1886
Replies
Yes.
That's what's actually quite funny with the Adobe rhetoric.
They say they are doing this because it results in more frequent software development and updates. Well Adobe, you can have that. If that is the reason for your new model, then WHY are we not allowed to keep the current versions we have installed perpetually when we stop the subscription? 
That just doesn't make any sense, IF the reason for this new business model is that Adobe can simply then give us more updates.
Of course everyone knows CC has absolutely nothing to do with trying to serve the customers better.
Andy Bay wrote:
Yes.
That's what's actually quite funny with the Adobe rhetoric.
They say they are doing this because it results in more frequent software development and updates. Well Adobe, you can have that. If that is the reason for your new model, then WHY are we not allowed to keep the current versions we have installed perpetually when we stop the subscription?
Of course everyone knows CC has absolutely nothing to do with trying to serve the customers better.
Can you point me where we say the only, or primary reason we are doing this is so we can do more frequent software updates? Doing more frequest updates is ONE advantage of the new model, but it is not THE reason we are doing this shift.
I am going to repost a comment I made on another site. They key thing is that the thing we used to sell, desktop software, is not the thing we are selling anymore.
Adobe is making a fundamental shift in what it builds and sells. For the past couple of decades, we have primarily built and sold desktop software, that would then be bought and used on the desktop. This is changing. We are shifting to creating and selling a more expansive creative process and workflow, of which the apps are only one part.
You can read more on this (and the why) at:
http://www.adobe.com/go/creativevision
You can find a really good diagram showing what the parts that make of the Creative Cloud at:
We also went into a lot of detail on this in the MAX Keynote this week. You can see the relevant section at:
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/max-2013/a-creative-evolution-the-creative-process/
This shows some of the initial integration we have done between the apps and cloud, as well as some of the mobile apps and services we are working on.
Now, I understand that a lot of people may not be interested in all of the Cloud stuff, and may say, do both. However, that presents problems, particularly over the long term.
First, we strongly believe that building a more expansive, and connected creative process is the right path for both us, and the larger creative community. But to get there requires a lot of work, and we want to focus on that path (and not split our efforts across multiple paths).
However, more practically, over time more and more functionality in the desktop app will be based on, and or require access to services made available via Creative Cloud. Right now that includes things like sync settings, colors, fonts, etcā¦ but eventually could include advanced image manipulating algorithms, or other image apis (in the case of photoshop). You would still use your desktop apps, but the core processing and work could happen in the cloud via open apis.
Why have that functionality in the cloud? Well, there are a number of advantages, including being able to do much more CPU intensive work (since we can take advantage of hardware farms in the cloud), and making the functionality open and available to other applications (including desktop, mobile, web and non-Adobe applications).
It is this last point that I am particularly excited about. Because access to the APIs would require a Creative Cloud account, it would be in Adobeās interest to allow anyone to use and build on top of those APIs (even traditional competitorās to Adobe apps). This is a model good for Adobe (more Creative Cloud members), good for non-Adobe app creators (get access world class Adobe technology for their apps) and to users (have a wider range of apps and solutions). This is a huge change in incentives around Adobe technologies, as before, our incentive was to keep it as closed as possible so competitors donāt use it and eat into sales of individual products.
Now, of course, you may say, āI donāt care about all of that stuffā, and that is completely fine. However, we do care. This is something that we think can completely change how people create, share and discover, and it is a vision that we are passionate about.
So, in summary, it is not just desktop software anymore.
mike chambers
MikeChambers wrote:
Andy Bay wrote:
Yes.
That's what's actually quite funny with the Adobe rhetoric.
They say they are doing this because it results in more frequent software development and updates. Well Adobe, you can have that. If that is the reason for your new model, then WHY are we not allowed to keep the current versions we have installed perpetually when we stop the subscription?
Of course everyone knows CC has absolutely nothing to do with trying to serve the customers better.
Can you point me where we say the only, or primary reason we are doing this is so we can do more frequent software updates? Doing more frequest updates is ONE advantage of the new model, but it is not THE reason we are doing this shift.
I am going to repost a comment I made on another site. They key thing is that the thing we used to sell, desktop software, is not the thing we are selling anymore.
Adobe is making a fundamental shift in what it builds and sells. For the past couple of decades, we have primarily built and sold desktop software, that would then be bought and used on the desktop. This is changing. We are shifting to creating and selling a more expansive creative process and workflow, of which the apps are only one part.
You can read more on this (and the why) at:
http://www.adobe.com/go/creativevision
You can find a really good diagram showing what the parts that make of the Creative Cloud at:
We also went into a lot of detail on this in the MAX Keynote this week. You can see the relevant section at:
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/max-2013/a-creative-evolution-the-creative-p rocess/
This shows some of the initial integration we have done between the apps and cloud, as well as some of the mobile apps and services we are working on.
Now, I understand that a lot of people may not be interested in all of the Cloud stuff, and may say, do both. However, that presents problems, particularly over the long term.
First, we strongly believe that building a more expansive, and connected creative process is the right path for both us, and the larger creative community. But to get there requires a lot of work, and we want to focus on that path (and not split our efforts across multiple paths).
However, more practically, over time more and more functionality in the desktop app will be based on, and or require access to services made available via Creative Cloud. Right now that includes things like sync settings, colors, fonts, etcā¦ but eventually could include advanced image manipulating algorithms, or other image apis (in the case of photoshop). You would still use your desktop apps, but the core processing and work could happen in the cloud via open apis.
Why have that functionality in the cloud? Well, there are a number of advantages, including being able to do much more CPU intensive work (since we can take advantage of hardware farms in the cloud), and making the functionality open and available to other applications (including desktop, mobile, web and non-Adobe applications).
It is this last point that I am particularly excited about. Because access to the APIs would require a Creative Cloud account, it would be in Adobeās interest to allow anyone to use and build on top of those APIs (even traditional competitorās to Adobe apps). This is a model good for Adobe (more Creative Cloud members), good for non-Adobe app creators (get access world class Adobe technology for their apps) and to users (have a wider range of apps and solutions). This is a huge change in incentives around Adobe technologies, as before, our incentive was to keep it as closed as possible so competitors donāt use it and eat into sales of individual products.
Now, of course, you may say, āI donāt care about all of that stuffā, and that is completely fine. However, we do care. This is something that we think can completely change how people create, share and discover, and it is a vision that we are passionate about.
So, in summary, it is not just desktop software anymore.
mike chambers
This is crazy talk. It's telling your customers how you want them to work, instead of empowering them to work how they want - or need - to work.
I actively avoid "collaboration" and "community" (I don't use Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Flickr, or any of the other social media nonsense). I'm also an individual, not part of a "creative group". I keep my published work, in large part, private (some of it is private by contracual obligation and/or federal law - "published" doesn't necessarily mean "public"). My "personal portfolio" is not now, and will not in the future be kept with Adobe's cloud services.
So, what does that leave? It leaves "CC Apps" and "Assets and Settings". Well, the apps are installed locally, it's just that I can't use them locally without them "phoning home" and without me paying continuously. Well, at work, funding comes and goes, and sometimes we can pay for upgrades and sometimes we cannot. And, per our prime contract, we can't rent software. We can pay for annual software maintenance, but that's it. Plus, we've at times gone many years without upgrading because addons we developed internally were broken by the upgrade.
At home, it's even worse. Sometimes I avoid upgrading - at times for years - because a new upgrade broke my old workflow. I did that with Elements - skipped from 3 to 9 because of a change in 4 that broke my workflow. It should be my choice whether to upgrade or not, and I should be able to avoid that for a long time if I so choose. I skipped from XP to Windows 7, for example, and did the upgrade when my own schedule and finances aligned with that upgrade, not when Microsoft (or Dell, or Adobe) wanted me to.
If you insist on forcing this cloud/community/collaboration model on everyone, even if they don't want to use it, you should fully expect them not to use it, and to go elsewhere. I fully understand that a number of people will absorb this model well, and use it to best advantage. But you can't expect everyone to adopt it - everyone is different and everyone has different needs and situations.
AdChoices