Why we're just outright reporting an Adobe release here, I'll never know.
Creative Suite and Mac users have a longstanding relationship. Virtually all publishing and imaging work is done on Macs so there are lots of AI users who are very interested in Creative Suite. I am because I use their products everyday and make a lot of money doing so. Sure there are other tools that do similar stuff but if you have to collaborate with other professional media people you have to use the current version. As soon as someone upgrades their suite and shares the files, there are often incompatibilities because of new features, plugins etc. Instead of emailing the person back and saying can you please export that file as an older version for me, you just go out and upgrade. As others have said, it's part of being in business.
Glad it works out for you. I read an interesting article here on the 'Adobe Tax'. One thing that popped: Dreamweaver, quote "A particularly gruesome example is Dreamweaver CS6. This tired old app is receiving its third or fourth bogus “update” in a row from Adobe, for which they would happily exact a $250 upgrade fee from Dreamweaver CS5 users! It appears that for CS6, Adobe has grafted on a few spotty self-serving features (integration with other pay services they offer like Business Catalyst and PhoneGap) without addressing any fundamentals of the app. Indeed, one of their “top new features” is that they’ve updated Live View to so it “uses the latest version of the WebKit rendering engine to provide the ultimate in HTML5 support”. Hilarious! It’s pretty clear they have no interest in updating Dreamweaver’s ancient and obsolete “Design view” or repairing all the broken features and ugliness of the core app. Indeed, all the changes they’ve implemented appear carefully restricted to peripheral aspects of the software that are probably themselves plugins. The fact is there’s nothing new in Dreamweaver CS6 anybody should be paying money for. Rather, Dreamweaver CS6 ought be a free upgrade to existing Dreamweaver licensers, accompanied by an apology."
If you rely on the design view in Dreamweaver, you are not building very complex sites anyway so it should work just fine. Most modern sites are relying on conditional code, database queries, browser detection, dynamic CMS, cookies, and php, or some other scripting language none of which display in the design view or the local browser. As a code editor Dreamweaver is pretty good and it also does a decent job of ftp and collecting dependent files. I agree the new features are pretty useless and is not worth upgrading but it is part of the suite. That is the main problem with CS, the idea of having a suite where all the apps are upgraded at the same time, some more than others. It is aggravating, but it is still a better price than buying the apps you need by themselves even if you are not even using half of the other stuff that is included.
yeah... 'cause everyone wants a cookie-cutter website done in WordPress....
Here's a paradox... I use Dreamweaver to create Wordpress sites! Whoa!
Dreamweaver at its core is a text editor. But it has other great features beyond vanilla text editing.
But to your point... I don't know which is worse: cookie-cutter Wordpress sites... or poorly-designed sites slapped together in Dreamweaver "Design View"
Like "techno" was hinting at above... there's more to a website than which tools were used to create it.
So they pay some marketing firm several $ million to find out they can make more money screwing customers and charging them monthly fees....why not just make it more affordable so more people will use their products and then make more money by having access to a larger customer base? Typical business bull___...
Are you mad that Adobe charges what they think their software is worth... or are you mad that no other company can make cheaper software that works as well as Adobe's professional software?
Just think... if Pixelmator had all the features of Photoshop... they wouldn't be charging $30 for it.
Adobe does offer Photoshop Elements for the price-conscious consumer.
If you have a couple employees... and you're using Adobe's software... you're probably making some money, right?
Like someone said earlier... these are tools of the trade.
The nice thing is... Creative Cloud comes out to $600 a year.
I made $500 in one night videoing a dance recital... then spent another night cutting it together and authoring a DVD using Adobe's tools.
So for me... two evenings plus a couple more hours duplicating and printing those DVDs... and I could have almost paid for Creative Cloud for the rest of the year.
In other words... a few nights work can pay for a year of software. That's how you need to approach "expensive" professional software like this. If you're not making money with Adobe's tools... you probably don't need them. They still offer Elements.
I think the pricing of Creative Cloud will bring even more customers to Adobe.
It's not expensive if you rely on these tools.
Photoshop alone, FYI, the only Adobe App I have any use for - and use frequently for creative, non-commercial purposes (and have invested 15 years in learning including multiple workshops and books) - is $699. And no, "Elements" and other products I'm aware of in that price range won't cut it, though I probably only use 15-20% of the PS tool set..
We're discussing whether the suite is expensive here with no reference to Adobe's gross or final margins - and if anyone's noticed, I am pro-entrepreneur, pro-profit and pro-open markets, so that's their business - if it's excessive they will gradually cut themselves off from a good portion of their potential base and at least open the door for a competitor who can begin to eat their lunch in the mid-range space, e.g., between $150-300, at least if they nailed the tool set, capability, etc. Maybe a company like Pixelmator can develop enough of a base to gradually add their own extended version. (Or maybe if I bought it I might discover it's enough for me at $30, since I don't buy every latest version of PS since in fact I tend to skip two versions).
However, the the Teacher and Student Extended Edition is $249 on Amazon - though I'm uncertain as to WHAT "verification is required after purchase." But the site notes about the product describe it as follows:
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the difference between Photoshop CS6 Extended and Photoshop CS6?
A: Photoshop CS6 Extended delivers all the unrivaled image editing power of Photoshop CS6 plus tools for creating and editing 3D images and performing quantitative image analysis.
Meanwhile, the.educational edition of Lightroom is $76.
If you earn your living using this suite of products, they are tools of the trade. It's part of the cost of doing business. Each update provides more tools, more resources and greater capabilities. These resources help me do my job better and faster. I'm happy to pay for them.
and more fresher bugs to learn and loathe. I'd love to know which new features they added to Flash Professional aside from publishing to the latest and yet already out of date 11.2 runtime. I know in each iteration they add the ability to break compatibility with older CS flash files. Maybe that's a feature.
Photoshop alone, FYI, the only Adobe App I have any use for - and use frequently for creative, non-commercial purposes (and have invested 15 years in learning including multiple workshops and books) - is $699. And no, "Elements" and other products I'm aware of in that price range won't cut it, though I probably only use 15-20% of the PS tool set..
We're discussing whether the suite is expensive here with no reference to Adobe's gross or final margins - and if anyone's noticed, I am pro-entrepreneur, pro-profit and pro-open markets, so that's their business - if it's excessive they will gradually cut themselves off from a good portion of their potential base and at least open the door for a competitor who can begin to eat their lunch in the mid-range space, e.g., between $150-300, at least if they nailed the tool set, capability, etc. Maybe a company like Pixelmator can develop enough of a base to gradually add their own extended version. (Or maybe if I bought it I might discover it's enough for me at $30, since I don't buy every latest version of PS since in fact I tend to skip two versions).
Who are we to say Adobe charges too much for their products? Photoshop has been $700 for decades. If you're a TWiT listener... a running joke is saying something costs an "Alex" ($700, the price of Photoshop)
Nobody has challenged Adobe yet. There are plenty of cheaper software packages... but they aren't a good replacement for Adobe's offerings.
I just looked up Adobe's financials... they had over $4 billion in revenue last year... and a profit of over $800 million.
It's not a "free market", it's a monopoly market with network effects, so they charge whatever they want and customers have no choice but to pay it if they are doing graphics work.
Partially true. There are other image editing apps, but nothing comes close to Photoshop or Illustrator. Flash is far and away better than it's competitors, but it does have competitors (Silverlight, JavaFX((lol)), and to a degree HTML5). None of them really offer the abilities Flash does. But, it is still a free market, and if Adobe thinks it can charge these prices and make more money doing so, it's up to the market to tell them otherwise. I don't see a ton of people opting out of this considering how much of an upgrade photoshop is despite the wallet raping you'll get for all the untouched applications in this "suite"
Adobe Cash-in Suite 6. This year we made the background dark grey and made our own cloud service that will be ready later. Now open your wallet.
You forgot:
"We also changed the interface text back to upper & lowercase and reinstated the ability to click a pane title to collapse it in InDesign! Sure, we removed these features in CS5, but we know what we're doing!"
If you rely on the design view in Dreamweaver, you are not building very complex sites anyway so it should work just fine. Most modern sites are relying on conditional code, database queries, browser detection, dynamic CMS, cookies, and php, or some other scripting language none of which display in the design view or the local browser. As a code editor Dreamweaver is pretty good and it also does a decent job of ftp and collecting dependent files. I agree the new features are pretty useless and is not worth upgrading but it is part of the suite. That is the main problem with CS, the idea of having a suite where all the apps are upgraded at the same time, some more than others. It is aggravating, but it is still a better price than buying the apps you need by themselves even if you are not even using half of the other stuff that is included.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
I see this thread has brought the Adobe shills out in force. Well, it's not the first time they have been so obviously active.
Normally it's only in the Flash threads where they're hopelessly trying to defend it against its shortcomings and removal from devices.
Why we're just outright reporting an Adobe release here, I'll never know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Why we're just outright reporting an Adobe release here, I'll never know.
Creative Suite and Mac users have a longstanding relationship. Virtually all publishing and imaging work is done on Macs so there are lots of AI users who are very interested in Creative Suite. I am because I use their products everyday and make a lot of money doing so. Sure there are other tools that do similar stuff but if you have to collaborate with other professional media people you have to use the current version. As soon as someone upgrades their suite and shares the files, there are often incompatibilities because of new features, plugins etc. Instead of emailing the person back and saying can you please export that file as an older version for me, you just go out and upgrade. As others have said, it's part of being in business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Glad it works out for you. I read an interesting article here on the 'Adobe Tax'. One thing that popped: Dreamweaver, quote "A particularly gruesome example is Dreamweaver CS6. This tired old app is receiving its third or fourth bogus “update” in a row from Adobe, for which they would happily exact a $250 upgrade fee from Dreamweaver CS5 users! It appears that for CS6, Adobe has grafted on a few spotty self-serving features (integration with other pay services they offer like Business Catalyst and PhoneGap) without addressing any fundamentals of the app. Indeed, one of their “top new features” is that they’ve updated Live View to so it “uses the latest version of the WebKit rendering engine to provide the ultimate in HTML5 support”. Hilarious! It’s pretty clear they have no interest in updating Dreamweaver’s ancient and obsolete “Design view” or repairing all the broken features and ugliness of the core app. Indeed, all the changes they’ve implemented appear carefully restricted to peripheral aspects of the software that are probably themselves plugins. The fact is there’s nothing new in Dreamweaver CS6 anybody should be paying money for. Rather, Dreamweaver CS6 ought be a free upgrade to existing Dreamweaver licensers, accompanied by an apology."
If you rely on the design view in Dreamweaver, you are not building very complex sites anyway so it should work just fine. Most modern sites are relying on conditional code, database queries, browser detection, dynamic CMS, cookies, and php, or some other scripting language none of which display in the design view or the local browser. As a code editor Dreamweaver is pretty good and it also does a decent job of ftp and collecting dependent files. I agree the new features are pretty useless and is not worth upgrading but it is part of the suite. That is the main problem with CS, the idea of having a suite where all the apps are upgraded at the same time, some more than others. It is aggravating, but it is still a better price than buying the apps you need by themselves even if you are not even using half of the other stuff that is included.
Yes, many do. The traditional static website is a thing of the past.
A website can be boring regardless of the technology that drives it.
But I was really talking about Drupal and not Wordpress.
Adobe Cash-in Suite 6. This year we made the background dark grey and made our own cloud service that will be ready later. Now open your wallet.
Here's a paradox... I use Dreamweaver to create Wordpress sites! Whoa!
Dreamweaver at its core is a text editor. But it has other great features beyond vanilla text editing.
But to your point... I don't know which is worse: cookie-cutter Wordpress sites... or poorly-designed sites slapped together in Dreamweaver "Design View"
Like "techno" was hinting at above... there's more to a website than which tools were used to create it.
Are you mad that Adobe charges what they think their software is worth... or are you mad that no other company can make cheaper software that works as well as Adobe's professional software?
Just think... if Pixelmator had all the features of Photoshop... they wouldn't be charging $30 for it.
Adobe does offer Photoshop Elements for the price-conscious consumer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
If you have a couple employees... and you're using Adobe's software... you're probably making some money, right?
Like someone said earlier... these are tools of the trade.
The nice thing is... Creative Cloud comes out to $600 a year.
I made $500 in one night videoing a dance recital... then spent another night cutting it together and authoring a DVD using Adobe's tools.
So for me... two evenings plus a couple more hours duplicating and printing those DVDs... and I could have almost paid for Creative Cloud for the rest of the year.
In other words... a few nights work can pay for a year of software. That's how you need to approach "expensive" professional software like this. If you're not making money with Adobe's tools... you probably don't need them. They still offer Elements.
I think the pricing of Creative Cloud will bring even more customers to Adobe.
It's not expensive if you rely on these tools.
Photoshop alone, FYI, the only Adobe App I have any use for - and use frequently for creative, non-commercial purposes (and have invested 15 years in learning including multiple workshops and books) - is $699. And no, "Elements" and other products I'm aware of in that price range won't cut it, though I probably only use 15-20% of the PS tool set..
We're discussing whether the suite is expensive here with no reference to Adobe's gross or final margins - and if anyone's noticed, I am pro-entrepreneur, pro-profit and pro-open markets, so that's their business - if it's excessive they will gradually cut themselves off from a good portion of their potential base and at least open the door for a competitor who can begin to eat their lunch in the mid-range space, e.g., between $150-300, at least if they nailed the tool set, capability, etc. Maybe a company like Pixelmator can develop enough of a base to gradually add their own extended version. (Or maybe if I bought it I might discover it's enough for me at $30, since I don't buy every latest version of PS since in fact I tend to skip two versions).
However, the the Teacher and Student Extended Edition is $249 on Amazon - though I'm uncertain as to WHAT "verification is required after purchase." But the site notes about the product describe it as follows:
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the difference between Photoshop CS6 Extended and Photoshop CS6?
A: Photoshop CS6 Extended delivers all the unrivaled image editing power of Photoshop CS6 plus tools for creating and editing 3D images and performing quantitative image analysis.
Meanwhile, the.educational edition of Lightroom is $76.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpf1952
If you earn your living using this suite of products, they are tools of the trade. It's part of the cost of doing business. Each update provides more tools, more resources and greater capabilities. These resources help me do my job better and faster. I'm happy to pay for them.
and more fresher bugs to learn and loathe. I'd love to know which new features they added to Flash Professional aside from publishing to the latest and yet already out of date 11.2 runtime. I know in each iteration they add the ability to break compatibility with older CS flash files. Maybe that's a feature.
Who are we to say Adobe charges too much for their products? Photoshop has been $700 for decades. If you're a TWiT listener... a running joke is saying something costs an "Alex" ($700, the price of Photoshop)
Nobody has challenged Adobe yet. There are plenty of cheaper software packages... but they aren't a good replacement for Adobe's offerings.
I just looked up Adobe's financials... they had over $4 billion in revenue last year... and a profit of over $800 million.
Do we now demand they lower their prices?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
It's not a "free market", it's a monopoly market with network effects, so they charge whatever they want and customers have no choice but to pay it if they are doing graphics work.
Partially true. There are other image editing apps, but nothing comes close to Photoshop or Illustrator. Flash is far and away better than it's competitors, but it does have competitors (Silverlight, JavaFX((lol)), and to a degree HTML5). None of them really offer the abilities Flash does. But, it is still a free market, and if Adobe thinks it can charge these prices and make more money doing so, it's up to the market to tell them otherwise. I don't see a ton of people opting out of this considering how much of an upgrade photoshop is despite the wallet raping you'll get for all the untouched applications in this "suite"
How often do these upgrades come out that cost $3500-4000? How do the upgrade features compare to Creative Suite?
Until you can answer that, then this is not an accurate comparison.
You forgot:
"We also changed the interface text back to upper & lowercase and reinstated the ability to click a pane title to collapse it in InDesign! Sure, we removed these features in CS5, but we know what we're doing!"
Excellent points!