4 ms·

Quark wasn't subscription and it fell down the "Who cares about OS X anyway" hole. Adobe saw that, and smashed indesign onto the market.

• coldtea 12y ago
  I'm not strickly talking about subscription vs no subscription. I think the key distinction, which is common in Quark of old and Adobe's subscription model, is "having the customers by the balls". And the problem I'm reffering to with Quark was not the "Who cares about OS X anyway". It was about arrogant and complacent company, not caring about its customers in general, even in the platforms it did support.
  • 1stop 12y ago
    Adobe have picked up the pace massively since CC. I'd call it the opposite of complacency. I work heavily in most of their products (the entire Adobe suite), and the amount of features they are releasing and the speed at which they are doing it, is amazing given their size. If you focus on one product (like lightroom, which is a minor product at best) then sure, it doesn't look like much, but take a look at Edge, InDesign, Flash, etc, and there is a lot of improvements taking place. How are they not caring?
    • coldtea 12y ago
      >Adobe have picked up the pace massively since CC. Yes, but it's also the opening stage of this. They would risk a backlash if they started their CC-only period as complacent. After all CS6 still works atm. A few years down the road though? After all Quark was also innovating and caring at first.
      • calinet6 12y ago
        I'm not seeing it. What I do see is an organizational change. I can't agree with the argument for the gloom and doom.