Adobe wants 10% for Director 12

Discussion in 'iOS Programming' started by CodeJingle, Feb 13, 2013.

  1. CodeJingle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Greater Seattle, WA
    #1
    Adobe Director 12 finally supports making iOS apps. But if you make more than $20k they require a 10% cut above that.

    The software isn't available for purchase right now, it has been removed from the Adobe online store and doesn't appear to be available anywhere else. The chat representative wasn't able to tell me how much it costs if I am not upgrading, although for previous versions full was $999 (the Director 12 buyer's guide page says upgrade price is $299 and lists all the products that qualify for the upgrade).

    Any comments from the developer community?

    http://www.adobe.com/products/director.html

    http://9to5mac.com/2013/02/13/adobe...lished-using-director-12-is-this-a-bad-trend/
     
  2. CodeJingle thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Greater Seattle, WA
    #2
    No response. I guess the market for iOS via Director is pretty small then. For such a small market I can't understand them asking for 10% revenue after the Apple cut and state and federal income taxes. Well nevermind them.
     
  3. 1458279 Suspended

    1458279

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Location:
    California
    #3
    There's only one other that I've seen that wanted a cut based on sales. It was a high end game dev engine. It's not a popular buying model for devs, and the bottom line is that whatever product you make, others will try and make a work-alike.

    Consider game engines: they range from very pricey to free, whatever they offered 2 years ago is probably outdated. They compete for market share and that means they want devs to use their product, the number of devs in large or well funded companies is small compared to the number of devs that are indie or small groups.

    In addition to these points, there's also the point what concern is it to them how well I do with their product?

    If I buy a Ford truck and make $10 million in a construction business, or if it sits in the driveway, it costs the same. Ford doesn't say "how much money are you going to make with this truck" ... if they did, people would buy elsewhere or lie to them.

    Charging more $$ because you got a hit app is silly, it has more to do with your marketing/idea/hard work/ skills/ etc.. little to do with the products you use...

    What can their product do that can't be done with other products?

    Do you get money from them if your app doesn't sell?
     
  4. forcesteeler macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #4
    Thats stupid i rather just learn Objective C and Learn Cocoas2d, and Pay 0% to Adobe and only pay apple cut. :).

    Plus there are way more powerful engines like Unity3D and you even have UDK which Uses Unreal Engine 3 Engine and they do not require you to pay any kind of revenue split.

    Just Plain Greed on Adobe part, plus theres way to many options.

    I smell a flop! :D
     
  5. CodeJingle thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Greater Seattle, WA
    #5
    I agree with all those points. The problem is my top rated developer refuses every other development platform. He will only develop apps using Director. Seriously this guy would rather work at Walmart than use anything else. And the guy is pretty much irreplaceable. So I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place with this 10% nonsense.
     
  6. chown33 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #6
    Sounds like a business decision. You probably need to crunch the numbers and work out a contingency plan.

    If a developer is truly irreplaceable, and isn't a company founder, then that's a hole that was dug before now. No developer should be irreplaceable, just for managing a company's risk exposure. What if he gets pneumonia and dies? Or a traffic accident? Or he gets fed up with the company and leaves? Does the company shrivel up and die?

    Even if you decide to keep the developer, don't retrain him, and pay Adobe's price, you should still make a contingency plan so this situation doesn't arise in the future. Otherwise you're just continuing to dig your current hole deeper, and you're giving that developer the ability to hold all future projects for similar ransom.
     
  7. dejo Moderator

    dejo

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Location:
    The Centennial State
    #7
    I agree with what chown33 is saying and would add:

    I wouldn't consider a developer "top-rated" if he refused to develop with any other platform. Sure, they may be able to crank out apps quickly because they are up-to-speed with a particular platform. But if they have become entrenched with a specific technology, they are not flexible enough to embrace new technologies, new technologies that are inevitable. What would you do if Director wasn't able to produce iOS apps? What would you do if Director no longer becomes a supported platform? These are hypotheticals but they point out weaknesses.

    A good developer should be willing to learn new platforms. A top-rated developer even more so.
     
  8. CodeJingle thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Greater Seattle, WA
    #8
    You are so right, except about the hypothetical part. Director wasn't being supported and didn't produce iOS apps. So my dev guy stopped developing and is currently working at Walmart.

    I am trying to pull him back in, this is my ticket. I should add that he is good at 2d and 3d artwork as well as programming, and also does PM so he is good with tracking features and reeling in the schedule. That is what makes him top notch, he is well rounded and can wear all the hats. Plus he works for free (well split royalties so no money up front anyway). Add all those things together makes him irreplaceable.

    ----------

    Yup. I don't know anyone else with his skill set that is willing to work for royalty only pay. I'd be all over them if I did.
     
  9. 1458279 Suspended

    1458279

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Location:
    California
    #9
    He may be irreplaceable as ONE person, but you could replace him with several people, however the work for % changes things. Finding people to work now in hope of pay later is like finding an gold coin on the ground, it can happen, just doesn't happen very often.

    Several points here:

    1. the Adobe model sucks for the reasons stated above.

    2. you are wanting/needing someone to perform work in advance of pay and only for a %.

    3. the ONE person you found, wants to use Adobe.

    If it were me, I'd find a different path. Not because of him, because of Adobe.

    General rule: if you can't find others doing it, there's probably a reason. [the inverse is not always true]

    If you have an idea for an app that you want to pursue, you have many options to get there. This is just one avenue.
     
  10. dma550 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    Location:
    CT
    #10
    For most of my apps, that wouldn't be a bother, but wow, I wouldn't pay that adobe tax!
     
  11. 1458279 Suspended

    1458279

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Location:
    California
    #11
    From the looks of it, Director is a shockwave product, so does it even create native iOS devices?

    They mention that it's cross platform, usually cross platform means it's not native to any.

    Every time Apple changes things, you'd be dependent on Adobe updating their product?
     
  12. ArtOfWarfare macrumors 604

    ArtOfWarfare

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2007
    #12
    My understanding is that Director is an IDE from Adobe that runs on OS X or Windows.

    You write programs using their scripting language, LINGO. LINGO is normally interpreted by a Flash plugin but since iOS lacks Flash, Director allows you to export LINGO to native iOS code.

    You wouldn't be wholly dependent on Adobe updating their product... you wouldn't be able to take advantage of new features until Adobe updates it, and you might have to target older iOS versions if Apple were to deprecate and remove something that Director was exporting the LINGO to.

    That's just my understanding.
     
  13. chown33 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #13
    Since your basic business plan seems to be to minimize up-front expenditures, I really don't see the big problem here. It's a basic business tradeoff, like millions of people in business make every day.

    Paying Adobe 10% after sales reach a $20k level should be least of your concerns. Getting to the $20k level should be the primary one. Maybe you'll never have the "problem" of paying Adobe 10%.

    Accounting for Apple's 30%, in the worst case you keep 60% of all revenues above $20k. 60% of something is always bigger than 70% of nothing.
     
  14. CodeJingle, Feb 26, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2013

    CodeJingle thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Greater Seattle, WA
    #14
    Right thanks for the down to earth response, that is where I am at right now. Looks like Director is being offered on a SaaS basis so I won't have to pay big bucks for a license either. I'll see how it goes I guess.

    .....update

    I started a subscription. It is only $20 per month for SaaS version of Director, so I'm very happy with that, if it turns out to be a bad idea I'll have no regrets. I think the idea here is that as soon as I publish to the App store I could end the subscription, so if the App only takes 1 month to write and I don't ever update it then Adobe gets very little money. I can see the need for a different licensing model for SaaS development platforms.

    Although I still think if I pay $1,000 for the non-SaaS version of Director 12 I shouldn't have to pay the 10%. But where I am right now that point is moot. I'll keep the thread updated with progress, though I'm guessing a very slow pace, at least starting off.
     

Share This Page