3 ms·

Autodesk have jumped the shark with their recent cloud pricing options. New users will be priced out of the software, and will use anything else other than the

Autodesk have jumped the shark with their recent cloud pricing options. New users will be priced out of the software, and will use anything else other than the Autodesk family of products. This may take a generation, but Autodesk have made a conscious decision to be less and less relevant over the next decade or so. Adobe are on the same path, but not quite so aggressively. They may still see the writing on the wall and back out before they become history.

semi-extrinsic 4y ago
Yeah, I don't understand how these firms (especially Adobe) are so completely oblivious to what actually made them successful. One of the main reasons Photoshop and Illustrator became widely used, is that every eleven-year-old with an interest in design or photo editing would torrent these products and learn the workflows inside out. Autodesk seems to have somewhat figured this out, with Fusion360 having a free hobbyist license for instance.
- rjh29 4y ago
  The subscription model for Adobe actually makes photoshop more affordable for students than before, though. (Even if they pay more in the end)
  - dghlsakjg 4y ago
    1. Students didn’t upgrade every version. So the cost was amortized over many years. 2. The above point is moot because I, and every student I knew, used a school copy on a lab computer or… obtained a copy without paying
    - rjh29 4y ago
      Photoshop CS6 is $700 ($1000 Extended), subscription is $10/month including Lightroom. So you'd need a lot of 'amortization' to make the standalone version a better choice. I think your second point is moot personally, forcing students to break the law to obtain Photoshop is not a solution. I don't like subscriptions personally, but most people do not care and it has definitely made Photoshop more affordable for the average person. This is reflected in Adobe' stock price.
  - KerrAvon 4y ago
    I’m certain this is what Adobe marketing managers tell themselves so they can sleep better at night.
- alexashka 4y ago
  They're not oblivious, at all. The switch to subscriptions has been a giant success for Adobe. Their stock went from hovering around 30$ for a decade from 2000 to 2011-2012, to skyrocketing every year since they introduced the subscription model (in 2011-2012), now being at roughly 450$. Anyone who doesn't think that's a giant success is living in an alternate reality.
  - salt-thrower 4y ago
    As usual, it’s success at the cost of increased user hostility. The company doesn’t care, because increasing the stock price is the only thing that matters to them, their board, and their shareholders. But it does make the lives of users worse. Companies get locked into licensing fees, students are put under ever increasing financial pressure. It’s just another example of “only stock price matters, we don’t care if users like us.” It’s a wild success if you own Adobe stock, and feels exploitative if you don’t.
    - alexashka 4y ago
      You realize the stock price is a reflection of people... paying for Adobe's services? It's a free market - go and use competing products that 'care'. Or if none of them 'care', maybe the problem is human nature, at which point, feel free to shake your fist at the sky and converse with whatever God figures you think are in charge :)
      - KerrAvon 4y ago
        You’re missing the broader point of this thread — no one is denying Adobe etc are currently financially successful. They are predicting that, in time, the way they are becoming financially successful will eventually cause a significant decrease in their success. Put another way: if I was a 15 year old just starting out, Adobe and AutoCAD would have nothing for me, and therefore I would start using other products out of necessity. Apple got one thing right from the very start back in the late 1970’s: hooking the kids early was important. They are your future users.
    - 4y ago

semi-extrinsic 4y ago

Yeah, I don't understand how these firms (especially Adobe) are so completely oblivious to what actually made them successful. One of the main reasons Photoshop and Illustrator became widely used, is that every eleven-year-old with an interest in design or photo editing would torrent these products and learn the workflows inside out. Autodesk seems to have somewhat figured this out, with Fusion360 having a free hobbyist license for instance.

rjh29 4y ago
The subscription model for Adobe actually makes photoshop more affordable for students than before, though. (Even if they pay more in the end)
- dghlsakjg 4y ago
  1. Students didn’t upgrade every version. So the cost was amortized over many years. 2. The above point is moot because I, and every student I knew, used a school copy on a lab computer or… obtained a copy without paying
  - rjh29 4y ago
    Photoshop CS6 is $700 ($1000 Extended), subscription is $10/month including Lightroom. So you'd need a lot of 'amortization' to make the standalone version a better choice. I think your second point is moot personally, forcing students to break the law to obtain Photoshop is not a solution. I don't like subscriptions personally, but most people do not care and it has definitely made Photoshop more affordable for the average person. This is reflected in Adobe' stock price.
- KerrAvon 4y ago
  I’m certain this is what Adobe marketing managers tell themselves so they can sleep better at night.
alexashka 4y ago
They're not oblivious, at all. The switch to subscriptions has been a giant success for Adobe. Their stock went from hovering around 30$ for a decade from 2000 to 2011-2012, to skyrocketing every year since they introduced the subscription model (in 2011-2012), now being at roughly 450$. Anyone who doesn't think that's a giant success is living in an alternate reality.
- salt-thrower 4y ago
  As usual, it’s success at the cost of increased user hostility. The company doesn’t care, because increasing the stock price is the only thing that matters to them, their board, and their shareholders. But it does make the lives of users worse. Companies get locked into licensing fees, students are put under ever increasing financial pressure. It’s just another example of “only stock price matters, we don’t care if users like us.” It’s a wild success if you own Adobe stock, and feels exploitative if you don’t.
  - alexashka 4y ago
    You realize the stock price is a reflection of people... paying for Adobe's services? It's a free market - go and use competing products that 'care'. Or if none of them 'care', maybe the problem is human nature, at which point, feel free to shake your fist at the sky and converse with whatever God figures you think are in charge :)
    - KerrAvon 4y ago
      You’re missing the broader point of this thread — no one is denying Adobe etc are currently financially successful. They are predicting that, in time, the way they are becoming financially successful will eventually cause a significant decrease in their success. Put another way: if I was a 15 year old just starting out, Adobe and AutoCAD would have nothing for me, and therefore I would start using other products out of necessity. Apple got one thing right from the very start back in the late 1970’s: hooking the kids early was important. They are your future users.
  - 4y ago