I don't have it so I can only comment on what I see.
We never really get people on the forums coming on to tell everyone how great InDesign is - it's usually just people that have a complaint.
In my time on the forums I notice, even though I don't have InDesign CC, that a lot of the things can be fixed quite easily by implementing a stricter work control procedure for documents.
There are some issues that have been addressed by Staff and they are working on fixing them.
You can view the responses in the FAQ at the Forum start page.
All in all - I'm not impressed with the implemations and "improvements" - that's why I haven't upgraded.
QR codes are nonsense and free to make on a lot of websites anyway.
They claim on the website to have "Faster Performance" - but clearly this not the case as a lot of lag issues reported.
"New Modern UI" - it's not that fancy - they recoloured it black - how is that an improvement?
They support HiDPI and Retina - well I guess that's cool - no idea what they are or why people have them??
Sync Fonts - Search Fonts - Font Preview - give me a break how are these important to anyone that is a designer will know what fonts to use when and where and will simply type it into the font dialog.
A lot of the "new" features seem to be fluff to me - and I won't upgrade for fluff.
Hear, hear! (Seems you aren't afraid of losing your MVP badge?)
"Retina" is Apple's new superhigh resolution screen. Higher resolution is always better, except when:
1. the underlying base code didn't change
2. the bitmap parts of the UI didn't change
ad 1. Higher resolution on a same screen size means more pixels to draw. CS6 already was extremely slow (remember all those posts where "switch off live preview" was offered as a solution?), CC must be about 4 times slower.
ad 2. There have been frequent posts here, in the Illustrator forum, and in the Photoshop forum, asking about the small texts and buttons in the UI. I didn't check but theoretically, with this larger resolution, text will be twice as small.
As for practical improvements:
QR codes? Nah, I can script that. Just for fun, really, as there are tons of other ways.
Font Stuff? Don't care.
New Improved Way Better Epub Export? It's still a workaround -- ID will never be an 'epub editor'. Unless they strip it from all print-related fluff -- "Page sizes? Who needs pages anyway, You Filthy Treekiller!?"
Faster INX Export? Okay ... at least I can see why people would want INX back. Did anyone try this one, by the way? It's still there in the "new features" list.
You forgot another loudly announce new 'feature': "It now runs in 64-bit mode, and More Bits == More Speed!". Well, only if nothing else changes. In Adobe's case, it only means they can employ even worse (= cheaper!) programmers than they already do.
Ah -- and what about that "New! Now you cannot buy InDesign anymore!"
Well I didn't mean to sound so bad about it.
But I don't think the new things added to Creative Cloud are that great. I'm still very much designing for print and will be for a very long time to come. That is never going to change for me.
I do a lot of flyers, booklets, and books on a daily basis. It's still the number 1 way of getting your message to the public.
I can't deliver 5,000 ePubs to a housing estate specific location - and not everyone would have a way of opening or extracting the information.
There's been a real lack of features for print designers - improvements in this regard would be wholly welcome.
I've wanted Footnotes updated for a long time.
Even a pagination/imposition would be great - I mean a proper system for it.
Don't get me wrong - InDesign is my bread and butter - I use it every day for at least 12 hours a day.
Just don't think any of the new features can be classed as "features".
Ah -- and what about that "New! Now you cannot buy InDesign anymore!"
That's the most annoying part about it to be honest. I might have upgraded if I could physically own the software.
But I'm not in a position to tell the company I work for that they have to pay a nominal fee every month to use the software. That won't fly, especially when there are no features in the product that will increase my productivity in anyway.
I mean I can't tell them to pay this fee indefinitely - it would be a waste of money - especially when there's software already in place to do the job we need.
Well, I have subscribed to the new Creative Cloud. All I've downloaded
are the latest versions of InDesign and Acrobat. My Photoshop and
Illustrator CS5 are so completely adequate that it's not even worth the
time for me to download and install the new versions.
Acrobat XI is nice to have compared to CS2, which is what I'd been
using, and is crippled on Windows 7 64-bit machines (no Adobe PDF print
As for InDesign -- the new ePub export features are presumably helpful.
But already in CS6 (despite Jongware's assertion), I was able to export
simple ePubs that didn't need ANY tweaking in an external editor.
Apart from that, there's nothing new in InDesign -- and many of the old
bugs are still there. Although, is it my imagination, or is the Word
import filter a little more reliable?
Anyway, the fact is that despite having ID CC installed and pinned to my
taskbar, I still choose to work in CS6 -- for several reasons:
(1) It's significantly quicker -- try paging through a 300 page book in
CS6 compare to CC -- it's much quicker in CS6, and that's something I'm
doing a lot.
(2) There's a very weird feeling opening InDesign CC and saying to
yourself: "This software isn't yours. You're paying good money for it,
but IT'S RENTED! Start a new project with CC at your peril! If you stop
subscribing, or Adobe prices the subscription out of your pocket, you
can kiss all your hard work goodbye (unless you rely on some dodgy
(3) (Overlaps with (2) above) Right now the price is fairly decent: $30
a month from CC. But in a year that will rise to over $50 at least, and
I truly have not made a final decision whether I will be interested in
continuing the subscription at that point. I am honestly not convinced
it's worth it. If I start projects in CC, my hands will be tied: I'll
have to continue, because I'll need access to those projects. So for the
coming year, until I've decided whether I will be continuing, or until
Adobe makes some more noises about CC (future plans, pricing), I want to
leave my options open, and that means CS6 remains the app of choice for
starting new projects, and only those that desperately need CC will find
me using it.
Whatever the reason, the fact is that for now, I'm starting new projects
in CS6, not CC, despite having them both installed.
So the only thing I've gained by subscribing is Acrobat XI, and being
up-to-date: especially with supporting my script customers, this can be
important, I guess.
I'm still considering cancelling the subscription at the end of the 30
days, purchasing Acrobat XI separately (I believe that is possible), and
living happily ever after with CS6.
I can export very basic ePub from InDesign in CS5 and CS5.5 - but I don't think that's what Jongware was getting at.
I think - and not speaking for him - that they are trying to push InDesign as an ePub creator and it has so many workarounds it's barely worth the effort unless your mass producer of publications to go this route.
eBooks were being made well before InDesign stepped into the market - so I really don't know what it brings to the experience.
As jongware says - it's not an epub editor and if Adobe want to go that way they need to strip it all back and just release an ePub editor - at least that's what I think he meant?
Interesting points you raise their Ariel! What if Adobe decides to hike up the price - your files will be out of date and no way to open them unless you rent the software.
Another thing is - I don't want or need the other packages that come with Creative Cloud
I need InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator and Acrobat... that's it. I don't want or need the other apps.
Why can't I have a subscription plan based on the software I want instead of what Adobe want to provide with the Creative Cloud?
I want 4 apps - not 16 - so should my subscription be discounted to a quarter of what the CC price plan is???
My guess is that they will sooner or later offer a tiered subscription
system: not just single app vs. the entire Adobe opus, but something
that is equivalent to the previous Creative Suite divisions.
Regarding ePub: Sure -- Adobe is certainly NOT an ePub editor. I agree
with that 100% (it's also not a Flash animation application! despite
Adobe's attempts to convince us otherwise) But it (CC and even CS6) can
generate a fairly decent straightforward ePub that, in my experience,
does not actually require any further editing in an ePub editor --
especially if one takes advantage of the ability to attach a custom CSS
file to the output. And by fairly decent I mean an ePub that looks okay,
and, importantly, that passes the iBookstore tests, so it can be
submitted to the important ePub vendors as is.
You need to stop looking at Creative Cloud as a single static application. Honestly, if all you use is InDesign and primarily for print you could have stopped at CS3. If you want to expand you skills and realize that the chances of surviving on print alone are slim (and yes, I'm aware that there are exceptions) then Creative Cloud is a very promising product.
I've already started using apps I never would have explored if I had to buy them. Things like Muse, Edge Animate, and Lightroom.
Open your minds or stick with what you have because Adobe's not going to change their minds on this and I don't see anything other than single app or the whole thing being offered. Only possible exception might be bundling Lightroom and Photoshop.
Most of the core apps are very mature at this point. Adobe needed a way to enhance them in an evolutionary way rather than adding whizzbang features that demo well to sell new versions every 24 months. Ariel and Jongware, could you guys survive if your customers only called you every two years? How about every 6 years which is what a lot of Adobe "customers" were doing by skipping two versions.
Well, Bob, that's what the coming year is for: To see whether InDesign
really is a static app or not. If indeed during the course of the year,
nice things happen to InDesign that are only available on the cloud,
that would be a big incentive to continue with the subscription.
Meanwhile, though, I'm hedging my bets, and although I have InDesign CC,
I'm still creating starting all new projects in CS6 so that a choice
remains for me at the end of the year how I want to continue.
And I take your point about Adobe needing to make money for its
customers. However, every year there must be thousands of graphic
artists retiring, and thousands of graduates entering the market. That's
the natural, real market for the InDesign part of Adobe Inc. Anything
beyond that is kind of "hype". The truth could simply be that the
business of creating page-layout software is not huge. A turnover of 30
or 40 million a year (while big for some companies) is not good enough
for a company aspiring to be a major multi-national concern. So I guess
the businessmen running Adobe are working for the wrong company. And
that is why they are trying to take it places where it doesn't belong.
InDesign should not be forced to grow beyond its natural size or
purpose. If it is not profitable for Adobe to maintain, it should be
I think for a human being there can be a lot of satisfaction in running
a niche, successful business (page-layout software) that is known to be
best in its class, that makes a nice profit, that people respect for the
quality of its product, even if it doesn't make the owner filthy rich. I
do not get the impression that top management at Adobe share that
Think how Adobe and InDesign started: By offering top-notch
typographical control (a feature set which has been entire neglected),
by offering top-notch fonts for the aspiring desktop typographer, by
offering point-accurate measurement. These are all compelling features
for the specialist; not so much for the masses. It's that aura of niche
product for specialists that has been steadily eroding with each
subsequent release of InDesign.
Anyway, I don't think, Bob, you should tell people to "open their minds"
unless you're very sure their minds are closed, and that yours is indeed
open. To me it seems your mind is open to the extent that you're willing
to run the Creative Cloud app on your desktop and download software you
otherwise wouldn't have looked at. But on the other hand, to stick at
all costs to Adobe products and technology isn't the sign of an open
Personally, if print-publishing is truly dying, and it becomes necessary
to earn a living differently, I think the next port of call may well be
Microsoft's Visual Studio -- the .net framework, Windows 8 apps, and so
on. I've been spending a good amount of time recently getting to grips
with that, and the sense of potential and excitement I get from that
environment reminds me that something has been missing from the various
Adobe offerings for a while now.
I think you missed my point. Creative Cloud isn't about InDesign, it's about every tool you could possibly need and then some. If all you want is InDesign to do print then stick with CS6.
It's not a question of what I "want". It's a question of where the
business is: right now, despite the hype, it's 90% print production. At
$30 a month, I've got nothing to lose by subscribing to the Creative
Cloud. If the price goes up, and/or Adobe continue to neglect InDesign,
then of course I will stop subscribing. And so as not to be stuck at
that stage, I'm still using CS6 for new projects that don't require the
new CC features (what were they again?) so that if/when my subscription
runs out, I'll still have access to my projects with the CS6 permanent
And if reality ever catches up to the hype, and it becomes no longer
possible to earn a living from print-production, and a career change is
called for, there are plenty of non-print design related avenues out
there. When it comes to print, Adobe is king. But when it comes to
non-print design, my mind is sufficiently open to look beyond Adobe's
new, and in many cases half-baked Creative Cloud offerings. In
particular, Microsoft has some excellent cutting-edge technology that
very much suits my designer/programmer tendencies and which far outrank
By the way, this shouldn't be taken as sour grapes. I'm grateful to
Adobe for producing fine tools for print-production (ID, Illustrator,
Photoshop) which have made work easier and more pleasant over the past
But if print is out, so is Adobe (that's my prediction: Adobe is PDF,
postscript, fonts, CMYK, color profiles – that's where Adobe has left
its mark and if that goes, Adobe goes [Flash was Macromedia, and is
dying out]). That's why I also want to learn about non-Adobe trends at
this time and not, close-mindedly, stick exclusively to Adobe products.
I agree about the "new features". Instead of improving crucial things like the footnotes, they concetrate on features that are of little or no use. How weird is that...
One person's "crucial thing" is another person's frivolity. I never use footnotes in my work but I understand that many do, and I support improvements that are long in coming. I'd rather have the improvements in creating EPUB files. It's always like that....
I like Steve's comment about one person's crucial thing versus fluff. I never had any use for QR codes before CC. Didn't care and thought they were a total waste of engineering resources for CC. However, after listening to the Adobe Product Manager and going to a conference on the future of Print Publishing I have made a 180° turn. Read this blog post I wrote: http://indesigndigitalpublishing.com/2013/08/05/paper-to-qr-codes/ It shows how QR codes have been used to add multimedia videos to a PRINT, PAPER book. Yes, little movies playing as part of pages in my book. And I could not have been able to do over 150 QR codes in the book, and in a custom color, if I had to have gone to some web page or external QR creator. I also have an article coming out in the next issue of InDesign Magazine. Read it and you'll see that QR codes are hardly trivial.
I agree too. Footnotes are important to me, epub features to you and QR codes for Sandee Cohen. But choosing to “improve” the UI (make it dark) I think is the least important when there are other a lot more important features to improve or add. Maybe making the UI dark involves much less code than the other features…
I don't care about the dark UI, either, but a LOT of users were clamoring for it.
The UI was a secondary effect of the complete re-write of the
application. I don't think many people realize exactly what went into
this version of ID as far as getting it up to 64 bit on Windows and Mac
and decarbonizing it.
That's the reason there are so few new features, at this point. I
realize some are having issues with it, but I can tell you that on my
machines (Win 8 64bit and Mac 10.8.4) CC is noticeably faster than CS6
and I've switched to it full time.
You are right. Making it a 64bit application was a big step, and I suppose it can only get even better. Let's cut it some slack because overall we all agree that it is a marvelous application.
The dark UI was not a frivolous change.
The UI change was necessary, repeat NECESSARY, for the program to look good for retina display Macs. The widget and doodads had to be redrawn.
I don't give a hoot about retina display Macs but for those that have them not having a program that works with the retina display makes it look horribly out of date.
The dark UI was important to make ID conform to Photoshop. Photoshop went for a dark UI because Premiere had it. People liked the idea that the interface was dark and the artwork or video stood out. This resembled the look of a video studio where everything is dark except for the video.
The dark UI required four sets of icons. There were over 4,ooo. That's a lot of work.
I disagree that ID users should use the dark interface. Having the page pop out against a dark interface hurts my eyes. I look over at the panels and my iris opens up to see the dark controls. When I switch to the large page it hurts until the iris adjusts.
Photoshop and Premiere users seem to keep their eyes on the art, not the interface. We don't.
But many ID users want it because the dark UI says cool, new, modern.
So ID changed to look like PSD, PSD change to look like Premiere. Premiere changed to look like a studio.
Yup this is just awfull - i copy and paste text and it takes an age - why ??? the whole programme is clumpy its like going back 5 years - get it sorted Adobe - it shouldnt have been released - iam on top notch equipment and its almost unuseable its costing me time and money ... iam going to reinstall cs6 and run this till they have created a product that works... as this clearly does not ... unhappy:(