Adobe moves to Creative Cloud, Cancels Creative Suite

It appeals to me, since I may only edit on occasions, so I may only need a subscription a couple times a year. For those that upgrade every three years, $50/month still comes to $1800? When a master suite costs $2400. But I see the appeal to have and own, and dislike the feeling that prices will change whenever they want, making business models less stable, as you never know the exact cost of next year's product. Overall seems like a lose for the little guys. Peace of mind is priceless.
 
I think the biggest objection is that the software stops working without an active license. Though they do give you a 120 day grace period. Seems like the wave of the future though. The new MS Office has gone to an annual cloud license model too.
 
Razz16mm said:
I think the biggest objection is that the software stops working without an active license. Though they do give you a 120 day grace period. Seems like the wave of the future though. The new MS Office has gone to an annual cloud license model too.
Click to expand...

Although MS also still offers Office with perpetual licensing.
 
James0b57 said:
It appeals to me, since I may only edit on occasions, so I may only need a subscription a couple times a year. For those that upgrade every three years, $50/month still comes to $1800? When a master suite costs $2400. But I see the appeal to have and own, and dislike the feeling that prices will change whenever they want, making business models less stable, as you never know the exact cost of next year's product. Overall seems like a lose for the little guys. Peace of mind is priceless.
Click to expand...

The little guys gain the most with this model since there is no large initial cash outlay. If you can't afford the price of a cup of coffee a day for top of the line software how can you effectively run a small production shop?
 
Razz16mm said:
The little guys gain the most with this model since there is no large initial cash outlay. If you can't afford the price of a cup of coffee a day for top of the line software how can you effectively run a small production shop?
Click to expand...

The tiny guys benefit. Low commitment, low initial cost. Although, each person will know how it effects their own business. CC is good for me.
 
Razz16mm said:
The little guys gain the most with this model since there is no large initial cash outlay. If you can't afford the price of a cup of coffee a day for top of the line software how can you effectively run a small production shop?
Click to expand...
When there about twenty other things that I could use that also cost the same... and they don't expire when I stop paying.
 
Razz16mm said:
The little guys gain the most with this model since there is no large initial cash outlay. If you can't afford the price of a cup of coffee a day for top of the line software how can you effectively run a small production shop?
Click to expand...

James0b57 said:
The tiny guys benefit. Low commitment, low initial cost. Although, each person will know how it effects their own business. CC is good for me.
Click to expand...

It's actually the opposite. The little guys get hurt the most. Small shops weren't the ones upgrading each cycle, instead opting to upgrade every 2nd or third version release. I used to work for Fortune 500 companies (when I say work for, I mean as an employee not a contractor) and I never had a problem keeping everyone in my group current with the latest software.

Adobe's bread has been buttered for a long time by big companies and shops. The little guy hasn't been Adobe's focus or concern for quite a while now. When they are thought of at all, it's as an afterthought. The thousands (sounds like a lot, but it isn't) of voices that cried out at the forced move to CC really don't matter to Adobe. What matters is maximizing profit. And that means selling subscriptions to the big guys, not upgrades every couple of cycles to the little shops.
 
Well stated, and very true.
keylight said:
It's actually the opposite. The little guys get hurt the most. Small shops weren't the ones upgrading each cycle, instead opting to upgrade every 2nd or third version release. I used to work for Fortune 500 companies (when I say work for, I mean as an employee not a contractor) and I never had a problem keeping everyone in my group current with the latest software.

Adobe's bread has been buttered for a long time by big companies and shops. The little guy hasn't been Adobe's focus or concern for quite a while now. When they are thought of at all, it's as an afterthought. The thousands (sounds like a lot, but it isn't) of voices that cried out at the forced move to CC really don't matter to Adobe. What matters is maximizing profit. And that means selling subscriptions to the big guys, not upgrades every couple of cycles to the little shops.
Click to expand...
 
James0b57 said:
The tiny guys benefit. Low commitment, low initial cost. Although, each person will know how it effects their own business. CC is good for me.
Click to expand...

I never understand this. Anyone with a credit card could do this with the perpetual Adobe products and make a monthly payment instead of paying the high initial cost. Cool, CC is good for you. It absolutely sucks for me, and arguing that it somehow 'opens things up' for those who don't have the ability to make a large initial payment seems to be pretty false to me.
 
Razz16mm said:
The little guys gain the most with this model since there is no large initial cash outlay. If you can't afford the price of a cup of coffee a day for top of the line software how can you effectively run a small production shop?
Click to expand...

I might counter with:

'If you can't afford a couple thousand dollars over three years to BUY top of the line software (including figuring out how to finance it if you don't have the initial cash outlay) then how do you expect to effectively run a small business?'

Not really sure why you feel this is in any way more beneficial to small companies...other than reducing the initial expense, which again, has been available to anyone with a credit card for years and years.
 
alaskacameradude said:
I might counter with:

'If you can't afford a couple thousand dollars over three years to BUY top of the line software (including figuring out how to finance it if you don't have the initial cash outlay) then how do you expect to effectively run a small business?'

Not really sure why you feel this is in any way more beneficial to small companies...other than reducing the initial expense, which again, has been available to anyone with a credit card for years and years.
Click to expand...

Over 3 years you aren't saving any money if you buy the suite and go for no upgrades at all vs subscription.
 
Razz16mm said:
Over 3 years you aren't saving any money if you buy the suite and go for no upgrades at all vs subscription.
Click to expand...

But if the model has stayed the same and we now had CS7, you could be at CS10 in three years time and three versions behind. If you're standing still you're going backwards. Not saying I disagree with perpetual licenses, but NLE platforms are constantly evolving (not including FCP7 :Drogar-KnockedOut(D) and if you're wanting to stay at the cutting edge, you need to keep your software up to date.
 
powervideo said:
But if the model has stayed the same and we now had CS7, you could be at CS10 in three years time and three versions behind. If you're standing still you're going backwards. Not saying I disagree with perpetual licenses, but NLE platforms are constantly evolving (not including FCP7 :Drogar-KnockedOut(D) and if you're wanting to stay at the cutting edge, you need to keep your software up to date.
Click to expand...

So are you working in 3D? 4K? After all if you are not 'cutting edge' you are going backwards, right? Thing is, for many small businesses (including me) we don't need to be 'cutting edge' because there is no business reason
(ie client demand ) for it. We are the ones Adobe would like to force to CC, as we didn't upgrade often enough. As long as clients in my corner of the world where I run my business are happy, it is really kind of stupid for me to pay extra to be 'cutting edge'. I'm not going to supply something that has no demand....for me that's 'bleeding edge'. Fact is, I don't use all that extra junk in CC. Once again, I point out how similar CC is to say a cable company. You must pay an ongoing fee, there is little incentive for the service provider to create innovation that makes your service actually better, and they force you to pay for a bunch of crap you don't want or need. In cable, they do this by 'bundling'. If you want popular channels like ESPN, you must pay for a bundle which also includes things like the Home Shopping Channel, which very few people would buy on its own merits. Hmmm, so lets look at CC. If you want ,more than one program....lets say you are a video guy and want Premiere, AE, and Photoshop. Guess what else you are going to have to pay for? Dreamweaver, Illustrator, Indesign, all sorts of programs you don't want or need. Seems eerily familiar somehow. If you like that way of doing business, more power to you. I don't think removing customers choice is a good thing, but that's just me. Cable companies are now worrying about 'cord cutters' (of which I am one). Adobe may be worrying about 'cloud jumpers' if they continue with the cable company way of doing business,
 
I am pretty happy with Premiere Pro Production Suite as the set of tools I need. I didn't want the tools for design and web development. So the feature of having the Master Suite does not provide any additional value for me. I wonder if Adobe ever considered keeping these feature silos and charging less, say $35 for just the video suite. That could draw some of us perpetual licensors back... maybe... nah. I'd still rather have the perpetual license option with the option to upgrade when it made sense for you.
 
powervideo said:
But if the model has stayed the same and we now had CS7, you could be at CS10 in three years time and three versions behind. If you're standing still you're going backwards. Not saying I disagree with perpetual licenses, but NLE platforms are constantly evolving (not including FCP7 :Drogar-KnockedOut(D) and if you're wanting to stay at the cutting edge, you need to keep your software up to date.
Click to expand...

The whole point of the subscription model is frequent updates as new features and new technologies come online. No waiting, no getting behind. The cloud model is one that best serves rapidly changing technology markets.

So when next year's new round of HD cameras comes out with H.265 codecs you won't be waiting a year or two or three for the necessary updates or laying out $300 or more in cash every year to get them.

My annual engineering CAD package updates run $1500 on top of an original $4500 purchase. Creative cloud is cheap.
 
Last edited:
Razz16mm said:
The whole point of the subscription model is frequent updates as new features and new technologies come online. No waiting, no getting behind. The cloud model is one that best serves rapidly changing technology markets.

So when next year's new round of HD cameras comes out with H.265 codecs you won't be waiting a year or two or three for the necessary updates or laying out $300 or more in cash every year to get them.

My annual engineering CAD package updates run $1500 on top of an original $4500 purchase. Creative cloud is cheap.
Click to expand...

No. Lets be very clear about this, the whole point of the subscription model is to make Adobe more money. If it was just about instant download of frequent updates so that there was no waiting or getting behind as you say, they could do that. FCP X does that without the move to a subscription based service. So lets not hide behind Adobe marketing speak. Sure they are now giving instant updates via download and that's great. But that is an entirely different issue. They are changing the way you pay to a subscription model. They don't have to do that, to offer frequent downloadable updates. It is a way for them to make more money. Cool for them, not cool for me. I get it, it's business. I'll take my personal business elsewhere.
 
Razz16mm said:
So when next year's new round of HD cameras comes out with H.265 codecs you won't be waiting a year or two or three for the necessary updates or laying out $300 or more in cash every year to get them.
Click to expand...

Another way to look at supporting the a new standard codec is that they really have an obligation to support ALL of their customers, creative cloud or not.

Canon, Nikon, Panasonic... they introduce a new camera and what does Adobe do? They release a small update to ACR that adds support for the stills side of camera. Why should video be any different? Making your customer buy a whole new version of your product so you can use your new camera is NOT supporting your customer. Nor is making your customer subscribe just so they can the new camera.

Supporting a standard codec isn't a sales opportunity. New features? Sure. But not supporting industry standard codecs.
 
alaskacameradude said:
No. Lets be very clear about this, the whole point of the subscription model is to make Adobe more money. If it was just about instant download of frequent updates so that there was no waiting or getting behind as you say, they could do that. FCP X does that without the move to a subscription based service. So lets not hide behind Adobe marketing speak. Sure they are now giving instant updates via download and that's great. But that is an entirely different issue. They are changing the way you pay to a subscription model. They don't have to do that, to offer frequent downloadable updates. It is a way for them to make more money. Cool for them, not cool for me. I get it, it's business. I'll take my personal business elsewhere.
Click to expand...

My opinion is that this is the best way to fight piracy. I"m not that tech savvy about software piracy but I think it's a lot harder to pirate software on the cloud than to crack a download.

I"m sure there are other business considerations and they may make more money from the cloud than straight up sales, but I have a feeling the number one driver of this is stopping piracy.

The cloud model doesn't work for me. Rather than stick with CS5 or something I think there are plenty of other options available for what I need. I'll just use something else, and if the cloud makes adobe money and works for other people, that's great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top