"CS" apparently not abbreviation for CREATIVE SUITE

[Val_A@adobeforums.com]

Is anyone else annoyed that they purchased InDesign CS - only to find out it is just - InDesign - no CS - That the actual Creative Suite is another grand? My InDesign CS packaging says "...combines the full version of InDesign CS with Adobe PageMaker plug-in pack" - well not so much, since NONE of the other apps are included. "Full version" seems to be a matter of interpretation - InDesign CS works great, but it is no suite - since it is but a single application, with many features, but still a unitary app. To further muddy the water, the complete package of Adobe apps is called Adobe Creative Suite - not "CS" which I now know means something else, "Consumer Stupid".

[Dave_Saunders@adobeforums.com]

Nope, not the least bit annoyed.

Dave

[Thomas_Phinney@adobeforums.com]

I'd go back to whoever you purchased it from, explain your problem, and see if you can get return InDesign CS and get a credit towards purchase of the Adobe Creative Suite.

T

[Larry_Grohman@adobeforums.com]

Well then... what's in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name
would smell as sweet.

Sorry, could not resist. But, naming is a tricky thing. I for one
originally thought that "InDesign" was a clumsy choice, but I've grown
accustom to it. And the entire CS naming and marketing thing is going to
take some getting used to. On the other hand, I think your comment is the
first I've heard about anyone confusing InDesign CS as a suite of
applications. I for one, take care to know what I am buying before I fork
over my CC number.

Larry

[Val_A@adobeforums.com]

Now I know CS - means a single component of the overarching Creative Suite - I read "full version" in their CS spec and thought it was complete in some way - so I gave my CC # for the "full version" of a suite that's not a suite - I'll live. It's just that Adobe doesn't have to be deceptive or purposely confusing to sell their SW. It's stands on its own. I was disappointed, mostly. Thanks for listening...

[Robert_Levine@adobeforums.com]

Adobe has not been diseptive about anything. If it was that confusing
these forums would be full of complaints. Yours is the first.

Bob

[Scott_Falkner@adobeforums.com]

I believe that the whole CS naming decision will prove to be a huge marketing blunder. The idea of a Creative Suite is praiseworthy. Coordinated upgrades could prove beneficial, but I'm cynical and smell a ploy to justify increasing upgrade frequencies. Also good is a more tightly integrated collection of programs, features, and interfaces.

But naming the programs CS was a decision made my short-sighted marketers, rather than visionaries.

What do you call the next version of Illustrator? Illustrator CS 2, Illustrator 12 CS, or something else? And if CS is an abreviation of Creative Suite, then what is the purpose in naming each component CS?

[Robert_Levine@adobeforums.com]

Some blunder:

[url]http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/tech/software/10157923.html[/url]

Bob

[Scott_Falkner@adobeforums.com]

As I said: "naming the programs CS was a decision made my short-sighted marketers"

That's the kind of thing that created fast initial sales, but hurts long term viability when the company has to reeducate their customers to understand confusing version numbering schemes.

[Robert_Levine@adobeforums.com]

So all the people who are buying now will never upgrade because of a
name? I think you're wrong.

Bob

[Lisa_Spike@adobeforums.com]

It's called the "creative suite" because...yes! Adobe wants you to use the products together! So what? They work well togehter. And of course their marketing efforts are going to be geared toward trying to convince people to buy MORE of their products. What's wrong with that? That's what marketing is.

The fact that for a little over $1000, you can get the latest version of Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Acrobat Professional, and GoLive I think is an incredible deal. And the fact that you can just pay an upgrade price for Photoshop (if you already have it), you get the whole suite! That's no ploy, it's a great deal. A "ploy" is software companies (who shall remain nameless) that make you pay full price for an upgrade that has almost no new features.

Val, I think you just misunderstood...and as Bob said, you're the first person I've heard complain about it. I agree also that you should go back to where you bought InDesign and exchange it toward the whole suite. Or, keep InDesign...it's still cheaper than Brand X.

[Steve_Werner@adobeforums.com]

You get the entire Creative Suite for not too much more than a single copy of QuarkXPress!

[Scott_Falkner@adobeforums.com]

So all the people who are buying now will never upgrade because of a name?
I think you're wrong.





I didn't say that. That would be ridiculous.

What I said was that naming individual components "CS" for "Creative Suite" is going to develop into a marketing headache as individual components are upgraded. What do you call the next versions of InDesign, Illustrator, GoLive, and Photoshop? CS2? If so, then you're going to have a hard time telling people that Illustrator CS 2 is the same as Illustrator 12 and Photoshop CS 2 is the same as Photoshop 9.

This is not new for Adobe. They learned once the hard way that a radical change in version numbering only creates confusion and discourages upgrading. I predict they will learn it again, and within a couple of years they will need to completely rethink their naming convention.

You get the entire Creative Suite for not too much more than a single
copy of QuarkXPress!




The value in the Creative Suite is indisputable. The usefulness of the Suite is, bugs notwithstanding, excellent.

[Robert_Oliver@adobeforums.com]

If so, then you're going to have a hard time telling people that Illustrator
CS 2 is the same as Illustrator 12 and Photoshop CS 2 is the same as Photoshop
9.




But they've already faced that hurdle with the current names. Why would the future be more confusing? There was a certain amount of confusion when the CS name came out, but as the CS product line continues it shouldn't be that big of a deal.

<http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/faq.html#q1>

They learned once the hard way that a radical change in version numbering
only creates confusion and discourages upgrading.




Yes, this can be confusing for people that don't do basic research on what they are buying.

I personally would have preferred that they stick with the old numbering scheme, and not try to emulate Macromedia (or even Microsoft, the king of long, bizarre, tongue-twisting product names), but in the end it really doesn't matter much. It's very easy to tell what the latest versions of a particular product are.

[Scott_Falkner@adobeforums.com]

But they've already faced that hurdle with the current names.




And, like hurdles, there are plenty on the track. I still can only guess as to how people will keep track of upgrades when the next versions ship. What can you call the next verion of Illustrator, maintaing its connection to the Suite, but also showing that is is an upgrade? What if the versions ship separately? Will the Adobe Creative Suite contain Illustrator CS 2, and Phtoshop, Indesign and GoLive CS 1? If so, there will be thousands of people wanting to upgrade Photoshop CS to CS 1. If they keep calling it Illustrator CS, then they'll lose a lot of revenue from people who don't think they need to upgrade, they already have CS.

If they ship separately, then they'll be constantly repackaging the suite, and keeping the version names consistent will be a nightmare. If they only upgrade together, then just one upgrade problem will hold up the entire line. Or, they'll have to ship buggy software because release dates will trump program readiness (oh, I guess we're there already). Or they'll upgrade together, but only one will justify a complete upgrade, and the rest will be more like X.5 versions.

In one, maybe two upgrades, I predict CS will be dropped from the program versions. The Creative Suite might still exist -- I hope so.

[Robert_Levine@adobeforums.com]

They've already decided that future versions will be released as a
suite. I'm quite confident that the marketing people at Adobe did some
pretty careful studies.

Anyone who can't figure out the current versions isn't going to be the
target audience anyway.

Bob

[Thomas_Phinney@adobeforums.com]

I will say this only because I have no idea (yet) what the next generation of Adobe apps will be called....

If it were up to me, I'd call the next generation of the suite "Adobe Creative Suite XYZ" and the individual apps "InDesign XYZ" and so on. Where XYZ is some clever thing like XP, MX, 2000 or whatever.

Cheers,

T

[Robert_Oliver@adobeforums.com]

I still can only guess as to how people will keep track of upgrades when
the next versions ship.




The same way they kept track of the last batch of upgrades. Really, there is no issue here at all.

What can you call the next verion of Illustrator, maintaing its connection
to the Suite, but also showing that is is an upgrade?




Illustrator CS 2. Simple. It's an upgrade from Illustrator CS, and is part of the Creative Suite. I don't see the confusion.

We already have a clue to the future scheme as the Creative Suite, with the addition of the PageMaker Plug-In Pack, is now Creative Suite 1.1.

What if the versions ship separately?




They won't. If you follow Adobe as closely as I do, including various webcasts featuring the top dogs at the commpany, you will quickly learn that Adobe really, really, really, really wants people to buy the whole suite and not the point upgrades. They will concentrate on the suite in the future. I'm assuming that was part of the reason they jacked up the upgrade prices significantly, and made Version Cue only available in the suite.

Will the Adobe Creative Suite contain Illustrator CS 2, and Phtoshop,
Indesign and GoLive CS 1?




Nope, that would be confusing. The products are now in the same release schedule, which I think is a bad idea. I personally can't afford to upgrade that many programs at once, and I think it will force some of them to be released before they are ready (as in GoLive CS).

Illustrator was actually due to be released months before the Creative Suite, but they delayed it so that it could be included in the suite. Releasing "Illustrator CS" before anyone knew what CS meant would have been confusing, as would having "Illustrator 11" part of the CS.

Or, they'll have to ship buggy software because release dates will trump
program readiness (oh, I guess we're there already).




Yes, that they will.

[George_Bilalis@adobeforums.com]

Illustrator was actually due to be released months before the Creative
Suite, but they delayed it so that it could be included in the suite.




It used to be the proverbial Quark that preferred to milk the cow for years before releasing an update (4 years at a time). They felt secure to do this acting as owners of the market and single major players. They showed disrespect to their customers and their needs and so they are going down the drain.

Now if this is a clever idea to hold back updates/upgrades depends on competition. Adobe sofar proved this isn't so, by releasing updates as soon as possible and upgrades average one per year.

So if one starts milking the cow again for overdue time, surely a competitor will see the void and jump in to fill it. The market has permanently changed since the old happy days.

Regrds
George

[Larry_Grohman@adobeforums.com]

George, I totally agree.

I know Adobe is one company, but they do have many different products, each
presumably with their own engineering team, and product goals.

If they (the engineering teams) must coordinate the release of their
particular product to the timing of other products, something will surly
suffer.

For example lets say that the InDesign team has made excellent head-ways
and added a bunch of new features. But, maybe the Photoshop team is
struggling to get their product to a state worthy of a new release (I see
Photoshop as a rather mature product). So, what happens. Does InDesign's
release need to wait for Photoshop to be ready, or do they go ahead and
release a new "Suite" with less then notable improvements in Photoshop.

Maybe they can pull this off. I hope so, but we'll see.

Larry