I just read a very interesting open letter, penned by Scott Kelby, the president of The National Association of Photoshop Professionals. That's an organization of some 70,000 professionals using Adobe’s flagship Photoshop products, the software used to prep a great number of the photos and graphics used on Websites worldwide.
According to Mr. Kelby’s letter, Adobe is engaging in the practice of cutting its nose off to spite its face (my words, not his).
Now, I’ve always been of the opinion that Adobe produces little but overpriced, overhyped software that, in many cases, should still be in alpha or early beta when released to the public. That usually happens in the form of a major version upgrade, nearly always filled with enough holes and bugs to insure the livelihood of software pros and security vendors worldwide.
It has long been the practice of professionals to evaluate each version of any software product for features and benefits that appeal to them, that justify the expense and retraining involved in any version upgrade. And it has long been the practice of the publishers of software these professional rely on to acknowledge this in their upgrade cycles -- offering discounts to anyone owning any previous version, or the last several versions. It’s a business model that makes sense and works.
Mr. Kelby’s letter states:
It’s my understanding that when the next version of Photoshop and the Creative Suite is released, if you do not already own Photoshop version CS5 orCS5.5 (or the 5 or 5.5 Creative Suite):
(a) You will not be eligible to upgrade to Photoshop CS6 (or the CS6 Creative Suite). Instead the only way to get Photoshop CS6 at that point will be to repurchase the entire product again at its full price (presumably $699 US). If you’re a CS4 Creative Suite User, you’ll have to buy the entire suite all over again to move to CS6.
(b)For Photoshop CS4, or CS3 users, their only real option is to pay to upgrade now to CS5.5 (though you are offering a 20% upgrade discount upgrade until the end of the year), and then to pay again to upgrade when Photoshop CS6 is released, or sign up for your new monthly subscription plan.
Nose, meet knife. Face, prepare for scorn and ridicule, and the terrified cries of small children.
If Adobe goes forward with this plan, it will, in my opinion, be one of the most blatantly stupid things championed by a company in recent memory. And I can only assume that it feels its product is so dominant, so necessary, that professionals will have no choice but to acquiesce.
There are viable alternatives to Photoshop. In fact, there are viable alternatives to virtually everything Adobe makes. And, these alternatives are virtually always a fraction of the cost of the Adobe equivalent, if not free.
For example, GNU Image Manipulation Program, better known as GIMP, is an open-source, free alternative to Photoshop. It’s powerful (and free); uses fewer system resources (and free); will use most Photoshop plugins (free); and is available for all the major and many of the minor operating system platforms. And it’s free -- just download and install away.
Corel’s Paint Shop Pro (formerly Jasc) has a strong following, uses Photoshop plugins, and currently is less than $50. Corel’s entire Graphics Suite, which includes some very nice products, is a little over half the price that Adobe charges just for Photoshop, and it includes all kinds of goodies for Website publishers that Adobe charges even more for.
Indeed, this situation may be all that these other platforms need to become dominant -- they’re just a few influential users away from acceptance, and acceptance leads to dominance.
We’ve seen it before. And, we’ll see it again. The question is: Will we see it here, or will Adobe come to its senses?
[Editor's note: We have contacted Adobe for comment on Scott Kelby's letter and on this blog's assertions. The company was closed for the holiday at press time.]
— John Myers is manager of technologies at the Knoxville Zoo as well as the owner of several technology-related companies.
Just in the past few days Photoshop CS6 has been released by Adobe and it seems as if the pressure put upon Adobe by Kelby and social networking groups has borne fruit. I just returned from the Adobe order site where you can buy an upgrade of CS6 if you go as far back as owning CS3. Apparently anything earlier than CS3 then you are out of luck.
Exactly. I use the current version until it's no longer productive to use. At that point, just buy the newer version. But I have seen many 'simple patches/upgrades' wreak havoc.
The two words Adobe and upgrade should never be combined in my world. I have seen systems down due to attempted updates to simple software. Mind you, there support was non-existent, even if you're willing to pay in some instances.
One thing I find abroad is a general confusion on Adobe's target demographics, myself included. I see many arguments on various tech blogs claiming Gimp and open source programs are replacements for Adobe products. Anyone that has to perform day in day out on a deadline with fine control over multilayer compositions , masking, CMYK, non destructive editing, etc all done with high workflow efficiency are NOT going to find GIMP as a replacement. And to claim otherwise is absurd. And while I can't provide a breakdown of PAYING users per demographic I know that designers using the tools and efficent workflow of Adobe are not some fringe 10% poweruser base. They are IMO, the professionals that Adobes pricing and software "should" be targed to.
So then, why is there such a misconception? I'll tell you why. Because Photoshop has become a ubiquitous got to have it powerhouse shiny new Ferrari that the Jones have. So you have hobbyists, at home pirates, and DIY designers all wanting the toy the "big kids use". Adobe has made this worse by adding "Easy Button" bloatware buttons to Photoshop. Why does a 600$ high end professional piece of design software need gee wiz golly magic content fill features and the like? Adobe is making bloat for a group of users that probably never even picked up a pen-tool. And so now, when Adobe wants to go hardcore revenue streaming model everyone that uses an adobe suite to brighten their kids photo are screaming foul because they hear Gimp can brighten just as well. LOL Gota love the poetic irony at work here. And you are right, Adobe has only itself to blame. It can't petend to be the product for the masses and then expect small nich speciality pricing. I can tell you that in our companies Cad Users seats like Solidworks, you don't see Deke McClelland promoting some new magic autofill feature.
Now don't get me wrong, Adobe's new pricing structure is too expensive even for the poweruser professional demographic. But I find it funny how Adobe's silly bloat to appeal to wannabees, and people that don't need all that power is now coming back to bite them in the ass. I just want to point out this effect at play how Adobe wants to have it's cake and eat it too by playing the cross-demographic game. This ties in perfectly to your point how those users that didn't need the power in the first place are looking even more shocked.
"If thre are many companies that buy adobe PS, Photoshop when Gimp would be a viable alternative then that is thier problem not adobe's."
Again, I must disagree. If there are many out there buying Adobe's products when something else would more than suffice, Adobe is making money off them. It's good for Adobe's bottom line. If, however, they drive those customers to the competition, it's bad for Adobe's bottom line. If it effects enough of their customers, it could well cost them more on their bottom line than they may hope to gain with their overly agressive new update structure.
And, if enough new users move to one of the other platforms, the designers of that platform will have enough support and encouragement to add the features desired by their new following.
It's much like building a bridge to an island. You don't build one until you need one. Once you do, and others see they can now reach the island, they start using it, and the island gets developed, and then you need a better bridge. And, then more people cross, and the island gets better developed. And, then you need a better bridge...
Photoshop wasn't always the standard. All it will take for it to stop being the standard is for someone else to get enough of a following. There are countless examples throughout history of the same.
As for the easy button bloat, there's a point. The hobbyist/consumer versions are basically just feature cut, dumbed down versions of the pro product. People get the really limited version with a new camera or scanner, get used to it, and then find out that the next level up consumer version has some features they'd really like, so they upgrade. They tinker with that version a bit, then find out the next version up has some feature they think they'd like, and upgrade. And, Adobe encourages this by adding those easy button fixes.
And, let's not forget the college, university, and trade school factor. Take a class on basic photography and you'll hear a lot about Photoshop. Take a class on basic marketing principles, and you'll hear a lot about Photoshop. It's even talked about in classes on hair coloring and design. You'd be hard pressed to pick up a catalog from an institute of higher learning and not find Photoshop. And, to get you hooked, they'll sell you the full version, or the suite, at a steeply discounted price. I'm on the advisory board of a local college system. The last time I was over there, CS5 as selling to students for $189. Non-profits can get similar pricing.
So, you take some classes, or volunteer at a non-profit, and you get used to the big package - don't even know there is a lesser package. Then, you get out in the work place, and convince the boss to buy it, even though you don't need the big package, because you're not actually utilizing the tools of the big package. But, you don't know that, or think about that, so long as you can afford it. Then, Adobe changes their pricing and the boss balks. Now what? You decide that you'll have to live forever with what you've got - until you find you need a feature you don't have. Then you start really looking, and find out you could have been using GIMP all along. Or, you could have been using the basic version of Photoshop. And, regardless of which way it goes, there goes the extra bucks Adobe was getting from you.
Sorry, I think I missed your original 10% to Acrobat.
But I really feel your other points are just off tangent.
If thre are many companies that buy adobe PS, Photoshop when Gimp would be a viable alternative then that is thier problem not adobe's. If you work in graphics profession I can telll you first hand, there are a good deal of functions and workflow efficiencies that simply dosen't exist in Gimp or other free programs. And they are deinitatly NOT an alternative adobe for a vast many of professional graphic designers. So then what is your point? If your point is This is a dumb move because all these ignorant users that have WAY overkill will find an alternative to adobe that is sort of a hollow argument isn't it? Adobe is not targeted towards users just wanting to brighting a picture so why should they be concerneed they will scare them away?
Well actually, rethinking that, Adobe DOES add a lot of "easy button bloat" that gives the impression hey even the novice users can use Adobe PS. So you may have a point that adobe needs to make up it's mind. Are they targeting professionals or home hobyists? And I think that mixed message is imcompatable with thier Luxary Pricing. Fact, that make a great future article for you ;)
Now, I do agree with your notion that Adobe's new revenue models are overly aggressive, but I strongly disagree with any blanket notion there are "viable alternatives". You need to please be more specific. Viable alternatives to WHAT? Certainly not for design professionals. So the real focus here should be how this new revenue model is overly aggresive to the professional industry, not the wanabees that just got priced out of the car they didn't even know how to drive.
My experience with open source software is reverse. If it's a very popular software or tool, then I agree that somebody may attend your query with a proper answer. I had posted my query with 2-3 forums and nobody responded. But I agree that paid technical supports are available on 24*7
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Singularity: n. The state, fact, or quality of being singular. That's the dictionary definition of the word. My personal definition is: the single greatest and most terrifying threat, ever, to the human species.
So, you finely got your new smartphone. Shiny! (If you don’t get the reference to “shiny,” you’re not a Firefly fan, but I won’t hold that against you.) You waited patiently until your carrier offered just what you wanted -- with just the right features, at just the right price -- and your new phone discount was finally available again.
I drive a minivan. I know what you’re thinking. It’s not because I’m having a midlife crisis and need to drive something sexy, a veritable chick magnet, but because it’s practical for a small-business owner and grandpa.
While the publishing industry reels from the pressure of digital books and freely available content on the Web, one branch of the industry, the publishers of academic books and journals, remains above the fray. How is this possible and how long will it last?
New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority is conducting a pilot test of digital kiosks to guide subway users to where they want to go more efficiently and at lower cost.
Facebook's Graph Search may face some profound challenges and risks, first, because Facebook users haven't been thinking of their posts as product reviews; and second, because Facebook will now have to contend with the social-network equivalent of SEO "gaming" of results.
Apple may want to do a TV offering, but to meet its goal it would have to address three specific issues that have been exposed by earlier attempts to make Internet TV work.
The new UltraViolet online DRM model has people upset, but the question we should ask ourselves is whether we want a flexible model to harmonize content owner and content consumer rights, or a one-takes-all model that probably results in less online content.
Netflix seemed to be a threat to all of TV, but with the current quarterly earnings report, it sure doesn't look as if that's true now. Netflix really proves that even Internet viewing of video isn't immune to profit and other business issues. This is a lesson we need to learn if we want a viable online video model.
Yahoo's new CEO can't go back to what Yahoo was; that's how it got to what it is! Instead she has to look at something that Yahoo has always rejected, which is a relationship with the telcos and cablecos. They'd love a partner in creating service applications.
Big-data and analytics tools enable marketers to understand customers as individuals, identifying unmet needs and addressing each customer as a "segment of one," says John Kennedy, VP corporate marketing, IBM.
New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority is conducting a pilot test of digital kiosks to guide subway users to where they want to go more efficiently and at lower cost.
The whole Amazon.reader debate is a double-stupid. It's stupid to think that there's any e-book buyer who doesn't know Amazon's URL, and it was stupider to let ICANN launch the whole free-form TLD initiative to start with.
While NFC's original goal was to enhance mobile commerce applications, it is finding its way into a number of other uses, which is creating both opportunity as well as challenges for IT departments.
Enterprises would like to move to cloud computing but are hesitant because they are concerned about providers’ ability to secure company data. Here are some tips that help to ensure that if breaches occur, the business is not left holding the bag.
Edmunds separates customers into segments based on the info it collects on its site and from partners, and uses that to push out custom content, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
The IBM Smarter Commerce Global Summit in Monaco kicked into high gear today, and we've already begun to see news emerging from that lovely city-state by the sea.
Expert Integrated Systems: Changing the Experience & Economics of IT In this e-book, we take an in-depth look at these expert integrated systems -- what they are, how they work, and how they have the potential to help CIOs achieve dramatic savings while restoring IT's role as business innovator. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
Email This
