Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > RIP Creative Suite

RIP Creative Suite
Thread Tools
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 08:26 AM
 
It's official.
What a lot of us feared has been made real. CS6 will be the last stand-alone, buy-it-and-you-own-it package of Adobe apps. Adobe is switching to its Creative Cloud monthly-rental scheme from this point forward. There will be no CS7.
OMG!!! We did it!!!!
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 09:07 AM
 
You should put this in the lounge.

I really don't like this market desire to get everything on a subscription model.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 09:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
You should put this in the lounge.

I really don't like this market desire to get everything on a subscription model.
You may not but sure as damn Adobe does.

PS is the most pirated software on the planet (apparently) and Adobe want that ended.

Luckily (as is oft pointed out on here) it's a free market and any other developer is more than welcome to step up and fill the gap, as long as they feel enough people won't want to subscribe to CC.

It's not as if your copy of CS4,5 or 6 will be stopping working any time soon (unless you need CameraRAW I guess) but I do fear for my CS3 suit, but that will be death from Apple not Adobe. IMHO Illustrator bit seriously jumped the shark after CS3
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 10:13 AM
 
I don't like the idea of having to pay per app or for everything. CS has different packages for design, web, production etc. Why can't there be a standard Cloud that gets you Indesign/Photoshop/Illustrator/Acrobat, then a Web Cloud package that adds Dreamweaver/Flash/Fireworks or a Production Cloud package that adds After Effects and Premiere etc. And not have to pay the full whack for everything when you're never going to use half of it.

I have the horrible feeling that I’m going to have to kill you. I thought you might appreciate a drink first. I know I would.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 10:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
You may not but sure as damn Adobe does.
No shit, Sherlock.

Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
PS is the most pirated software on the planet (apparently) and Adobe want that ended.
By whom, though? A bunch of high school and college students who pirate it aren't actually hurting Adobes bottom line.

Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Luckily (as is oft pointed out on here) it's a free market and any other developer is more than welcome to step up and fill the gap, as long as they feel enough people won't want to subscribe to CC.
It was a free market with Windows in the 90s. It's stature and entrenchment within the industry made it an impossible nut to crack, however.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 10:27 AM
 
I imagine they'll keep stuff like PS Elements alive for the nonprofessionals and people who can't afford to shell out $50 a month for something they use a handful of times.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 10:34 AM
 
This is really annoying for a lot of reasons.

We have about 10 licenses for the Creative Suite and we update about every 3 years. At 1300 a pop that's about 13,000 bucks every three years. 10 users at $50 bucks a month for 3 years is $18,000.

Sure, we're getting new versions of the software more often, but for the most part, you really don't need to be updating this stuff yearly. Usually updating causes more problems than it solves.

And this really screws the guy who wants Photoshop, but only needs it once or twice a month. In the past, you could pay a couple hundred bucks and have photoshop for years and years and not worry about it. Now it's going to be $50 bucks a month? What casual user is going to sign up for that?

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 10:37 AM
 
Casual users will make do with older software, or other software. there's a bunch of apps in the app store for light photo editing.

It sucks. No one was buying the cloud so they will force it on us. You'd need an always on internet to use the apps. I hate that idea.

As long as CS6 works we'll keep with it then. How long til it is incompatible with OSX?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 10:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
We have about 10 licenses for the Creative Suite and we update about every 3 years. At 1300 a pop that's about 13,000 bucks every three years. 10 users at $50 bucks a month for 3 years is $18,000.
Which I think is the point. Much like OS X and other software, people only update when they feel a compelling reason or are forced to by circumstance. Given the diminishing need to thanks to lack of new features and general polish, this new strategy circumvents the problem.

Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
And this really screws the guy who wants Photoshop, but only needs it once or twice a month. In the past, you could pay a couple hundred bucks and have photoshop for years and years and not worry about it. Now it's going to be $50 bucks a month? What casual user is going to sign up for that?
That's what I'm saying.


Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
It sucks. No one was buying the cloud so they will force it on us. You'd need an always on internet to use the apps. I hate that idea.
Is that for certain? I could see it only requiring daily or weekly online certification to run.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 10:52 AM
 
but that means I won't be able to use Indesign CC to create my manifesto posters from within my underground off-the-grid concrete bunker.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 11:06 AM
 
from what I gather you can sign up for CC and you get some limited stuff for free (but not any of the CC apps) however if you stop paying for PS, AI etc then your apps just stop working. If you start paying again six months down the line they start working again, so actually, ideal for the casual user.

Also, yes it is supposed to work without a live internet connection. It only verifies every so often (not sure how often but often enough that you can use it on the train , or way from your desk)
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 11:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
No one was buying the cloud so they will force it on us.
Hate to disagree, but not really. One of the reasons they got the confidence to go ahead with this is that the uptake has been exceeding expectations - according to Adobe, of course.

We switched over as soon as we got the invite and I am happy with the result. It works really well. We have one license power different apps installed on different computers.

Also, you only need to verify account ownership once every six months - everything works just fine offline. You don't need to be online for the apps to work.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 11:24 AM
 
I think I read that it checks once a month. Not 100% on that.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 11:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
I think I read that it checks once a month. Not 100% on that.
You can use the product for 180 days offline.
Adobe Creative Cloud – FAQ
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 11:41 AM
 
As a consumer user, this would suck. As a business user, $600 a year to keep my main axe polished is fine.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Oakland, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 7, 2013, 12:14 PM
 
I don't care for this subscription sh*t, I got enough monthly bills as it is. Time to get my Pixelmator skills up to par.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 07:00 AM
 
I think the biggest hit Adobe is going to take are from people who would have pirated it when they were broke, and bought it when their skills with the pirated software earns them a job.

Free CS2 will help, but not as much as pirates did.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 07:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by exca1ibur View Post
I don't care for this subscription sh*t, I got enough monthly bills as it is. Time to get my Pixelmator skills up to par.
I hear good things about Acorn.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: God's Country
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 01:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I think the biggest hit Adobe is going to take are from people who would have pirated it when they were broke, and bought it when their skills with the pirated software earns them a job.
This right here.

I feel as though companies like Adobe and EA are so far removed from what customers actually want and need that they're just making various decisions based on nothing more than bottom lines and maximizing revenue.

I get that they're businesses, so of course that's what they care about most. However, with this change, it's possible and maybe even likely that more people are going to move away from Photoshop toward other options. If businesses start showing interest in The GIMP (like what has happened with both Firefox and Ubuntu), it could very easily become a usable consumer replacement for Photoshop.

Right now, the biggest reason why I don't use the GIMP isn't because it lacks features. In fact, it seems like it can do everything Photoshop can do. The problems are that (a) it's unstable in Windows, and (b) it kills my productivity because none of the Photoshop shortcuts I use (keyboard and otherwise) work. If GIMP can get past those flaws, it could be a serious competitor for Photoshop.

I also don't see how you can pay for a month, stop paying, then pick up again later. All the plans listed on Adobe's website appear to require a one-year contract.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 01:28 PM
 
The GIMP is a non-starter due to its lack of CMYK. It's a good tool if all you ever do is web work, but most professional designers are still doing a great deal of print, and need CMYK.
OMG!!! We did it!!!!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: God's Country
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 02:01 PM
 
I guess one of the things I'm getting at is that if Photoshop starts slipping as the has-no-competition only option for professionals, the GIMP or other software like it can focus on being actual competition for Photoshop.

That's pretty much what happened with Ubuntu. That project turned Linux from a hobbyist OS for nerds into something that anyone can install and start using with minimal effort or research.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 02:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by shifuimam View Post
That's pretty much what happened with Ubuntu. That project turned Linux from a hobbyist OS for nerds into something that anyone can install and start using with minimal effort or research.
Except virtually nobody actually does, though, do they?

The only people I know who run Ubuntu are those who never had trouble running any other Linux distro, anyway.

Or have the usage stats changes lately?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 02:22 PM
 
The site where I read it is down at the moment, but Fireworks won't be in CC. There's a petition for Adobe to make it open source so that it can continue to be developed by others.

I have the horrible feeling that I’m going to have to kill you. I thought you might appreciate a drink first. I know I would.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 04:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Except virtually nobody actually does, though, do they?

The only people I know who run Ubuntu are those who never had trouble running any other Linux distro, anyway.

Or have the usage stats changes lately?

Things can change quickly with the right circumstances though. Look at how quickly Android surpassed iOS.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 05:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Things can change quickly with the right circumstances though. Look at how quickly Android surpassed iOS.
Android did not take over a market that belonged to iOS; it and iOS together took over a market that belonged to traditional cellphones.

This was a fundamental shift in one of the biggest technology markets, and Android made it possible for key industry players to build products for the new market with a minimum of effort.

There is no such shift here.

Note that I'm not saying that it isn't possible that people might finally hunker down and turn GIMP into a usable industry tool; I'm just saying that claiming that this is likely because it's happened before is invalid, because in the one example, it didn't happen, and in yours, that's not what happened.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 05:36 PM
 
Yeah, I'm pretty confident in predicting there won't be a massive wave of creative professionals installing any flavor of Linux any time in the near future.

On another board I frequent, in the discussion of this move by Adobe, we of the creative caste were read the riot act by FOSS acolytes over the whole GIMP/CMYK thing. Their opinion was that we should all learn to code and then join the team and write CMYK into GIMP. That, or donate buckets of cash in the hope that someday, someone might write CMYK into GIMP.
OMG!!! We did it!!!!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 05:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Android did not take over a market that belonged to iOS; it and iOS together took over a market that belonged to traditional cellphones.

This was a fundamental shift in one of the biggest technology markets, and Android made it possible for key industry players to build products for the new market with a minimum of effort.

There is no such shift here.

Note that I'm not saying that it isn't possible that people might finally hunker down and turn GIMP into a usable industry tool; I'm just saying that claiming that this is likely because it's happened before is invalid, because in the one example, it didn't happen, and in yours, that's not what happened.

They didn't take it over, they redefined it, they changed its scope, and their vision "won" in terms of total penetration.

It's all about the opportunity that exists, the vision, and the execution and negotiation of politics. Could somebody stick a fork into Adobe using the GIMP? Sure... Why not? Many people used to say that normal people would never use a Linux derived product, but they are now with the Android phones and the myriad of cloud services that run on Linux.

Just about any tech product can be transformed into something that eventually dominates the market with the right strategy and resources.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 05:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
Yeah, I'm pretty confident in predicting there won't be a massive wave of creative professionals installing any flavor of Linux any time in the near future.

On another board I frequent, in the discussion of this move by Adobe, we of the creative caste were read the riot act by FOSS acolytes over the whole GIMP/CMYK thing. Their opinion was that we should all learn to code and then join the team and write CMYK into GIMP. That, or donate buckets of cash in the hope that someday, someone might write CMYK into GIMP.

Why would they have to install Linux to run GIMP?
     
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 05:50 PM
 
You brought up installing Linux.
Obviously, they wouldn't need to, but I couldn't think of any other reason Adobe-using pros would install Linux.
OMG!!! We did it!!!!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 05:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
You brought up installing Linux.
Obviously, they wouldn't need to, but I couldn't think of any other reason Adobe-using pros would install Linux.

No I didn't. The first thing I wrote to this thread was "Things can change quickly with the right circumstances though. Look at how quickly Android surpassed iOS."
     
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 05:59 PM
 
I took your comment in relation to SH's assertion about few people running Linux. Your comment seemed to imply that this could change very quickly. I disagree.

You're right you didn't bring up Linux. My bad.
OMG!!! We did it!!!!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
I took your comment in relation to SH's assertion about few people running Linux. Your comment seemed to imply that this could change very quickly. I disagree.

You're right you didn't bring up Linux. My bad.

Desktop Linux as we know it today has no future, but I also think it is wrong to look at it this way.

There is no "Linux Desktop", Linux is a kernel coupled with a bunch of components. Many people erroneously think that an operating system is its GUI, which is debatable. If such an opportunity existed, any company could build their own OS off of Linux using a GUI unlike anything that has been seen before, and with the right strategy it could very well succeed. That's why I qualify what I say with "as we know it today".

For example, I've said this a bazillion times, but I don't think it would be out of the realm of possibility for Google to develop a version of Android for the Desktop. I know they sort of have this with Chrome OS, but I'm talking about more of an Android-derived/inspired port for the Desktop - sort of the reverse of iOS's OS X lineage. I don't know if Google would ever do this, but it would be foolish to say that this would be impossible and that this could never succeed.

If it did, if it remained running on a Linux kernel could you say that it is Linux? Maybe... Is an OS its kernel? Its GUI? If the latter, like I said, there is no Linux GUI.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:22 PM
 
Quite possibly.

Shif was saying that Ubuntu "turned Linux from a hobbyist OS for nerds into something that anyone can install and start using with minimal effort or research".

My impression is that Ubuntu is a hobbyist OS for nerds.

Sure Google could create an Android- (and thus Linux-)derived OS for "traditional" computers. But given the raving success of their own Chrome OS and the shrinking "traditional" market, isn't it more sensible to concede that market to Microsoft and Apple and concentrate on the future?


To steer this back on topic once again, I think it's quite possible that there is actual interest for people to code vital features into GIMP now.

But the people who need it aren't going to be the ones coding or funding coders, and the ones coding aren't those in need of features such as CMYK, or clean-cut workflows.

I've seen calculations that imply that the new subscription model works out equivalent or cheaper for professional production outfits, so what's going to die is the hobbyist and "prosumer" (I hate that word) Photoshoppers, as well as those using various Adobe tools occasionally, while not actually using most of the functions. Those will be looking at alternatives.

But will they be driving GIMP development?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Quite possibly.

Shif was saying that Ubuntu "turned Linux from a hobbyist OS for nerds into something that anyone can install and start using with minimal effort or research".

My impression is that Ubuntu is a hobbyist OS for nerds.
I would disagree with Shif that Ubuntu is suitable for the mainstream.

To steer this back on topic once again, I think it's quite possible that there is actual interest for people to code vital features into GIMP now.

But the people who need it aren't going to be the ones coding or funding coders, and the ones coding aren't those in need of features such as CMYK, or clean-cut workflows.

I've seen calculations that imply that the new subscription model works out equivalent or cheaper for professional production outfits, so what's going to die is the hobbyist and "prosumer" (I hate that word) Photoshoppers, as well as those using various Adobe tools occasionally, while not actually using most of the functions. Those will be looking at alternatives.

But will they be driving GIMP development?

What if Google was interested in making a Google web app out of GIMP derived code, or some company wanted to make a Photoshop clone for iOS or Android using GIMP derived code? If there is money to be had, somebody will eventually at least try to follow that money trail, and they may succeed at it.

It might be more technically accurate to call that product something other than the GIMP if it is a commercial fork of it, but if the product is 80 or 90% GIMP stuff and 10% proprietary stuff, it still is basically the GIMP.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:34 PM
 
We can all assume that Google would develop it, get a bunch of hobbyists and prosumers dependent upon it, and then decide three years down the road that it wasn't generating any core revenue streams and kill it with two weeks' notice.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
We can all assume that Google would develop it, get a bunch of hobbyists and prosumers dependent upon it, and then decide three years down the road that it wasn't generating any core revenue streams and kill it with two weeks' notice.
Google Drive/Apps has been around for a long time, it seems to be doing just fine. Why do you speak of them so dismissively? There are a *ton* of people dependent on the Google Drive suite (which GMail is a part of). If Google Drive is hobbyist/prosumer, what does that make iCloud?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Google Drive/Apps has been around for a long time, it seems to be doing just fine. Why do you speak of them so dismissively? There are a *ton* of people dependent on the Google Drive suite (which GMail is a part of). If Google Drive is hobbyist/prosumer, what does that make iCloud?
*ahem*
Google Keep? It'll probably be with us until March 2017 - on average | Technology | guardian.co.uk

Did you miss the Google Reader shutdown and hoo-hah that ensued?
Sure you can pick out a single service that happens to still be around.

(also, has anyone argued that iCloud is anything but a consumer service? They can't even make real sense of Photo Stream device syncing! Thankfully, they're not marketing iCloud as anything other than a consumer service.)
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
*ahem*
Google Keep? It'll probably be with us until March 2017 - on average | Technology | guardian.co.uk

Did you miss the Google Reader shutdown and hoo-hah that ensued?
Sure you can pick out a single service that happens to still be around.

(also, has anyone argued that iCloud is anything but a consumer service? They can't even make real sense of Photo Stream device syncing! Thankfully, they're not marketing iCloud as anything other than a consumer service.)

I guess I don't understand your point.

Apple has killed things off too either directly or indirectly. Is your point that Google is more prone to kill off things? You could make that argument, but this is generally only with products that do not make money. Google Drive is not just some random experimental product, it is probably Google's #2 source of revenue. This whole discussion is built around the notion that the company that builds this product will do a good job at executing and it will make money. If you want to argue that Google cannot make money with this product, fair enough, but there is no way to rationalize that they'll kill off a money making product for the fun of it.

Besides, in this particular instance would it be a disaster if this product only lasts for 5 years? What is the alternative? Do you see Adobe lasting 5 years benefiting solely from the profits of CS? I kind of have a hard time seeing that, my point being that the future of this part of the market is rather murky now anyway for a number of reasons (one of them being whether an iPad version of Photoshop would ever be a thing).

Moreover, when and if the death of this Google thing happens, I'm sure those files will be openable in some other product, and people will just switch to that new thing. People are capable of changing, as tricky as it is.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:53 PM
 
If people based their decisions on what might not be around 5 years from now, why have these free email services flourished? Switching email is a PITA.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 06:59 PM
 
SH, maybe I'm misunderstanding you...

Is your argument not that a product like I'm describing couldn't succeed, but as an analyst you wouldn't see it lasting for very long? If so, I'd like to hear why... I'm honestly undecided on whether the idea would work out in the long run, my main point is that it simply isn't impossible for something like this to happen and for there to be a successful outcome. Perhaps we agree on that?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 07:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I guess I don't understand your point.

Apple has killed things off too either directly or indirectly. Is your point that Google is more prone to kill off things? You could make that argument, but this is generally only with products that do not make money. Google Drive is not just some random experimental product, it is probably Google's #2 source of revenue. This whole discussion is built around the notion that the company that builds this product will do a good job at executing and it will make money. If you want to argue that Google cannot make money with this product, fair enough, but there is no way to rationalize that they'll kill off a money making product for the fun of it.
We are not talking about Google Drive.

We are talking about taking an existing mess of functionality and horrific interface and turning it into an industry-grade professional tool, and then possibly selling it AS A SERVICE (because Google doesn't sell products) to what amounts to ambitioned hobbyists and occasional professionals.

OF COURSE we can postulate that Google could kill this service at any time even if it were making money. It would simply need to not make ENOUGH money, or it might at some point be deemed to not align with the brand identity or its core interests. They do it all the time, after an average of four years (as per the link I posted above). Check out the list of dead services at the end of this link: List of Google products - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Compare this to Adobe. Yes, Fireworks appears to have been cancelled. But the basic stuff isn't just another service that they're offering on top of 46 other, completely unrelated services, for the hell of it: It's been their core business ever since the company has existed.

Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Besides, in this particular instance would it be a disaster if this product only lasts for 5 years? What is the alternative? Do you see Adobe lasting 5 years benefiting solely from the profits of CS? I kind of have a hard time seeing that, my point being that the future of this part of the market is rather murky now anyway for a number of reasons (one of them being whether an iPad version of Photoshop would ever be a thing).
Seriously?

Adobe has spent the past 25 years making themselves inescapable, eliminating competition and becoming effectively an industry monopoly that has whole markets completely by the balls, and you see them not lasting five years on that?

Even if Google were to pick up GIMP and run with it (why on earth would they? how is this relevant to their interests? This sounds a lot like "Apple should by Adobe because, um, they can. And secure a market, or something.") it would take years for them to get it up to snuff.

In the meantime, the hobbyists and prosumers can use the Google solution until it no longer sucks, but Google is supposed to somehow make money off them. How?

Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Moreover, when and if the death of this Google thing happens, I'm sure those files will be openable in some other product, and people will just switch to that new thing. People are capable of changing, as tricky as it is.
"Some other product" presumably being an Adobe product, leaving everybody exactly where they started, except with five years' worth of growing pains, incomplete products, and stress.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 8, 2013, 07:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
If people based their decisions on what might not be around 5 years from now, why have these free email services flourished? Switching email is a PITA.
Free email services have a viable business model. Gmail's, for example, is perfectly aligned with the absolute core of Google's business.

But that really isn't relevant to the discussion at hand, especially since e-mail is much less important in day-to-day communication, having been supplanted by chat and facebook messaging.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 03:16 AM
 
I need adobe acrobat 11 (st/pro) to sign documents, i considered docusign as it seems cheaper.. but then I see docusigns license model, which is 20$ a month per user. Which is awkward enough not to buy it.
So i will buy acrobat 11 standard (275$) until i have a need for professional, then i upgrade for 300$ more.
{Animated sigs are not allowed.}
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 04:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by ajprice View Post
The site where I read it is down at the moment, but Fireworks won't be in CC. There's a petition for Adobe to make it open source so that it can continue to be developed by others.
Fireworks petition: Petition calls on Adobe to open-source Fireworks | Adobe | Creative Bloq

I have the horrible feeling that I’m going to have to kill you. I thought you might appreciate a drink first. I know I would.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 11:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by PB2K View Post
I need adobe acrobat 11 (st/pro) to sign documents, i considered docusign as it seems cheaper.. but then I see docusigns license model, which is 20$ a month per user. Which is awkward enough not to buy it.
So i will buy acrobat 11 standard (275$) until i have a need for professional, then i upgrade for 300$ more.
PDFPen? I own it. It's good shit.

PDFpen: Mac PDF Editor - Edit, Sign, and Correct PDFs
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 02:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by ajprice View Post
Oh yes. Why not ask the Freehand guys how they made out with their petition.

Adobe isn't listening/interested
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 03:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
On another board I frequent, in the discussion of this move by Adobe, we of the creative caste were read the riot act by FOSS acolytes over the whole GIMP/CMYK thing. Their opinion was that we should all learn to code and then join the team and write CMYK into GIMP. That, or donate buckets of cash in the hope that someday, someone might write CMYK into GIMP.
This attitude is why FOSS still hasn't made any inroads on the desktop.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 03:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
PDFPen? I own it. It's good shit.

PDFpen: Mac PDF Editor - Edit, Sign, and Correct PDFs
There's an iPad app that does that for free. Not saying PDFPen isn't good, just that signing pdfs isn't a big issue anymore.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 03:20 PM
 
GIMP is going nowhere. Pixelmator on the other hand, and similar offerings, already do what 90% of all casual users need to do. For $14.99.
I'd wager that for those who really NEED Adobe's big guns, price is not an issue.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 03:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Google Drive/Apps has been around for a long time, it seems to be doing just fine. Why do you speak of them so dismissively? There are a *ton* of people dependent on the Google Drive suite (which GMail is a part of). If Google Drive is hobbyist/prosumer, what does that make iCloud?
If you trust google to supply mission critical services then you're making a huge mistake. With google you never know what offering will fall out of favour next.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:40 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2014 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2