Does CC subscription increase or decrease motivation for innovation by Adobe?

[l_d_allan]

My (perhaps contrarian) view is that there's a ton left to do for photographers, in Ps, ACR, and Lr.  Even without looking at any type of social networking, online collaboration, or mobile efforts.  While I unfortunately can't guarantee anything about product pricing, one thing I can guarantee is that the ACR task list is extremely long ... 

This is GREAT to hear. Actually, I've been impressed by the innovation in ProcessVersions, going from PV2003 to PV2010 to PV2012. Those have been real, meaningful improvements, particularly for LR and ACR. Perhaps not so much for PS itself.

I'm looking forward to PV2020 (as in 20/20 vision?) in 6 to 7+ years.

[Steve House]

Let me add something to that. The perpetual software licensing model and how revenue is usually recognized can discourage developers from releasing incremental improvements after a product has shipped to customers. In addition, the "plumbing" for Creative Cloud (and in particular the Creative Cloud application that's installed locally) makes it really easy to deliver updates to the Creative Cloud software installed on your computer.

So my belief is that there's more motivation for innovation with Creative Cloud.

It may well be easier to deliver updates with a subscription model but developing those updates costs money - big money - and unless they either generate incremental cash-flow that would otherwise not have been realized or prevent customers from leaving for the competition, why would they spend it?

[daws]

My first reaction when CC was announced is unprintable.

My second reaction was that Adobe engineers and developers who are not in the company's top tier of stars had best update their CVs, and that those seeking to join Adobe should look elsewhere -- Adobe's Age of Innovation as the driver of sales is winding down, if not essentially over, and is being replaced by the Age of Marketing.

[hjulenissen]

I would also assume that there is a lot left to innovate in terms of real-world usable photography stuff. Not only magic sharpening or denoising etc, but workflow, efficiency, user interface. How to make more photographers able to achieve better results with less time invested. I positive to any innovation that does not include the words "cloud" or "social".

Now, can Adobe deliver those innovations to market? Will the CC model inspire more or less innovation from Adobe? I would be a lot more comfortable if there were at least one more player operating in the same league as Adobe.

-h

[Fine_Art]

Both models have problems.

The traditional perpetual license had companies churning software with new gimmicks never bothering to get it working well. It led to bloat and bugs. People that wanted new gimmicks were all over it even when it did not improve their output much.

The rental (annuity) model encourages getting the software right first as most revenue going forward is from existing customers. It is the base for low tech support costs. It stifles innovation for the same reason, customers are just cows to milk.

If you are a pro user you should prefer the latter if the software does what you need. It should just work removing problems you have to deal with. If you are a rare or occasional user you prefer the traditional model where you just buy once what you want to use.

As a customer I would prefer Adobe to rewrite PS capability into a small tight package. Roll that into LR then I would buy it. Accept PS is mature, release those resources to do constructive work in the economy rather that keeping them locked in an attempt to add more bells and whistles. More revenue should come from new products.

[madmanchan]

I agree, but my point -- to address the original question -- is that the incentive to make progress on the task list is reduced if it is not going to generate additional revenue, which it won't under the rental model.

I don't agree.  Adobe's new incentive under the CC model is to keep users subscribed (as opposed to purchasing upgrades).  These sound related but they're a bit different.  Keeping users subscribed is best done by keeping users happy, which means listening to the users and working on the features that will really make a difference in their day-to-day use of the product (i.e., identifying and fixing common pain points, improving rendering performance, refining existing tools -- not just building brand new tools, polishing things, etc.).  This is a rather different view of improving the product, compared to developing whizzy "headline" features that are intended to drive upgrades. 

Btw, Thomas elaborates on this distinction in the video interview that Michael recently posted. 

As an example, Camera Raw 8.2 (scheduled for release any day now) will have some minor refinements compared to Camera Raw 8.1, all of which originated as feature requests from users in this forum and elsewhere: a feather control to soften the blending for the spot tool, improved low-frequency noise reduction (color blobs), improved auto exposure, an improved white balance tool, the ability to create presets for batch-saving images, and a couple of other things.  None of these items are great innovations, nor would they make a top-ten list of features for driving an upgrade.  But they are (I contend) useful little features that do make a difference in the day-to-day use of ACR by photographers. 

This is the sort of stuff that I feel we (engineers on the ACR team) have an incentive to deliver on an ongoing basis. 

[Tim Lookingbill]

Keeping users subscribed is best done by keeping users happy, which means listening to the users and working on the features that will really make a difference in their day-to-day use of the product (i.e., identifying and fixing common pain points, improving rendering performance, refining existing tools -- not just building brand new tools, polishing things, etc.).

This sounds like you're suggesting individual attention will be given to each user's specific problem for their own system. If so, I take it when one of these pain points are addressed to Adobe engineers the response is not going to be..."We're not experiencing your problem on our system" or "We can't duplicate the problem on our system" as it has been in the past.

Yes, that is a different approach but it does sound too good to be true or maybe the limits to this haven't been specifically lined out in this thread because that level of attention sounds like a lot of work for program engineers to tackle.

[jjj]

I don't agree.  Adobe's new incentive under the CC model is to keep users subscribed (as opposed to purchasing upgrades).  These sound related but they're a bit different.  Keeping users subscribed is best done by keeping users happy, which means listening to the users and working on the features that will really make a difference in their day-to-day use of the product (i.e., identifying and fixing common pain points, improving rendering performance, refining existing tools -- not just building brand new tools, polishing things, etc.).  This is a rather different view of improving the product, compared to developing whizzy "headline" features that are intended to drive upgrades. 

This is the sort of stuff that I feel we (engineers on the ACR team) have an incentive to deliver on an ongoing basis. 

That's a good thing as it's the little niggles [as dealt with by the JDI initiative that John Nack pushed for PS in recent years] that probably makes the most improvement to the day to day drudgery of working with software. For example one of the new features just announced in Premiere CC is the fact  that "Transitions can be pasted to multiple edit points", something that shamefully should have been in the very first iteration of the software. Not to mention the "Link and Locate Media" which again is such a basic necessity, it again baffles me that it was missing. These sorts of tweaks are far more important than the fancy headline grabbing features used to sell a new upgrade as in day to day use they will save soooooo much time. So if subscription means more of the basics get improved, then subscription has an advantage over 24 month release cycles. One that has not been pushed in all the fancy marketing as I far as I know.

[digitaldog]

If so, I take it when one of these pain points are addressed to Adobe engineers the response is not going to be..."We're not experiencing your problem on our system" or "We can't duplicate the problem on our system" as it has been in the past.

As someone that's done beta since Photoshop 2.5, that is still and always will be a possibility. It isn't because Adobe doesn't want to find a fix, our systems are complex and differ and what may affect you might not be an issue with nearly anyone else. So the remark, with the implication that Adobe shrinks from finding and fixing bugs doesn't really wash. If they can identify an issue, they will fix it if they can.

Since the introduction of the CC subscription, the mindset of some who are not happy with it and how they suggest Adobe behaves is nothing short of the torch and pitchfork crowd. Unnecessary.

[madmanchan]

This sounds like you're suggesting individual attention will be given to each user's specific problem for their own system. If so, I take it when one of these pain points are addressed to Adobe engineers the response is not going to be..."We're not experiencing your problem on our system" or "We can't duplicate the problem on our system" as it has been in the past.

No, what I'm really talking about here are smaller features and refinements.  I gave the above list of items for Camera Raw 8.2 as an example.  That's quite a lot of new stuff in a reasonably short amount of time (a few weeks).  None of it is going to knock anybody's socks off, but I believe photographers will find them useful nonetheless. 

[Rand47]

No, what I'm really talking about here are smaller features and refinements.  I gave the above list of items for Camera Raw 8.2 as an example.  That's quite a lot of new stuff in a reasonably short amount of time (a few weeks).  None of it is going to knock anybody's socks off, but I believe photographers will find them useful nonetheless. 

Eric,

Thanks for your insight/perspective.  The suspicion & cynicism must get a bit tedious.
I'd much rather have continuous refinement/improvement of robust tools than "new stuff for new stuff's sake."
Your efforts on all our behalf are appreciated. I'm not much worried that you and your colleagues are going to just kick back now that you've trapped me into CC.     Good grief!  LOL

Rand

[Tim Lookingbill]

It isn't because Adobe doesn't want to find a fix,

Could you possibly stop misinterpreting my line of questioning for specifics as some kind of finger pointing at Adobe?

Any good lawyer would be asking what Eric meant about helping users with their problems/requested feature adjustments (that appears a la carte) with the software that I don't think is written anywhere in the subscription plan EULA or is it?

Or to put it another way are the customer service promises Eric points out with the subscription plan included as part of the deal in writing anywhere and where can one find this?

How long would it take for the kinds of services to be added and to later be downloaded off the cloud to the existing subscription version of the software? Will it take months? Weeks? Days?

And Rand47 keep the back slapping up. It really adds to the discussion.

[Oldfox]

the ACR task list is extremely long ... 

Maybe you could open up the list? 2014? 2015?

[Martin Kristiansen]

Downloaded the first incremental upgrade to PS CC since I began my subscription about 6 weeks back.

Nothing dramatic but the enhancements to the pen tool are really useful and since I do a lot of work with the pen tool Im pleased with that.

Seems the improvements will continue to roll out.

[digitaldog]

Could you possibly stop misinterpreting my line of questioning for specifics as some kind of finger pointing at Adobe?

No. You start your silly line of question councilor by writing:

This sounds like you're suggesting...

Then you go on to make up some silly leading argument about some user problem that some theoretical Adobe (tech support?) employee suggests as being non-reproducible on their system and blows you off. Classic suspicion & cynicism as Rand points out.

Any good lawyer would be asking what Eric meant about helping users with their problems/requested feature adjustments

Doesn't appear you're a good lawyer either in real life or one on TV.
You are entitled to silly opinions without basis and I'm entitled to call you out on them. IF you have a concrete question for an Adobe engineer about what he wrote, ask it. Trying to read between the lines (poorly) isn't helpful to anyone here and you'd be far better off conversing with Eric in a more straight forward, adult fashion. He's here to help.

[madmanchan]

Maybe you could open up the list? 2014? 2015?

Hi Oldfox,

I'm not exactly sure what you mean here ... but my interpretation is, "How long would it take you / your team to finish the list?"  I would say about 3 to 5 years.  Does that mean in 3 to 5 years there will be nothing left to add?  I don't think so.  A few years ago I thought ACR was already pretty mature and someone asked how long my task list was, and I also said "about 3 years worth."  I think it goes to show there's always more to add, and I by "more" I mean actually useful stuff, rather than useless filler stuff.

Advances in some areas often open up opportunities in other areas, which is why things keep getting added to the list.

[digitaldog]

Nothing dramatic but the enhancements to the pen tool are really useful and since I do a lot of work with the pen tool Im pleased with that.

The new Adobe generator is also pretty cool. But I'll be accused of being a fanboy even if it's a feature I would use on my multiple layered doc's I place in InDesign that I use to swap out covers of books. It isn't dramatic but will save me some time in organizing the multiple image layers I need to 'extract'.

[JimGoshorn]

What changes to the pen tool? I don't recall reading anything about that.

Jim

[digitaldog]

What changes to the pen tool? I don't recall reading anything about that.

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/path_direct_selection_tool_selecting_multiple_paths_on_drag_select

This is actually a new feature in Photoshop CC that allows you to select and edit multiple paths across layers. You can also select and edit multiple paths in the Paths panel.

You can limit which layers are selected when you drag on the canvas by using isolation mode:

-To isolate a single shape, double-click on that shape on canvas with the Path Selection tool.
-To isolate multiple layers (including non-shape layers), select the layers in the Layers panel, right-click on the image with the Path Selection tool, and choose Isolate Layers.
-To exit isolation mode, double-click on the image with the Path Selection tool again.

When you are in isolation mode, the vector selection tools will only select paths from the isolated layers.

[Martin Kristiansen]

When you place an anchor point and perhaps have it a couple of pixels off you can now press the space bar and move the point into place on the fly. I used to nudge it into place with the arrow keys. When you are constructing a lot of complex paths every little thing speeds up the process and helps make it more accurate.