Adobe moves to Creative Cloud, Cancels Creative Suite

Gillvane said:
I don't have to switch a project from one to the other, just because I'm now using something else. I'd just boot up the old project in the old software because I'd still have it.
Click to expand...

You are right that for a smaller shop it's relatively easy to set aside a machine in the corner, stop updating it and have that be, for example, the FCP7 or CS6 'safe' machine as eventually hardware and software updates will stop being compatible with older software.

I was thinking more along the lines of larger shops (10-30 machines) as it's those types of places I've been working recently. For those places it's a wholesale shift (just like back in the day when people sold/stopped leasing their Avids so they could move to FCP). One machine might keep the old NLE software on it, but that would just be for safety's sake as all the projects would need to be exported out as XMLs or EDLs so they could be opened up in whatever the NLE is. Keeping enough old copies of the software (and computers able to run them) doesn't scale well to larger operations.

Whether or not you are a large shop or a small shop exporting out XMLs or EDLs or some other NLE-neutral format should be a part of your archiving practice as you don't want to be tethered to old hardware and/or old software indefinitely.


Tzedekh said:
That wasn't my point, and you probably knew that. My point was that Adobe blamed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act for not being allowed to offer free feature upgrades and thus for motivating them to move to a subscription-only model, which would permit more frequent release of new features without running afoul of SOX. I provided a solution that would allow them to offer essentially free (or very low-cost) upgrades if indeed it was their desire to do so in the face of government meddling.
Click to expand...
But why would Adobe want to offer very low cost feature upgrades to perpetual license holders? They already charge (well, charged) an upgrade fee every 12 months so why keep basically keep the same business model but nearly give away the feature upgrades instead of charging a few hundred bucks a year for them? I think this is beside the point though as Adobe is looking beyond just its traditional applications (more on this below).


I also indicated that I considered it cynical to blame SOX when the real motive was to maximize ongoing revenues and compel continual upgrades.
Click to expand...
I've never disagreed that Adobe wants to maximize revenue. All companies (especially those with shareholders) are trying to maximize revenue. Apple hopes that FCPX and the new Mac Pro will make them more money and I bet Avid wishes it could go back to the days when Avid MC was $25,000 a seat instead of $999. Adobe has already dropped the price of CC once and very well could do it again if subscriptions lag. It's much easier to drop a price than to raise it.

If the backlash against Adobe right now lasts long enough it could open the door for competitors to get a toe hold in areas that Adobe currently has nailed down. So I think even people that are worried about Adobe jacking up the prices and holding users hostage should want Adobe to keep down this path because it will surely open up room for competition and that's to the benefit of everyone.

But is it sustainable? Probably. If Adobe charged, say, the equivalent of two to three years' subscription fees to purchase the product and a nominal ongoing fee (which, like the CC subscription fee, could be paid in advance) to circumvent SOX, they'd be no worse off than they'd be if they had simply collected two to three years' subscription fees. They could even offer a discount for those committing such a large outlay in advance. The difference? The buyer would be able to upgrade the apps only for a limited time (as opposed to those on the subscription plan) but would have a perpetual license to the latest upgrade covered by the contract. The software, however, would no longer be upgradeable.
Click to expand...

The software that resides on the end users' machine is only part of Adobe's vision of its future self. Adobe wants to become a platform. Currently along with the CC apps you get access to 20gigs of Cloud storage as well as an account with a portfolio hosting service called Behance (as I understand it both services are being integrated into Adobe's apps). This seems like just the baby step beginnings though. Mike Chambers from Adobe has mentioned he sees the possibility of cloud-based processing and opening up Adobe APIs to 3rd parties in the future. Imagine using a tablet version of Photoshop (or another app that leverages Adobe's APIs) and having access to an Adobe Render farm via WiFi to do the heavy lifting. Or being able to utilize Adobe Anywhere on desktop and mobile applications.

Those types of 'always on', Adobe server powered services make sense with a subscription service.

I don't believe this is necessarily so. Besides, the subscription model ensures divergent versions. I don't really see this as any more of a problem than with the subscription model.
Click to expand...

If everyone has access to the same, free feature upgrades I don't think divergent versions will be that common. If some users have access to free feature upgrades, and other users do not then I think divergent versions will be very common. Plus, like I mentioned before, having subscription users and perpetual license users doesn't seem like it would jive well w/Adobe trying to reinvent itself as a platform.


It's too soon to tell if Adobe's master plan will work or if the wheels will fall off but I applaud them trying to innovate (though, as previously stated, I think there are certainly things they could do to bring more value, flexibility and peace of mind to users).


-Andrew
 
Anything to do with "cloud' base processing is & will continue to be a walking talking nightmare for this industry.

With camera horsepower increasing the dataload will only increase not decrease for NLE's. Seriously name me any business that would entrust their copyrighted data to the 'cloud' or who would be prepared to entrust time critical renders/ processes to vagaries of the web ? What may sound fantastic for stills, web, design, print becomes unworkable with 'moving pictures'.

If Adobe's plan is to try & 'herd' users of their software into using cloud based processing so they can become a "platform". They've profoundly mis-undertand this industry needs and will only serve to alienate the production business even more from what they have currently done with the subscription model.
 
Surf it Mike said:
With camera horsepower increasing the dataload will only increase not decrease for NLE's. Seriously name me any business that would entrust their copyrighted data to the 'cloud' or who would be prepared to entrust time critical renders/ processes to vagaries of the web ? What may sound fantastic for stills, web, design, print becomes unworkable with 'moving pictures'.
Click to expand...
Internet-based rendering has been fairly common for the 3D graphics industry for quite a few years now. But your point is well-taken with regard to real-time processes. Offloading a ten-hour 3D render is different from working in an NLE and expecting processes to go quickly and smoothly. But the always-connected platform is a pipedream. Being connected to the Internet isn't always possible or even desirable.
 
Surf it Mike said:
Anything to do with "cloud' base processing is & will continue to be a walking talking nightmare for this industry.

With camera horsepower increasing the dataload will only increase not decrease for NLE's. Seriously name me any business that would entrust their copyrighted data to the 'cloud' or who would be prepared to entrust time critical renders/ processes to vagaries of the web ? What may sound fantastic for stills, web, design, print becomes unworkable with 'moving pictures'.

If Adobe's plan is to try & 'herd' users of their software into using cloud based processing so they can become a "platform". They've profoundly mis-undertand this industry needs and will only serve to alienate the production business even more from what they have currently done with the subscription model.
Click to expand...

For heavy data projects different team members would be working remotely on one central project library. The data typically doesn't move after original upload. More like a remote desktop model.
 
Call me old school, but Does anyone remember when the rule was that your NLE workstation "doesn't TOUCH the Internet?"

I had a couple rules: No games and No internet on the workstations.
By the time a workstation was all configured and licensed with all the hardware/software/plugins, you cloned it and left it alone so it kept working. Because it just HAS TO WORK. :)

Kind of funny how things are now.
 
adkimery said:
If the backlash against Adobe right now lasts long enough it could open the door for competitors to get a toe hold in areas that Adobe currently has nailed down. So I think even people that are worried about Adobe jacking up the prices and holding users hostage should want Adobe to keep down this path because it will surely open up room for competition and that's to the benefit of everyone.
Click to expand...
I don't really see that happening. Adobe's huge product portfolio has resulted from years of acquisition and in-house development. The applications are mature and time-tested, and where possible, Adobe has enabled integration and interoperability. The breadth and depth of the product line seem untouchable. The apps may individually see more competition, but unless there's a dark horse out there, there probably won't be a cheaper, perpetual-license, integrated product line that will seriously compete with CC.
 
Last edited:
Tzedekh said:
I don't really see that happening. Adobe's huge product portfolio has resulted from years of acquisition and in-house development. The applications are mature and time-tested, and where possible, Adobe has enabled integration and interoperability. The breadth and depth of the product line seem untouchable. The apps may individually see more competition, but unless there's a dark horse out there, there probably won't be a cheaper, perpetual-license, integrated product line that will seriously compete with CC.
Click to expand...

At least as far as sales are concerned the CC model is a rousing success for Adobe. They have sold nearly four times the annual subscriptions compared to the typical number of perpetual suite sales in the same period of time. There may be a lot of grousing, but apparently not much real backlash as in people dropping the product.
 
@Tzedekh
Dark horses you mean like Blackmagic & Resolve 10, sounding more like an NLE finishing system with every passing day. Resolve walks all over Speedgrade and now its starting to morph into some form of NLE.

Dark horses a plenty out there with disruptive technology . Could Adobe become the AOL of the future ? Who knows but I'm certainly not putting all my productive eggs into one bloated & "mature" system called Adobe.

 
Last edited:
Surf it Mike said:
Anything to do with "cloud' base processing is & will continue to be a walking talking nightmare for this industry.

With camera horsepower increasing the dataload will only increase not decrease for NLE's. Seriously name me any business that would entrust their copyrighted data to the 'cloud' or who would be prepared to entrust time critical renders/ processes to vagaries of the web ? What may sound fantastic for stills, web, design, print becomes unworkable with 'moving pictures'.
Click to expand...

Amazon, Hulu, Apple, Netflix, etc., all offer services based on companies entrusting their copyrighted data to the cloud. Emails, texts, human resource info, company banking/accounting info... all up in the cloud someplace. CNN did a promo video for Adobe Anywhere and I'm sure Avid did market research before developing Interplay Sphere so I think there are a lot of businesses that are interested leveraging what the cloud has to offer. I've used various cloud services (from everyday ones like DropBox and YouSendIt to more high end ones like Aspera) to send/receive content (sometimes final deliverables) from major studios, cable channels and TV networks. As far as timeliness goes, I once worked for a show that would regularly lock on Thursday afternoon in LA and then get delivered over the interwebs to NY for air later that same night (much faster than overnighting an HDCAM SR tape).


If Adobe's plan is to try & 'herd' users of their software into using cloud based processing so they can become a "platform". They've profoundly mis-undertand this industry needs and will only serve to alienate the production business even more from what they have currently done with the subscription model.
Click to expand...
Adobe serves many industries though and I doubt, for example, they would shoehorn PPro users into workflows that are only suitable for PS users.



Tzedekh said:
I don't really see that happening. Adobe's huge product portfolio has resulted from years of acquisition and in-house development. The applications are mature and time-tested, and where possible, Adobe has enabled integration and interoperability. The breadth and depth of the product line seem untouchable. The apps may individually see more competition, but unless there's a dark horse out there, there probably won't be a cheaper, perpetual-license, integrated product line that will seriously compete with CC.
Click to expand...

I agree about the integrated product line, but I think it's possible for a number of stand alone apps to emerge and chip away at Adobe if Adobe doesn't offer enough value in the eyes of its customers. Adobe wasn't always the 'big dog' and there's no guarantee that they will stay the big dog forever.


-Andrew
 
adkimery said:
I agree about the integrated product line, but I think it's possible for a number of stand alone apps to emerge and chip away at Adobe if Adobe doesn't offer enough value in the eyes of its customers. Adobe wasn't always the 'big dog' and there's no guarantee that they will stay the big dog forever.
Click to expand...

I agree and I have to say its a pretty bold move in this day and age where it seems easier for anyone who wants to get into the "game" to do so. Look at BMC for example. BOOM! Just like that they launch a camera.. and BM is a company that has the experience, know-how and amazing support to possibly even compete with Adobe in terms of an NLE. I would love to see that and would be their first customer.

I use to be a big Adobe fan, owning and paying for legal versions of Production Premium Suites since CS3.. now, my tastes have changed. I'm using Resolve which is far more superior to Adobe in my opinon, and all BM has to do now is come out with an NLE and I'm there. I will ditch Adobe for good.
 
Surf it Mike said:
@Tzedekh
Dark horses you mean like Blackmagic & Resolve 10, sounding more like an NLE finishing system with every passing day. Resolve walks all over Speedgrade and now its starting to morph into some form of NLE.
Click to expand...
Sure, but it could be years before Resolve is a full-fledged competitor to Premier. And then you have to replace the other programs in the Production Premium suite.
Surf it Mike said:
Dark horses a plenty out there with disruptive technology . Could Adobe become the AOL of the future ? Who knows but I'm certainly not putting all my productive eggs into one bloated & "mature" system called Adobe.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't underestimate the value of product "bloat" and maturity. When Apple tried to foist a totally rewritten FCPX on users after removing industry-standard features that FCP7 users had become accustomed to, there was a backlash that, ironically, Adobe profited from. Apple was compelled to restore the missing features, but it proved too late to assuage many users.

adkimery said:
I agree about the integrated product line, but I think it's possible for a number of stand alone apps to emerge and chip away at Adobe if Adobe doesn't offer enough value in the eyes of its customers. Adobe wasn't always the 'big dog' and there's no guarantee that they will stay the big dog forever.
Click to expand...
Individually, some of the Adobe apps aren't even the best of breed. To a large degree, it's the integration that makes Adobe's production apps great. It's getting people to change workflows/pipelines that may prove the biggest impediment to any emerging competition's making inroads. There will have to be compelling reasons for users to switch.
 
Last edited:
I think some of the hardest of the Adobe products for a competitor to rival will be Photoshop, illustrator and after effects. Premiere also being a major industry competitor.

I mean, does photoshop have any real competition? How about After Effects?
Like mentioned it's the integration of the whole suite that really packs a hard punch.
It won't be easy for someone to compete with all that, but I hope they do.
 
It's one of the bigger selling points for me and one of the reasons I happily upgraded to the CC apps.

Everything works tightly together.

And not just with each other, but with 3rd party apps too:

 
Speaking of competition, this Ars review of Lightroom 5 had a perfect quote on why Adobe still releases LR as a perpetual license (emphasis added):

So let’s first talk about what’s not in Lightroom 5: the Creative Cloud license. That means that if you upgrade to Lightroom 5, you pay once and own a license to use the software indefinitely—unless it’s used to add more rockets to Iran’s arsenal or make Portia de Rossi look any more like one of the Olsen twins (that’s my law). There is no long-term money hole option. I don’t think you have to be a cynic to pick out the main reason for Lightroom being spared the Creative Cloud treatment. Lightroom actually has competition.
Click to expand...

SNIP

Almost no one would be willing to risk losing access to his or her photo library’s rich metadata catalog for a low entry fee. Maybe if FreeHand still existed, Illustrator might have been spared the Creative Cloud treatment as well. But since you’re not going to switch to Lightroom 5 because your files are held hostage, Adobe’s going to have to convince you to upgrade the old-fashioned way—compelling features.
Click to expand...

Yes - compelling features. And once Adobe has released enough new features to move a strong majority of people to subscribe to the cloud, Adobe will no longer need new "compelling features".

The full review: Adobe Lightroom 5 review: Who needs to be licensed or connected?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top