Adobe Outlook

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 23, 2010.

  1. I thought they had a good third quarter, but it looks like sales of CS5 are
    flattening off much earlier than expected—just two quarters and all the
    “pent-up demand†is gone
    <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/adobe-can-it-wean-itself-off-the-creative-suite-dependence/39473>.
    And that is putting over half the company’s revenue in doubt.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 23, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 12:58:45 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > I thought they had a good third quarter, but it looks like sales of CS5
    > are flattening off much earlier than expected—just two quarters and all
    > the “pent-up demand†is gone
    > <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/adobe-can-it-wean-itself-off-the-

    creative-suite-dependence/39473>.
    > And that is putting over half the company’s revenue in doubt.


    The problem is it is a very expensive suite, and maybe 5 or 6 versions
    ago most of the applications in the suite got to the point where they
    were good enough for most things.

    There isn't really any actual need for most people to upgrade.

    If Adobe wants people to upgrade then they need to either reduce the
    price they're extorting, or introduce incompatibilities between each
    successive versions of the applications.

    The second option would cause people to NOT purchase a new version unless
    it is a spectacularly significant improvement over the previous version,
    and given that it is now a very mature suite I really don't see that
    happening anytime soon.


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Sep 23, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On Sep 23, 9:07 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:

    > If Adobe wants people to upgrade then they need to either reduce the
    > price they're extorting, or introduce incompatibilities between each
    > successive versions of the applications.


    One way in which they're trying to encourage purchasing new versions
    of their product, is by ensuring that you can only be 1 to 2 versions
    behind the current in order to qualify for upgrades.
    Simon, Sep 24, 2010
    #3
  4. In message
    <>, Simon
    wrote:

    > One way in which they're trying to encourage purchasing new versions
    > of their product, is by ensuring that you can only be 1 to 2 versions
    > behind the current in order to qualify for upgrades.


    That is probably backfiring, now that people are perfectly content to remain
    with an old version like CS2.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 24, 2010
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 17:49:59 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > In message
    > <>,
    > Simon wrote:
    >
    >> One way in which they're trying to encourage purchasing new versions of
    >> their product, is by ensuring that you can only be 1 to 2 versions
    >> behind the current in order to qualify for upgrades.

    >
    > That is probably backfiring, now that people are perfectly content to
    > remain with an old version like CS2.


    Or even Photoshop7!


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Sep 24, 2010
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On Sep 24, 5:49 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
    central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
    > In message
    > <>, Simon
    > wrote:
    >
    > > One way in which they're trying to encourage purchasing new versions
    > > of their product, is by ensuring that you can only be 1 to 2 versions
    > > behind the current in order to qualify for upgrades.

    >
    > That is probably backfiring, now that people are perfectly content to remain
    > with an old version like CS2.


    It certainly hasn't worked with us. I think that they'll only end up
    either shifting users to a competitors product, or perhaps moving them
    (eventually) to an OS product with the features they require.
    Simon, Sep 25, 2010
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:

    > LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product quality and
    > features.


    Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why we're
    sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.
    Simon, Sep 25, 2010
    #7
  8. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:33:00 -0700, Simon wrote:

    > On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >
    >> LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product quality and
    >> features.

    >
    > Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why we're
    > sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.


    Why would you need to look for alternatives when what you have is
    satisfactory?


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Sep 26, 2010
    #8
  9. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On Sep 26, 12:03 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    > On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:33:00 -0700, Simon wrote:
    > > On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:

    >
    > >> LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product quality and
    > >> features.

    >
    > > Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why we're
    > > sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.

    >
    > Why would you need to look for alternatives when what you have is
    > satisfactory?


    I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    budget, so we're looking at alternatives.
    Simon, Sep 26, 2010
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On Sep 26, 11:21 am, "impossible" <> wrote:

    > CS3 is an excellent product. But unless you want to handcuff your graphic
    > artists,  the only alternatives are CS4 and CS5.


    We're not in a hurry, so we can afford to keep an open mind on what
    products we use.
    Simon, Sep 26, 2010
    #10
  11. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:58:37 -0700, Simon wrote:

    > On Sep 26, 12:03 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:33:00 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >> > On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:

    >>
    >> >> LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product quality
    >> >> and features.

    >>
    >> > Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why we're
    >> > sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.

    >>
    >> Why would you need to look for alternatives when what you have is
    >> satisfactory?

    >
    > I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    > additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    > budget, so we're looking at alternatives.


    "Need" or "want"?

    Given how very good CS3 is (not to mention all versions of Photoshop
    since PS7) I find it difficult to believe you "need" something else.


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Sep 26, 2010
    #11
  12. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On Sep 26, 10:15 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    > On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:58:37 -0700, Simon wrote:
    > > On Sep 26, 12:03 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    > >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:33:00 -0700, Simon wrote:
    > >> > On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:

    >
    > >> >> LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product quality
    > >> >> and features.

    >
    > >> > Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why we're
    > >> > sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.

    >
    > >> Why would you need to look for alternatives when what you have is
    > >> satisfactory?

    >
    > > I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    > > additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    > > budget, so we're looking at alternatives.

    >
    > "Need" or "want"?
    >
    > Given how very good CS3 is (not to mention all versions of Photoshop
    > since PS7) I find it difficult to believe you "need" something else.


    Of course you'd find it difficult to believe when you jump to a
    conclusion like that without any knowledge of what we're using it for.
    Simon, Sep 27, 2010
    #12
  13. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On Sep 27, 1:36 pm, Simon <> wrote:
    > On Sep 26, 10:15 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:58:37 -0700, Simon wrote:
    > > > On Sep 26, 12:03 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    > > >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:33:00 -0700, Simon wrote:
    > > >> > On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:

    >
    > > >> >> LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product quality
    > > >> >> and features.

    >
    > > >> > Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why we're
    > > >> > sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.

    >
    > > >> Why would you need to look for alternatives when what you have is
    > > >> satisfactory?

    >
    > > > I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    > > > additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    > > > budget, so we're looking at alternatives.

    >
    > > "Need" or "want"?

    >
    > > Given how very good CS3 is (not to mention all versions of Photoshop
    > > since PS7) I find it difficult to believe you "need" something else.

    >
    > Of course you'd find it difficult to believe when you jump to a
    > conclusion like that without any knowledge of what we're using it for.


    I'm confusing your nick with a person on another forum whose bothering
    me - sorry!

    basically there are some effects that the graphic designers need to
    use for a client, that are only supported in the new version. In
    addition to this, there are some features that makes life easier for
    Flash development.

    In the long-term, I'm hopeful that a number of our projects can be
    completed cost-effectively using HTML 5, but in the mean time we will
    have to continue as is
    Simon, Sep 27, 2010
    #13
  14. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 17:36:05 -0700, Simon wrote:

    >> > I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    >> > additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    >> > budget, so we're looking at alternatives.

    >>
    >> "Need" or "want"?
    >>
    >> Given how very good CS3 is (not to mention all versions of Photoshop
    >> since PS7) I find it difficult to believe you "need" something else.

    >
    > Of course you'd find it difficult to believe when you jump to a
    > conclusion like that without any knowledge of what we're using it for.


    I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I'm simply asking why you need a
    newer version because I can't see why anyone "needs" an upgrade from CS3.


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Sep 27, 2010
    #14
  15. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:53:45 -0700, Simon wrote:

    > On Sep 27, 1:36 pm, Simon <> wrote:
    >> On Sep 26, 10:15 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:58:37 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >> > > On Sep 26, 12:03 pm, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    >> > >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:33:00 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >> > >> > On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:

    >>
    >> > >> >> LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product
    >> > >> >> quality and features.

    >>
    >> > >> > Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why
    >> > >> > we're sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.

    >>
    >> > >> Why would you need to look for alternatives when what you have is
    >> > >> satisfactory?

    >>
    >> > > I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    >> > > additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    >> > > budget, so we're looking at alternatives.

    >>
    >> > "Need" or "want"?

    >>
    >> > Given how very good CS3 is (not to mention all versions of Photoshop
    >> > since PS7) I find it difficult to believe you "need" something else.

    >>
    >> Of course you'd find it difficult to believe when you jump to a
    >> conclusion like that without any knowledge of what we're using it for.

    >
    > I'm confusing your nick with a person on another forum whose bothering
    > me - sorry!
    >
    > basically there are some effects that the graphic designers need to use
    > for a client, that are only supported in the new version. In addition to
    > this, there are some features that makes life easier for Flash
    > development.
    >
    > In the long-term, I'm hopeful that a number of our projects can be
    > completed cost-effectively using HTML 5, but in the mean time we will
    > have to continue as is


    [shudder] "Flash development".

    Can't one manually code for those special effects? :)

    Is it really that important that they be automated? :)


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Sep 27, 2010
    #15
  16. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    On 27/09/10 20:30, Sweetpea wrote:
    > On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:53:45 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >
    >> On Sep 27, 1:36 pm, Simon<> wrote:
    >>> On Sep 26, 10:15 pm, Sweetpea<> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:58:37 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >>>>> On Sep 26, 12:03 pm, Sweetpea<> wrote:
    >>>>>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:33:00 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >>>>>>> On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible"<> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>>>>> LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product
    >>>>>>>> quality and features.
    >>>
    >>>>>>> Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why
    >>>>>>> we're sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.
    >>>
    >>>>>> Why would you need to look for alternatives when what you have is
    >>>>>> satisfactory?
    >>>
    >>>>> I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    >>>>> additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    >>>>> budget, so we're looking at alternatives.
    >>>
    >>>> "Need" or "want"?
    >>>
    >>>> Given how very good CS3 is (not to mention all versions of Photoshop
    >>>> since PS7) I find it difficult to believe you "need" something else.
    >>>
    >>> Of course you'd find it difficult to believe when you jump to a
    >>> conclusion like that without any knowledge of what we're using it for.

    >>
    >> I'm confusing your nick with a person on another forum whose bothering
    >> me - sorry!
    >>
    >> basically there are some effects that the graphic designers need to use
    >> for a client, that are only supported in the new version. In addition to
    >> this, there are some features that makes life easier for Flash
    >> development.
    >>
    >> In the long-term, I'm hopeful that a number of our projects can be
    >> completed cost-effectively using HTML 5, but in the mean time we will
    >> have to continue as is

    >
    > [shudder] "Flash development".
    >
    > Can't one manually code for those special effects? :)
    >

    Yes,
    >
    > Is it really that important that they be automated? :)
    >

    It's much faster than hand coding.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

    The end excuses any evil - Sophocles
    Enkidu, Sep 27, 2010
    #16
  17. In article <>, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    >On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 17:36:05 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >>> > I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    >>> > additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    >>> > budget, so we're looking at alternatives.
    >>> "Need" or "want"?
    >>> Given how very good CS3 is (not to mention all versions of Photoshop
    >>> since PS7) I find it difficult to believe you "need" something else.

    >> Of course you'd find it difficult to believe when you jump to a
    >> conclusion like that without any knowledge of what we're using it for.


    >I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I'm simply asking why you need a
    >newer version because I can't see why anyone "needs" an upgrade from CS3.


    Just cos you don't see it doesn't mean it aint there. :)
    Bruce Sinclair, Sep 28, 2010
    #17
  18. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 09:14:53 +1300, Enkidu wrote:

    > On 27/09/10 20:30, Sweetpea wrote:
    >> On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:53:45 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sep 27, 1:36 pm, Simon<> wrote:
    >>>> On Sep 26, 10:15 pm, Sweetpea<> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:58:37 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >>>>>> On Sep 26, 12:03 pm, Sweetpea<> wrote:
    >>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:33:00 -0700, Simon wrote:
    >>>>>>>> On Sep 25, 2:04 pm, "impossible"<> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>>> LOL. Adobe has no real competition when it comes to product
    >>>>>>>>> quality and features.
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> Features that even our graphic artists don't need. That's why
    >>>>>>>> we're sticking with CS3 and actively looking for alternatives.
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> Why would you need to look for alternatives when what you have is
    >>>>>>> satisfactory?
    >>>>
    >>>>>> I never said it was satisfactory - We've got CS3, but need some
    >>>>>> additional features, but the latest CS exceeds out requirements and
    >>>>>> budget, so we're looking at alternatives.
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Need" or "want"?
    >>>>
    >>>>> Given how very good CS3 is (not to mention all versions of Photoshop
    >>>>> since PS7) I find it difficult to believe you "need" something else.
    >>>>
    >>>> Of course you'd find it difficult to believe when you jump to a
    >>>> conclusion like that without any knowledge of what we're using it
    >>>> for.
    >>>
    >>> I'm confusing your nick with a person on another forum whose bothering
    >>> me - sorry!
    >>>
    >>> basically there are some effects that the graphic designers need to
    >>> use for a client, that are only supported in the new version. In
    >>> addition to this, there are some features that makes life easier for
    >>> Flash development.
    >>>
    >>> In the long-term, I'm hopeful that a number of our projects can be
    >>> completed cost-effectively using HTML 5, but in the mean time we will
    >>> have to continue as is

    >>
    >> [shudder] "Flash development".
    >>
    >> Can't one manually code for those special effects? :)
    >>

    > Yes,
    > >
    >> Is it really that important that they be automated? :)
    >>

    > It's much faster than hand coding.


    Have you heard of code once, use multiple times with copy/paste?


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Sep 28, 2010
    #18
  19. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 23:02:35 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:

    >>I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I'm simply asking why you need a
    >>newer version because I can't see why anyone "needs" an upgrade from
    >>CS3.

    >
    > Just cos you don't see it doesn't mean it aint there. :)


    How does that answer the question?


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Sep 28, 2010
    #19
  20. In article <>, Sweetpea <> wrote:
    >On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 23:02:35 +0000, Bruce Sinclair wrote:
    >
    >>>I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I'm simply asking why you need a
    >>>newer version because I can't see why anyone "needs" an upgrade from
    >>>CS3.

    >>
    >> Just cos you don't see it doesn't mean it aint there. :)

    >
    >How does that answer the question?


    It doesn't ... but your *assumption* (earlier) that no one "needs" something
    that you can't see a reason for is unreasonable. Asking what they do need is
    fine (asking for data) ... but your assumptions have been showing ... and
    they are still wrong. :)
    Bruce Sinclair, Sep 28, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?c2FuZHdvcm0=?=

    Outlook Error when opening Calender or Outlook Today

    =?Utf-8?B?c2FuZHdvcm0=?=, Oct 12, 2005, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,638
    =?Utf-8?B?c2FuZHdvcm0=?=
    Oct 12, 2005
  2. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,119
  3. LAH

    Adobe Acrobat & Adobe Reader

    LAH, Apr 11, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,128
    pcbutts1
    Apr 11, 2005
  4. sharjo23
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,505
  5. Andy Leese
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    909
    nick c
    Nov 24, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page