New software upgrades: how fast should they be released?

[Laurens]

While I am still getting used to CS3, Adobe already announce CS4. I wouldn't mind that there was a bit more time in between new software releases, regardless of the vendor. I posted a poll about this on the Prepressure site and hope everyone votes. Of course feedback in this thread is always appreciated.

[Joe]

I think Adobe is on the 18-24 month cycle. I wish it were more like 3 years. It's too expensive to upgrade Creative Suite on all machines so we usually upgrade about half on one version and the other half the next go around.

[gnubler]

I'm still using CS1, both at home and at work. They more-than get the work done running on modern operating systems. No reason to upgrade. In fact, I would be fine still using Photoshop v. 6 or 7. I suppose it depends what you use it for.

The software companies can upgrade as much as they want - doesn't mean I'm going to follow their lures. Unfortunately this is different in a business environment when dealing with outside files. Once you start getting a certain amount of newer-version native files, you're screwed if you want to keep your clients.

There are still businesses (Ratintrap?) running 10 year old software and OSs. The shop I last worked at was running half of their workstations on OS9 and Quark 4. Gets the job done.

[Joe]

I'm still using CS1, both at home and at work. They more-than get the work done running on modern operating systems. No reason to upgrade. In fact, I would be fine still using Photoshop v. 6 or 7. I suppose it depends what you use it for.

The software companies can upgrade as much as they want - doesn't mean I'm going to follow their lures. Unfortunately this is different in a business environment when dealing with outside files. Once you start getting a certain amount of newer-version native files, you're screwed if you want to keep your clients.

There are still businesses (Ratintrap?) running 10 year old software and OSs. The shop I last worked at was running half of their workstations on OS9 and Quark 4. Gets the job done.

One of the better weekly jobs I do is PDF's from PageMaker. Almost never have any problems with them. However the people using PageMaker are having more and more problems with ads supplied to them that are newer PDF's that contain transparency.

[ratintrap]

Unfortunately this is different in a business environment when dealing with outside files. Once you start getting a certain amount of newer-version native files, you're screwed if you want to keep your clients.

Even with newer version PDFs rather than native files you can have trouble.

There are still businesses (Ratintrap?) running 10 year old software and OSs.

That's me, still stuck in the stone age.

However the people using PageMaker are having more and more problems with ads supplied to them that are newer PDF's that contain transparency.

Yeah, we get that quite often. I spent quite a while this afternoon trying to get an ad to work before I decided to just rasterize.

PageMaker + Newer PDFs = 

-Rat

[ratintrap]

I think there would be a possibility that the company I work for could keep up with the software upgrades if they weren't coupled with OS and hardware upgrades too.

-Rat

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

I wouldn't per say have a problem with upgrades if they were FREE! Often times, companies like Adobe, get in a mad rush to push software before it's even been properly tested... then it wastes your system. So, you end up PAYING up the wazoo for software that blows your machine. It used to happen all the time... now, it still happens all the time. It is ridiculous to pay almost a grand for software that becomes outdated in a year.

The biggest gripe about software lately? NEO. Just because it specifically targets a certain user, (Prepress) the software manufacturer puts a price-tag on it that makes it almost impossible to obtain if you are not a Fortune 500 company. $6000 for me to able to do what Pitstop should? I talked down the price $3300 for a single user, but still CRAZY! The first thing the Sales-Slime asked me after I voiced my concerns about the price and how I felt they were taking advantage... "What do you think it's worth?"

I thought that was a little tacky. It is a very useful tool that ALL Prepressers should have... unfortunately, the price keeps that from becoming an even possibility.

[Joe]

I wouldn't per say have a problem with upgrades if they were FREE! Often times, companies like Adobe, get in a mad rush to push software before it's even been properly tested... then it wastes your system. So, you end up PAYING up the wazoo for software that blows your machine. It used to happen all the time... now, it still happens all the time. It is ridiculous to pay almost a grand for software that becomes outdated in a year.

The biggest gripe about software lately? NEO. Just because it specifically targets a certain user, (Prepress) the software manufacturer puts a price-tag on it that makes it almost impossible to obtain if you are not a Fortune 500 company. $6000 for me to able to do what Pitstop should? I talked down the price $3300 for a single user, but still CRAZY! The first thing the Sales-Slime asked me after I voiced my concerns about the price and how I felt they were taking advantage... "What do you think it's worth?"

I thought that was a little tacky. It is a very useful tool that ALL Prepressers should have... unfortunately, the price keeps that from becoming an even possibility.

You got a hell of a price there. The reason it is so expensive is that there is a small market for it (prepress). Just like Preps. You'd be surprised just how few copies they sell compared to something like MS Office or even Adobe Creative Suite. They have to charge  those prices to make any money. If NEO was a package that every office worker in America needed it then the price would reflect it.

[Monkeyman]

Updates are obviously just part of the industry. It's all a matter of opinion and there's not really a definite answer to this question. My opinion is that Adobe is coming out with full new releases too fast. The problem with this is the possibility of alienating its client base. Most people and business cannot afford to continually pay updates.
On the other side of the spectrum one may recall the history of Quark. Quark took forever to come out with updates. This too can, and did, alienate some of the client base. It's a delicate balance that changes constantly. Ebbs and flows of one's business will make it seem that the release is too soon or too late sometimes.
Adobe does need to come out with significant updates to their existing software and not charge for it or make it a minimal upgrade. Ex: CS 3.3. Fix and update what we have and not continually throwing out new tools, removing old tools and reinventing the wheel every version. Why would everyone want to pay for such things?

If you're looking for a definite answer, you will not get one. You will get a large variety of opinions but hopefully there will be a large consensus on one answer.

[Joe]

Updates are obviously just part of the industry. It's all a matter of opinion and there's not really a definite answer to this question. My opinion is that Adobe is coming out with full new releases too fast. The problem with this is the possibility of alienating its client base. Most people and business cannot afford to continually pay updates.
On the other side of the spectrum one may recall the history of Quark. Quark took forever to come out with updates. This too can, and did, alienate some of the client base. It's a delicate balance that changes constantly. Ebbs and flows of one's business will make it seem that the release is too soon or too late sometimes.
Adobe does need to come out with significant updates to their existing software and not charge for it or make it a minimal upgrade. Ex: CS 3.3. Fix and update what we have and not continually throwing out new tools, removing old tools and reinventing the wheel every version. Why would everyone want to pay for such things?

If you're looking for a definite answer, you will not get one. You will get a large variety of opinions but hopefully there will be a large consensus on one answer.

Agreed. One thing I don't like about Adobe is they rarely fix anything in their current version of software. They fix it in the next version. If you don't update you don't get the fix.

[WharfRat]

I don't know -
I always update immediately.
I have been running CS4 for a week now.
I only put it on my G5 10.4 machine - but it rocks.
(It is on a secondary drive, just in case)
Not one snag or hiccup. No crashing. Everything is quick - even on the older system.
I will put it on my Intel Pro this week and see how that goes.
Pitstop works great - Acro 9 works fine (just don't try to run 8 after you install 9).
There is a reason new upgrades come out -
and it is usually not just to piss off us prepress pros.

MSD

[dudley]

I think Adobe is on the 18-24 month cycle

Isn't that, rather than a bona fide production cycle, based on shareholder (profit) expectation cycle?

I'm pretty naive about that stuff. Often when i go to the Official Adobe User Forums, i wonder who among the Adobe User Boosters hold stock in the motherLode.

Not me of course, judging by my 301K.

Much as i wd like to *itc*Slap my superiors, who have also to deal w Quirk8 based on one client who insists on moving forward, i just go along to get along.

Willing to reLocate. Or meet up in NYC for a coupleFew beers, lemme know.

dudley

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

I wouldn't per say have a problem with upgrades if they were FREE! Often times, companies like Adobe, get in a mad rush to push software before it's even been properly tested... then it wastes your system. So, you end up PAYING up the wazoo for software that blows your machine. It used to happen all the time... now, it still happens all the time. It is ridiculous to pay almost a grand for software that becomes outdated in a year.

The biggest gripe about software lately? NEO. Just because it specifically targets a certain user, (Prepress) the software manufacturer puts a price-tag on it that makes it almost impossible to obtain if you are not a Fortune 500 company. $6000 for me to able to do what Pitstop should? I talked down the price $3300 for a single user, but still CRAZY! The first thing the Sales-Slime asked me after I voiced my concerns about the price and how I felt they were taking advantage... "What do you think it's worth?"

I thought that was a little tacky. It is a very useful tool that ALL Prepressers should have... unfortunately, the price keeps that from becoming an even possibility.

You got a hell of a price there. The reason it is so expensive is that there is a small market for it (prepress). Just like Preps. You'd be surprised just how few copies they sell compared to something like MS Office or even Adobe Creative Suite. They have to charge  those prices to make any money. If NEO was a package that every office worker in America needed it then the price would reflect it.

I agree, but for one thing. Why is there a NEO anyway? Pitstop should be able to do all of this and more. Oh, because they can.

[G_Town]

I agree unless there is a legitimate reason for an upgrade (think transparency) they should keep it to every couple years especially in this business where DTP apps need to be compatible with rips and the like.

As we know, however, that aint gonna happen the new microsoft needs their revenue.

[Joe]

I wouldn't per say have a problem with upgrades if they were FREE! Often times, companies like Adobe, get in a mad rush to push software before it's even been properly tested... then it wastes your system. So, you end up PAYING up the wazoo for software that blows your machine. It used to happen all the time... now, it still happens all the time. It is ridiculous to pay almost a grand for software that becomes outdated in a year.

The biggest gripe about software lately? NEO. Just because it specifically targets a certain user, (Prepress) the software manufacturer puts a price-tag on it that makes it almost impossible to obtain if you are not a Fortune 500 company. $6000 for me to able to do what Pitstop should? I talked down the price $3300 for a single user, but still CRAZY! The first thing the Sales-Slime asked me after I voiced my concerns about the price and how I felt they were taking advantage... "What do you think it's worth?"

I thought that was a little tacky. It is a very useful tool that ALL Prepressers should have... unfortunately, the price keeps that from becoming an even possibility.

You got a hell of a price there. The reason it is so expensive is that there is a small market for it (prepress). Just like Preps. You'd be surprised just how few copies they sell compared to something like MS Office or even Adobe Creative Suite. They have to charge  those prices to make any money. If NEO was a package that every office worker in America needed it then the price would reflect it.

I agree, but for one thing. Why is there a NEO anyway? Pitstop should be able to do all of this and more. Oh, because they can.

They are totally different programs. NEO is a stand alone heavy duty PDF editor while Pitstop is just a plugin for Acrobat. So you really think they should sell NEO for what Pitstop costs and do away with Pitstop? I mean I'm okay with it should they decide to take that route but that's asking a bit much don't you think?