Skip navigation
We Know A Place
Currently Being Moderated

Does Anybody Like the new SAS version of photoshop?

Apr 22, 2013 1:48 PM

My company is toying with the idea of converting our designers over to the new Creative Suite Monthly Service versus having to update  photoshop and other adobe products everytime there is a new version.

 

Anythoughts would be helpful.

 

Mackie Visor

 
Replies
  • Noel Carboni
    23,482 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 22, 2013 6:00 PM   in reply to We Know A Place

    It kind of boils down to what's more important to you.

     

    • On the one hand you get the latest new feature developments as soon as they're available.  The designers will like that.
    • On the other hand, if you have a lean few years and you've bought the perpetual licenses you could keep editing using the version you already have.  But ultimately you'll have to shell out a big wad of cash to buy the latest version if you should get in the black again.

     

    Few folks plan for failure, and everyone expects Adobe will release great new features - hence the subscription model is a success.

     

    I think it's expensive either way you go.  If it's just Photoshop you need a single product subscription can be had for $20/month.

     

    Adobe announced more frequent releases.  Photoshop CS6 13.0 was released last May, and 13.1 came out for cloud subscribers only last December.  The new features list wasn't huge.

     

    -Noel 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 22, 2013 7:30 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    I think it's expensive either way you go.  If it's just Photoshop you need a single product subscription can be had for $20/month.

    It is expensive. But since Adobe has changed the perpetual license upgrade discount to ONLY the previous version... If you bought CS5 Extended at beginning of its (18 month) cycle, then upgraded to CS6 Extended at the (assumed) end of its (assumed 18 month) cycle... that's $1000 + $400 divided by 36 months...

     

    ...works out to $39/month for three years to keep using Photoshop on a perpetual license AND be eligible for upgrades.

     

    Adobe marketing has surely run these numbers.

     

    Regardless, I think Adobe's model of having to "out-do" itself every 18 months to the tune of a $400 upgrade has a limited shelf life. It ends up producing an unnecessarily bloated and cumbersome product. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 22, 2013 7:33 PM   in reply to charles badland

    We'll soon see the perpetual licence upgrades being yearly or every 9 months, regardless of how little will be in an upgrade, in order to make the maintaining of a perpetual licence extremely expensive and unattractive in comparison to a Cloud subscription.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 23, 2013 12:26 PM   in reply to conroy

    that would be really crossing the line into new territory for being hostile to users. are you speculating about this or do you have some inside info?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 23, 2013 1:25 PM   in reply to eclic

    The following regards After Effects but I think Photoshop will follow the same path.

     

    http://mograph.net/board/index.php?showtopic=28259#entry207838

     

    Screen-shot-2013-04-23-at-21.21.09.png

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,482 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 23, 2013 1:36 PM   in reply to eclic

    What line?  Adobe has the goods, and customers want the goods.

     

    Clearly they want people on the new model (subscription plan).  It would be stupid for them to have the perpetual license upgrade path be much less expensive moving forward.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 23, 2013 1:44 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel - are you serious? be alittle objectionable sometimes here.

     

    customers do not want to pay $50 or more (I know about the one time year at $30)

    and lose the ability to use any of the software if they stop subscribing.

     

    I don't want to be foreeced to subscribe to a whole suite if I only need a few products and what if I don't need alot of the other bundled things? Doesn't make sense for alot of people that way it is now.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,482 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 23, 2013 4:37 PM   in reply to eclic

    Hopefully I'm not objectionable, though I do try to be objective.  I'm not taking sides, and lord knows I sure don't wish to have to pay more, but I do think sometimes from the perspective of an executive...

     

    It's pretty clear all these cloud, etc. machinations are aimed at doing one thing:  Increasing Adobe's profits.

     

    Assuming Adobe cannot easily engineer more value into the products than they already are, so as to increase market share, and they can't reduce support cost easily, another way is to charge more for the products.  If they can charge more for products in a way that people will accept, and knowing that there really isn't another competitor...  It's not rocket science.  Having the feature that it helps KEEP people paying is a bonus.

     

    From Adobe's perspective cloud subscription licensing borders on genius.  Look at the ADBE stock price trend.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 24, 2013 5:52 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    thanks for catching my grammar mistake.

     

    why - as users - shouldn't we voice our displeasure when big companies enact policies that are unfriendly to us?

    obviously SAAS benefits Adobe at the expense of many long time users. It would be more acceptable if they just came out and said it instead of trying really hard to make it look like CC is a good deal for the customer.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,482 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 24, 2013 6:33 AM   in reply to eclic

    By all means, voice away!

     

    Given the amount of effort that it takes to make software as powerful as Photoshop, even though it seems like the price is going up, that we can have all the features and functions for just a few hundred dollars is just amazing.  Millions of dollars have gone into developing it.

     

    $200 buys what, two tanks of gas?  I don't know about you, but my landscaper charges over $200 just to trim my palm trees.  How long can you eat on the food you buy at the supermarket for $240?

     

    Maybe I'm an incurable optimist, but I have this hope/dream that as Adobe makes more profit, they'll spend some of the funds on engineering and we'll all be the benefit of even more sophisticated and higher quality tools.  Maybe they'll even finish some of the work they started years ago but never seem to be able to get back to (e.g., updating old filters to work on 16 bit data, or fixing the bugs that remain from release to release)

     

    No one is keeping you from investing in ADBE stock.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points