Adobe Reports Record Revenue in the Third Quarter

[AlanF]

All this arguing about whether the monthly price is high/low missed the point of the original poster: that if the company is making record profits, maybe they could invest some of that in making the products slightly less sh$t.

+1

 

[SteveM]

I'm a big fan of Adobe and have used their software for 15 or more years. This is a genuine question, no sarcasm intended, other than the speed enhancements many appear to want, what other features could adobe add to LR6 that would make LR7 a 'must have' update? (Clearly, they must already exist in Lightroom cc)

 

[privatebydesign]

What bulls!t. If a creative professional can't afford $7.99 a month then they aren't very creative.

If they are at school/college/university they can get a crazy good 'educational discount'.

Absolute rubbish (or garbage)! The UK educational price is £9.98 ($13) a month - http://www.adobe.com/uk/creativecloud/buy/students.html. In the USA it is $9.95/month http://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/buy/students.html

ePhotozine has just reviewed it. It does look like a stunning lens. The MTFs are stellar: At 400mm in the centre, 4100 lw/ph on the A7R II out of a maximum possible of 5304 for the sensor.
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sony-fe-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6-g-master-oss-review-31417

The Sigma 100-400mm on the 5DSR gave 3800/5792

OK, the lens software is expensive, but some of us will pay for our passion.

Hmm... strangely inconsistent for somebody who's posts are always consistent. Did somebody hack your account Alan or did you get a Venti by accident?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Actually, more profit means more money to hire programmers and make improvements. I doubt if its the photographer program that is raking in the dough, its the large companies that pay out the big bucks, and licensing actually works out better for them.

That's not how this works, that's not how went of this works. More profit means more executive payout, means share buybacks, means higher share price . Programmers are many lines above under the r&d costs. Profit means they *could* add r&d and remain profitable, but it doesn't mean they have to or will.

I recommend that you read the Adobe reports and get some information as to what they are doing, and where they are going. Doubting without any clue to what is happening does not help to understand that huge amounts are being invested. Its true, programmers are not making anything, if much at all. Many, if not most are in India and get paid by the line. Like it or not, they are now a cheap commodity, and are plentiful. The money goes to those very few and rare individuals with a vision for creating new features and products that people will plunk their money down for. They define the software parameters and how it will work.

Thinking in terms of programmers has little to do with what is happening.

 

[unfocused]

...it smacks of forced taxation that the Vikings imposed on us and we kicked them out...

I'm curious about this. Would those be the same Vikings whose progeny conquered England in 1066? It seems like one might temporarily resist, but ultimately conquest is inevitable.

 

[AlanF]

What bulls!t. If a creative professional can't afford $7.99 a month then they aren't very creative.

If they are at school/college/university they can get a crazy good 'educational discount'.

Absolute rubbish (or garbage)! The UK educational price is £9.98 ($13) a month - http://www.adobe.com/uk/creativecloud/buy/students.html. In the USA it is $9.95/month http://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/buy/students.html

ePhotozine has just reviewed it. It does look like a stunning lens. The MTFs are stellar: At 400mm in the centre, 4100 lw/ph on the A7R II out of a maximum possible of 5304 for the sensor.
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sony-fe-100-400mm-f-4-5-5-6-g-master-oss-review-31417

The Sigma 100-400mm on the 5DSR gave 3800/5792

OK, the lens software is expensive, but some of us will pay for our passion.

Hmm... strangely inconsistent for somebody who's posts are always consistent. Did somebody hack your account Alan or did you get a Venti by accident?

You are at perfect liberty to pay for your passion of a regular heart attack special white chocolate mocha and send your monthly danegeld to Adobe. I pay for my passion of sharp telephoto lenses. But, I do not expect everyone to follow my passions or argue that those who don't are cheapjacks. And, consistent with my philosophy, I buy my lenses and don't sign a contract to rent them for the rest of my photographic life and lose them if I fail to pay the ransom.

 

[AlanF]

...it smacks of forced taxation that the Vikings imposed on us and we kicked them out...

I'm curious about this. Would those be the same Vikings whose progeny conquered England in 1066? It seems like one might temporarily resist, but ultimately conquest is inevitable.

The tax was originally against the Danes = danegeld. The Normans who conquered England in 1066 were the descendants of Scandinavians who had interbred with the French, possibly of Norwegian descent but perhaps of Danish and Swedish as well. The Normans were bastards who destroyed Anglo-Saxon society, and it took centuries to recover. A lesson for what happens when you allow software and other tech companies to dominate you.

 

[Jopa]

Recently got a new Dell XPS (i7700 HQ, 32GB). It's not something crazy fast like gaming laptops or desktops, but it's a decent machine. LR is barely moving, almost unusable. It works slow but better (usable) on the same generation MB Pro with twice less memory. Seems like a garbage software to me, and Adobe should be very proud of selling such cr@p and making huge profits, people are buying it so why not? Photoshop still works ok on both machines though.

 

[AlanF]

I'm a big fan of Adobe and have used their software for 15 or more years. This is a genuine question, no sarcasm intended, other than the speed enhancements many appear to want, what other features could adobe add to LR6 that would make LR7 a 'must have' update? (Clearly, they must already exist in Lightroom cc)

No answers yet to this simple question. I'll ask another, what improvements has Adobe made in the cloud version compared with my legacy CS6?

(Adobe in a nasty stroke has stopped updating the RAW converter to accept new models. But, that doesn't worry me as I use DxO Optics Pro for RAW conversion and use PS only after that.)

 

[LDS]

Like it or not, they are now a cheap commodity, and are plentiful. The money goes to those very few and rare individuals with a vision for creating new features and products that people will plunk their money down for. They define the software parameters and how it will work.

That's why more and more recent software is plain rubbish. Skilled and competent developers are not a commodity, especially for sophisticated software like PS or LR. Just like anybody able to operate a camera is not a "photographer".

You may have a vision, but if you lack the proper skills and experience to turn it into something tangible and working flawlessly, that's useless.

Time will tell if Adobe is going to invest that huge pile of money into product R&D, or it will become complacent and will just remunerate more executives and stockholder - it would be not the first one to follow the second path, especially when there's not enough competition pressure. Many of them got into troubles later.

 

[Diko]

This type of thing makes me very annoyed. Where is the incentive for Adobe to improve their products or even make them work properly when they are raking in this much money?

What makes you thing they don't that the very minute we are discussing it here ;-)

What bulls!t. If a creative professional can't afford $7.99 a month then they aren't very creative. If they are creative they can afford the fees which are a lot easier to find than a one off license fee many times that amount, PS as a standalone was generally in the $600-700 range.

And I do recall times when it all was above the $3k border... ;-)

Well I have had enough - what are the other options? Is Capture One the only realistic alternative to Lightroom?

It may not be the only alternative, but it is SOOOOOOOOOO much better than lightroom. Download the 30 day trial, you'll be blown away.

Nope... Actually there's a bunch of others ;-)

I think they've run out of ideas. Piracy will become a bigger issue for them if they don't start improving them. If one of the other companies could get very smart on selection tools and making composites easy I'd stop with Adobe. Affinity is quite good.

I think and I believe NOT. Adobe is smarter than that, though there are no indication on that. ;-) I want to go shooting and upload them photos in the cloud and let someone in the other side of the world to who's passionate about it make amazing post production then I want my customer to log in in the URL and account I've provided and make their decisions. And all that in all-in-one.

I have no damn idea if Adobe can pull that off, but they have all they need. I don't want to pay to five different providers for five different services in order to offer the best to my customers. Adobe has the potential thanks to CC like no other else!

Perpetual license?
In the age of internet.... where no more diskettes are required for installation...?
In the age of piracy - where one single program is shared in a nick of time - Adobe are and should be smarter than that.

No one is selling product. Everyone is going for service.

Like it or not, they are now a cheap commodity, and are plentiful. The money goes to those very few and rare individuals with a vision for creating new features and products that people will plunk their money down for. They define the software parameters and how it will work.

That's why more and more recent software is plain rubbish. Skilled and competent developers are not a commodity, especially for sophisticated software like PS or LR. Just like anybody able to operate a camera is not a "photographer".

You may have a vision, but if you lack the proper skills and experience to turn it into something tangible and working flawlessly, that's useless.

Time will tell if Adobe is going to invest that huge pile of money into product R&D, or it will become complacent and will just remunerate more executives and stockholder - it would be not the first one to follow the second path, especially when there's not enough competition pressure. Many of them got into troubles later.

True being told - I feel like not really original ideas come now and then.... I feel like everyone think the same way in the internet age.... I feel like people are afraid to say NO - we need it the other way around.

It's not the devs - it's the users that lack the imagination ;-)

 

[daphins]

This type of thing makes me very annoyed. Where is the incentive for Adobe to improve their products or even make them work properly when they are raking in this much money? I can't believe so many people have bought into this vision of a world where everyone pays up whether the products are being developed or not.
At least when we paid to upgrade then Adobe had to put some interesting new features in each version or their revenue would dry up. Now the money keeps coming in regardless.
Well I have had enough - what are the other options? Is Capture One the only realistic alternative to Lightroom?

Ugh, I'm with you man. I've moved off of the entire suite (I have CS6), though I still use LR Stand-alone. IF they improve LR, and offer a stand-alone license I'll consider buying it. However, if I find a better alternative I'll move from Adobe in a heart beat.

I hate what they've done to creative professionals, with the holding of tools hostage.

What bulls!t. If a creative professional can't afford $7.99 a month then they aren't very creative. If they are creative they can afford the fees which are a lot easier to find than a one off license fee many times that amount, PS as a standalone was generally in the $600-700 range.

If they are at school/college/university they can get a crazy good 'educational discount'. If they have half a brain and want to 'stick it to the man' they can get a pirated fully functional copy of CC for nothing but the 30 mins it takes to install. Nobody is holding tools hostage.

As for the development, there have been many improvements to LR and PS over the last three years, the thing is they go unnoticed and unappreciated by those who have taken a stand against the corporate evil. Now we don't have the big new releases people don't add up the various changes and improvements that have been introduced.

I can understand people who say I am not comfortable paying monthly for a product, I can understand people who want a 'perpetual' license. But I can't understand this constant Adobe bashing, they said what they are going to do, they said why they had to do it (and they did have to do it as they were going bankrupt) and they did it, you have the choice, accept their decision to not go bankrupt and get either buy their products or not. Saying you hate them is ridiculous.

Who’s said anything about “able to afford”? I’m a successful professional with the ability to purchase whatever software I need. I have however made a personal CHOICE to not “rent software” that gives a private company power over my intellectual property. As it is, LR is the only Adobe software left where if young quit paying rent rent, you can still access your personal art.

Adobe can take a piss. I have liabilities for years beyond when a contract ends that requires me to bro able to access my art. I refuse to purchase th CC from Adobe as long as their current policy stands.

 

[Orangutan]

This type of thing makes me very annoyed. Where is the incentive for Adobe to improve their products or even make them work properly when they are raking in this much money? I can't believe so many people have bought into this vision of a world where everyone pays up whether the products are being developed or not.
At least when we paid to upgrade then Adobe had to put some interesting new features in each version or their revenue would dry up. Now the money keeps coming in regardless.
Well I have had enough - what are the other options? Is Capture One the only realistic alternative to Lightroom?

Ugh, I'm with you man. I've moved off of the entire suite (I have CS6), though I still use LR Stand-alone. IF they improve LR, and offer a stand-alone license I'll consider buying it. However, if I find a better alternative I'll move from Adobe in a heart beat.

I hate what they've done to creative professionals, with the holding of tools hostage.

What bulls!t. If a creative professional can't afford $7.99 a month then they aren't very creative. If they are creative they can afford the fees which are a lot easier to find than a one off license fee many times that amount, PS as a standalone was generally in the $600-700 range.

If they are at school/college/university they can get a crazy good 'educational discount'. If they have half a brain and want to 'stick it to the man' they can get a pirated fully functional copy of CC for nothing but the 30 mins it takes to install. Nobody is holding tools hostage.

As for the development, there have been many improvements to LR and PS over the last three years, the thing is they go unnoticed and unappreciated by those who have taken a stand against the corporate evil. Now we don't have the big new releases people don't add up the various changes and improvements that have been introduced.

I can understand people who say I am not comfortable paying monthly for a product, I can understand people who want a 'perpetual' license. But I can't understand this constant Adobe bashing, they said what they are going to do, they said why they had to do it (and they did have to do it as they were going bankrupt) and they did it, you have the choice, accept their decision to not go bankrupt and get either buy their products or not. Saying you hate them is ridiculous.

Who’s said anything about “able to afford”? I’m a successful professional with the ability to purchase whatever software I need. I have however made a personal CHOICE to not “rent software” that gives a private company power over my intellectual property. As it is, LR is the only Adobe software left where if young quit paying rent rent, you can still access your personal art.

Adobe can take a piss. I have liabilities for years beyond when a contract ends that requires me to bro able to access my art. I refuse to purchase th CC from Adobe as long as their current policy stands.

FYI: While I agree with you entirely on the rent vs. own question, LR will continue to have limited function after expiration.

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2014/07/what-happens-to-lightroom-after-my-membership-ends.html

 

[Talys]

Relatively cheap subscription have proven to be extremely successful for highly pirated software like Office and Photoshop, because the overwhelming sentiment from people who like the software and used to pirate it is, "I'd pay for it if it were fairly priced."

What's fairly priced? Look at the price tags for O365 Home/Enterprise and Adobe PS+LR/CC, and you have an idea of what a whole lot of market study has yielded.

Personally, for Lightroom/Photoshop, I think it's a great bundle that is affordable even to hobbyists, and that Adobe hasn't added in some "not for commercial use" clause in it makes me like them more.

 

[daphins]

This type of thing makes me very annoyed. Where is the incentive for Adobe to improve their products or even make them work properly when they are raking in this much money? I can't believe so many people have bought into this vision of a world where everyone pays up whether the products are being developed or not.
At least when we paid to upgrade then Adobe had to put some interesting new features in each version or their revenue would dry up. Now the money keeps coming in regardless.
Well I have had enough - what are the other options? Is Capture One the only realistic alternative to Lightroom?

Ugh, I'm with you man. I've moved off of the entire suite (I have CS6), though I still use LR Stand-alone. IF they improve LR, and offer a stand-alone license I'll consider buying it. However, if I find a better alternative I'll move from Adobe in a heart beat.

I hate what they've done to creative professionals, with the holding of tools hostage.

What bulls!t. If a creative professional can't afford $7.99 a month then they aren't very creative. If they are creative they can afford the fees which are a lot easier to find than a one off license fee many times that amount, PS as a standalone was generally in the $600-700 range.

If they are at school/college/university they can get a crazy good 'educational discount'. If they have half a brain and want to 'stick it to the man' they can get a pirated fully functional copy of CC for nothing but the 30 mins it takes to install. Nobody is holding tools hostage.

As for the development, there have been many improvements to LR and PS over the last three years, the thing is they go unnoticed and unappreciated by those who have taken a stand against the corporate evil. Now we don't have the big new releases people don't add up the various changes and improvements that have been introduced.

I can understand people who say I am not comfortable paying monthly for a product, I can understand people who want a 'perpetual' license. But I can't understand this constant Adobe bashing, they said what they are going to do, they said why they had to do it (and they did have to do it as they were going bankrupt) and they did it, you have the choice, accept their decision to not go bankrupt and get either buy their products or not. Saying you hate them is ridiculous.

Who’s said anything about “able to afford”? I’m a successful professional with the ability to purchase whatever software I need. I have however made a personal CHOICE to not “rent software” that gives a private company power over my intellectual property. As it is, LR is the only Adobe software left where if young quit paying rent rent, you can still access your personal art.

Adobe can take a piss. I have liabilities for years beyond when a contract ends that requires me to bro able to access my art. I refuse to purchase th CC from Adobe as long as their current policy stands.

FYI: While I agree with you entirely on the rent vs. own question, LR will continue to have limited function after expiration.

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2014/07/what-happens-to-lightroom-after-my-membership-ends.html

Yep, LR does, but PS, AI, and AE don’t. To my knowledge, LR is the only one that still does, and I honestly don’t trust Adobe to keep it that way.

 

[unfocused]

Can't people take 15 seconds to do a google search before spouting off?

There are tons of programs and advice on opening and converting PSD files if you just type it in. Plus, you can always convert files to a .tif or .jpg. Alternatively, you can spend about $50 and pick up Photoshop elements to open the files. And, just like in the analog era, you always have your negative (now we call it a a raw file.) So, just as we used to do in the darkroom days, you can reprint the negative.

Anytime you use a proprietary file type to store a document you run the risk of not being able to open it if you dump the program it was created in. That's not unique to Adobe. But as with any other program, there are usually programs available to read or convert those files.

 

[Talys]

Does anyone remember how much Photoshop USED to cost, by itself? Or lightroom? PS was like $700, and extended version was about $1k. Plus $150 for Lightroom.

That's $750-$1150. Versus $10 / month.

:

Now, if Adobe were clever, they would throw in Illustrator at an extra $10 / month, and a bunch of people who barely use Illustrator would pay twice a much.

 

[AlanF]

Does anyone remember how much Photoshop USED to cost, by itself? Or lightroom? PS was like $700, and extended version was about $1k. Plus $150 for Lightroom.

That's $750-$1150. Versus $10 / month.

:

Now, if Adobe were clever, they would throw in Illustrator at an extra $10 / month, and a bunch of people who barely use Illustrator would pay twice a much.

They do throw it in plus everything else Adobe for $10/month for teachers and students. Just enrol as a student somewhere.
https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/buy/students.html?promoid=61PM819L&mv=other

 

[Orangutan]

Does anyone remember how much Photoshop USED to cost, by itself? Or lightroom? PS was like $700, and extended version was about $1k. Plus $150 for Lightroom.

That's $750-$1150. Versus $10 / month.

First, back in those days you didn't need an ongoing relationship with the vendor; once you buy you're done. When/if you upgrade, you can give your old version to your cousin who might want to play with it.

Second, remember back in those days where every release was a large advance over the previous one? That's because we could hold onto our money until Adobe gave us a product worth buying. Now, while there is some advancement, it is very very slow.

I will say it again: the subscription model is fine for pros who make their living from it, but it's an insult to amateurs. Also, there is no reason Adobe cannot offer both a subscription for those who want it, and perpetual license (without major upgrades) for those who prefer that.

It's fine to make the case that subscription works for you, but don't extrapolate that to everyone.

 

[LDS]

First, back in those days you didn't need an ongoing relationship with the vendor; once you buy you're done. When/if you upgrade, you can give your old version to your cousin who might want to play with it.

No, you couldn't - legally, unless you bought a new full license, and not an upgrade. A software upgrade is part of the actual license.

These behaviors telss that Adobe, after all, could be right.... :