Return-Path: Received: from p3plwbeout04-06.prod.phx3.secureserver.net ([72.167.218.227] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 5479375 for ae-list@media-motion.tv; Tue, 20 May 2014 00:55:29 +0200 Received: from localhost ([72.167.218.245]) by p3plwbeout04-06.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with bizsmtp id 3yvT1o0015JG3DC01yvT8Q; Mon, 19 May 2014 15:55:27 -0700 X-SID: 3yvT1o0015JG3DC01 Received: (qmail 13183 invoked by uid 99); 19 May 2014 22:55:27 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Originating-IP: 142.129.187.88 User-Agent: Workspace Webmail 5.6.47 Message-Id: <20140519155526.89259f98f291d771214680e8971719cb.e1d7da479b.wbe@email04.secureserver.net> From: "Robert W. Walker" To: "After Effects Mail List" Subject: RE: [AE] CC subscription price increase Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 15:55:26 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 The voice of reason.=0A=0AIt's all good as long as advocates such as Todd c= ontinue to have an=0Aimportant say in how Adobe deploys its development res= ources. We REALLY=0Aneed this guy in his job. The scary part is that one or= two personnel=0Achanges could result in far less customer-friendly policie= s. (See=0Apost-Jobs Apple Computer).=0A=0ABut for now, I am okay with the f= inancial arrangement we have with=0AAdobe.=0A=0ARobert W. Walker=0ALos Ange= les=0A=0A> -------- Original Message --------=0A> Subject: Re: [AE] CC subs= cription price increase=0A> From: Todd Kopriva =0A> Date= : Mon, May 19, 2014 5:48 pm=0A> To: "After Effects Mail List" =0A> =0A> =0A> > Does it mean=0A> > that Adobe gets to focus mo= re on keeping existing users happy, or does it=0A> > mean that Adobe can si= t back and get lazy because we keep paying them=0A> > even if they don't ad= d anything we want?=0A> =0A> Our attitude is that we now have to work even = harder to keep existing customers satisfied, because you can stop paying us= at any moment (well, any month, that is). Under the old model, once we got= your couple thousand dollars for a suite, you didn't have such a recourse.= =0A> =0A> As After Effects product owner (the person who prioritizes what w= e work on) for the past year, my focus has been on removing as many pain po= ints as possible for existing users, since that is how we get you to keep p= aying us. This is in contrast to trying to come up with big flashy things t= hat will attract new users... which often don't help y'all, the existing us= ers.=0A> =0A> As a _huge_ example in this area, consider that we have the m= ajority of our team doing nothing but work on performance improvements for = a large fraction of this year.=0A> =0A> So, at least in After Effects land,= the new model is better for you existing users.=0A> =0A> I'm not addressin= g matters of price here, since that is way out of my realm... except to say= that we've noticed that the ability to get started using the application(s= ) without a large initial expenditure does help a lot of folks. =0A> =0A> = =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> +---End of message---+=0A> To unsubscribe send any mess= age to