From: "Elaine Montoya" Received: from smtp94.ord1c.emailsrvr.com ([108.166.43.94] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 5480415 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Tue, 20 May 2014 17:06:13 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 688D2140160 for ; Tue, 20 May 2014 11:06:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp4.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: elaine-AT-motion.tv) with ESMTPSA id 0F13B14083B for ; Tue, 20 May 2014 11:06:10 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Subject: Re: [AE] CC subscription price increase Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 09:06:09 -0600 X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 422291168.607777-9fa500301ff1b6cf29dc1ea8948be97b Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: After Effects Mail List X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) I agree with Robert's statement about Todd. He=92s a gem. Adobe is = fortunate to have him! And so are we! elaine =85=85=85=85. motion.tv On May 19, 2014, at 4:55 PM, Robert W. Walker = wrote: > The voice of reason. >=20 > It's all good as long as advocates such as Todd continue to have an > important say in how Adobe deploys its development resources. We = REALLY > need this guy in his job. The scary part is that one or two personnel > changes could result in far less customer-friendly policies. (See > post-Jobs Apple Computer). >=20 > But for now, I am okay with the financial arrangement we have with > Adobe. >=20 > Robert W. Walker > Los Angeles >=20 >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: Re: [AE] CC subscription price increase >> From: Todd Kopriva >> Date: Mon, May 19, 2014 5:48 pm >> To: "After Effects Mail List" >>=20 >>=20 >>> Does it mean >>> that Adobe gets to focus more on keeping existing users happy, or = does it >>> mean that Adobe can sit back and get lazy because we keep paying = them >>> even if they don't add anything we want? >>=20 >> 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. >>=20 >> As After Effects product owner (the person who prioritizes what we = work on) for the past year, my focus has been on removing as many pain = points as possible for existing users, since that is how we get you to = keep paying us. This is in contrast to trying to come up with big flashy = things that will attract new users... which often don't help y'all, the = existing users. >>=20 >> As a _huge_ example in this area, consider that we have the majority = of our team doing nothing but work on performance improvements for a = large fraction of this year. >>=20 >> So, at least in After Effects land, the new model is better for you = existing users. >>=20 >> I'm not addressing 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.=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> +---End of message---+ >> To unsubscribe send any message to >=20 > +---End of message---+ > To unsubscribe send any message to