Adobe About Face?

http://news.cnet.com …-for-cs6-upgrade-pricing/

Ugh more cloud nonsense. Id have pitched a fit too.

" Subscriptions will be more interesting & attractive than you might think, so please stay tuned."

Right, give us your first born child so the CS6 team can enjoy an afternoon snack and we'll upgrade you.
From what I've seen (so far) CS6 doesn't have much to lure me in.

I would be interested in a monthly subscription if it offered significant cost savings.

And one license per 2 machines would be nice as well...

Bollocks!
Crock.
Sham.
Swindle.
Screwover.
Scam.
Sucker.
Hustle.
Crooked.
Double Dealing.
Racket.
Fast One.
Rook.
Shakedown.

Call it what you will Adobe, but it's still crap.

The only constant is change.

Money is the big driver of change.

Subscriptions offer more control and more money - with subscriptions come additional add-ons.
Most people are not good at taking a monthly cost and figuring what it will eventually cost them in total - that is how companies like phone/cable/dish, etc...rape the public.

Todd Lambert wrote in post #13697986
Bollocks!
Crock.
Sham.
Swindle.
Screwover.
Scam.
Sucker.
Hustle.
Crooked.
Double Dealing.
Racket.
Fast One.
Rook.
Shakedown.

Call it what you will Adobe, but it's still crap.

your well-documented disdain for adobe aside, isn't this response a little premature?

unless i'm reading this article wrong, all we know is that adobe is backing down from their previous stated policy in light of a strong user backlash. much like verizon's quickly-repealed transaction fee surcharge, adobe realized they were stepping on toes and backtracked a little. according to the article, they've decided to offer perpetual license upgrades to CS3/CS4 users through the end of the year along with those who bought CS5/CS5.5. it was originally only offered to those with older versions through subscription, but there's been a change of plans. so if anything, this is a little victory for the user base as we've successfully forced adobe to rethink their deployment of mandatory subscriptions.. and hopefully this will be an indicator to them that forcing this on it's users in the future will most likely stir significant resistance as well.

I referring to the entire subscription model as it is proposed, in addition to all of the customers out there who went ahead and paid for a 5.5 upgrade because Adobe told them to, and then now will end up having to upgrade twice to get to 6.

If nobody complains, nothing will change. Think their prices are high now, wait until they have you on a subscription model... then they will start increasing the price and it's upgrade or else.

No thanks!

Todd Lambert wrote in post #13698438
I referring to the entire subscription model as it is proposed, in addition to all of the customers out there who went ahead and paid for a 5.5 upgrade because Adobe told them to, and then now will end up having to upgrade twice to get to 6.

If nobody complains, nothing will change. Think their prices are high now, wait until they have you on a subscription model... then they will start increasing the price and it's upgrade or else.

No thanks!

well, they announced the CS5.5 update as a mid-version refresher. i don't think it was ever marketed as CS6 so i don't see how they're upgrading twice to get to CS6. if people paid to upgrade from CS5 to CS5.5, they bought the features offered in the release. i don't think it's fair to say that they were lied to since CS5.5 was never meant to be CS6. adobe didn't force them to upgrade, it was a choice. (for example, i still use CS5 and opted not to upgrade to CS5.5 because i didn't see the benefit.)

from what i read, it seems like they want to move towards subscriptions, but they're backing down off the idea for now because their users don't want it. i agree that it's not the direction that we all want to move in because it'll most likely cost us all more in the long run, but i think that list of words you used was a bit harsh. almost every company is moving towards cloud services and subscriptions (even your beloved Apple enacted their controversial app subscription policy for developers). i don't agree with the trend either, but calling adobe a scam, swindlers, crooked, etc is a bit much, don't you think?

No, people were told that they could upgrade to 5.5 from version 3 or 4, and to do so, in order to get upgrade pricing. There was no upgrade path from v3 or v4 to v6.

Even though 5.5 is a joke update with no features for anyone other than a sliver percentage of CS users. They were told that if they didn't upgrade, that they'd not be able to upgrade to CS 6.

In essence, Adobe took advantage of loyal customers, who bought a version that they wouldn't have otherwise (just like yourself) because that's what they were told they had to do, in order to stay within Adobe's product path.

People who were running v3 o4 v4 upgraded as they were told to, and now, they're going to need to upgrade again for v6... which they could have gotten for just one upgrade, if they'd waited and not listened to Adobe.

That's crappy business no matter how you want to rationalize it.

And please stop characterizing me. I don't hate Adobe, and I don't hold Apple as "beloved" either... I call a spade a spade... simple as that.

I've worked with both Adobe and Apple since before some people on this board hit puberty. I've been for and against both on a variety of issues over the years.

Adobe has in recent years, lost sight of it's core businesses and in doing so, is taking advantage of it's extremely loyal customer base.

I'm with Todd on this.

I'll be looking elsewhere if they force me into a subscription. Unfortunately this is the future of software I think. Microsoft are heading in this direction as well

sorry, i don't mean to characterize you improperly, i've just seen the industry trend for everything from music, apps, software, mobile services in general move towards cloud systems and subscriptions in general so i just didn't see why this was surprising to be honest. you seemed to have such a strong rejection of this, and i only brought up apple since you usually had nothing but accolades for them and i feel like they're all pushing this trend on us just the same as every other company (adobe included).

for your version upgrading, i still don't see how it's crappy business. companies release upgrades all the time and none of these were really forced. CS3/CS4 users who upgraded to CS5.5 were never told that they would be upgraded to CS6 for free on release. to me, it's like people who upgraded from 1Dc's to 1Dmk2n's. the fact that the 1Dmk3 came not long afterwards doesn't change anything really. they knew they weren't buying a 1Dmk3 and i'm sure there are plenty of people who think that the 1Dmk2 to 1Dmk2n weren't significant to warrant upgrading.

did adobe tell people who had CS3/CS4 that they had to buy CS5.5 in order to upgrade to CS6 earlier?

alt4852 wrote in post #13699525
did adobe tell people who had CS3/CS4 that they had to buy CS5.5 in order to upgrade to CS6 earlier?

Yes, that's the crux of the issue. In the past, there wouldn't have been a cutoff like this, but Adobe made it clear that if v3 and v4 users didn't upgrade to 5 or 5.5, they wouldn't be "current" Adobe customers anymore and would have to buy CS6 at full price.

So, many customers did just that, upgraded to a v5.5 which was a very crappy upgrade except for that guy in Ohio somewhere.

Now, they're going to have to pay upgrade pricing again, to get to v6.

Apple is doing the cloud thing too, but it's all value added properties... music in the cloud, etc...

Yes, you could make the argument that OS X is sort of on a subscription model, but honestly, they've got the price at $20, I can handle $20 a year to get the latest OS.

Beyond that, I don't see Apple locking anyone in or out based on subscriptions (at least not for any core markets that I'm aware of) and that's why I don't have issue with Apple about this.

I actually think Apple is doing things pretty legit by it's customers lately, so not many gripes on my part.

I think they've made some stupid moves (but then who doesn't?) like the Final Cut X (which should have been the next version of FCE instead).

Todd Lambert wrote in post #13699574
Yes, that's the crux of the issue. In the past, there wouldn't have been a cutoff like this, but Adobe made it clear that if v3 and v4 users didn't upgrade to 5 or 5.5, they wouldn't be "current" Adobe customers anymore and would have to buy CS6 at full price.

So, many customers did just that, upgraded to a v5.5 which was a very crappy upgrade except for that guy in Ohio somewhere.

Now, they're going to have to pay upgrade pricing again, to get to v6.

yea, the resistance to this is understandable. however, CS5 and CS5.5 users can reasonably assume that in accordance to adobe's upgrade structure, they can skip CS6 and upgrade to CS7 later down the line at a discount. if they upgraded from CS3 to CS5.5, they did get something for their money. having made that upgrade, i can attest to the fact that it was a pretty significant jump.

in light of their change of heart, if anything it sounds like you're upset that scott kelby was able to raise enough of a stink to make adobe not do what they promised to do. their leniency on their own stated policy is what you seem to be protesting.

Todd Lambert wrote in post #13699574
Apple is doing the cloud thing too, but it's all value added properties... music in the cloud, etc...

Yes, you could make the argument that OS X is sort of on a subscription model, but honestly, they've got the price at $20, I can handle $20 a year to get the latest OS.

Beyond that, I don't see Apple locking anyone in or out based on subscriptions (at least not for any core markets that I'm aware of) and that's why I don't have issue with Apple about this.

I actually think Apple is doing things pretty legit by it's customers lately, so not many gripes on my part.

I think they've made some stupid moves (but then who doesn't?) like the Final Cut X (which should have been the next version of FCE instead).

i was referring more to what they were doing to software developers last year. much to the dismay of app developers everywhere, they were enacting new rules about content on their platform that required them to be sold via apple's own app store and it prohibited linking to alternative methods of purchases unless the price was the same. this ensured that the vast majority of downloads/purchases would be done through their app store, and they decided to take a 30% cut of the profits.

if anything, this was more fitting of the term "shakedown", "crooked", or "sham". if you noticed, a few of the major app developing firms threatened to abandon the apple platform because the system would make some of their businesses unprofitable. there was no reason to do this other than a simple money grab on apple's part as it didn't help developers, and didn't help the end users either. their app subscription system is a whole different can of worms.