An Open Letter To Adobe Systems from Scott Kelby about Creative Suite pricing

There are some grey spots in the communication that, I feel, Adobe should answer.

1)Historically, there has always been a grace period, that allowed get the newer version for free if you purchased the old one very close, or after the announcement, and before the actual disponibility of the new version of the Creative Suite. This would allow, this time, to upgrade from CS3 onwards to CS5.5, and get CS "next", bypassing, this time, the one version limit.

I am wondering if Adobe did not have to react due to the lenghtening of the release cycle of full versions.

Before, major versions were released 18 months apart.

Three versions back then was 54 months, so 4years and 6 months.

Now, under the new releases model, a three "full versions" gap would equal 60 months, but with 6 point versions apart...

But the change to a single full version is quite harsh, and is computed by many as the trick to make the Creative Cloud cheaper than an upgrade.

But in fact the Creative Cloud is already cheaper if you add the point versions upgrades, subscriptions to Muse, Carousel and maybe Edge, plus the price of whatever tablet apps are released.

Compared to the Master Suite.

If one uses only, say the Video Production, and has no need for the other offerings, going the Creative Cloud way is more expensive.

(BTW, the text on this page is confusing, master collection should be removed from the upgrade plans below the three first ones:

2)Another point that is not clear: there does not seem to be an upgrade plan for existing owners of suites to the creative cloud. If the stated goal is to move all customers into a subscription, some incentive should be there for historical customers.

Funny thing...  I was just up at Walt Disney World.

Hundreds of thousands of people packed themselves in like sardines spending hundreds of dollars a day for the privilege to wait in line or of paying even more (e.g. for outrageously priced trinkets or food).  Even with "park hopper" passes and some of the parks staying open really late, we actually only got to go through no more than 3 or 4 main attractions a day.  Mostly we just waited for transportation (boats, buses, etc.) or stood in lines that snaked back and forth outside and through various buildings.

My conclusion:  There is no limit to how much people can be asked to spend for less and less actual value, and they keep paying it.  There may be a fairly large percentage of people out of work, but the amount of disposable income amongst the rest is still HUGE.

Adobe are positioning themselves to take advantage of this.

Does it affect me?  No.  I buy the Photoshop upgrade every version release, right when it's released.  I have to; the product is at the core of my own business, and frankly a couple hundred dollars every year and a half is no big deal.  But I'm not a "casual" Photoshop user.  I fear Adobe has overestimated the morality of hundreds of thousands of "casual" Photoshop users who may seek "less legal" copies for that five hundred dollar difference.  It's already becoming less and less important to the young folks to pay for software online if they can get cracked versions for free.  This will only make things worse.  Much worse.

-Noel

As someone who was eagerly anticipating an upgrade to CS6 (currently on CS3) the moment it was released next year, I have to say this new policy leaves an extremely bad taste in my mouth.  Had this been announced, say... when CS5 was first released, I probably would've been more forgiving.  I wouldn't have minded upgrading from CS3 to CS5 in April 2010, and then CS5 to CS6 sometime in 2012.  I still wouldn't be particularly fond of the policy to exclude past versions, but I'd at least have had the chance to get a couple years use out of CS5 for that upgrade fee.  But the way this is being done, to qualify for an upgrade path to CS6 Master Collection upon its release, I'll need to purchase CS5.5 (assuming I bought it before the 20% deal expires, it'll cost me a little over $1100 USD) as it approaches the end of its life-cycle.  I'll get, what?  A few months use out of that, and then if I want CS6 (which I do), I'll have to upgrade to that for whatever the upgrade cost from 5.5 to 6 might be.  I'm sorry, but that's not something I'm going to be doing.

I hope Adobe comes to its senses and takes Scott Kelby's advice to hold off on this policy until CS7 rolls around.  At least that way, no existing users of pre-CS5 software will be stuck with a horrendous cost-of-entry in order to get into the upgrade cycle without lagging forever behind.  Yes, I could buy 5.5 now and then not upgrade until 6.5 was a few months away from being replaced by CS7 (essentially only having to pay once every 2 years or so)... but being forever sentenced to lag behind like that unless I absorb a ~$2000 double-upgrade within the span of a few months is off-putting enough to make me drop Adobe software for good.

While I do want CS6, I don't want it enough to just lay down and take this.  If Mr. Kelby's advice isn't heeded, I can assure Adobe that Master Collection CS3 will be the final version of any Adobe product I own.  If you truly want to institute this new upgrade policy (though I'd advise against it in general), wait until CS7.  If not, here's one customer you'll lose for sure; and based on the backlash this is receiving thus far in just a few weeks, I believe I would be far from the only one.  There are probably still many customers who haven't even heard, not regularly following the kind of tech or industry blogs it's been reported on (and certainly not following Adobe Press Announcements).  Imagine their outraged shock when they come to your website on the day CS6 is announced or released, only to find their software is no longer eligible for an upgrade.

The main advantage I see as an owner licenseee of a whole suite edition is if the individual apps were updated as they are ready, rather than waiting for the whole suite to be ready to go. We shall see.

By the way, note that there is a Crative Cloud forum: here.

Q: If I have CS 4 and I pay the full price to upgrade to CS 6, then I assume I can sell my license to CS4 and that buyer would have a valid CS4 license? This should be possible, right? After all, the license to CS 6 is not dependent on having a CS4 license.

I would only add to this that Adobe should consider the fate of Netflix. There recent problems (and severe decline in stock price) all started from a price increase that did not sit well with a significant number of customers.

(I too am someone that uses Photoshop maybe 6 times a year for a couple of days at a time. As a serious amature, I would not upgrade from CS4 to CS6 if I'm forced to pay the full price for CS6.)

I'm personally really bothered by this and hope Adobe isn't serious about implementing this plan.

This scheme of forcing loyal, registered users into a monthly subscription pricing thing is exactly the type of thing only a greedy, bean-counting "suit" could propose. The whole idea is generating a greater amount of positive cash flow for Adobe at the much greater expensive of registered users.

There's all sorts of problems with this loony plan and it really could backfire badly for Adobe.

First of all the economy in the US and the rest of the developed world is not in great shape. Any advertising related industry takes it on the chin pretty hard when the broader economy is in the toilet. There is a LOT of businesses who just don't have the money laying around to get all of their computer "seats" on the hook for this monthly bill "cloud" upgrade scheme.

Next, not every upgrade is worth buying to every user. Lots of users sit out an upgrade cycle or two to make the upgrade worth the price. Adobe and other software companies used to understand this and used to have a one price fits all model on upgrades. Back in the 1990s it didn't matter what version of Photoshop or Illustrator you had. You pretty much paid the same thing to bump up to the latest version. Now Adobe is threatening to fine anyone with full pricing if they sit on the fence just once. That's going to create a tremendous sales opportunity for rivals like Apple, Autodesk, Avid, Corel, etc.

One must also consider the additional cost this will place on customers in terms of hardware. Most any new version of any application will have greater performance requirements than its previous version. I kept using CS3 and avoided upgrading to CS4 mainly because it would not work well on my old computer. I bought a new Win7 64-bit based system and had to upgrade to CS5.5 because CS3 wouldn't run on the new hardware. If I'm forced to continually upgrade my Adobe license out of fear of being stuck with full price fines I'm also going to have to buy new computer hardware more often too.

I prefer to upgrade my software when I want or need to do it, not when Adobe or anyone else tries to force me into doing it. This sort of thing could have a lot of Adobe customers keeping a grip on old software, old hardware and refusing to upgrade.

With the misteps Apple recently made with Final Cut X, one would think Adobe executives would be a little more careful about how they treat their customers.

Getting somewhat off the Photoshop-topic I work in prepress and am therefore trepidatous about what effect this will have to companies’ upgrading Adobe applications like Indesign.

Currently almost all the agencies we deal with use CS4, CS5 or CS5.5, so downward-compatibility is little problem when handing back files; but if people were to omit upgrading for more than two versions to offset the costs that could become a problem.

And depending on the new features in future releases of Photoshop downward compatibility (or rather maintaining editability for all such potential features when editing in lower versions) might become an issue for this, too.

Anyway, the decision to shorten the upgrade-path seems ill-conceived to me, but I’m not optimistic about Adobe (or their marketing department) re-evaluating it.

Thank you for that link. I suppose that I need to go and read some of my NAPP e-mails, as I had missed the "open letter."

As a NAPP member for many years, it is comforting to see the organization speak out on the new upgrade policies.

Well done Mr. Kelby.

Appreciated,

Hunt

I believe the only thing that Adobe will listen to is their bottom line. The pricing change may have an adverse effect on it and if it does Adobe will revert back to their old practice.  Asking users to upgrade to a buggy CS5 so they will elageable to upgrade to CS6 is no way to treat their install base.  While I have CS5 I will not upgrade to CS6 unless Adobe fix the Bug I reported and Fix the other CS5 bugs I read about and checked. CS5 is a buggy version of Photoshop I have upgraded from PS3 to PS5 to PS5.5 to PS7 to CS to CS2 and CS3 without problems. However when I upgraded to CS5 bugs effected many of my action, changes broke two of my Photoshop Plug-in Script,  Changes in CS5 UI broke other Actions I had recorded. Additionally Adobe removed function from Photoshop without providing a viable alternative so many users need to keep CS3 installed so the can use the PDF support that was removed and can not be installed into CS5. Adobe's support is now so bad I will no longer use it. Submit a bug report and you gat an automated response that your bug report will automatically be closed unless Adobe hear form you again. In fact even if they hear from you many times and they accept that you have indeed reported a bug they will still close you bug report and tell you Adobe may fix it is some future release. Who need that kind of support when Adobe and other Photoshop forums are more informative and knowledgeable then Adobe support personal. IMO Adobe seems to be butchering their Golden Cow.