News on Premiere Next at Adobe Max

[lasvideo]

Join us today at our #AdobeMAX keynote, live at 9:30 a.m. PT with CEO Shantanu Narayen and SVP @DWadhwani: http://adobe.ly/AdobeNext

[rainschub]

Oh - I see now - you compare only CS6 to CC...

OK, let´s compare that:
I take the same reference again, which is given from Adobe, itself:
http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/investor-relations/PDFs/ADBE-Investor-...

Page 4, left, top:
CS6-Suite Users in total: 4.4 mio.

CS6-Single Product Users in total: 1.5 mio.

Total 5.9 mio. Users.

(In my eyes, and logically, this must be the number you take for the "before CC", or?)

Page 5, right side, top:
Complete amount of subscribers (so called "Cloud"): 1.4 millions.

So, less than 1.4 mio. (24%) of CS Users have none of AE Single App, Prod. Suite, Master Collection, right?
(Elsewise it can´t work... or?)

And you will also call everyone a "user" who has (only) installed the App, right?

(I think, there are only a few people, who can call themselves users of all these Apps (CC) in a professional way)

And given all that as true - there are much more users than before?
Really astounding (because on base of the numbers - it´s possible, but hard to believe).

...which is what it would take to see the breakdowns for the high-level numbers that you're quoting from the financial statements...

These numbers are an official statement of Adobe, given to investors.

What do you mean with this sentence? What´s the difference between them and the numbers you call "real" ("breakdowned")?
I really don´t understand, why I can´t I take them as given (real totals)...

PS.: Why you can´t see sales data, when they are available official at Adobes Website (Link above)? Or is there an difference between the official statements and real/other numbers?

[Todd_Kopriva]

You are comparing large-scale aggregates of people who have paid for the software. I am comparing actual use of the applications, since I can see details of how many people have activated the software and---if people opt in---how many people have started the software. You are comparing apples; I am comparing oranges. Frankly, I don't care about the apples (the sales numbers); I care about how many people are actually using the applications. I don't come to work each morning motivated by sales numbers; I come to work each morning motivated to help people to make movies---and there are a lot more people using After Effects and Premiere Pro now then ever before.

My main point was that people were claiming that we're losing customers, and from where I sit I can see that we have more users than ever before.

[rainschub]

Todd_Kopriva wrote:

My main point was that people were claiming that we're losing customers, and from where I sit I can see that we have more users than ever before.

It´s Adobe itself, who made the plan with losing customers in the end (an established "Cloud").

The Investor-Handout of March 2013 isn´t available any longer at Adobe´s Website, but this statement was made.

..how many people are actually using the applications...

That´s what I asked for... On what base do you call someone a user?
If the App is simply activated? Installed? started? or what else?
If I have a look at the product-forums, it seems, there are lot´s of newcomers. And right, the low-felt Entrance price may work for some people.

So I can see many, many fundamental "how to..." questions since the start of the so called "Cloud" in May.

Think, the long time users don´t ask for support as much or with more specific questions.

PS.: I didn´t compare Apples or Oranges. I simply wondered about the official numbers and your statement.
(I would estimate, people who payed for SW are also using it)

And coming to the end... I believe, you are highly motivated with what you are doing (I dont come to work...). No question about. I will believe YOU, that you are not first interested in sales numbers.
I just wanted to understand the relation between the different numbers.

[R Neil Haugen]

Todd,

I'm a fairly new user ... about a year now, from Cs6 into CC. One of the things that I do appreciate about the Adobe forums are the number of experienced people answering questions around here. Most of whom are NOT staff, but users. And also ... a large share of the threads I look through have people whose projects involve masses of footage for tv station use, for commercials, for indie shorts, for music videos, all sorts of things. People who are clearly TOTALLY commercial in their use of the programs. And yea, at times pissed when something goes bloopy on them. As I've been a time or two.

Point is, there are quite a number of very experienced people around her who do this for major commercial living purposes. Wish I had their experience, and I'm trying to get there as fast as possible. And grateful for their help, both in posting problems and talking through solutions. But this forum handles noobs and commercial editors, graders, and all in one big open area.

And as someone who's been a professional photog my entire working life (last time I had a "job" for someone else it was cooking in college 40 years ago) ... no I don't expect the experienced ones to ask as many questions. But I'm grateful for their help here.

Neil

[rainschub]

R. Neil Haugen

I'm a fairly new user ... about a year now, ...

with 239 posts since 2008?

But you are right... These forums are full of people, who try to help us.

Thanks to Todd & all the others.

[TheCoroner9]

Todd_Kopriva wrote:

Yes, we have more users of After Effects CC through subscription than we have of After Effects CS6 through a perpetual license. A lot more. The difference is even greater for Premiere Pro.

Also don't forget - Adobe has a lot more complaints about their company now and dissatisfaction from a large group of Adobe users from not wanting CC and the subscription.   A lot more.

Or this thread wouldn't still be going on, Adobe TV on youtube wouldn't have turned off commenting, Adobe users wouldn't still be complaining this long after the end of the perpetual license, and Adobe wouldn't have sent out surveys to it's users that was geared to be pro CC rather than finding out the true feelings of their users. 

[shooternz]

THe world keeps spinning and the sun comes up somewhere everyday and most users get on with doing what they do best..despite their true feelings.

LIfe sux dont ya know.

[R Neil Haugen]

rains,

In case you actually read my posts, I've been a pro photographer since what ... 1978? First Adobe product purchases was probably what, 199*? Photoshop 2 ... might have been 3, but I think 2. I'm a noob at video stuff, on these forum boards. That "total" post and 2008 date includes posts on mostly Lightroom as far as the ones before say last April or so. And I'd actually had an earlier "presence" on the Adobe forums for a post or two a month, but that got lost somehow in 2008. Maybe another 30 posts overall. The vast majority of my posts have been since April or so, as the total number of programs I'm using has blossomed since I joined the video side of things and went "cloud".

Which has been very useful in my small business. We'll be going to the cloud on another subscription probably before the end of next month. That one will be more Lr/Photoshop/Illustrator area, stills and graphic design as it's what my wife does more than I. She's also looking at the range of programs she'll probably end up with out of the cloud. Because they're useful to us. And financially worthwhile. Or we couldn't justify the expense.

Neil

[Steven L. Gotz]

Which makes it suitable for hobbyist websites at best. I would never dare to sell something like that to an actual client.

Hobbyist or Pro photographers who want more control but still don't want to code. Or just about any other creative who doesn't want to pay someone to put up a site.

That's why you should probably leave websites to professionals.

That is one of the silliest statements I have ever read. Selling websites should be left to the pros perhaps, but it doesn't take a pro to put up an interesting web site. My design skills are extremely limited, but I still have regularly achieved over 30,000 unique visits in a single month. My site is not as interesting as it used to be. When I started it, there was a limited amount of information available. Nowadays, you can find just about anything using Google. But I still get lots of hits as more people are searching. And I am anything but a professional website developer.

[Andy Bay]

You are comparing large-scale aggregates of people who have paid for the software. I am comparing actual use of the applications

Now you're just twisting it. The context of my claim was that a smaller amount of payers will necessarily have to pay more if revenue needs to grow. That's a simple fact. Don't start talking about "use" now, when what matters is the amount of people paying = amount of licences sold. You can see why that's the only thing that matters for the argument of less people having to pay more, right?

Frankly, I don't care about the apples (the sales numbers); I care about how many people are actually using the applications. I don't come to work each morning motivated by sales numbers;

Good for you Todd, but that's not what your bosses and stockholders care about. And that's not what my argument was about.

[Steven L. Gotz]

Andy, you are certainly right that prices have to go up if the user count doesn't. And for my purposes, I look at a user as someone starting the software, because you are correct that subscribing to the cloud does not make me a user for Illustrator or InCopy. I just looked to see what else I have not used yet, and much to my surprise, that's it except for the Edge products, Gaming and Scout - and I have not yet even figured out what those are for, nor do I care at this point.

But does that really matter? Here's my thinking. I doubt that there are that many single product customers. However, I don't know that Todd or anyone else can tell if the product being used is single product or the entire CC. Assuming that the majority of users have the entire CC, just for argument's sake, because I don't know, then people have access to products they may not have used before. If they discover those products during the 30 day free trial, then they might become hooked on using them. The more products in the suite that they use, the happier they are with the price, and you can see where I am going with this. The happier they are the longer they subscribe, and the more they encourage others to subscribe.

I truly believe that the pricing will draw in the hobbyists, the people who shoot weddings on the side and professionals who have owned Photoshop and realize that they could use the entire suite as their business grows, just like Premiere Pro users might find After Effects and InDesign handy (see my post about using InDesign to make titles). More students will be able to afford the $30 and they will learn the products and when they become professionals, they will have a predisposition to using Adobe products.

I have worked for many public companies that do not broadcast their sales figures except once per quarter. The people I work for now don't tell me. Sure, I can guess by how much work I am doing, but it is still just a guess because I can't see the nationwide sales figures.

However, all of that said, if someone can tell that more people are opening Premiere Pro and After Effects and other applications, it is not difficult to extrapolate that into how many are using the products. After all, there must be a reason they are opening them.  Right?

The user numbers have got to be hard to interpret initially. What version of software did the users upgrade from, or are they new users? We have no idea. But, given enough time, it will all shake out. We will know if the revenue picks up because, being a public company, they will release the sales figures. One quarter at a time. So being impatient, trying to get those numbers sooner is pointless.

Sit back, wait to see if Adobe is doing well. If they are not, I am reasonably certain that the stockholders will cause a change in leadership, if the leadership themselves don't make changes to correct the path of the company.

However, it is entirely possible that the user base will continue to grow. I am confident that the vast majority of users never even see these forums. They read the PDF files, they buy books, they watch tutorials on Total Training and Lynda.com - but even if they all read the forums, it would probably be after they started using the products, so arguments against subscribing are going to be too late.

Once again, i submit that the business case for using the Adobe Creative Cloud is considerably different for people who never had an Adobe product, than for those who own the entire CS6 suite.

If Adobe does lose 30% of its former customer base, which is unlikely in my opinion, but possible, I suppose, and then they double the number of actual users by bringing in fresh new customers, then they win. At your expense, perhaps, but they win, nonetheless.

[Biggles Lamb]

We are definately at the have and have not stage with this post.

The undecided will no doubt wait until the perverbial freezes over before buying or subscribing to Adobe.

Meanwhile I'll continue to use CS5.5 PP, it does all I want and with the cash I have saved I'll buy something really useful.

Col

hey post 499 one more to go

[excited_Genie16B8]

Adobe has a lot more complaints about their company now and dissatisfaction from a large group of Adobe users from not wanting CC and the subscription.   A lot more.

When you consider that more people are using Adobe tools than ever before, I'm not sure that's such a surprise...or that it matters.

[Steven L. Gotz]

hey post 499 one more to go

 

[Andy Bay]

Okay Steven, would it be a fair summary of your post to say that you think many people not previously buying into Premiere, After Effects, Illustrator and/or other specialized software will feel tempted to start using those programs now that they get them for "free"?

I certainly acknowledge that as a possibility, but I wouldn't put very high hopes on any massive shifts based on that factor. People tend to use the software they have a real need for. It's pretty hard to get into the video production game just because you learned an editing program two weeks ago. There is so much more that you need to learn to produce quality videos than just that.

People have access to free software all the time, but few take the time to learn those programs. Take Blender for example. What an amazing free product. Yet very few people in these forums take the time to go and learn it. I don't blame them. That's just how life works. Our time is limited.

Adobe may win some battles, but it will loose the war. That's my prediction and I might be wrong. I think Adobe will loose in the end because I have never so far seen a company really survive angering it's user base like this. I think Adobe will open a lot of doors for the competition and people will flee just as fast as FCP people switched to Premiere when they see the first chance. Adobe is seriously underestimating the amount of damage we pissed of ex-customers can do to their reputation. To quote a book title at Amazon: "Satisfied Customers Tell Three Friends, Angry Customers Tell 3,000".

[Steven L. Gotz]

Okay Steven, would it be a fair summary of your post to say that you think many people not previously buying into Premiere, After Effects, Illustrator and/or other specialized software will feel tempted to start using those programs now that they get them for "free"?

Yes, and it happened to me. I used to buy the Production suites, which did not include Acrobat Pro. Now I find that I use it now and then.

I never had a reason to use InDesign until recently, but I have used it to make titles a couple of times in the last two weeks.

Someone on the forums is looking into motion tracking a face in order to blur it. People are telling them to use After Effects.

I am sure that this is the perfect opportunity for FCP Next to recapture its original customers. But will it? Avid could be working on a secret alliance that made it a powerful force in the consumer, prosumer, and professional marketplace. But is it?

Time will tell.

I know one thing for sure. These forums are going to be inundated with even more questions from newbies, and they will ask the same questions over and over. 

[John T Smith]

>forums are going to be inundated with even more questions from newbies, and they will ask the same questions over and over

That is certainly not unique to the Cloud distribution model... happens every year during/after the Christmas season with someone with a (usually 1st) video camera and software finds either the PPro or Premiere Elements forums to ask the same questions as hundreds of previous people

Some are grateful of the help, albeit painful at times as they find out that their computer needs to be replaced for video editing... others are angry that the computer they have for word processing and Internet access won't work the way THEY think it should for video editing

I personally will never use the Cloud model... but I do home video editing and don't NEED every tool Adobe offers

I can certainly see how someone making $$ from editing MAY need the latest tools... for them, the Cloud may be a viable option

[TheCoroner9]

R. Neil Haugen wrote:

Let's see ... I've been using a computer in my business since what, 1988 or so? In that time ... the first word-processing program we used is completely LONG dead, that would be WorPerfect (dos). The second one, AmiPro by Lotus ... LONG dead. You have to go to the 'net to find ways to get access to your old files, and well ... some of your formatting almost undoutedly ain't coming along. Used two major database programs that are also LONG DEAD ... the basic databases can be accessed, BUT ... all the forms and cross-linked info needed to make them "work" is kaput. One of those I've found a way I could probably get some functionality back sort of maybe if I worked for days. The other ... fuggedaboutit.

So for the comments about worrying about bringing forward old projects ... that's a HUGE problem in our modern world, wasn't created by Adobe nor is Adobe or it's products in any way shape or form going to escape the changing of the digital 'guard' ... constantly. And look at the complaints of the new version of FCP ... I've seen a number of people furious it won't load and properly use their older projects and in the process of trying damages them beyond repair. Changes in software, codecs, wrappers, OS, this whole thing keeps MOVING. I'm not a huge fan of that in many ways but there's nothing any of us nor any company can do about it. Period. So why complain about this vis-a-vis Adobe? Get a life, people.

As to the nastyness of the Evil subscription process, where they supposedly are getting MASSIVE amounts of 'new' money out of their users, piffle. Let's see ... we had Lightroom (two computers and their user's laptops) and Photoshop (three computers, two of the user's laptops) before. Lr was what, around USD$150 or so times 2 every 12 months about. Photoshop was what, USD $365 or so for our version times 3 every fourteen months or so.We looked at adding other "titles" but the cost of each individual item was enough we just didn't go there.

Now ... I'm running Lightroom, Bridge, Photoshop, Story, Prelude, Premiere Pro, Speedgrade, AfterEffects, Audition, and Adobe Media Encoder, and Encore for less than USD$50 a month/USD$600-yr. We left one old computer with Photoshop CS on it, and have moved on with the other two. And we can load in a ton of other major programs for the same fee ... Illustrator, jeepers ... and you know, as a single-price item several of those were close to USD$600 a pop anyway. Just our OLD Lightroom/Photoshop use was costing us around USD$1240/year.  For a bit less than that, we've got sheesh how many other expensive programs also?

No, I haven't been cheated ... they've given me a reason to use more of their programs and at a cost I couldn't have touched before. For virtually the same cost I'm getting a ton more programs to use. Big fat juicy ones too.

And I'm a-using like crazy.

Neil

And since you don't have a perpetual license with CC - in 10 years if you decide that you don't want to pay their subscriptions fees add up the amount of $ you spent for software that you will never be able to use again after stopping your payment.   I haven't paid for CS6 last year or this year and I'm still editing away on two projects for $0.00 

You can be using like crazy now but don't complain in the future when the subscription rates rise and if you stop payment then you loose all access.

[rainschub]

Steven L. Gotz wrote:

...so arguments against subscribing are going to be too late.

...right. All arguments are going to be too late, as there was never an announcement, that Adobe will kill CS.

[John T Smith]

>never an announcement, that Adobe will kill CS

I don't have a time machine to see the future, but so far at least Adobe has NOT killed CS6... which may still be purchased

http://www.adobe.com/products/catalog/cs6._sl_id-contentfilter_sl_catalog_sl_software_sl_creativesui...

[Steven L. Gotz]

Well, John, to be fair, they may not have killed it, but they capped it.

I really don't see why, as has been stated many times, Adobe could not find a spot at which they could cap CC7 and make it available as a perpetual licence, just as they announce CC8.

It would give people a sense of security. I would be willing to pay a little more per month, knowing that in two years, I could stop paying and still have CC7 if I wanted to. It is kind of like paying for my cell phone over the course of a two year contract. When the contract is over and I go month to month I still have a phone. I paid for it, I should get to keep it.

I will probably keep using the Adobe service for many years, but let's face it, there will come a time when I am too old to do much with it, but I might still want to play around with old memories now and then.

I don't know if there is a financially viable way to do it, but it is certainly something that I hope they have seriously considered.

[R Neil Haugen]

"Coroner" (love all the people using aliases ... ) ...

This is just a bizarre argument. To me, one created because one needed an argument (meaning the element to discuss) not because it makes any particular sense on its own.

As I've stated above in this thread ... over the last few years I've had THREE different word-processing programs, TWO different data-base programs, and several others of various types go out of "production" and therefore be totally unusable on any later OS. The files and database systems made with those softwares are "dead" now, except for a couple cases where you can still get a program off the internet that can interpret most of what's in those, but still cannot get all the formatting even close to correct for the word-processing and of course, all the inter-linked computed fields of the multi-table linked databases.

So ... what you're listing as a Major Point is something that one ASSUMES is going to happen with software, and if you don't realize that, well ... you are going to have a problem with ALL your 'data'. Period. If one has the sense God gave ants, you leave your 'main' data in widely-utilized formats for best chance of later accessibility. Unless, of course, you want to have a bunch of ancient computers sitting around that CANNOT communicate with anything newer ... so yea, go play with your old stuff, but it's STUCK there ... and pray that the ol' thing's hardware doesn't croak on you. Oh, ouch, lose the mobo ... well, ALL that data is toast, right? Can't just buy a replacement to easily for a 1997 mobo, huh?

I do rather think that working my images and video into final format, and then as part of the general workflow archiving both any useful "original" footage and final master output into a heavily used "standard" format is a part of my job. And those files will be accessible as long as those codecs are still usable by available software. So ... I'll have access to most of the original footage and the final masters for years to come with or without Adobe.

And that varies from my other digital data in what possible way? Oh ... yea ... none at all.

Sorry but I find your argument a compete fail.

If you don't like the subscription model, stick to that one, ok? You'd have more rationality to the discussion. I understand some hate subscription based services. To me it's a silly choice, but we all have our own silliness, I certainly do. So I'm not critical of someone else's ... well, most of the time ... 

But even as far as the subscription, Adobe has chosen to change their entire operative model. They once made products to sell. They now provide services.

You once bought CS4 mostly sort of like you bought a toaster. And like a toaster, use is gonna "die" over time. So then you upgraded when you wanted a better toaster or your computer/OS didn't toast your data anymore. But your "toaster" didn't grow any new features, it was simply a static object.

Now, you don't buy a static "toaster". This is a service product, one that they are working to constantly improve, and one where you don't have to wait 14 months for the next set of features or fixes to come out. It's a model used by many other businesses quite successfully and without fanfare, but suddenly when Adobe adopts this you find it sinister and awful and feel their user-base MUST be up in arms over it. Well ... piffle. Some are ... some aren't ... and some were but love it now.

One of my pro-photog peers was madder than HADES about the "cloud" at first, boy, he was gonna ditch every Adobe software in his studio and use other stuff from people who weren't out to gyp him. So ... he went and tried Aperture instead of Lightroom, and a couple other programs too ... and then talked more calmly with others using the "cloud" as so many of us pros do ... and ... um ... he's one of those running not just Lr and Photoshop, but ... inDesign, Illustrator, Muse, and several others of the Adobe stuff. I think recently he started looking over the video programs too. He's got three subscriptions for his studio, and working away like crazy in them. As a member of both state, reginonal, and national/international professional organizations, he's certainly not alone. Within the ranks of my peers, the once angry calls for protests have turned mostly to people just a-workin' away ... on more Adobe software than ever. With the occassional angry dude/ess still there, of course. But we mostly chuckle at them. Politely, of course. They spend too much time looking over our shoulders at our laptops as we sit working in our Adobe software and staring intently at what we're doing.

And if I wanted to really truely work my businesses public-seen paperwork using a 15-year-old word-processing program and an ancient laser printer or daisy-chain, well, I could. But it would be stupid, wouldn't it? I mean, yea, they would have been paid for long ago and all that ...

Neil

[rainschub]

John T Smith wrote:

I don't have a time machine to see the future, but so far at least Adobe has NOT killed CS6... which may still be purchased...

...killed the ability to be upgraded.

As I trusted Adobes words:
"This will be the last Release, from which you can upgrade to the next one"

like many others.

[shooternz]

One of the many "arguments" that those so miffed by the CC subscription model has been to prove and convince others.... Not to use it.

...they desparately wish for it to fail by virtue of those that will subscribe or not.

...they desparately want Adobe to be taught a lesson by the stock market.

They believe the rest of us have no idea and should be supporting their cause.

They are tedious and untiring in their regurgitated arguments.  Arguments first time proffered  are worthy of interest and consideration ...next thousand echos...not so much!  This comes equally from both sides of the "debate".

[TheCoroner9]

I have no idea why anyone would not want to pay a monthly fee forever for  a software package you will never own and be able to continue to use as soon as you stop paying the fee.

Why would anyone want to argue with the wonderful CC created by Adobe.

Are you sure there are misguided souls out there Shooter?