I'm interested to know why Adobe has decided on a subscription based model for Muse (and the next version of Adobe CS?) as this seems to be the way a lot of software products are going?
I imagined Muse as a standalone boxed product rather than software as a service. What do you see as the advantages/disadvantages as far as the end user is concerned?
Muse will be sold only by subscription because it will allow the Muse team to improve the product more quickly and be more responsive to your needs.
Traditionally Adobe builds up a collection of new features over 12, 18 or 24 months, then makes those changes available as a major upgrade. New updates of Muse will be released much more frequently, probably quarterly. New features will be made available when they're ready, not held to be part of an annual or biannual major upgrade. This will enable us to stay on top of browser and device compatibility issues and web design trends, as well as enabling us to respond to feature requests and market changes in a much more timely fashion than with a traditional purchase model.
The problem with this model is that customers do not really have control over their own work. This is new for any Adobe product.
Because Muse is not designed to work with other web design programs (such as Dreamweaver) a Muse user will only be able to edit and build upon their own creation if they pay Adobe to continue to use the Muse HTML generator.
It is a terrific lock-in that really only benefits Adobe.
(cough... are not read-only FAQs ideal?)
Actually this is not a good model at all. It is purely a marketing "ruse" by Adobe to ensure a steady income stream. Updates and patches have worked just fine and still continue to. So to say "New updates of Muse will be released much more frequently, probably quarterly. New features will be made available when they're ready, not held to be part of an annual or biannual major upgrade" is pure nonsense. I have been using GoLive (and still continue to use it) since it first came out. It works perfectly well under Win7 VM. That is over 5 versions which translates to $1000 in upgrads saved on my end. Over the years Adobe has gotten paranoid and greedy (to say the least). Proof of this? Their new policy of upgrade qualifications. The new policy and direction of "Cloud" is absolute nonsense and purely a way to control the way you work even more. Adobe needs allow their customers to decide which version is best for them and when to upgrade. Their prices are high enough. Let's see... How about if Apple and Microsoft do away with "boxed versions" and make every one subscribe to their OS. Would you like that? I think not. Leave the choice to the people and offer all your software as stand alone products. This Cloud stuff is pure nonsense.
This is an off-shoot musing / rant derived from my current inability to purchase the Month-to-Month sub for Muse and a boxed copy of Illsutrator CS6 [just keep getting a system error at the Checkout stage], but it allowed me to look at the Year sub against the Month-to-Month one. It made me realise, what's the difference between the two when both are set to auto-rew [very ugly business practice I think] anyway?
I mean. I know I can turn it off for the Month-to-Month deal, if I so please, but I don't know why I should have to from the offset.
What Adobe is doing is conditioning the "youth" of the business not to expect a "boxed" version that they can use for however long they want (a.k.a. skip the rediculous yearly "upgrades" which contain minimal improvements). I expect and demand that if I am paying top dollar of hard earned money for a product, I will choose if and when I will upgrade or subscribe. It's bad enough we were forced to trash a good amount of perfectly fine hardware and software to upgrade to Win7. Now Adobe is going to make us their software slaves? I don't think so. Imagine car dealerships not selling but only leasing cars!
We need to stop this preposterous practice dead in it's tracks by people speaking out (and not purchasing "subscriptions") before it's too late.
I'm advising my 1000+ seat establishment not to get involved with Muse until at least version 2, which is likely at least 18 months away, Adobe are being hopelessly unrealistic by releasing it commercially in the state it's currently in. You think these forums are bad now, wait until Joe Public gets their hands on it and can't figure out why 1) a lot of stuff doesn't work or is buggy, and 2) why basic common-sense features (align/distribute panel, layers/z-order panel, @font-face) aren't implemented.
But for those complaining about the subscription model, the majority of Adobe's clients are corporate organisations like mine or larger, and the subscription model actually makes a lot of sense to a purchasing manager that answers to a board and CFO. Adobe doesn't care about the opinions of individuals, to them you are like ants.
"Traditionally Adobe builds up a collection of new features over 12, 18 or 24 months, then makes those changes available as a major upgrade. New updates of Muse will be released much more frequently, probably quarterly. New features will be made available when they're ready, not held to be part of an annual or biannual major upgrade. This will enable us to stay on top of browser and device compatibility issues and web design trends, as well as enabling us to respond to feature requests and market changes in a much more timely fashion than with a traditional purchase model."
This is total BS. This is an out right money grab. Muse (and egde) should be part of the master collection at a min and most feel it should be part of web premium also. once any major release is out, there is nothing to prevent the muse team from putting out dot releases every month if they want to. So the idea that they have to have a subscription model in order to keep it current is just not true. I have a small freelance shop and we currently use master collection seats and update them regularly. we will not be updating CS5.5 MC until adobe includes muse and edge. Everyone knows that flash is on the way out and html5 is the furture and Adobe is just trying to force us into the lame subscription model it came up with that offers the user nothing but permanent addiction. Sunscription models in an of themselves aren't all bad but this one is a no win for the end user. We use 3dmax here also and do use the 3dmax subscription model, it's about $500 a year and provides us with constantly updated version of 3dmax with new features avaliable thoughtout the year and a major update on disk about every 12-18 mo. But the BIG difference is, 1 they ship us disk with all the major updates, lastest releases and 2, if at any time we decided not to renew the subscription we still own and can use what we have. The big problem with the adobe subscription model is; 1 say you subscribe for a couple of years, then you decide you don't want to subscribe any longer, then youv'e got ZIP, nada, and none of your current projects will open in your older software. 2 After getting everyone "hooked" on the subscription model you can't leave without losing everything, and adobe knowing this has less of an incentive to provide more an better updates and just starts putting that money in their pockets. This Model is a VERY bad idea from day one. If they want to sell me a subscription similar the the 3dmax model I would entertain that idea, but the MASTER collection should included EVERYTHING period.
I really don't see "piracy" being the driving issue here. With adobe's subscription model you still download and install the software and run it locally, it's just constantly phoning home to check your subscription status (basically the same process it does now to check your license "activation", only more often) so it's still there for a pirate to "crack" etc so I don't see it effecting pirates at all. While there is a lot of pirated software out there and people that use pirated software, the number of pirate software users that would actualy go out and buy the software if they couldn't get it pirated is not that significant compared to total sales. The issue here is an additional money grab from honest users pure and simple and a slap in the face to current CS collection owners.
Here's one more issue with subscriptions:
From the license we claim to have read before running the software:
1.5 Adobe may change the Terms at its sole discretion. If we change the Terms, then we will make a new copy available at http://www.adobe.com/go/terms. Your use of the Services is subject to the most current version of the Terms at the time of such use.
Statements like this are often accompanied by some allowance for the other party to opt out of the new terms, although often by voiding/cancelling the service contract. Adobe is not saying that they will alert us when they change terms.
Adobe can't really change terms on traditional perpetually-licensed "boxed" software. Those terms are set once when we buy the box. As subscribers, we get no guarantees what the future holds. If we find the changed terms to be disagreeable, we can simply discontinue our subscription and be left with MUSE files that we can no longer open/edit. That is a terrible way to lose control of our creations.
You are fooling us. Now I can not buy Muse, I have to pay each month and I have to pay more if I dont want it in english. Hey, wake up Adobe. For years we buy and work with adobe. We feel cheated with the new politics. In Switzerland, like a lot of countries, because of restricted licences, I have to work with a CS in german, I am francophone in the german part of Switzerland, I am not allowed to switch the language, with a multiple licence, all have to speak the same language, here, everything is mixed, I write many times, I call many times, each time I am in front of a bureaucraty, in a labyrinth of understanding. Pay and shut up!
What do you think about that, am I alone or what?
No ocolere, you are surely not alone. We just need to keep making noise about this to bring to light what is actually happening here. It's a shame that Adobe feels the need to "take hostages" to get what they want. Tell your friends to post their displeasure. Unfortunately the only thing that Adobe understands now is the almighty "greenback". They have lost their sense of artistic community and common sense and are purely a bureaucratic establishment now. It's a shame to see what they have become from what they were.
This was a bad decision by Adobe... There are products out there that are just as easy to use and a lot cheaper. No body cares about how fast you can develop features that are all ready on stand alone products. Stop trying to justify a reason to milk customers dry. Disappointed to say the least. $179.00 a year vs $99.00 one time shot from another great web design product (no names) but I will stick with that software program.
If I go along the subscription path for Muse, If I later choose to upgrade to the full Creative Cloud, will my muse subscription be incorporated in the payment I make for CC or will I receive two charges a month?
I would seriously re consider a subscription at this point. Here's why:
I am working on 3 new/updated sites for my businiesses. I completed and posted one site. It used simple navigation (by simple I mean one top nav menu with no dropdowns) and I am very pleased with it. Once I had a solidified outline it took me less than a day to complete it.
Upon building my second (and most important) site I ran across a "deal breaking" bug:
When you use iframe to embed .swf content, any menu (in my case dropdown with multiple links) is obscured by that iframe content. In my case this means that 3/4 of my dropdown menu is covered, thus rendering it un-viewable by clients using Chrome and IE. I tried everything. Chatting with Adobe, googling... nothing works. I researched and tried inserting "wmode" value="transparent" at the end of the url in the iframe with no luck at all.
Adobe is quite aware of this issue. What gets me is they are marketing this software as "Design and publish unique HTML pages that adhere to the latest web standards without writing code..." and I have to search high and low (with no luck) for code to insert to get the site to display properly in 2 major browsers?!!! That is what you (I have not subscribed yet) are paying for. It to actually work!!! Sure I could redesign the page(s) but that would ruin the aesthetics of the page(s) and I shouldn't have to.
How can I post a site where the navigation is inaccessbile by the client using Chrome or IE? Firefox is reportedly fine according to Adobe Chat.
I truely think MUSE has the potential to be a great program, however simple things like described above make it almost unusable for anthing but a simple site with simple navigation. Adobe needs to seriously get their act together especially if they are asking the end user to subscribe to a product that is incomplete.
rogersphoto.com, I wasn't able to find a thread here on the forum where you asked about wmode=transparent?
If it's specified correctly in the embedded HTML then other content can appear both on top and behind the Flash (or other browser plug-in drawn content).
One example of where the wmode="transparent" needs to be places can be seen by placing a SWF in Muse and then exporting the HTML and looking at it. For a SWF placed in Muse, Muse automatically generates the correct wmode settings.
Here's what it looks like for a placed SWF. Exactly where it needs to go and how it would appear for HTML from an arbitrary source would depend on the specific HTML. It's possible the source for the embedded HTML doesn't support wmode="transparent" (in which case the layering of content on a page for something like a submenu wouldn't work with it regardless of whether you're using Muse or hand-coding):
<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" width="100" height="100" id="u184_media">
<param name="movie" value="images/redcircles.swf">
<param name="quality" value="high">
<param name="swfversion" value="188.8.131.52">
<param name="wmode" value="transparent">
<param name="expressinstall" value="Scripts/expressInstall.swf">
<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="images/redcircles.swf" width="100" height="100">
<param name="quality" value="high">
<param name="swfversion" value="184.108.40.206">
<param name="wmode" value="transparent">
<param name="expressinstall" value="Scripts/expressInstall.swf">
<h4>Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.</h4>
<p><a href="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer"><img src="http://www.adobe.com/images/shared/download_buttons/get_flash_player.g if" alt="Get Adobe Flash player" width="112" height="33"></a></p>
I believe you'd want to contact Adobe Customer Support in order to cancel your Muse subscription, at which point your Creative Cloud Subscription would enable you to continue using Muse.
As an Adobe user for the last 20 years I have watched them become more and more greedy....they buy up perfectly good software, and either completely destroy its usability or kill it...they have turned the design software market into a monopoly we with very very little other options than their software. I want control over my software...I want to be able to NOT upgrade if I don't want to - some of my printers are 2-3 versions back for their equipment...and I do minimal web work and I really like Muse and if it was "box" copy I would snap it up, but I can't see paying a subscritpion fee every month in perpitude to do my website and maybe 1 more a year! Love the software HATE subscriptions...so Adobe...why alienate your market?? basically your just saying we arent doing free patches now you have to pay for everything...and I thought Microsoft was the devil...Adober I think you have knocked them off the throne.
Customers should react as users of Netflix did...revolt...refuse...they change their minds really quick when things start effecting their bottom line and they get bad press.
I'm paying the $15/month right now but I'll be cancelling soon.
What if stock market crashes and Adobe goes bancrupt???
I still have disks for my other programs, not depending on someone else for 100s of websites is important to any real designer.
Thanks for the reply. I think I may have not phrased my frustrations about swf content embedded in muse not correctly displaying and completely misunderstood the "wmode=transparent" thing.
The code below is what I have embedded (cut & pasted) into muse according to muse instructions:
<iframe style="width:1000px;height:900px" src="http://www.rogersphoto.com/engagement-gallery/index.html?wmode=transpa rent" seamless="seamless" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true"></iframe>
Now the actual gallery appears just fine in all browsers however there is no way (that I can find) to have my dropdown menus appear on top of that content. As you can see I have (wrongly?) placed the "wmode=transparent" in the iframe after the url.
I don't design anything using "flash" as I don't need to therefore my flash vocabulary is quite limited. And although I am not a coder (I am a photographer) I can understand enough html to tweak anything that need to be tweaked.
My absolute MUSE problem is the fact that when: I place embed an iframe containing .swf such as the one above, MUSE will not write the correct code to have my meunus be on top of the content!
Curiously I do not have this problem at all when I embed an .mp4 from say "Animoto.com" In this case the menus appear as they should; On top of the content.
I would really appreciate guidance on how to correct this as I would love to be able to incorporate muse into my work flow (despite the absolutely horrible, dictatorial, Adobe subscription policy).
After all, Adobe advertises MUSE as Code Free web design and want's users to subscribe for that "privlidge". Shouldn't they live up to their claims? And if Adobe can't get it right or at least fix this bug with all their resources and (subscription) $$ how am I supposed to? It's like driving a car with the visor stuck down (you can only see half the road in front of you). Can you help me put the visor up please?!!!
Email me or post here. I just need a fix!
Very good point Mike! Or how about if Adobe get's acquired/taken over and the new owners decide to discontinue? What then? Your site(s) is useless! I can't think of one logical and supportable reason why Adobe will not sell this software outside of greed. It's a dictatorial policy unbecomming of a reputable company. They didn't even try to "package" this software for sale.
and their big reasoning is that they want to have updates every few months....well that is fine...I get updates every few months with lots of apps and Mac OS....they are all FREE...maybe do packages of extras that can be added on for a small cost....not main features some of which are still missing...like say lists!! but say you add more widgets you could release a widget pack for $15 or something...I would much rather pay a fee like that to get some new useful addons if I wanted them...but knowing that I have the software as my own w/o a subscription. PLEASE Adobe....you finally got something close to what probably a lot of designers like me whos eyes roll back in their head when they look at code can actually get excited about...I think your shooting yourself in the foot by alienating all the would be potential users w/ this stupid subscription scheme
The CEO has spoken read:
Narayen, speaking at the Robert Baird Growth Stock Conference Tuesday, outlined Adobe’s transition to become a cloud company. He said that the Creative Cloud showed it could bring in new customers in a pilot in Australia. He expects the Creative Cloud—a Web-based roll up of Creative Suite 6—will bring in new customers and diminish piracy.
We have taken a very measured approach. We will offer perpetual (licensing) in order to enable people to experience the Creative Cloud offering and get comfortable with the amount of innovation that is happening.
So unlike other companies who have had to make business transformations, you can think of this as an augmentation of the business model rather than a complete left shift. So I think that could give you as investors and us comfort that we are doing this in a measured way.
We do think that the Creative Cloud with the new offerings that we have is certainly going to be long-term the preferred way, both for Adobe as well as for our customers.
What we tell investors is, if you believe that everybody is going to stay on the perpetual model, then you can look at CS6, which we think is one of the strongest releases we have released in a long time; and you should get comfort from the fact that people are going to want to upgrade to the new version. If you believe that the subscription offering is going to be a more compelling offering, then what that means is that over time we are certainly making our business more sticky. And we are attracting customers to our platform.
We can now all see where all the subscription stuff is coming from and where it might be heading to.
hmm you have to wonder what the "attracting new customers" is...because honestly if you are an artist, designer, web developer or photographer how are you not using adobe products somewhere? if they showed an increase you have to wonder if it was people who needed it for a specific purpose...say they had a big project and hired 5 contract workers...they license CS so those contract workers can use it in the office on their rented computers...and then at the end they just stop their subscription....that is what I see as the usefulness of the whole subscription model...letting smaller businesses use contract or freelance people and not have to pay for a whole new CS....
The whole "Cloud" thing might be great for large places that do a lot of sharing....but its useless to those of us who are 1 person studios...I don't share my stuff...I don't need asset available everywhere...there should be extra offerings like a Cloud package for companies that do work that way...I have never used Adobe Bridge or any of the other "sharing" management bits already in CS...Cloud will do nothing to improve my user experience....and anyway what happens when your on a deadline at 3am and ur internet goes down because your service provider is doing work on the lines OR Adobe servers go down and you need sometihng from your cloud....yea...I don't want to be relying that heavily on an internet connection to do my work....
The whole piracy issue is just a nice excuse...they ran the numbers on a subscription service and saw that they can basically hold their customers hostage....I know I ran the numbers and it was way more expensive for me....which means they are making more. I have talked to a lot of colleagues and other designers and they all feel the same...Adobe is being greedy not innovative.
I just downloaded Joomla (Adobe will probably edit or delete this) and it looks like a nice, FREE and somewhat easy alternative to Muse with quite a few free "plugins" too. I happened across this on somebody elses site and it looked nice and clean.
Best of all, you actually get to download the software package and don't have to worry about a subscription and loosing the ability to edit your site if you choose not to subscribe anymore!
If Photoshop ever goes the way of total subscription I will go back to using Corel Photo Paint which is what I used decades ago (It was an awesome program).
So because Adobe can't balance money, you have to tax us by using a BS excuse of update frequency... really??? For the short time it was avail. as a beta I didn't see tons of updates. As a loyal adobe customer for years, I think this new biz model is by far the WORST idea I have ever seen Adobe do. The next was killing GoLive, but that's another issue. It's painfully obvious that all of us are not going to purchase this program with these kind of buying options, so why don't you LISTEN to your CUSTOMERS? You do realize the longer you ignore customers, the more chance you will have to loose them to other options, which will soon be built by some college kid who has passion and cares to LISTEN.
In closing, if money is the issue here, then put a price on muse that is high enough that you can pay your developers to keep updating the software, charge a small fee for updates and make the price low enough that the consumers are happy. I can't believe leadership there lacks the ability to understand basic business fundamentials!!!!
its not $99, but its a fine program - http://www.softpress.com/products/freeway-express.html