Hi, Tammy and all Framers: In response to a comment I posted on this list a few weeks ago I received a couple of responses from alleged Adobe folks, both private and public.
One in particular seemed to make the best and clearest statement of the problem. It was so innocent and naïve I won't repeat it here, because I think would embarrass the sender. It said something like, IIRC, "please tell me the whole problem and I'll do my best to fix it." Well, IMO, the problem is that FrameMaker's been a neglected product line for decades, as Adobe's corporate growth and profitability dwarfed little FM's niche-ness. Hey, it's a fabulous tool – a foundational component of the technical information and publishing industry that underlies most of the major companies and technologies that the current global commerce world relies upon. It's been a key player to the development of the information age's infrastructure. But, like water to fish, it's so ubiquitous, it's invisible. The problem with Adobe's treatment of FM is basically that it's been kicked down the road each time a new shiny tool or market takes the attention of whoever is put in charge of this dependable runt of the product and service litter. That's how corporate management works. So, over the years and changes in development, marketing, and other strategic directions, different teams have inherited the task of keeping FM viable at minimal cost and impact to the larger corporate evolution. Now that some viable competitive tools have evolved, perhaps FM's future is even bleaker. That it's survived for so long is as much a testimony to the industries, companies, and users who've employed it for its core purpose - capturing, organizing, repurposing, and distributing the technical information that dedicated technical writers have distilled from masses of data, research, and hands-on trial-and-error experience with products, into useful information for those who make things work for the benefit of others. So, each time an Adobe team hands FrameMaker of to a new group that's "tasked" (I hate that term,) with improving, fixing, maintaining, evolving it, the continuity is broken, some history is lost, and folks on the new team need to start over. Tech writers used to describe their job as "changing tires on a moving car." The new teams and their members are in the same situation. The two main problem areas that have resulted from this flawed approach are: * technical - keeping the product working and fixing new bugs that arise when developing new product features, and from failed fixes of old ones. * support and licensing - helping users get the result that the product is intended to provide, and keeping their purchase history intact and valid. Technical stuff can usually be attended to by skilled support techs. Some problems require exceptionally well-skilled techs, with the dedication to stay with a customer until an issue is solved. Licensing is a separate domain. From a corporate view, it's more about maximizing revenue. So the responses that Tammy's documenting here really point to how corporate revenue management is being done, and the wall that's blocking any recognition of what a customer deserves after paying a company for a product, license, service, and value. My professional life has changed, so I don't actually use FM any more. If I had to deal with this problem, however, I'd try to get it fixed by escalating it. However, I don't mean the usual escalation to a higher-level tech-support tier, or a higher-level customer-service manager, because it's become clear that folks at these levels aren't able to break through the policy walls that they quote as reasons for denying access to previously-purchased licenses. I'd suggest trying to disrupt the ineffective incremental up-a-level-at-a-time escalation method, and instead starting at the very top - the CEO. Perhaps start a write-in campaign site, collect signatures, and keep up the pressure. People at the top are not stupid. They get it when plenty of major corporate users who represent plenty of licenses in major corporate enterprise customer companies and partners. After all, while FM itself might not be a big Adobe revenue chunk, large corporate software, cloud, and service customers are Adobe's bread and butter. Often folks on this list cite the problem of getting buy-in from their own PTB (Powers That Be) to get approval to buy a product, subscription, or service, that can make them more productive. It's often seen that this is a competitive struggle within one's organization. Well, look at this Adobe licensing stymie as an opportunity to enlist your own corporate PTB coooperate with you to advocate the need to have Adobe honor its commitment. You know, CEO-to-CEO level, a corporate summit, you might call it. Hey, it could happen! Just a thought... On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:04 PM <tamm...@spectrumwritingllc.com> wrote: > So, I had some offlist inquiries about how the licensing issue went with > Adobe, and in a nutshell, it didn't. Here's a quick summary: > > > > 1. Adobe wants proof of purchase or invoice for this extremely old > software. I bought it so long ago (when it first came out), that I simply > do > not have that anymore. I do have a registered product, but evidently that > is > not good enough. > 2. Adobe provided an email to me that stated that they would be more > than happy to charge me out the wazoo for upgrading to the latest and > greatest subscription version of CS - Basically, pay every year for what I > paid for this one time perpetual license. > 3. They also sent the email below: > > > > You might have been using this license for last couple of years. You are > facing this issue now because Adobe is running a new program > <http://www.adobe.com/genuine.html> http://www.adobe.com/genuine.html > under > this, we are running a validation test to check the software is properly > licensed or not. We introduced this in 2016 and gradually we are going to > cover all our customers those who have unknowingly purchased the non > genuine > product. Earlier Adobe was not aware of this counterfeit issue, so even > those invalid serial keys were able to register and use it without any > interruption, but after Adobe notice this issue all those in valid serial > keys were flagged out. > > Uhm, OK, but the whole irony is that Adobe is notorious for licensing > problems with valid licenses, so how on earth could an invalid serial > number > even be allowed to be registered? I don't buy that at all. I can even > remember a few times entering a license number wrong for a product and > getting an error message and having to double-check and redo my entry!!! So > an invalid number going through unscathed for multiple installations > throughout the years and then blam, it is dead in the water?? > > > > Compare this experience to the absolutely incredible one that I had w/ > Madcap Flare: > > > > 1. Had a license transferred to me (the whole process took less than > 30 > minutes.) > 2. Called support to activate the transferred license - someone > answered like in 5 seconds vs. the hour wait on hold with Adobe w/out any > help whatsoever. > 3. Provided my identifying information, CRS replied "one sec," and > voila, license was activated, and now working beautifully in Flare. > 4. Just downloaded the latest and greatest version of Flare and > automatically get one month of PLATINUM support (yes, PLATINUM support) for > free. Have a whole list of questions I want to ask, submitted them to > MadCap > and they are setting a specific time for me to use this support to get all > my questions answered. > > > > Final result - Flare purchased and is being used for a new client project > with the prospect of another soon. Adobe was absolutely NO longer in the > running. . . .I will have to stick w/ Adobe for my long time clients that > know it and have been using the setup that I established for them - but > going forward, unless a client really balks, it's Flare. > > > > TVB > > > > > > > > Tammy Van Boening > > Principal/Owner > > Spectrum Writing, LLC > > www.spectrumwritingllc.com <http://www.spectrumwritingllc.com> > > 303-840-1755 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > This message is from the Framers mailing list > > Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com > Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com > Archives located at > http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ > Subscribe and unsubscribe at > http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com > Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com > > _______________________________________________ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
