Goodbye Photoshop

[Buckster]

BTW, I think it's wrong of you to belittle a person's opinion because you think some amount of money is insignificant - paltry in your words.
Shame on you. Some people give up a lot to be able to afford a passion like photography. Shame on you for not respecting that.

Huh?

The word "paltry" connotes, "not very good, important, or valuable", and that reflects on the people you are referring to who don't pay the large prices. I too thought it a poor choice of words.

 

[sleist]

As a hobbyist, I don't ever plan on spending full price on CS-WTF - ever.

There are too many of me I think and Adobe is trying to change the business model.

Here's the thing... Please note that I am not saying that I like it, this is just how it is...



"As a hobbyist", they don't care. You'll spend maybe $1000 per decade... They'll write that off as a 'cost of doing business'. They could give it to you for free and wouldn't even notice. They even admit that piracy is not really a big concern for them (I don't entirely believe that though...)

You are not the type of customer they cater to. They honestly do not care what you think - you are insignificant to them. The people they care about are the people that pay them, often.

I don't like it any more than you do, but that's just the way it is...

I think you misunderstand me. I am part of the (their) problem and I get that. They can do whatever they want or need. I just think that people have the right to ***** about it and not be told they are insignificant due to their perceived value as defined by $$$ sent to Adobe.

 

[Derrel]

I love the drama that is TPF...

You've been selected to be a member of The Academy!!!! Every month you'll be sent DVD screener discs, with tons of rude jokes and snappy put-downs that you can use in real life! You'll receive special discounts, and be assured of by-the-kitchen-entrance seats at all your favorite restaurants! You'll also receive a 50-pack of cards you can leave for lazy waitresses,shiftless cab drivers, minority group members, and others whom you look down upon! Your special Academy membership package will be sent to your upcoming address. We know you love drama, so...welcome to The Academy ;-)

 

[Jad]

It will interesting to see what the camera manufactures will do going forward. If the small user drops out of upgrading software they will also drop out from making new purchases of camera gear. It won't happen overnight but I think in the long run if other software brands start down this road the small user will stop buying simple because of cost. We all want to control our monthly expenses and most would prefer to buy things when they feel the need. Remember that in Kodak's hay day they relied on the snapshot shooter to make their money in film industry. The only way we enjoyed the good darkroom papers and chemicals was because there were a lot a Grandma's taking pictures of their grandkids. The small user is a major support in many industries.

 

[Overread]

It will interesting to see what the camera manufactures will do going forward. If the small user drops out of upgrading software they will also drop out from making new purchases of camera gear.

I don't see why. Canon already ships all their DSLRs with a free editing software package and Nikon has their own up for sale at a lower price than Adobe. There are also multiple other packages out there in the market. As customers Adobe shutting themselves out of a market segment could actually be a good thing since it might encourage more competition within the market itself (lets face it at present Adobe rule the market for casual and commercial and all inbetween - if they move away from the casual with this choice they might well leave that market open for new companies to get a foot in the door - and if they do then they can always push up to take part of the upper markets as well).

 

[Steve5D]

I just think that people have the right to ***** about it and not be told they are insignificant due to their perceived value as defined by $$$ sent to Adobe.

But here's the thing: In the grand scheme of things, from the perspectrive of Adobe, they are.

Liking it or not liking it does not alter the reality of it...

 

[Overread]

I just think that people have the right to ***** about it and not be told they are insignificant due to their perceived value as defined by $$$ sent to Adobe.

But here's the thing: In the grand scheme of things, from the perspectrive of Adobe, they are.

Liking it or not liking it does not alter the reality of it...

As an individual they are disposable to the company - however as a market segment itself only Adobe know how important they are in the great scheme of things. Indeed Adobe might well be fine with losing a segment of its market if they can gain a strong regular income off a core of its other market groups. It all depends on the background figures that only Adobe will know about and also upon their own internal plans for the future and stability.

 

[Steve5D]

I just think that people have the right to ***** about it and not be told they are insignificant due to their perceived value as defined by $$$ sent to Adobe.

But here's the thing: In the grand scheme of things, from the perspectrive of Adobe, they are.

Liking it or not liking it does not alter the reality of it...

As an individual they are disposable to the company - however as a market segment itself only Adobe know how important they are in the great scheme of things. Indeed Adobe might well be fine with losing a segment of its market if they can gain a strong regular income off a core of its other market groups. It all depends on the background figures that only Adobe will know about and also upon their own internal plans for the future and stability.

That's pretty much the point I've been making all along...

 

[Benco]

I just think that people have the right to ***** about it and not be told they are insignificant due to their perceived value as defined by $$$ sent to Adobe.

But here's the thing: In the grand scheme of things, from the perspectrive of Adobe, they are.

Liking it or not liking it does not alter the reality of it...

So because one's like or dislike of something does not change the reality of that thing then....what? we should not have any opinion? like/dislike has no meaning? I dislike mushrooms, this doesn't make any difference to mushrooms but that doesn't change the fact that I don't like them.

 

[Overread]

Of course the gamble here is how much of the market will adobe actually lose and what is their game plan. With market dominance like they have this could be a ploy (as I suggested earlier) to spark fear purchases of the current products by those on the fence; it could also be an attempt to push toward something that they knew would be resisted, so they overplay their hand with something "worse" and then tone it back to what they really want. This latter method is common in business, many contracts and agreements put forth are often for the "idealistic" concept that a company wants but knows they won't get - they ask because there is no harm in it - then negociation whittles things down to a fairer agreement between parties (or the other party sign and agree fully and the company gets more than they expected because they asked for it).

For adobe the big question is not really the casual user, but rather the ambassadors to the pros and the market. How they take this news is going to be key - last time adobe tried changing things some of these ambassadors organised resistance against it and forced through changes - I think it was Scot Kelby and some others but I honestly can't recall. Now how these people react this time around is key.

There is also a pressure factor; people get bored or whittled down easily en-mass sometimes so if a company keeps applying pressure they can often push things through since people are just too "lazy" or demoralized to bother resisting en-mass again (or those who organised it all first time around just haven't got the time or energy to mass organise things again).

 

[Steve5D]

So because one's like or dislike of something does not change the reality of that thing then....what? we should not have any opinion?

Um, I suppose that's up to you. I certainly never suggested that you shouldn't have an opinion...

like/dislike has no meaning?

In the grand scheme of the topic being discussed? No, it doesn't. Whether you like or dislike what a company has determined to be the best way to increase revenue does not matter to said company. I'm sure it'll help you sleep better to believe that it does, but it really, really doesn't...

I dislike mushrooms, this doesn't make any difference to mushrooms but that doesn't change the fact that I don't like them.

And if the mushrooms cared, your dislike of them would matter...

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

In the grand scheme of the topic being discussed? No, it doesn't. Whether you like or dislike what a company has determined to be the best way to increase revenue does not matter to said company. I'm sure it'll help you sleep better to believe that it does, but it really, really doesn't...

I think you're missing the big picture here.

The customer matters.

Benco is just one customer. One of many customers that are similarly disgruntled. If you're Adobe, and you alienate just Benco, and no one else, you're going to recover from that just fine.

But, if you alienate Benco and....

• 100,000 other customers along with him
• potential new customers (charging them much more to get into the CS)
• anybody who wants to buy a new camera and wishes to use non-cloud Adobe software (but will be forced to anyway because Adobe won't support)
• existing customers who were fine with the way it was

​
Then suddenly that one customer, that one opinion you're painting insignificant, becomes much louder.

So allow me to modify your quote to more accurately reflect the big picture: The customer matters.

Whether [the customer] likes or dislikes what a company has determined to be the best way to increase revenue, does matter to said company.

 

[KmH]

Bad Karma? - CS 6 is Photoshop 13. :lmao:
Adobe is basically saying there won't be a CS 7, nor a CS 8, nor a CS 9, just CC (Creative Cloud). That also means upgrades will happen continually instead of on a regular cycle.

Adobe Creative Cloud
Given this, the CC applications will be available only as part of Creative Cloud. We will continue to sell and support Adobe Creative Suite® 6 applications, and will provide bug fixes and security updates as necessary. We do not, however, have any current plans to release new versions of our CS applications.

If this turns out to be a bad move by Adobe, they won't be the first to shoot their own corporate foot.

Rest assured that every single company has made bad growth decisions, at least once. I had 78 Fortune 500 companies as clients and I can tell you that every single one of them suffered from drastic growth “bad decisions”, at one time or another. As a matter of fact, every person has done the same thing, especially during times where everything is going great, we just call it: The grand illusion from a developed sense of immortality. Apple had made this mistake, Microsoft, IBM, AOL and so on and so on… It is how they rebound after realizing that the tail truly does not wag the dog and how this equates to market sampling; as a vehicle that truly promotes the profitability in balancing the margins for a consumer driven sector. - Ben Cochran

Time will tell if this turns out to be good or bad for Adobe, but I would bet Adobe did not expect any 'attaboys', and did expect a fair amount of negative comment.
Corporations don't like to publicly own up to significant financial loses caused by outside the corporation factors, like software piracy.
Software piracy is a HUGE problem for software producers, even though Adobe is downplaying that aspect.

The change to SaaS will cause changes in other related industries.

 

[Steve5D]

I think you're missing the big picture here.

The customer matters.

Benco is just one customer. One of many customers that are similarly disgruntled. If you're Adobe, and you alienate just Benco, and no one else, you're going to recover from that just fine.

But, if you alienate Benco and....

• 100,000 other customers along with him
• potential new customers (charging them much more to get into the CS)
• anybody who wants to buy a new camera and wishes to use non-cloud Adobe software (but will be forced to anyway because Adobe won't support)
• existing customers who were fine with the way it was

​
Then suddenly that one customer, that one opinion you're painting insignificant, becomes much louder.

So allow me to modify your quote to more accurately reflect the big picture: The customer matters.

Whether [the customer] likes or dislikes what a company has determined to be the best way to increase revenue, does matter to said company.

Look, I get it. You're upset.

But you also don't have an understanding of big business.

I worked for one of the largest musical instrument manufacturers in America. The following for our products was downright rabid.

Came a time, though, when the boss-man decided that changes needed to be made. He decreed that certain things would happen. Many of the changes were unpopular not only with the rabid fans of our products, but with dealers, as well. The chorus of "You will doom your business" was deafening. The "fans" of our instruments vowed never to purchase our products again. Dealers swore they would drop the line in lieu of something else and, in fact, some did exactly that.

We made the changes anyway.

Dealers were pissed.

Customers were pissed.

And revenue in my territory increased by 537% in six years.

That company's products remain at the top of the heap. Yes, many former fans left the fold and switched to other brands. Yes, we were lambasted on the internet. And I made more money in a single year than I had made in any four years previous to that combined. The customers we lost, in all honesty, didn't matter much. They were our customers, sure, but many would only ever buy one or two of our products in a lifetime. What we cared about was the fact that, in some territories, we gained three customers for every single customer lost. Every single territory around the globe saw an increase in revenue. We were damn near printing money. If someone hopped on the internet to decry the changes we were making, we really, truly, didn't care.

That company, and the people who own it and run it, are among some of the most respected people ever to grace that industry.

Does the customer matter? Sure. But the reality that "the customer" needs to wrap his pointed little head around is that he doesn't matter as much to big business as he believes he does, or should. Big business; in this case Adobe, will do that which they believe will increase their revenue. Adobe isn't in business to provide us with affordable digital editing software, they're in business to make money. The software is simply the manner in which they do it. If market research showed them that they would make more money selling coloring books, you'd see Adobe in bed with Crayola.

This is business, and business is often an ugly thing. Ugly or pretty, though, it revolves around money, and after the dust clears, that's one fact that simply cannot be contested...

 

[Steve5D]

Software piracy is a HUGE problem for software producers, even though Adobe is downplaying that aspect.

I have no doubt that piracy was a huge factor in this decision. To that end, anyone here using a pirated version of any of their software shoulders the blame for this...