Main Nav

We also saw a 65% increase in the cost of the concurrent use licenses and maintenance for Acrobat.  Adobe has made no secret of its dislike for CULs.

Time to accelerate the pdf alternative search. 

Janice


Janice K. Tulloss, PhD, ASM
Software Coordinator
ITS - Client Services
202 Forney Bldg.
UNC Greensboro
Greensboro, NC 27412
336-334-5401




Comments

Message from mknox@austin.utexas.edu

I hope Adobe is listening…

 

____________________________________________________

Margaret H. Knox                  mknox@utsystem.edu

 

Chief Information Officer (CIO)     (512)322-3774   

The University of Texas System

CTJ 2.218 78701

       

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Software Licensing Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:LICENSING@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Janice Tulloss
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 8:38 AM
To: LICENSING@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [LICENSING] FW: Adobe High Volume Program Ending

 

We also saw a 65% increase in the cost of the concurrent use licenses and maintenance for Acrobat.  Adobe has made no secret of its dislike for CULs.

Time to accelerate the pdf alternative search. 

Janice


Janice K. Tulloss, PhD, ASM

Software Coordinator
ITS - Client Services
202 Forney Bldg.
UNC Greensboro
Greensboro, NC 27412
336-334-5401



> I hope vendor of xyz is listening… In my misspent youth I studied a fair amount of economics. Back then the big "anti-trust" actions got a lot of attention and monopolies, in general, were a major topic. Today, "anti-trust" is really old fashioned, and monopolies don't get much attention - because "classical" monopolies are absent or rare and so "de facto" monopolies some how get overlooked. IMHO, we're facing de facto monopolies in this discussion. MS Windows and Office Suite fall in this category, also the Adobe products discussed in this thread. As long as we buy into the monopolies, we strengthen them and give them more and more leverage over us - and they will never be satisfied until they extract our entire budget for "monopoly rents". Why should they settle for less if they can get away with it? (Of course they won't ask for this much in 2013, that would create an upset - instead annual increases of 10-25%, plus new licenses to purchase because of license restrictions, ..., will lead to that same end. We feel great when we negotiate a 20% increase down to only 12% - but that doesn't change the direction!) Every time we (the education community) says to students, "You *must* use (monopoly) product xyz!" we are supporting the monopoly of the xyz vendor. Oh well, "we have to require it because the employer's require it" - is an explanation of why we are supporting the monopoly, but we should understand the consequences. Every time we look for alternative software (open source or proprietary) which leaves behind the monopoly vendor, we weaken the monopoly - and provide support for others to also do this. (The alternative will never be an exact/perfect replacement - often it is "good enough" - but that's not perfect." So yes, the monopoly vendor *is* listening - and, in my circles, is mostly hearing from the addicts. --henry schaffer ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Recently we met with Adobe and was told that we could continue with our CLP license but it will no longer include administrative staff.  When we pushed back and said that would be extremely difficult for us they "pushed" the FTE option which would quadruple our cost.  We have a year to figure this one out.



Stephanie Trowbridge

Academic Technology Portfolio Manager

Northeastern University

360 Huntington Ave.  MS 2 ELL

Boston, MA  02115

Phone:  617.373.4581

Cell:  617.438.7108

Fax:  617.373.4354

 



From: <Knox>, Marg <mknox@AUSTIN.UTEXAS.EDU>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Software Licensing Issues Constituent Group Listserv <LICENSING@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Date: Thursday, November 1, 2012 5:55 PM
To: "LICENSING@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU" <LICENSING@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: [LICENSING] FW: Adobe High Volume Program Ending

I just caught up on an Adobe change; most of you probably already know it but in case not…here are some snippets from an internal conversation

 

-        Adobe discontinued the high volume Acrobat license program and the price of the regular CLP licenses went up by about 20% with the release of XI

-        They now offer two programs, TSL and ELA. See attached about TSL. Some sample TSL pricing :

o   FTE count:

o   500-2000      $8.77 per FTE

o   2001-8000   $7.67 per FTE

o   8001+          $5.48 per FTE

o    

-        ELA is a custom quote

 

Could this be what caused all the flurry about clones for Acrobat Pro?

____________________________________________________

Margaret H. Knox                  mknox@utsystem.edu

 

Chief Information Officer (CIO)     (512)322-3774   

The University of Texas System

CTJ 2.218 78701

 

********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Hear hear! This is exactly why we are doing what we are doing at our institution. We are in the middle of connecting the Adobe purchases and subsequent installations with the faculty and staff who have requested their installation, and we will be engaging each of them to determine which individual Adobe products (not which suites) they require vs. desire (but not require) vs. don't need at all. We will assemble a list of which users are connected to each product, and we will suggest potential alternatives (scraped from the info we've been discussing on this list, from http://alternativeto.net, and other sources), and we will ask them to look at potential alternatives so they can tell us which products would truly be alternatives to them. When/if they identify alternatives, even if those alternatives only apply to a subset of the user population, we will do our best to implement and support them. Once we have that, it's mostly a matter of giving the alternatives the same type of preferential treatment (i.e., space in our virtual delivery infrastructure, availability for home use, increased accessibility on as many workstations on campus as possible) as we would LIKE to give Adobe but that Adobe won't let us due to their licensing restrictions and/or unreasonable fiscal demands. At the rate things are going, and especially if Adobe is moving away from wanting to provide concurrently licensed software at reasonable prices, they will damn themselves to being installed on a bare minimum number of institutionally-owned workstations on a per-seat basis, unfortunately minimizing their accessibility to those who need access (e.g., those who are being taught to use those specific tools). Subsequently, we expect to see the number of users of those Adobe products dwindle to that minimum number of installations required to minimally support those who absolutely require Adobe-brand software for instructional purposes or for performance of their assigned job duties. I realize that EDUCAUSE might not be the vehicle that can most effectively deal with issues like these, particularly since sponsorship of annual events by vendors like Adobe are an important source of revenue for the organization. However, state and regional consortia whose reason for existence is to best leverage their size and scope to gain the best deals for its members are. We're not just looking at this for the perspective of my institution - the State University of New York system (with 64 members) is also having this same discussion. I hope others will step out of Adobe's comfortably appointed jail cells long enough to have similar discussions with their respective groups as well. - Rick .- / -.-. .-.. ..- . / ..-. --- .-. / -.-- --- ..- / .- .-.. .-.. Rick Engelhardt    http://staff.buffalostate.edu/engelhrb/ - .... . / .-- .- .-.. .-. ..- ... / .-- .- ... / .--. .- ..- .-..
I estimate that UW-Milwaukee's Adobe license costs during our current 2-year CLP period will increase by a factor of 10 over the previous two years -- before concurrent use was taken away from all computers but "classrooms and student lab facilities." We simply can't absorb that. I don't know what public university could. (Certainly not one with an education funding slashing governor. Forward. Wisconsin.) On the bright side, we're just beginning to weigh the ELA options, which may be a much better (lower cost) fit for our campus. If anyone else is in our financial bind, I wouldn't hesitate to talk to Adobe about an ELA. Joe Smith, Software Asset Manager UITS, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Northwest Quadrant B 2438, 2025 E. Newport Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53211 | Phone: 414-229-5623 Email: software@uwm.edu | Web: www.software.uwm.edu Aim higher. Fail better. ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Janice Tulloss" > To: LICENSING@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > Sent: Friday, November 2, 2012 8:37:46 AM > Subject: Re: [LICENSING] FW: Adobe High Volume Program Ending > We also saw a 65% increase in the cost of the concurrent use licenses > and maintenance for Acrobat. Adobe has made no secret of its dislike > for CULs. > > Time to accelerate the pdf alternative search. > > Janice > > > > Janice K. Tulloss, PhD, ASM > Software Coordinator > ITS - Client Services > 202 Forney Bldg. > UNC Greensboro > Greensboro, NC 27412 > 336-334-5401 > > > > > >