[Locked] No perpetual licenses are you serious?

[Mattrman]

I just head that Adobe was planning to abandon its perpetual license in favor of an on line only rental program. At first I thought that this must be a joke. I have been using adobe products for 18 years. Primarily Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign. I am currently an owner of CS 6 Master collection and obviously do upgrade my products and have consistently done so over the years. I am not connected to the internet full time and in fact my work computer is never directly connected to the internet. So how does this work? Is adobe now forcing me to connect to the internet - it seems that this is the case.

In regards to upgrade cycles, I dont want to rent my software and be tied to a rental agreement. I want to upgrade when I choose, not rent my software like some kind of loaner program!

I want to purchase the software then not worry about it. For instance when I travel, I dont want to be bogged down with downloads and upgrades chewing up my bandwidth. I have traveled to many places where internet access is very limited. Downloading from a wireless card in China is painful, I dont want to be bogged down with no software or large megabyte downloads costing me a fortune on the other side of the planet.

Adobe I know that I am just one person and you will probably not listen to me but did someone ask? No one asked me about this. How simple could this be - I want to buy the software then use it when I want where I want, is this too much to ask?

Please let me continue to use this software in the way that I have used it for so long. If others wish to have the creative cloud then great! More power to them, don't alienate your other users. Please provide both alternatives.

Best regards - Matt

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

001andrew wrote:

If you are able to negotiate then say so other wise. You are just playing cheer leader,

I'm not here to negotiate. I don't have the authority to do that, and I never suggested I did. I asked the question because I was personally interested, and it turns out something positive could come of it.

After all this outcry, I'm sure Adobe would be interested to know what compromises might be acceptable to everyone, and it's in our interests to come up with compromises that would satisfy us.  I can't promise what will happen, and they'll never satisfy everyone, but compromises stand a better chance of happening than a complete turnaround.

[Guest]

Right well there is not going to be a compromise. Adobe Stock will tank and Money is all they care about. I and others will not spend a dime with them EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. And you are wasting my our time. You should join ranks with the artist here and tell Adobe they made a mistake.

So the awnser to your Q I want to see them sink yes yes yes

[Jeff_Know1]

[W_J_T]

^^^ I asked my "magic 8 ball" about the creative cloud and it said:

[W_J_T]

sigh

[Guest]

They are hoping we get tired and go away. All we have to do is make the stock drop thats is. then they will listen

[W_J_T]

Hi Victoria, thanks for your detailed description above about your own experience, that certainly gives some perspective to the context.

Victoria Bampton wrote:

After all this outcry, I'm sure Adobe would be interested to know what compromises might be acceptable to everyone

Victoria Bampton wrote:

I believe they want to know - what compromises would be acceptable

Ok well given all the outcry, has Adobe done anything at all formally themselves publicly to gather information and feedback from current customers and future consumers about their concerns, dislikes and suggestions? The only thing I have witnessed from Adobe is a continual pushing of the Creative Cloud Subscriptions with a complete and absolute absence of consciousness about those whom are concerned and dissatisfied with Adobe's chosen direction.

So: Are they interested? Are they listening?

What does the absolute silence by Adobe equate to towards its customers, concern and a willingness to understand and be part of a solution? Should the silence give us solace that we are being heard and that they feel our opinions and concerns matter?

Is the following an example of Adobe listening?

Adobe Exec: Creative Cloud complainers

http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/11/adobe-creative-cloud-interview/

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

W_J_T wrote:

So: Are they interested? Are they listening?

I wouldn't be spending my valuable time here having this conversation if I wasn't 100% sure they're interested.  Listening to people ranting isn't my idea of a relaxing way to spend the evening, believe me!  But I value logical reasoned conversation, and I believe good can come from that.

Yes, they're clearly fairly quiet at the moment, but they get shot down in flames every time they poke their heads above the parapet. Seen some of John Nack's posts, and the resulting comments?  That doesn't mean they're not listening to everything though.

Yeah, that link was not their best PR moment, for sure.  But that was an interview held at Max, at the same time the announcement was made, before the, er, user feedback had begun.

[Shawn4G]

I think the biggest problem all of us have is the idea of perpetually renting the software and never owning anything in the end.  There should be opt out or buy out option that would allow us to retaining the functioning software we have paid for up to that point.  I have no problem paying a monthly fee for upgrades and such, but I do have a problem not owning anything after paying hundreds or thousands of dollars and investing all that time and effort in projects and learning their software to have it all taken away years later when I stop paying.  Or say I decide to switch to a different set of software.  I'd still be a slave to Adobe if I need to go back and make changes to a project created on CC.  I'd have to continue paying for the CC subscription and pay for my new software.

I would probably pay the monthly fee as long as, like others have mentioned, we have an option to discontinue our subscription after X months and retain the functioning software in its current state. Just not be elegable for continued updates unless a subscription or somekind of payment were made again.  A "rent to own" option.  That's all I think we really want.  It's really not that complicated.

Thanks,
Shawn

[W_J_T]

Victoria Bampton wrote:

I wouldn't be spending my valuable time here having this conversation if I wasn't 100% sure they're interested.

Yes all of our time is valuable, it was not our choice to be forced to take part in Adobe's decision and lack of choice for consumers going forward. I wish all of us could be assured amidst the silence that they do care and are listening. Given your own depiction above however, to be honest even though you may care and be interested, it appears you are comfortable and content personally regardless of any changes or if Adobe is in fact listening or considering making concessions to the outcry regarding the Creative Cloud only approach.

Victoria Bampton wrote:

But I value logical reasoned conversation, and I believe good can come from that.

I certainly value it as well. I am however not presently convinced even with it that anything will in fact come out of this situation for the better good of the existing customers concerns. I would like to be shown differently by an official release from Adobe themselves however.

Victoria Bampton wrote:

Yes, they're clearly fairly quiet at the moment ... That doesn't mean they're not listening to everything though.

Well the silence in and of itself is deafening and defining, a statement could easily be released by Adobe to dispel concerns of their apparent lack of interest and that they are in fact by contrast listening and making considerations to better align with the customers present needs and concerns.

Victoria Bampton wrote:

Yeah, that link was not their best PR moment, for sure.  But that was an interview held at Max, at the same time the announcement was made, before the, er, user feedback had begun.

Marketing if anyone should have known better regardless of the timing. I find it to be an exemplary example of Adobe's current ideal towards its customer base. That is, not caring what the consumer wants but telling them what they need and how they are required to be apart of it with the absence of any real choice.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

W_J_T wrote:

it appears you are comfortable and content personally regardless of any changes or if Adobe is in fact listening or considering making concessions to the outcry regarding the Creative Cloud only approach.

Yes, it's fair to say I'm not overly concerned for myself, so the fact I'm here having this conversation surely suggests I have solid reason to believe Adobe are listening and I'm concerned about getting the best compromise for users who are not content with the current situation. There's only so much I can say, but why else would I be here? Although I'm off to bed now!

[W_J_T]

Victoria Bampton wrote:

Yes, it's fair to say I'm not overly concerned for myself, so the fact I'm here having this conversation surely suggests I have solid reason to believe Adobe are listening and I'm concerned about getting the best compromise for users who are not content with the current situation. There's only so much I can say, but why else would I be here?

Victoria Bampton wrote:

I'm not here to negotiate. I don't have the authority to do that, and I never suggested I did.

You're not concerned personally and have no authority to negotiate. I do understand however your desire for a more positive dialogue (certainly at points, threads such as this and conversation about this topic at large have lost their way by some), but with the absence of any presence from Adobe officially where is the dialogue at all? So then, what is in fact your role here aside from provoking a presently one sided dialogue given your not concerned personally and have stated you have no authority to negotiate?

Victoria Bampton wrote:

Although I'm off to bed now!

Sweet dreams. Will your sheep be jumping over creative clouds, is a subscription required for such dreams?

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

W_J_T wrote: what is in fact your role here aside from provoking a presently one sided dialogue

Well, since I can ensure the information gets back to the right people, I was hoping that, as a group, we could come up with specific suggestions for compromises that would be acceptable for everyone concerned, instead of just repeating the same complaints over and over again. But you've made it quite clear I'm wasting my time, so I'll leave you to it. I hope you get a result that suits you.

[flaming1]

Victoria - there are plenty of constructive suggestions in this thread, and many other threads too.

As a group there are some very clear and sensible messages that are being repeated over and over that, as a group, people would like Adobe to listen to and consider.

Price is an issue to some. Even though personally it is not a big issue to me, it is to some. It is not limited to hobbyists though. CC still represents a price increase to most professionals as well, but a lot of them will be able to manage that. The spin put on it by Adobe and others of comparing it to a full purchase does not wash for those of us who are already in the system and are only up for upgrade prices.

The big issue for me, and a lot of others - and one that should be an issue to any professional that relies on CS software for a living is that there is no longer any certainty around being able to use our tools. Read the myriad of posts in the CC forum and it quickly becomes clear that the whole CC environment is unstable for a lot of people. Software suddenly becoming unavailable, reverting to trial versions, asking for non-existent serial numbers, removing synced files from local machines etc.

Opening yourself up to the potential of these failures by subscribing to CC is suicide for professionals who are managing tight deadlines. This combined with not being to access your files once you stop subscribing makes the CC a very unattractive option for most (in this I mean that you cannot open your own files if you no longer have any functioning software).

The nonsense explanation of CC being better because it allows for ongoing/rapid addition of features also rings a little hollow. A lot of users don't upgrade to every version simply because the 'features' are little more than gimmicks in a lot of cases. Why would we now want to have immediate access to these same gimmicks?

The software should be treated as a tool - which is what it actually is - not a consumable.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

flaming1 wrote:

Victoria - there are plenty of constructive suggestions in this thread, and many other threads too.

Yeah, I've read some great suggestions and passed many back. They're just difficulty to find amongst all the other angry chatter, but that's an excellent summary of the main concerns I'm hearing too.

[W_J_T]

Very nicely stated flaming1.

flaming1 wrote:

The big issue for me, and a lot of others - and one that should be an issue to any professional that relies on CS software for a living is that there is no longer any certainty around being able to use our tools. Read the myriad of posts in the CC forum and it quickly becomes clear that the whole CC environment is unstable for a lot of people. Software suddenly becoming unavailable, reverting to trial versions, asking for non-existent serial numbers, removing synced files from local machines etc. Opening yourself up to the potential of these failures by subscribing to CC is suicide for professionals who are managing tight deadlines.

I agree and this thought is not just the average laymen who are concerned with this concept either concerning the cloud. As one exmple:

Steve Wozniak: Cloud Computing Will Cause 'Horrible Problems In The Next Five Years'

http://www.businessinsider.com/steve-wozniak-cloud-computing-will-cause-horrible-problems-in-the-nex...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/06/steve-wozniak-cloud_n_1748269.html

"I think it's going to be horrendous. I think there are going to be a lot of horrible problems in the next five years."

"I want to feel that I own things," Wozniak said at the event. "A lot of people feel, 'Oh, everything is really on my computer,' but I say the more we transfer everything onto the web, onto the cloud, the less we're going to have control over it."

Sadly, much like flaming1 stated, the forum is already riddled with customers having senseless issues using the Creative Cloud and thusly it does not then help promote or embrace Adobe's decision for Cloud Only or ensure them moving forward.

[Terrachild]

Victoria, you are right about one thing.

The reaction has been Angry!

You seem surprised that people are so angry.

Gee....I wonder why.  Sarcasm intentional.

Anyone who bought or upgraded to CS6 was lied into doing that with the false promise of a continuing franchise.

Every software company that has ever stopped development of a piece of software has doomed it.

That is grounds for a class action lawsuit.

There is no nice way to put that.

We all feel screwed!

And what makes it worse is, unlike other companies that have discontinued software, Adobe offers no equivalent cross-grade that offers the same service.

We are expected to rent forever or give up use of our work!

What kind of company treats their customers like that and then acts like they are helping them?

Adobe.....You are not helping us!

I'm planning to go to Siggraph soon, and I would be surprised if Adobe wasn't constantly flash-mobbed, and shouted at during their entire time there.

I certainly plan to make it clear to them how people are feeling anyway I can.

[Greg_Bohn]

> Yeah, I've read some great suggestions and passed many back. They're  just difficulty to find amongst all the other angry chatter,

There's 'angry chatter' because many people feel angry that Adobe is making a clear grab for greater control over and profit extraction from their customers. And Adobe surely knew what it was doing.

For the most part, the suggestion to "reach a compromise" seems somewhat like trying to negotiate with a bully hoping you can reach a 'compromise' where he bullies you less...

  And after being bullied in the first place, would you trust them not to bully more in the future?

  But, stranger things have happened, so in the end I guess it will all come down to what most people find acceptable (or not)...

[Jeff_Know1]

Shawn4G wrote:  
I think the biggest problem all of us have is the idea of perpetually renting the software and never owning anything in the end.

Yep, in a nutshell.

BITESBITER wrote:

After  a certain time of rental comes a perpetual licence of the current  version with the possibility to extend for the same rental time (when ever you feel to to the next perpetual license upgrade)

Shawn4G wrote:   

I would probably pay the monthly fee as long as, like others have mentioned, we have an option to discontinue our subscription after X months and retain the functioning software in its current state. Just not be elegable for continued updates unless a subscription or somekind of payment were made again.  A "rent to own" option.  That's all I think we really want.  It's really not that complicated.

With software development it quickly becomes complicated to maintain different versions at the same time.

There are some major issues with a "rent-to-own" / "opt-out" solution.

bitm07 wrote:

... [Adobe] would be in a position where different licences would be entitled to their perpetual licences at different times.

This is indeed a serious flaw, to say the least...

1) With this system everyone would be at a different 'current state'.

You wouldn't easily be able to reinstall your own 'current state' if there is a problem. And Adobe is not going to keep a backup handy for everyone. So a 'current state' at different times would be difficult to manage and maintain. Can you imagine customer support? It's already a real b*tch.

2) Adobe would have to provide a pre-made 'current state'. Every +- 18 months? But how different is that from a normal perpetual license?

It would still put Adobe in a position where they will have to 'Wow' us to upgrade and have periods with less money in between cycles. Which is what they are trying to avoid by picking us all up and throwing us into the 'forever Cloud subscription' scheme.

3) You will not have access to the 20gb of storage anymore, just the 2GB. I personally don't care about that, but still, it's yet another problem. People would still be able to use the software itself. And therefore might still want to use the storage service. you would have to be able to pay for that separately.

Victoria Bampton wrote:
I've also seen things from the opposite side, as I think I'm now allowed to say I've been involved in testing some of CC. I've seen the difficulties of testing both CS and CC at the same time, which takes away time from developing new features and fixing bugs. I've seen the engineers become more excited about what they're developing instead of stressed about schedules. I've seen teams forced to sit on brilliant new features for months on end, because it wasn't time for another perpetual license upgrade yet. I've seen features pulled from the releases and bugs that couldn't fixed in time for a fixed release schedule. I've seen them focus on fantastic new big features that will sell upgrades, at the expense of little features that would make our workflows so much easier.

Those are some very valid points from Adobe's perspective. And I can appreciate their position and how this will make the programmers life's easier.

But I'm looking at it from a customer's perspective. You can't just alienate your customers like this and force us to pay forever or leave with NOTHING to open our files with. It's simply unacceptable. No matter how awesome the new features might be. We need to have a safety net to fall back on. And that is a perpetual license. With this scheme Adobe will OWN us for life. They got us by the balls if too many of us agree to this madness...

The money Adobe makes comes from us customers. We are the ones who PAY to use the software so that Adobe programmers can continue to develop new features etc. Let's not sugar coat this. This is simply put a very hostile approach to lock us in for life.

If this is how they treat us now while we still have a perpetual license... I can only fear what it will be like in the future.

Sorry Victoria, but no. This is not good for us. We need to have a safety net to fall back on.

W_J_T wrote:
So: Are they interested? Are they listening?

Victoria Bampton wrote:
Yes, they're clearly fairly quiet at the moment, but they get shot down in flames every time they poke their heads above the parapet. Seen some of John Nack's posts, and the resulting comments? That doesn't mean they're not listening to everything though.

I was thinking about this myself. As an Adobe employee it would be unwise to 'just say something' out of the blue. We would twist and turn every single word around in ways they can't even imagine. It would be a disaster. (Even more so I mean...) But it would also not help us in getting back perpetual licenses, or something that works in a somewhat similar fashion.

Now that I've actually written this down it's once again clear to me. If Adobe meets their target of 'Cloud slaves/prisoners/hostages' we will never ever see perpetual licenses again. Then it really will be the Cloud or nothing.

We must stay strong as a community and say NO for now. Vote with your wallet people, vote with your wallet.

Anyway, I hope Adobe is giving it some serious thought to bring back perpetual licenses in one form or another. It doesn't have to be the exact same system.

I don't think ANY company who would have known before hand how this would have ended up would still have gone through with this.

Bottom line for me is this. I don't have a problem with the Creative Cloud services on their own. Or being more connected to these Cloud services. I really don't mind any of that. I might even come to like them and appreciate them. The nice thing is we can decide to use them or not. It's our choice. But leaving us with NOTHING to open our files with when or if we leave the Cloud.... well, how can anyone agree to that? Can you explain to us why we shouldn't think that is a big deal?

[Greg_Bohn]

> Those are some very valid points from Adobe's perspective. And I can  appreciate their position and how this will

> make the programmers life's  easier.

It sounds to me that the issues that were mentioned were all controlled/controllable by Adobe. They set the release schedule's, they could have produced more frequent "point' releases if they chose to, they could have hired more testers or programmers if needed, etc.

As I understand it, Adobe made over $ 1,000,000,000 in profit last year. You'd of thought that they'd have had a few dollars to spend on QA, etc...

I don't buy this as a "If only they weren't at the mercy of that terrible perpetual license" story.

> We must stay strong as a community and say NO. Vote with your wallet people, vote with your wallet.

  I think that's the only hope of getting them to change in any meaningful way.

[Hatteras Photo]

  Victoria........if you leave all the bickering here on this forum and get out in the real world.....Graphics and Photography wise. Everyone pretty much wants things the way they were....but also know this is not going to happen. When I talk to colleagues in NY NY and around the world the biggest concern is we are paying for ever and never end with anything. I have talked to no one that wants to rent....But....what seems to be the deal braker is we never end up with anything when we stop paying.......Even after years of paying for the cloud one is left with nothing.....not even a way to use the files we have made. The biggest consern I have heard from friends around the world is.......I own my work not Adobe !! They will hold my work hostage and force me to pay forever.

     What would have worked from the beginning would have been a monthly payment for a certain amount of time ....then if you choose to stop your software is frozen at that point....but continues to work so you can access your files and work on them. If you want anything new you must rejoin the CC for a set amount of time again. It would have worked....most....but maybe not all......but most could have lived with it. Problem is now the trust is broken ( I think this is why you see so much hostility here in this forum) as you know it is much harder to regain trust then loose it. But for many many artists around the worl the trust is gone ! What I have heard many many times talking to friends around the world is " How could they be so stupid to think we would go for something that makes you pay forever to be able to access our work ! If I stop paying for some reason I can not even use my files that I own ! Are they really that stupid to think we would all go for that ! " This is what I hear from artists around the world.

     I am sorry to say but for many the TRUST is gone and it may never return......Peter

[jbjones]

Jeff_Know1 wrote:

1) With this system everyone would be at a different 'current state'.

You wouldn't easily be able to reinstall your own 'current state' if there is a problem. And Adobe is not going to keep a backup handy for everyone. So a 'current state' at different times would be difficult to manage and maintain. Can you imagine customer support? It's already a real b*tch.

2) Adobe would have to provide a pre-made 'current state'. Every +- 18 months? But how different is that from a normal perpetual license?

It would still put Adobe in a position where they will have to 'Wow' us to upgrade and have periods with less money in between cycles. Which is what they are trying to avoid by picking us all up and throwing us into the 'forever Cloud subscription' scheme.

3) You will not have access to the 20gb of storage anymore, just the 2GB. I personally don't care about that, but still, it's yet another problem. People would still be able to use the software itself. And therefore might still want to use the storage service. you would have to be able to pay for that separately.

I don't think it is as big of an issue as you are imagining. It would be difficult for Adobe to maintain an archive of all versions of software for download, but Adobe has never been good at that anyway.

Essentially Adobe would just need to provide a downloadable installer package of all the current software; an offline installer which people need anyway (divided into 4GB DVD sized chunks maybe).  As long as you maintained a serial number you could download the latest package and once you stopped your subscription you lost access to the downloads. People would have to maintain their own backups, just like in the old days.

Once you stop your subscription your serial number would be time stamped on Adobe's servers. Then the installer package would also be date aware so that when you installed it, the activation would check the serial number and as long as it was newer than the installer package, activation would be successful.  This would also allow people to keep past versions if they needed. It would also prevent someone from getting the newest installer package from their friend and being able to activate it.

For users who subscribe for 2 months and cancel, well Adobe could just disable that serial number activation completely. Only after 2 years of subscrition would the serial number be eligible for perpetual locking and time stamping. Also, during the next year, perhaps give immediate eligiblility for upgraders of CS6.

--------------------------------------

As for the cloud syncing features, I would like to see an option for standalone CS6 users (or CC cancelers) in the price range of $5 a month or $50 a year. As it is, I'll continue to use Dropbox or Google Drive either of which offer a cheaper cloud storage system than Adobe currently does.

[Pauls Sloss]

jbjones wrote:

Jeff_Know1 wrote:

1) With this system everyone would be at a different 'current state'.

You wouldn't easily be able to reinstall your own 'current state' if there is a problem. And Adobe is not going to keep a backup handy for everyone. So a 'current state' at different times would be difficult to manage and maintain. Can you imagine customer support? It's already a real b*tch.

I don't think it is as big of an issue as you are imagining. It would be difficult for Adobe to maintain an archive of all versions of software for download, but Adobe has never been good at that anyway.

Essentially Adobe would just need to provide a downloadable installer package of all the current software; an offline installer which people need anyway (divided into 4GB DVD sized chunks maybe).  As long as you maintained a serial number you could download the latest package and once you stopped your subscription you lost access to the downloads. People would have to maintain their own backups, just like in the old days.

Adobe already says in it's CC FAQ that they will maintain archived versions of CC, and that you can access any version you require.

I don't think a baked opt-out, "hire-purchase" system is a technical hurdle for Adobe. (I personally would be happy with this as an option.)

I'm also not convinced of their declared reasoning for CC as a way to roll-out features on a quicker schedule. There is virtually no significant new features in the upcoming CC v7 for Indesign and only slightly better for Illustrator. Photoshop is where the action is happening and of course the new apps such as Muse.

I can see that this simplifies Adobe's sales strategy, and cuts cost for sales, but it seems to be at the cost of part of the customer base. How large this will be, only time will tell.

Adobe have never released a compelling list of features in their slower upgrade cycles, which is why I preferred to alternate my upgrades. I haven't seen any evidence that this new improved upgrade cycle will be of much benefit ... well at least to me and many of my colleagues.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Hatteras Photo wrote:

..But....what seems to be the deal braker is we never end up with anything when we stop paying.......Even after years of paying for the cloud one is left with nothing.....not even a way to use the files we have made. The biggest consern I have heard from friends around the world is.....

Problem is now the trust is broken ( I think this is why you see so much hostility here in this forum) as you know it is much harder to regain trust then loose it.

Yeah, that's the main themes I'm hearing too. Nothing they can do now will bring back that trust overnight, or for a long time. I guess they could cuts their losses and move on to the next generation, but I don't think many of us want them to do that.

If they came up with some kind of opt-out deal at this stage, do you think it would help? Or, besides the obvious (bring back perpetual), is there anything else they could do to improve relations? Is the pricing reasonable, if there was some kind of opt-out to address those primary concerns? There was an idea of some kind of read-only reader, to enable continued limited access to files, but that doesn't appear to be too popular.

[FastFeet]

Victoria Bampton wrote:

Well, since I can ensure the information gets back to the right people, I was hoping that, as a group, we could come up with specific suggestions for compromises that would be acceptable for everyone concerned, instead of just repeating the same complaints over and over again.

Some people at Adobe messed up really big without any comparison. Even with a half brain and a little bit of understanding of humans and logic it was obvious that it will backfire big. This was more than just stupid. The only explanation I can come up with is that the responsible people felt invulnerable and really believed they can get away with it—just look at the example of the bankers that haven’t learned either.

I hope Adobe knows that they only have one shot to make things right. Anything half-beaked will backfire again. Their words are that they do things for the benefit of their customers, but their actions are that they do everything for the benefit of their profit only. They even alienated their dealers, because they don’t earn anything anymore selling regular CC licenses. They can only sell team licenses. So they have no incentive to sell Adobe anymore and are already advertising products of the competition.

Adobe needs to treat current and longtime customers adequately who pay the biggest part of the employees’ salaries and shareholders revenues. This includes making products available at a fair price. The price of CC is only beneficial for new customers. For current customers CC is between 150% and 350% more expensive. Schools also face more than 100% price increases.

The principle of interim updates is nothing special in the software industry. I have various software products that I pay for and that include 1 year of free upgrades. After that time I can decide if I want to pay for another year or, if I don’t need any of the new features or can’t afford an upgrade, stick with the latest update I received. If a new version comes out that benefits me, I can purchase the actual version for an upgrade price and I get another year of free upgrades. So the argument that Adobe can only offer interim updates with the subscription model is completely nonsense. If they prove to be innovative people will buy, because they want and not because they are pressed to.

A subscription only model, where you don’t own anything after you stop subscribing might be interesting for large businesses that have a varying number of employees and if it is beneficial for tax purposes. Still this needs to be much cheaper than if you would upgrade all the time and own something.

So here is my list of things that Adobe needs to do:

Gain trust again

1. Have the CEO and the responsible people resign. They proved to be a danger to the company, the employees, the shareholders and the customers.
2. Apologies big and truthfully.
3. Stick to the words and promises (about two months ago I was still told by Adobe sales rep that there will be perpetual licenses for the new versions) and bind yourself publicly to them.
4. Offer any kind of compensation (even small) for the trouble and lost time
5. Give their dealer base again the option to sell licenses with an incentive margin.
6. Ensure that the customer data in the cloud is not read or scanned by Adobe for any purpose. Give customers an encryption option before the data is transferred into the cloud.
7. Offer free knowledgeable 24/7 support for issues with cloud access.

Strive to offer what is best for Adobe’s customers

1. Offer upgrades to existing perpetual licenses that include one year of free upgrades, like with a subscription version. This is equivalent to CC where you have a perpetual license for the versions that came out during the one year upgrade plan.
2. If customers don’t want to continue with a new version, but want to benefit from cloud features make those available for a low fee (e.g. storage, settings in the cloud, etc.)
3. To lower the bar for new customers Adobe could offer to turn a subscription license into a perpetual incense after some years of subscription.  The monthly price for new customers could also be higher than for existing customers. Microsoft for example doesn’t offer updates to Office anymore, but the price for a new version is now about the price of previous updates. This way the entry bar for new customers is low. Yes, existing customers don’t receive a discount, but when the price is low to begin with it is not necessary.
4. Offer sub-packages of CC that compare to the old Web, Design, or Production Suites that are less than half the price of CC.
5. Offer an optional installation media, e.g. DVD for a small fee (e.g. $10-$20) for customers that don’t have access to the Internet or have only a low bandwidth connection. (This exists actually for enterprise customers of CC, so it could also be offered for other customers.)
6. Have an option to download updates, so in case you have no Internet connection or the cloud is down and you need to re-install the software (crashed computer, non-starting or non-working application) you can without missing a deadline (this is software for professionals).
7. Offer a one-time payment for the full year, including other payment options than just credit cards