
Posted by Paul DeCesare on December 11, 2012 at 5:54 PM
I watched part of the big Adobe webinar today, and was FLOORED at what I heard. Most know that Adobe is pushing the Creative Cloud where you pay a monthly fee for the software, not buy it outright. Microsoft has been trying to get Windows and Office on that model for years but fortunately their lousy marketing hasn't convinced anyone to do that. Adobe is pushing it and being much more successful unfortunately. Big corporations who need to bring in temp artists for graphic work to meet deadlines can simply turn on a subscription to Photoshop or Illustrator for a month, and for them that's a GREAT advantage.
But what about the small guys, all of us? Right now it looks innocuous, I mean, you can rent or you can buy, no big deal, right? Today that all changed. There's now a new big update to Photoshop that adds some fairly useful features, probably not so much for landscape editing, but still useful stuff especially if you shoot events. There's one they've added called Conditional Actions where geeks like me can run an action on a batch of photos and program it do different things based on properties of the image (such as, is it vertical or horizontal, etc). I'd LOVE to have that feature. That's great, right??
WRONG.
Those 12 new features released today are only for those who are subscribers to the Creative Cloud subscription. If you bought the software flat out, you don't get it. Period. I paid $1200 for the Production Premium CS4 suite, $599 to upgrade to CS5 and nearly the same for CS6 (I do use almost everything in there besides PS, such as Premiere, Illustrator, After Effects, etc). The reward for buying the software that I SO like using: you don't get to upgrade, too bad, become a renter. I like Photoshop so much I went through the certification process for CS5 and CS6, so even as an "Adobe Certified Expert" I can't even get the new features. Whatever.
Understand that this is just the first batter in the game. Things like this will continue to emerge and before long, we'll all have no choice but to become renters. Pay your mortgage and electricity and cable bills, and oh, don't forget your software bill.
If you do the math it comes out to about the same over a year as buying it. But if one of us hits hard times (medical bills, loss of income, whatever) a purchased package stays with your forever. Your Cloud subscription won't, and when you can't pay it, you have no Photoshop. That's lunacy.
Posted by Jim DeWitt on December 11, 2012 at 7:49 PM
Oddly enough, I was contacted for an Adobe survey this morning. One of the primary issues was sale/lease of software. The questions were stacked for the lease option. You report on the webinar doesn't surprise me.
For me, the issue is very serious. I don't have the bandwidth to support use the Cloud. It's another instance of Adobe burning my lingering good will: axing Framemaker, axing GoLive, bundling stuff in ways that forces you to buy dog software to get the stuff you want, refusing to break bundles, adding useless features; I don't want to start an Adobe-bashing thread (there may not be any other kind of Adobe thread) but no single software vendor, in my 36 years of pounding computer keyboards, has disappointed me more often or more badly than Adobe.
It would literally cost me more to 'lease/rent' PS-CS6 over the course of a year than to buy the DVD. This is what they want, of course. Adoobie doesn't want to ship boxes with discs in them, they want us to download all our stuff and use it in this nebulous 'cloud'. It's easy for them, and costly for us, which is what they want.
The problem with nebulous clouds is the dust and gas can hide a black hole, and that is what scares me about this whole 'cloud' computing thing. We are rapidly losing our ability, and the right, to control our stuff. It scares the hell out of me.
If Adobe finally says, "Well, Mr. P., you can't upgrade to PSCS-x and have a disc any longer. You have to rent it in the 'cloud'.", well, Adoobie, I have news for you...I'm outa here!
btw: I use MS Office 2010. If MS says the same thing, well...you guessed it.
--P
Posted by Mark Stahlke on December 11, 2012 at 8:45 PM
If someone produced image processing software with some basic functionality and a Photoshop compatible plug-in architecture Adoobie (Thanks, Preston, I like that. ) would be on the ropes in no time.
By the way, when anyone talks about "the cloud" always substitute the words "someone else's computer". That's what the magic cloud is - someone else's computer.
Posted by David Bostedo on December 11, 2012 at 9:15 PM
While I agree with some of the things above, I think a lot of people are conflating what is meant in this case by "the cloud subscription", and I don't want anyone to get confused.
For Adobe currently, the only thing on the "cloud" is the actual license/activation of the software. Everything else is still the same. It's still installed on your computer, all of your data occurs on your computer, and all of the processing occurs on your computer.
While in the future it might be possible that Adobe will push for "cloud" data storage or "cloud" data processing, right now all they have is monthly online licensing. Online data storage and online data processing is a much bigger deal, for users and even more so for Adobe. I'm not sure it will ever get there for most people.
And in general I think anything referencing "cloud" is typically not fully realized in the way that the term should be used. (Plus, I hate the term anyway since it's such a buzz-word and misused and overhyped so frequently right now.)
=============================================
Some related notes...
-- A lot of corporate software is leased and not owned. Most of what I use at work is leased, but it's a bit different model since it's very expensive software (think hundreds of thousands of dollars). That said, it's not unusual software for electronics designers. I also know software designers that have leased software. Depending on how much of Adobe's business is corporate and not individual users, they may have good traction with this model already.
-- There are a lot of organizations out there looking for you to donate your CPU time when you're not using it to form a true cloud (or grid) computing system. They're usually non-profit science organizations looking to bring lots of processing to bear on major problems. A lot of these projects/networks can be seen on this distributed computing Wikipedia page.
-- Those are close to "true" cloud computing in a lot of ways. Usually when companies use it now (like Amazon "cloud" storage, for instance) they really just mean online storage. A real cloud would be a loose, often unknown amalgamation of random machines with available space. Amazon certainly doesn't do that - they simply store your data on their own machines so it's available online and (hopefully) properly backed-up.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on December 11, 2012 at 11:19 PM
Good explanation David. As a software developer by day, I do hear terminology get a bit discombobulated (I actually have no idea how to spell that, lol). And being I work for a huge semiconductor company, I look at Adobe's subscription model as a huge plus for corporate entities that need to turn on and off features, it's a huge money saver. What has me fried are two simple things:
1. Adobe wants 100% subscription, that's a given. That does us littler photographer folks no good if we hit hard times. Our subscription runs out, we don't have software to run.
2. They have the nerve to do what they revealed today, withhold features from the loyalists that we are (were). I totally get it, that's a wonderful marketing plan, hence the title of my post.
I've never been a basher of the Adobe licensing way, I gladly paid for my suite upgrades because I knew just how much better each version was. This has nothing to to with photography, but what Adobe did to Premiere Pro CS6 was so good, 10,000 people left Apple's cripped Final Cut Pro and switched. Then they added what used to be a $20K software title to the Prod Premium suite, an app called Speedgrade CS6, absolutely phenomenal post production software for video. Plus Photoshop with CS5 and CS6 got hugely better in so many ways. In fact, it's STILL getting beter, I just can't have it, lol. I don't subscribe (in all fairness, I'll stop the "renter" jab).
Jim DeWitt, if you read down this far, I got the survey also (really DID take 25 minutes!), and I voiced my take in the end. I know it's a moot point, but it felt good to at least tell 'em.
There is another way to avoid the mess if you only do photo work, and that's Lightroom 4 which is half the price now. Adobe ripped out weak printing capability of LR3 and rebuilt it in LR4 where it's now THE way to print. It's no option for me personally but for many it IS a viable option.
What's frustrating is that not one iota of this issue has anythng to do with what the software does, only on how they want to sell it. CS6 is pretty stinkin' good, to be honest, I could live with this version for years to come. (Crowd shouts, "Then why on earth did you start this thread and aggravate all of us???").
1. Adobe wants 100% subscription, that's a given. That does us littler photographer folks no good if we hit hard times. Our subscription runs out, we don't have software to run.
2. They have the nerve to do what they revealed today, withhold features from the loyalists that we are (were). I totally get it, that's a wonderful marketing plan, hence the title of my post.
This I definitely agree with, especially the first point. If don't pay your subsription fee, you're toast, even though the software, and the files you won't be able edit exist on your computer.
--P
Posted by Lisa Cuchara on December 12, 2012 at 12:28 AM
I went to Kelby's Blog and he does not say anything about the shortcomings of this new change in distribution of features. So I put this question in the comments.
This is very disturbing! people who purchased do not get the upgrade. only people who lease PS get the new features? WT? I paid good money and it seems like things like people who purchase are getting shorted. imagine people who buy a house not being able to have the new channel on TV, only renters? WT? Things "conditional actions" would be very useful. I am not sure where this path is leading, but it sure smells funny.
Posted by Joe Paratore on December 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM
I also received Adoobes survey . It most definitely was slanted for the monthly
renting of the cloud. I too let them know of my displeasure. This might end up being a good thing
if other software companies step up and develop newer and better products to compete with adobe.
Adobe has lost me as a loyal customer for the two main reasons that Preston summarized in the thread. I'll be shopping for Ps replacement when I decide it's time to upgrade. Consumers do have power– don't cave to marketing ploys! Vote with your feet and leave– for whatever OTHER software meets your needs! Adobe is a giant in the industry. They have lots of kinds of "consumers", so it behooves them to provide a great product for all of them. Giants eventually fall, too, if they don't provide what the customer wants. I'm looking for the next genius that will fill the niche for us, that Adobe is apparently no longer interested in. I definitely am NOT INTERESTED in supporting filthy rich companies getting richer at my expense.
There's my rant on the subject! Thanks for the opportunity, Paul. It does feel very good!
Posted by Phillip Noll on December 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM
Has anyone used Picture Window Pro as a PS alternative? Wondering how it stacks up.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on December 12, 2012 at 5:49 PM
Haven't heard of it before... anyway, I'll just stay on CS6, it's paid for and it's best in class at the moment. There are folks still using CS2/CS/7.0, so if they can wing it for 10 years on those, I'm good for 15-20, lol. Ooooo, think of it!! Adobe wants subscriptions, and if we just keep using what we have, there's NO extra cost involved and we keep using Photoshop for free, year after year.
People, keep Photoshop and revel in the fact that you don't need to upgrade any longer, software nor PC.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on December 12, 2012 at 5:57 PM
That was an interesting shift, huh?
Posted by Mark Stahlke on December 12, 2012 at 7:29 PM
YES, Paul! That's what I intend to do, and I'm at Cs5.
Posted by Dan Roberts on December 13, 2012 at 5:46 PM
One other aggravating issue not mentioned thus far... what about when you don't have an internet connection? Is the software still functional if your machine can't access the online license registry? I do a good bit of processing on my laptop, typically with net access but not always.
By the way, let's not be naive enough to think Adobe will be the only one to do this. Recall that Nik was bought by Google and they aren't exactly big into marketing products in a box.
Like several who have already posted, software companies are driving me to do what I probably should anyway which is to live with what I've got and not upgrade. I'll be better off spending the additional $$ on other equipment or tickets to exotic locales
Posted by Paul DeCesare on December 15, 2012 at 12:07 AM
Dan, they most likely will embed your sub info in resources files or even the Registry if you run Windows, just like they do now if you install the 30-day trial. But the push is for everyone to have a net connection everywhere, so your concern is a valid one. I do believe that long term plans for everything tech-related could certainly be being designed with the assumption of an internet connection. Just yesterday I upgraded my AT&T plan for our three iPhones (me/wife/son), and guess what? The "How many minutes per month" thinking is getting phased out, gone goodbye. Now you pick how much data you want in a month and that's what you pay for. All calls and texting is all free unlimited, that's almost like an afterthought. This actually is relevant, stay with me a sec... so now our iPhones are first and foremost data consuming devices that just happen to be able to communicate as a phone. I do like that model, not worrying about minutes anymore, amen! SO, tonight we're in Hobby Lobby, and my son fires up Speedtest.net to see what kind of cellular download speed we now get in Phx on LTE: 32mb/sec! That's 32megaBITS which is a full 4megaBYTES per second, the same we get with Cox at home. Incredible download speed, in an iPhone. ALSO, all three phones now have full tethering capability, we all can create a wireless hotspot right where we are, at Cox Premium Cable speeds.
So why on earth would anyone not have an internet connection? See where I'm going with this? It isn;t there yet, there are plenty of folks in rural areas not quite there YET, but Adobe and Microsoft's sales targets aren't pinned to Idahna, Oregon which has a gas station and a bar and a population of 53 (I miss driving through there actually, gorgeous and peaceful), it's all targetted for major cities that are rapidly getting blazing web in their phones. So it's not entirely crazy to think that customers will be required to have a net connection to authenticate Photoshop when you fire it up.
I'm so glad they got CS6 so well put together, it and Windows 7 are going to be my world as long as I'm here.
So...now we get a double whammy to the pocketbook: We pay for software by the month and for the data we transmit or consume. Sure, I pay a monthy amount for my DSL through my ISP, but I don't pay a per GB fee: I can upload/ download as much I want. I refuse to use my low-tech, non Apple, phone for anything other than...a phone. Call me a ludite, but I have never sent a text message, either.
I do live in a rural county. High speed internet and cell coverage is getting better, but there are still thousands of folks who must have landlines for phone calls and use a dial-up modem for internet access. How much good is all this whiz-bang tech for them?
It would really bug me to be forced to have an internet connection in order to use my software. As it stands, if my internet connection goes down, I can still fire up CS6, or any other application I have on my machines, and still be productive.
Maybe I'm being paranoid, but I truly believe that we, as a society, are slowly but inexorably losing control of our right to choose. To me, that's a scary prospect.
--P
Posted by Dan Baumbach on December 15, 2012 at 8:14 AM
If Photoshop wants to price themselves out of our market, we can use the copies we currently have and get third party raw converters for our new cameras. It's the ability of Camera Raw and Lightroom that really impressed me as far as Photoshop improvements go and I'm sure there are third party raw converters that would love our business.
"...and I'm sure there are third party raw converters that would love our business."
I think that's key. I've posted before that I am looking for Photoshop alternatives, and non-Adobe products in general. The best way to rein in Big A is to cut deeply into their market share.
Call me a ludite too (we have waaaay too much in common Preston), but as much as advancing technology drags me into life changes I might not want, I reject the technology.
Posted by Mark Stahlke on December 15, 2012 at 11:28 AM
Call me a ludite, but I have never sent a text message, either.
Wow, I thought I was the only one on the planet. I'm not a Luddite, I use technology where it does something useful for me. I have no need to send text messages.
"I use technology where it does something useful for me."
Same here, Mark. I rarely even have my cell phone with me unless I am traveling, or I know I have a pressing need to carry it. I have no desire for a tablet or an iPhone-like device. Honestly, I believe these things disconnect people from the world around them, rather than connect them to it.
I have seen people stand on the bridge below Yosemite Falls yacking away. Did they really hear the roar and rumble of the falling water, feel the chill of the spray, or see the sunlight dancing on the water from the second highest waterfall on earth? I doubt it.
Anyway, back on topic...If Adobe decides to no longer ship me a DVD, and tries to make me use the 'cloud' so that I can use the latest version of Photo Shop, then the version I have is the last one I'll buy. I currently have no need for RAW converter since PS ACR and my DAM program currently support my ancient Nikon (which I rarely use, being a LF film guy, btw), but, if I ever do upgrade, I'll look for a 3rd party solution. It would make no sense to give Adobe a ton of money so that I can be able to convert RAW files. Like others, I will take my business elsewhere.
Discussion
21 repliesBut what about the small guys, all of us? Right now it looks innocuous, I mean, you can rent or you can buy, no big deal, right? Today that all changed. There's now a new big update to Photoshop that adds some fairly useful features, probably not so much for landscape editing, but still useful stuff especially if you shoot events. There's one they've added called Conditional Actions where geeks like me can run an action on a batch of photos and program it do different things based on properties of the image (such as, is it vertical or horizontal, etc). I'd LOVE to have that feature. That's great, right??
WRONG.
Those 12 new features released today are only for those who are subscribers to the Creative Cloud subscription. If you bought the software flat out, you don't get it. Period. I paid $1200 for the Production Premium CS4 suite, $599 to upgrade to CS5 and nearly the same for CS6 (I do use almost everything in there besides PS, such as Premiere, Illustrator, After Effects, etc). The reward for buying the software that I SO like using: you don't get to upgrade, too bad, become a renter. I like Photoshop so much I went through the certification process for CS5 and CS6, so even as an "Adobe Certified Expert" I can't even get the new features. Whatever.
Understand that this is just the first batter in the game. Things like this will continue to emerge and before long, we'll all have no choice but to become renters. Pay your mortgage and electricity and cable bills, and oh, don't forget your software bill.
If you do the math it comes out to about the same over a year as buying it. But if one of us hits hard times (medical bills, loss of income, whatever) a purchased package stays with your forever. Your Cloud subscription won't, and when you can't pay it, you have no Photoshop. That's lunacy.
For me, the issue is very serious. I don't have the bandwidth to support use the Cloud. It's another instance of Adobe burning my lingering good will: axing Framemaker, axing GoLive, bundling stuff in ways that forces you to buy dog software to get the stuff you want, refusing to break bundles, adding useless features; I don't want to start an Adobe-bashing thread (there may not be any other kind of Adobe thread) but no single software vendor, in my 36 years of pounding computer keyboards, has disappointed me more often or more badly than Adobe.
Time to evaluate GIMP, I guess.
The problem with nebulous clouds is the dust and gas can hide a black hole, and that is what scares me about this whole 'cloud' computing thing. We are rapidly losing our ability, and the right, to control our stuff. It scares the hell out of me.
If Adobe finally says, "Well, Mr. P., you can't upgrade to PSCS-x and have a disc any longer. You have to rent it in the 'cloud'.", well, Adoobie, I have news for you...I'm outa here!
btw: I use MS Office 2010. If MS says the same thing, well...you guessed it.
--P
By the way, when anyone talks about "the cloud" always substitute the words "someone else's computer". That's what the magic cloud is - someone else's computer.
For Adobe currently, the only thing on the "cloud" is the actual license/activation of the software. Everything else is still the same. It's still installed on your computer, all of your data occurs on your computer, and all of the processing occurs on your computer.
While in the future it might be possible that Adobe will push for "cloud" data storage or "cloud" data processing, right now all they have is monthly online licensing. Online data storage and online data processing is a much bigger deal, for users and even more so for Adobe. I'm not sure it will ever get there for most people.
And in general I think anything referencing "cloud" is typically not fully realized in the way that the term should be used. (Plus, I hate the term anyway since it's such a buzz-word and misused and overhyped so frequently right now.)
=============================================
Some related notes...
-- A lot of corporate software is leased and not owned. Most of what I use at work is leased, but it's a bit different model since it's very expensive software (think hundreds of thousands of dollars). That said, it's not unusual software for electronics designers. I also know software designers that have leased software. Depending on how much of Adobe's business is corporate and not individual users, they may have good traction with this model already.
-- There are a lot of organizations out there looking for you to donate your CPU time when you're not using it to form a true cloud (or grid) computing system. They're usually non-profit science organizations looking to bring lots of processing to bear on major problems. A lot of these projects/networks can be seen on this distributed computing Wikipedia page.
-- Those are close to "true" cloud computing in a lot of ways. Usually when companies use it now (like Amazon "cloud" storage, for instance) they really just mean online storage. A real cloud would be a loose, often unknown amalgamation of random machines with available space. Amazon certainly doesn't do that - they simply store your data on their own machines so it's available online and (hopefully) properly backed-up.
1. Adobe wants 100% subscription, that's a given. That does us littler photographer folks no good if we hit hard times. Our subscription runs out, we don't have software to run.
2. They have the nerve to do what they revealed today, withhold features from the loyalists that we are (were). I totally get it, that's a wonderful marketing plan, hence the title of my post.
I've never been a basher of the Adobe licensing way, I gladly paid for my suite upgrades because I knew just how much better each version was. This has nothing to to with photography, but what Adobe did to Premiere Pro CS6 was so good, 10,000 people left Apple's cripped Final Cut Pro and switched. Then they added what used to be a $20K software title to the Prod Premium suite, an app called Speedgrade CS6, absolutely phenomenal post production software for video. Plus Photoshop with CS5 and CS6 got hugely better in so many ways. In fact, it's STILL getting beter, I just can't have it, lol. I don't subscribe (in all fairness, I'll stop the "renter" jab).
Jim DeWitt, if you read down this far, I got the survey also (really DID take 25 minutes!), and I voiced my take in the end. I know it's a moot point, but it felt good to at least tell 'em.
There is another way to avoid the mess if you only do photo work, and that's Lightroom 4 which is half the price now. Adobe ripped out weak printing capability of LR3 and rebuilt it in LR4 where it's now THE way to print. It's no option for me personally but for many it IS a viable option.
What's frustrating is that not one iota of this issue has anythng to do with what the software does, only on how they want to sell it. CS6 is pretty stinkin' good, to be honest, I could live with this version for years to come. (Crowd shouts, "Then why on earth did you start this thread and aggravate all of us???").
This I definitely agree with, especially the first point. If don't pay your subsription fee, you're toast, even though the software, and the files you won't be able edit exist on your computer.
--P
This is very disturbing! people who purchased do not get the upgrade. only people who lease PS get the new features? WT? I paid good money and it seems like things like people who purchase are getting shorted. imagine people who buy a house not being able to have the new channel on TV, only renters? WT? Things "conditional actions" would be very useful. I am not sure where this path is leading, but it sure smells funny.
renting of the cloud. I too let them know of my displeasure. This might end up being a good thing
if other software companies step up and develop newer and better products to compete with adobe.
There's my rant on the subject! Thanks for the opportunity, Paul. It does feel very good!
People, keep Photoshop and revel in the fact that you don't need to upgrade any longer, software nor PC.
By the way, let's not be naive enough to think Adobe will be the only one to do this. Recall that Nik was bought by Google and they aren't exactly big into marketing products in a box.
Like several who have already posted, software companies are driving me to do what I probably should anyway which is to live with what I've got and not upgrade. I'll be better off spending the additional $$ on other equipment or tickets to exotic locales
So why on earth would anyone not have an internet connection? See where I'm going with this? It isn;t there yet, there are plenty of folks in rural areas not quite there YET, but Adobe and Microsoft's sales targets aren't pinned to Idahna, Oregon which has a gas station and a bar and a population of 53 (I miss driving through there actually, gorgeous and peaceful), it's all targetted for major cities that are rapidly getting blazing web in their phones. So it's not entirely crazy to think that customers will be required to have a net connection to authenticate Photoshop when you fire it up.
I'm so glad they got CS6 so well put together, it and Windows 7 are going to be my world as long as I'm here.
I do live in a rural county. High speed internet and cell coverage is getting better, but there are still thousands of folks who must have landlines for phone calls and use a dial-up modem for internet access. How much good is all this whiz-bang tech for them?
It would really bug me to be forced to have an internet connection in order to use my software. As it stands, if my internet connection goes down, I can still fire up CS6, or any other application I have on my machines, and still be productive.
Maybe I'm being paranoid, but I truly believe that we, as a society, are slowly but inexorably losing control of our right to choose. To me, that's a scary prospect.
--P
- Dan
I think that's key. I've posted before that I am looking for Photoshop alternatives, and non-Adobe products in general. The best way to rein in Big A is to cut deeply into their market share.
Call me a ludite too (we have waaaay too much in common Preston), but as much as advancing technology drags me into life changes I might not want, I reject the technology.
Same here, Mark. I rarely even have my cell phone with me unless I am traveling, or I know I have a pressing need to carry it. I have no desire for a tablet or an iPhone-like device. Honestly, I believe these things disconnect people from the world around them, rather than connect them to it.
I have seen people stand on the bridge below Yosemite Falls yacking away. Did they really hear the roar and rumble of the falling water, feel the chill of the spray, or see the sunlight dancing on the water from the second highest waterfall on earth? I doubt it.
Anyway, back on topic...If Adobe decides to no longer ship me a DVD, and tries to make me use the 'cloud' so that I can use the latest version of Photo Shop, then the version I have is the last one I'll buy. I currently have no need for RAW converter since PS ACR and my DAM program currently support my ancient Nikon (which I rarely use, being a LF film guy, btw), but, if I ever do upgrade, I'll look for a 3rd party solution. It would make no sense to give Adobe a ton of money so that I can be able to convert RAW files. Like others, I will take my business elsewhere.
--P