Discussion

By Patrick Berger on Jun 30, 2007

Since reader 8.1 is a free program it should offer equal or customizable print online choices for all users. Microsoft had all kinds of trouble with the US justice department and internet explorer. I look at this as almost identical. Only having a single choice for on line outputting.
This totally non competitive.

The print Industry would be wise to congeal and start to using open source software. ADOBE and FEDEX could mean a death sentence for thousands.

Boycott Adobe and Kinkos they have just hit you in the pocket it is only fair to return the favor.

Treat others as you would have them treat you goes for business also.

 

By Mike on Jun 30, 2007

What is stopping anyone from creating this type of Acrobat plugin for their own printshop? The Kinkos plugin is pretty simple, it doesn't really do much with Acrobat at all. I'll give you the formula. Create a button that launches a web page that automatically uploads the pdf, automate your back-end printing and add a simple e-commerce solution. Stop relying on others. Get to work and start innovating. Acrobat's developer resources are http://www.adobe.com/devnet/acrobat/" rel="nofollow">right here

 

By Steve Whitman on Jun 30, 2007

Whoa! Wait a minute. The quick response from Adobe's CEO Chizen and his stated sincerity to enter into a discussion with the DICE membership within the constraints of the obligation to Kinko's sort of misses the point. A strategic mistake has likely been made by Adobe, at least, I dare say, in the eyes of the general printing industry that competes with Kinko's. Therefore, Mr. Chizen needs to decide if he wants to reverse that decision, painful and as expensive as it might be or just talk about what Adobe has done and cannot undo. Conversely, the print industry needs to decide if they wish to roll over or start to look for other alternatives to Adobe, also painful and expensive as that might be and, in case Adobe doesn't see the obvious, negotiating with the 328 DICE members is just a small drop in the graphics arts bucket. There are many thousand more of us and we have all been, or should have been in the Adobe camp, that is up until this move. I respectfully suggest it is time for Mr. Chizen to reverse course.

 

By John Henry on Jun 30, 2007

I sent a letter to Bruce and got a canned response.

The bigger issue is if this is a trial balloon and they will next take on Vista print or some other.

I sent this to Bruce:


On Jun 29, 2007, at 8:58 AM, John Henry wrote:

[email protected]
Bruce Chizen, Adobe CEO


Mr Chizen;

I am very upset that a company (Adobe) I have chosen to build my design/Printing business around has added a link for FedEx/Kinkos on a product everyone of my customers use.

At this time I have told my designers to switch all our creative work to Quark and no longer recommend Adobe CS to clients. Yes, we will still take their files in CS, just not longer recommend it when asked what program they should use or buy.

I also have started to use and recommend Primo PDF as our PDF creator and even have Primo on our website as free download for our accounts. I am about to put a link for Foxit Reader 2.0 as our recommended PDF reader. These programs will avoid my customers having to use your FedEx/Kinkos linked products. These both are FREE, faster and much smaller than your products.
In fact they work better on many files. Yes, they are missing some features but 99% of my accounts do not need them. I will keep my acrobat pro with pitstop for the few that do.

My next step will be fully implementing Microsoft's XPS, their PDF competitor. You see we printers are not dumb; we helped to make Acrobat and CS a success. As things stand we have even more incentive to make the others systems work even better. I know of major software VAR's that are right now working on scripts that will remove the FedEx/Kinkos link and install links to their customers. The Jaws PDF creators have been a consultant for Microsoft's on XPS. How long to they come with a simple solution?

Why can't Adobe configure Reader so that it has all the ASN providers built into Reader? Then, if someone wanted to send a job via Reader, they would have a choice. I have no problem competing when the competition is fair.

I assume Adobe is being paid upfront and/or a percent of the revenue FedEx/Kinkos gets. I know it may take years to affect a major shift away
from Adobe, but assure you that printers will. Just as we moved to
CS from
Quark, we will move back and adopt other workflows when our business is threatened like this.

You need to act; every printer I know and printing industry group is looking at you and what you decide...


John M. Henry
Mitchell Printing & Mailing Company
125-129 East First Street
Oswego, New York 13126
(315) 343-3531
(315) 343-3577 Fax
www.mpcny.com
[email protected]

 

By Pat Berger on Jul 01, 2007

Mike could you make a link to download the formula.

 

By Daniel Korzeniewski on Jul 01, 2007

WOW, this is really bad, and its true Adobe is now supporting a direct competitor of thousands of their own clients. I don't think this going to work, all the graphic community will be looking for options. I smelled something bad for all of us when FedEx took over Kinkos, and I stopped using FedEx and recommended everybody I knew to use alternative shippers. Why in the world I would use FedEx for my shippments when they are coming to compete with us? This is more of the same shame Adobe!!!, and I recommend all the printers also to stop using FedEx for their shipments, there are better options.

 

By Howard Smith on Jul 01, 2007

Why use FedEx at all? I used to ship fine artwork (framed under glass) via FedEx, then discovered that the U.S. Postoffice will take the same cartons, get them to my customers in a average of two days via Priority Mail, and charge much less. So far I haven't had any claims against the post office, either. Can't say that about FedEx.

When we get locked into one source out of habit, we may be losing money and not realizing it. As for Adobe, I'm waiting for Microsoft to do further development work on their new graphics program. I don't like being taken for granted.

 

By William Volk on Jul 01, 2007

The general printing industry reliance on 'free' solutions bought this chain of events onto themselves. For years we offered a low cost web-based alternative for content approval but the typical response was "I'll just email a PDF". Nevermind that the average customer doesn't have markup abilities in their PDF readers.

Meanwhile our loyal print shops will never had to send a PDF to a client. Spending a whopping $50/mo. for a web based solution that any one can use does have it's benefits.

Selling to the printing industry has been educational to say the least.

 

By Andy McCourt on Jul 01, 2007

Another example of what happens when a virtual monopoly situation is held by a supplier to the industry. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely (by 'corrupt' I don't mean it in the illicit sense, just a propensity to wrong-headed decision making). It's astonishing that any global marketer with a broad customer base could agree to this on an exclusive basis, if it is exclusive. If Adobe offers the link to all and sundry and on a regional basis, okay.
My take is that it's a shot at Vistaprint's success, and an odd ugly shot at that.

 

By Brad Smith on Jul 01, 2007

I own a small print shop in Sydney Australia. I am concerned about the impact this will have on our industry, in many directions. I think it will impact on Adobe more than they realise. I have emailed but Adobe and our local industry body voicing my concerns. It will be interesting to see what shapes up over the next month or two. There is already much concern from printers on websites and forums.

 

By Ahmed El-Sherif on Jul 02, 2007

Just incase anyone from Adobe is reading this; I wanted you to know that this is not only affecting US and European printers, but every printer who has a Kinkos franchise located in their country. I personally agree with Mr. John Henry, it is not that Kinkos is a direct competitor to my business; it is more of the concept. We have helped shape Adobe to what it is today; almost all web2print applications incorporate a PDF proof including my own. There is no way I will allow my customers to view a "Print at Kinkos" while they are actually placing an order…this is an outrage. I have already started to look for alternatives and believe all printers should do the same, Adobe is a truly remarkable application, but it needs to look out for the best interest of its users rather than a quick buck.

 

By Robbie K. Burger on Jul 02, 2007

Kinko's was a failing enterprise before the FedEx acquisition and, although FeEx revenues are still ascending while Kinko's are declining I see a reversal for FedEx in the near future. Kinko's products and services have never been better than mediocre and advances in printing technology have made new purchasers more knowledgeable and demanding for higher quality.

As for Adobe, they are making a big mistake triggered by hubris in thinking that they are the only game in town. I have yet to upgrade to CS3 from CS2 and I think I'll wait quite a bit longer to do so.

 

By Michael J on Jul 02, 2007

As usual, Dr Joe Webb has it pretty right.

Adobe is a software business. As I understand it, the entire graphic industry is about 1/3 of their revenue. And my guess is that it isn't a growth sector for them.

Like any business, their job is to make a sustainable profit. They are "friends" as long as it that meets that goal. That's just life.

My guess is that Adobe 9and Microsoft) see Open Source and Google, not Quark, as the real threat.

So... the most reasonable response of the industry is to use them when they are the best solution, and use something else when they are not.
It's not personal, just business.

 

By Todd Shelhorse on Jul 02, 2007

"What is stopping anyone from creating this type of Acrobat plugin for their own printshop?"

How am I supposed to get this custom Acrobat plugin distributed and installed to thousands of potential customers. Do you think Adobe would provide distribution services, automatic installation, and a big press release announcing the ability to submit print jobs directly to my company?

It seems that this decision was made, with no regards to the industry that has promoted Adobe's products for so many years.

 

By Marcus Angelo on Jul 02, 2007

Frankly I'm not surprised with the Adobe and FedEx/Kinkos announcement, annoyed, but not surprised. Greed is the primary business motivator in the 21st century and suppliers in this industry don't have any qualms about simply stepping right on or over their well-define customer channels to reach end users.

For example, look at the recent move by HP to acquire LogoWorks, an online and deeply discounted provider of graphic design (and printing)services. Sure HP will probably claim that the printing work will be funneled to their network of Indigo installations, but isn't HP merely acting as print broker in this case?

The printing and graphic arts industry in rapidly undergoing a "channel collapse." This phenomenon can witnessed in other industries such as the automotive and office supply retail businesses. Our challenge will be not how to fight it, but to retool our businesses to work with it.

 

By Dr Joe Webb on Jul 02, 2007

Since Mike brought it up, the Adobe developer site is important to visit, and yes, the industry complaining is much of its own fault. But there's no place on the Adobe site for a printer to have their business be included in the free Acrobat download. That's the real issue here: Adobe choosing FedExKinko's over thousands of its users.

This is a great opportunity to bring open source software to the attention of the industry, and we should take that initiative.

Editor's note - See Dr. Joe's full comments on this topic at this http://members.whattheythink.com/allsearch/articleerc.cfm?id=29473" rel="nofollow">WhatTheyThink.com link.

 

By Greg L Roberts on Jul 02, 2007

Wow...I truly can't believe why Adobe wouldn't see how offensive this move is to all the small print shops out there - and why Kinko's? It is routinely the most expensive option available when I compare prices for their kind of work.

Really, adding automatic preference to ANY printer would be equally egregious, but the Fed/Kinkos deal just smacks of monopoly-making.

Please, Adobe, don't spoil your outstanding reputation for product excellence by implementing this ill-advised marketing strategy.

 

By Fred in IT on Jul 02, 2007

I would suggest that everyone *try* the new functionality before commenting on the deal. I think you will find the system to be "self limiting" in nature.

Seeing is believing, and you too will become enlightened.

While I agree that the deal was dumb in nature and that there should have been a development framework for other printers to add their own buttons. Adobe is a large corporation and is, and should be, allowed to make dumb mistakes.

The market will respond accordingly - Mike's "fix" to the solution is just one.

However, as a recient side-by-side comparison of OSS tools such as GIMP, Ghost*, etc., with their purchased counterparts found out, the OSS tools are absolutely no match for the paid tools in a professional environment. While, Dr. Webb's goal is laudable, it is only an idealistic dream at this time.

Personally, I would like to see more work done with the JDF framework Adobe has placed in their products for order submittal. Everyone has been fiddling around with how to get their Heidelburg to talk to their finisher - who cares. Just get the MIS (order entry & billing) stuff working.

 

By Dr Joe Webb on Jul 02, 2007

Responding to Fred in IT, I am not surprised that open source software would not hold its own in a high intensity production environment. People have to build the tools to do that and be willing to share them with others. That obviously takes a lot of time.

The OpenOffice product is a good example. It started as open source because Sun Microsystems was a big enough company that it realized it could buy a small office software company in Europe for the price it was paying in Microsoft licenses. It made it open source because it needed resources in addition to its own to ensure that there would be office products available for its own Solaris operating systems as well as Unix and Linux. The still support OpenOffice to the tune of about $20 million a year, I believe, and pay for that with sales of StarOffice (a combination of OpenOffice with proprietary and licensed plug-ins). It's only recently that I can say that OpenOffice really works well. It has its shortcomings, but I'm able to use it all of the time except when I need an Excel chart, in which case Excel 2000 fills what I need.

This model may work for our industry. But in the meantime, where for many small printers with unsophisticated customers (printing flyers, church bulletins, newsletters, etc.) where people need relatively simple things, and often do them in MS Word, Scribus and other open source products can fit the bill very well.

I wouldn't put it into daily production at a major newspaper or publisher, or use it for fine fashion work, but for the work of infrequent print buyers, it may be just fine.

The strategy of getting open source into our industry for higher end applications would probably need a base to build on, much like Sun did with OpenOffice.

I had a conversation with someone at Corel a few months ago asking if they ever considered putting Ventura Publisher out as open source, since they have done little to promote it, and don't seem interested in making a full commitment to major upgrades. I was told that there are lots of proprietary Corel Draw items in the core of Ventura, and in layman's terms, the product would not work without them.

Of course, Draw and Ventura are Windows products, and would require some re-engineering to get onto Mac and other platforms, but it would be a start. We also have to keep in mind that Ventura fell out of favor for a reason, and getting it into shape for modern production may take some effort and a financial "sugar daddy."

This is a good opportunity for Quark to step up and be an industry hero, or it seems that way.

 

By Gerrie Blum on Jul 02, 2007

Adobe has always had an independent attitude ... don't like it, go elsewhere -- and for a long time during the "early days" we couldn't. Whether it was Illustrator or Photo Shop or Acrobat, they were in a class by themselves.

Not so anymore. There are some great programs out there, yes, like Quark which I have used since it was on a bunch of floppies. And, of course, TrueType fonts abound. It remains to be seen if Adobe changes with the times or stays rigid and unyielding.

As for Howard Smith's comment about FedEx and the USPS ... did you know that the post office has its mail on FedEx planes every day? So, in a sense you are getting the speed of FedEx with the reasonable prices of the USPS, which I use all the time for our business packages, along with UPS and DHL. I will use FedEx, only if the customer asks specifically.

 

By "Dr" Dan Webb on Jul 02, 2007

So when I saw my dad reading this blog post I felt the need to reply to Fred in IT as I like to follow Open Source. :D

Personally, I haven't tested the feature so I don't know how much it can do and how "self-limiting" it is. But based on my few business experiences I do know that this caters to small businesses, and based on the success of small, customized printers like VistaPrint, this is a segment that the industry doesn't want to lose bussiness from because of Adobe's new feature.

Yes, GIMP, Scribus, etc. aren't exactly near CS3 at this point. I've only played with Scribus a little bit, but I love GIMP. It's making good progress, and I'd say it's somewhere between Elements and CS3.

But these tools are free, and as such, are very cheap to at least try. Not to mention they can save in Adobe's formats (well, at least GIMP can save psds, I haven't really checked on other programs thoroughly). They're open source, too, so printers can actually try to customize things for themselves.

I'd highly recommend to some businesses to look at these programs:

FontForge
The GIMP
Inkscape
Scribus
Enblend
Synfig

And by the way, if you're on a Mac right now, you're using an operating system that has its roots in open source (BSD). Who knew OSS could be so powerful? :D

 

By Bill Wylde on Jul 02, 2007

Adobe's choice is detrimental to far more than just small printers. How about Staples, OfficeMax, Office Depot, etc.? Those companies not only compete head to head with Kinko's, they sell Adobe software.

This would all be reversed overnight if a few of things happen:

1. The office supply chains refuse to sell Adobe products.

2. All of us return our Fedex materials and boycott them.

3. Because pdf's are the industry standard, there may be viable restraint of trade issues here. Contact your congressman and senators about this unfair competition.

4. Contact your trade associations and have them consider class action lawsuits against Adobe/FedEx/Kinko's.

Every time my company gets the opportunity to compete directly with Kinko's, we blow their doors off on service, quality and price. This is their solution to stumbling in the marketplace.

 

By Tony Tedeschi on Jul 02, 2007

Mr. Bruce Chizen
Adobe CEO
Dear Mr Chizen:

As an incredibly loyal and long-time user of your products, I am quite outraged that Adobe has chosen to point my clients to a competitor's website (FedEx/Kinkos) when they use the new version of Acrobat.

We have five graphic artists in our company and six or seven fully licensed copies of your software. We are part of the ASN Network, too, and have been for at least 10 years. Companies like mine have built Adobe and carried the company through challenges from Corel, Quark and others. Our small firm has spent tens of thousands of dollars buying fonts, upgrades, and packages from the company you steer. This is how you reward us?

I am volunteering my firm to provide direct mail material to help with the boycott of Adobe and FedEx Kinkos until this relationship no longer harms our industry. We will promote your competitors products and PDF alternatives such as Primo and Foxit. We have already switched to Jaws PDF creator on our website. I guess we're going to have to look into Microsoft XPS, too, as a future alternative.

I will push the Printing Industries of America to join in the boycott and help educate their enormous membership what Adobe is doing. The same with NAPL and several other associations that we belong to. Other vendors have done things like this before and we have responded in mass. Ask Xerox how they did with their stand alone copy centers. Shareholders won't like you alienating the bread and butter of their wealth.

Mr. Chizen, please find a way to correct the mistake that Adobe made with its exclusive promotion of FedEx/Kinko's before it is too late.

Sincerely,

--
Tony Tedeschi, President
Piedmont Press & Graphics
Warrenton Lifestyle Magazine
404 Belle Air Lane
Warrenton, VA 20186
(540) 347-4466

 

By Mike on Jul 02, 2007

I don't know if these canned copy and paste letters to to Mr. Chizen are any better then any canned response Adobe may make. Do you can really think that Microsoft's XP$ has any more obligation to you then Adobe. It will only be a matter of time before they install some print to Kinko's type button.

But for those who wish to blaze their own path, Adobe also puts a small price on making a plugin for their apps. Nothing too greedy, http://www.adobe.com/devnet/reader/ikla.html" rel="nofollow">just $2,500.

I don't know if an individual print shop is in the best position to make and promote their special button. A network of printers would seem to have the best effect. Perhaps DICE or some other organization could create the network and system for their members. They could promote it online or through a nice direct mail campaign, I am sure WhatTheyThink and other sources would post the press release.

 

By David on Jul 03, 2007

Mike said: "What is stopping anyone from creating this type of Acrobat plugin for their own printshop?"

Answer- nothing (Well, if you have a programmer or two around). There are even tool kits out there to assist in the entire preflight and file transfer bit already, which can be fully customized beyond this Fedex/Kinkos offering.

The point- the fact is that Adobe simply added this "feature" to the standard, free, release version of Acrobat Reader, choosing sides in effect (hopefully by mistake), that is the gruesome point.

 

By Samuel Hargis on Jul 03, 2007

BOYCOTT FedEx Starting Now:
Lets put as much pressure on FedEx. We are what, the 9th largest industry or so. Starting tomorrow, get a boycott of FedEx using all business and consumer shipping, send it all UPS and Airborne. Anything you buy, don't use FedEx, they are unscrupulous as a vendor. Like Adobe, they chose to compete directly with a large customer base.

SEE POST AT http://prepressforum.com

post: {Big News} Adobe Deal with Kinko's, Screwing Printers Big!

We have email address list going for all to send an email to these guys and let them know of the noise we can make. Sure, you may get a canned message like others did, so what. Show the numbers to Adobe. It can be brief and pithy as Adobe won't take time to read them, just need to demonstrate the size of our groups. Prepress forum has almost 4,000 members now.

If anyone can assist with top executives email addresses for fedEx, we are trying to compile that for our members to email all those guys too. Also talk of threads for NON-ADOBE options to support.

 

By John Henry on Jul 03, 2007

NAPL/NAQP and just yesterday PIA/GATF have come out hard against the Adobe FedEx/Kinko's marriage.

If I have the numbers right they combined, own 2/3's of the GraphExpo show in Chicago. Would it not be a strong message if they during the forth coming discussions about this notified Adobe if this issue is not resolved before the show, that Adobe would not be welcome at the show.

Plus NO Adobe led seminars, NO booths, NO Adobe signage or marketing of any type will be allowed at the show??? One step more, a call to Quark and HQ could be made to provide how to work without Adobe seminars...


I fully understand that 3rd party's will be there with their plug-in's. But NO Adobe banners, NO seminars and NO marketing. That I am sure is a strong message and the way to jump start a boycott and while our industry leading groups, the 2 largest ones in fact take a stand that is loud and clear in support of printers.

The purely PR factor of this move is incredible. We just must have them hold Adobe's feet to the fire. Maybe Dr Joe and Frank Romano can jump in on this tactic.

In fact all of us can write NAPL and PIA and request this.

 

By David Watson on Jul 03, 2007

Don't through the baby out with the bath water...

Just because Joe Webb and others do not like the actions of Adobe, is not a reason to lead an assault on the software industry that specializes in providing solutions to the printing and publishing industry. There are many companies from small to large ones that spend millions in R&D to meet the needs of their customers. The call for widespread support for open source software to be implemented is an indirect call to undermine these many businesses. If successful it would lead to their decline and in many cases demise. Would the printing industry be better off if this happened?

There are a limited number of graphic arts companies. To meet their needs software vendors have to have some prospect of making a profit, or they will concentrate on software for the wider horizontal markets. The problem with the call for widespread adoption of open source solutions is the distraction it will give printers in trying to play with solutions not designed for printers and not supported by professional development resources. Time and money would be wasted by printers trying to meet their needs in the murky world of open source.

Most vendors try to help their customers become more profitable and do not compete with them. Punish the ones that do, if you choose to, but do not punish them as a group.

 

By Fred on Jul 04, 2007

We own server graphic arts studios and have reluctantly and only, I might add bought, into Adopie because our clients’ printers expressed a strong preference for work product to be delivered that was produced in Adobe.

If printers were to support an effective alternative, preferably open source, option we would be very interested in the process.

 

By DHunter on Jul 05, 2007

I know this is a different direction than the boycott/beseige Adobe thinking, but I'm guessing someone would know how to "hack" the transfer address of the Adobe button so the file gets sent to another printer instead of Kinko's. Mike's solution of creating another button seems a bit daunting to those of us who aren't serious programmers.

If that hack was easy enough and widely posted, Adobe's "lemon" could be made into "lemonaide". They would probably holler and fuss, but lots of us wouldn't care. Combined with boycott/beseige Adobe, it would be another way to apply pressure.

 

By Thomas D. Greer on Jul 05, 2007

I certainly understand all the uproar, but I'm much more concerned about the functional issues of the software. What happened to FDF? Creating fillable forms via pdfmark operators in PostScript? Not only has Adobe made a huge marketing blunder with 8.1, but they have also removed some core functionality. Another example, font distribution. Adobe has stopped distributing the "base fonts", now we only get Courier, Symbol, 4 CJK fonts, and everything else is handled by 2 generic MultiMaster fonts, a serif and a san-serif.

To me, these issues are more important than the FedEx Kinkos link. It's one thing to blithely blow-off the entire quick printing industry (I think quick printers will adapt and compete), but it's quite another to break existing applications dependent upon application features.

As long as I'm griping, I think Adobe has made a complete muddle of the Acrobat product line, and also left many developers and RIP vendors stranded by abandoning PostScript language development.

 

By Bruce Harrison on Jul 05, 2007

It seems incongruous that Adobe would have entered into an agreement such as this without first considering the likely industry response. Bruce's apology seems equally disengenious and appears to foreshadow the futility of the petitions from industry associations. Hopefully, after the dust settles, Adobe will attempt to redress the situation. For those contemplating alternatives to PDF, take a look at XPS.
This technology is maturing quickly and Graph Expo 07 has announced a "XPS Land" Technology Showcase where the Show Daily and other publications will be running live using native XPS products from a number of companies demonstrating composition to print.

 

By Rob Munz on Jul 06, 2007

Our company PROOF-it-ONLINE already provides hundreds of graphic designers and printers with an alternative to sending customers native PDF's for review and approval thus eliminating the fears stated in many of these entries. I suggest that the reaction I’m observing to Adobe may be overblown.

Printers are dealing with the same challenges of those who buy printing. Fear not. Do other printers buy Google ad words that show up next to another printers listing? Of course they do. Think about the “competition only one click away” nature of the internet on your own customers. Or in many towns he one door down furniture store competitor on furniture row, or the competing auto dealership just across the street. Customer care and service differentiation must for them, the retailers, services and professionals in your cities, be more important than simply the awareness or opportunity to do business with those offering similar services. The same holds true for printers. I have consistently suggested that it is a printer’s customer care, service and actions towards removing friction from doing business that is the real secret to a printer’s success and continued business growth. Keeping the competition or in this case the Kinko’s at bay requires service. Continue to sincerely care about your customers, deploy tools and technologies to make doing business easy on your customers. The difference resulting in success is in what PRINTERS do not in what Adobe does.

 

By Gary on Jul 09, 2007

I am a small commercial printer, and I agree with the majority here. Adobe alligning themselves with a large corporate competitor is a mistake. I too will do my all to promote non Adobe products within my client base and certainly my art department.

 

By Scott on Jul 09, 2007

As a 25-year plus industry veteran, I want to expand on some points and bring up others not covered yet.

First, Adobe is between a “rock and a hard place” much as Scitex management selling CEPS was at the end of the 1980s and early 1990s. Remember the conflicting needs and capabilities between printers and publishers? Printers and prepress firms had been the first graphic arts users of Scitex CEPS and were the drivers of growth and profitability for that company after some other divisions cratered. On the other hand, publishers, which were a huge and wide open market, started to note that Scitex (and other vendor’s) CEPS could finally help them paginate color and black/white pages. The big point of contention was how CEPS would work with Macs as their capabilities quickly developed. Printers and prepress firms wanted to keep a closed system to preserve their $1,000 to $2,000 per hour system fees to ad agencies and other creative customers. Publishers wanted an open system to allow pages designed on Mac workstations to pass through for pagination. The publishers won that one, not the printers.

At Adobe, a similar analogy is unfolding today as creative designers/corporate publishing personnel have one set of wants and desires versus printers and prepress firms with conflicting wants and desires. Again, a long-time industry vendor/partner begins to shift its strategic focus to the needs of a future and growing market, the creative and corporate design professionals, and away from the past and shrinking market, printers and prepress firms.

Second, the idea that we can boycott either Adobe and/or FedEx/Kinko’s is a nice knee-jerk, reactive thought but not realistic. Let’s take Adobe first. It’s a good idea to boycott Adobe if you are a printer but what is the benefit of that to design professionals, Adobe’s main customer segment and an important part of the “value chain” that feeds your shop? I can’t think of one since most design professionals don’t have this type of problem with Adobe. In fact, Adobe continues to provide a complete creative software package for their needs to create multimedia, not just print, communications. And as one other person in this thread points out, you as a printer don’t decide the software you buy to service your customers. Your customers make that decision for you and to serve their needs, printers and prepress firms will continue to buy Adobe products without an alternative, bitter as that is to swallow.

Okay, even if printers could interest some design professionals to consider alternatives to Adobe, just getting them to try and eventually use that software isn’t enough. Where do entry-level and trained designers come from? Design schools and other learning institutions. My view is that will be an even more difficult venue to pull away from Adobe than designers themselves.

Also, it will be a long, long time for any vendor, free or not, to match the extensive and proven capabilities in Adobe products right now. And I doubt that Adobe will stand still. Furthermore, writing code for a browser can’t even be compared to writing code for the various packages with Adobe’s capabilities. Something on a similar scale would be an operating system and it took many “man-years” for Linux to be considered a viable alternative to Windows. Finally, as in every area of life there is the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” or “why should I be a pioneer and get the arrows, front and back” inertia to overcome.

How about boycotting the FedEx side of FedEx/Kinko’s? If you as a printer make the choice of carrier, it is realistic and a worthy idea so by all means, do that. But are you the one that pay’s the shipping charges, really pays? Probably not. Again it is your customer and they make the choice using their own criteria such as price, consistency of delivery, etc.

Thirdly, I have not seen anyone else note that this may be one effect of the never ending drive for corporate cost savings. I used to work for one large publishing group with a very efficient and effective centralized purchasing staff. They negotiate national contracts which yield significant cost savings for the company. And you at a business unit really don’t have any choice but to play by these rules. So I used FedEx for shipping everything, regardless of some concerns and problems I had. Well can we rule out with certainty that Adobe and/or FedEx/Kinko’s did not receive a request from this group of “customers” to develop the “Print to Kinko’s” feature and some others we’ll see in future updates/releases? This is one-stop shopping and with the volumes that some large corporations buy and ship, the cost savings could be serious dollars. Also I used to complain under my breath about these arrangements but in the large companies, we as users may have strong input but the centralized purchasing staff has equal if not greater influence on the vendors.

Fourthly, we’ve all heard what happens to small retailers and building suppliers when Wal-Mart and Home Depot come to town. The general retailer and building supplier, even though they provided good service, quality goods, a nice shopping experience, etc., went out of business. The retail market for their goods and service became commoditized and they provided nothing distinctive to remain in business. On the other hand, I frequent a specialty retailer (unique gifts) and specialty building supplier (electrical and lighting items) that not only survived but continue to prosper because they offer a wider selection of specialty items and better service than their big box competitors.

Printers voicing the loudest concerns over this tie-up face a similar future and have to take one of the two paths. We’ve all heard that if you compete with Kinko’s, Staples, etc. for the type of printing they provide, your future is unfortunately grim. That is now a commodity business and is not going to change. But if you specialize and provide services that Kinko’s cannot or will not do, your future is much better. Your customers will ignore the “Print to Kinko’s” button as if it isn’t even there.

In many ways, Adobe is in a similar position as Proctor and Gamble was in a number of years ago when they had to supply Wal-Mart, and agree to Wal-Mart’s terms. The retailing behemoth demanded many concessions and changes to existing operating practices at the consumer goods company. Eventually though Wal-Mart became Proctor and Gamble’s biggest distribution channel. And who benefited from this new world order? Wal-Mart certainly did all along with Proctor and Gamble eventually reaping higher volumes and increased efficiencies even at a lower price. Wal-Mart passed on to the consumers many benefits so they definitely did. And where did this leave the small general retailer? Out in the cold and eventually out of business unfortunately. Now FedEx/Kinko’s is clearly not like Wal-Mart but you could substitute the creative and corporate design professionals market for it in this analogy. And the small to medium size printers that compete for work done by FedEx/Kinko’s is the retailer.

As a printer/publisher, I’m not happy with this decision or how it was handled. But if I step back and ask the question “If I was in a senior decision-making role at Adobe would I have chosen this as an appropriate tactic as part of my corporate strategy?” Well, the printer part of me says “Hell no Adobe. You are stabbing a group of good, loyal, and long-time customers in the back!” If I step over to the vendor’s side though, I see it from a different perspective. I will never make all my customer segments happy and sometimes they will be in direct conflict. And if it comes down to the choice to upset my biggest and best positioned customer segment or my smaller less well positioned segment, it’s the later. That’s what I see Adobe staring in the face right now and going forward. So if I was in Adobe’s shoes, I probably would have done this but they clearly blew the execution of the strategic choice. I still don't like it though.

Lastly, I should note that, I never worked for or own stock directly in either company. And contrary to what you might think, I’m not a raving fan of either company since I think both have many areas to improve. But both are lucky that most if not all of their competitors perform even worse off than they do in many important areas.

 

By Marcus Angelo on Jul 10, 2007

In an earlier post, someone brought up Adobe Transit, which reminded me of the heady dot com days, a former employer and this thread.

While I'm not defending Adobe at this point, I do want to point out the following. Back in 1999-2000, print franchisers and chains were all given the opportunity to provide privately labeled e-commerce software to their customers. While I can only comment on the company I worked for, the functionality of our solution back then gave users the ability to "File | Print" from any desktop application, including MS Office, Adobe and so on, which would then drive the print output to whomever privately labeled the software.

Very few print franchisers and none of the print chains either understood the opportunity that this technology brought, or perhaps the company I worked for was ahead of its time. Either way, all of them were given the opportunity to take advantage of this technology back then and even today, with more current Web-to-Print and e-commerce solutions.

I hate to say it, but is it simply easier to cry foul then to proactively take advantage of readily available technology? Or, to point the finger of monopoly when one of us (yes us, FedEx/Kinkos is a print chain)steps up and does something innovative?

P.S.: Has anybody wondered how much of the work generated through Acrobat 8.1 is going to end up at one of rarely mentioned FedEx/Kinkos "closed door" facilities?

 

By Michael Josefowicz on Jul 10, 2007

Thanks Scott for the thoughtful summary of the situation. Just one point to add. There is a practical alternative to the "wal-Mart" effect. People might want to check out a book called The Small Mart Revolution that describes a different reality, more in sync with the descriptions described by printers who have gone head to head with Kinko's. From the blurb on the website...http://www.smallmart.org "Contrary to popular belief, many small, locally owned businesses actually out-perform their “big box” and Fortune 500 competition—both in outright profitability and the value they bring to consumers, workers, and communities. Unlike mega-stores and multi-national chains like Wal-Mart, these small businesses stimulate the economy by buying supplies and services locally, adapt to (rather than fight against) higher local environmental and labor regulations, and stick around for many years, often many generations."

 

By Samuel Hargis on Jul 13, 2007

Reading other posts gave me a few more thoughts if I may. Apple has http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/pdf/" rel="nofollow">Preview which is in many ways more powerful than the simple Acrobat Reader application. With a few enhancements it could be easily better than reader and atleast a viable alternative. We all already have this on the Macs, how many Macs are there in the industry? Quark 6.6 had Jaws, Harlequin/Global Graphics PDF engine to make PDF instead of Distiller/Adobe. Millions of PDF files came out free of an Adobe engine there, no problem. Printers everywhere are running http://xitron.com/Navproduct.htm" rel="nofollow">Harlequin based RIP interpretors that are quite viable. The only problems Harlequin has is that we all still deal with Adobe, they are creating problems, then solutions to the problems they create. Always making Harlequin chase code riddles. Before PDF, Harlequin had actually surpassed Adobe in RIP technology at about 1/2 to 1/3 the cost. A serious push between Apple, Quark, and Harlequin could take a large chunk out of Adobe. ESPECIALLY with heavy support from the industry at large. Quark seemed to hold so much longer than anyone thought, then they blew it.. Seems in all areas but Photoshop & Illustrator, Adobe bought FreeHand too, so they sealed up the illustration and image editing now, but all other areas have some pretty viable alternatives. For image editing, there is http://www.gimp.org/" rel="nofollow">Gimp, I guess is the closest thing to PhotoShop. Maybe someone as good as Apple could take Gimp and do a Red-Hat-like Gimp version, could handle most needs except the most intense users.

 

By Jeremy Smith on Jul 14, 2007

This uproar by the printing industry over the Adobe/FedKinko’s is ridiculous, unfounded and misdirected.

So Adobe did a deal with FedKinko’s, big deal! Its Kinko’s for christsakes .

If your customers are going to Kinko’s for their printing needs and not you then you deserve to go out of business, you’re not doing your job. I’ve had to use Kinko’s before and it’s a nightmare.

Adobe probably did this deal because FedEx/Kinko’s was the only company still willing to pay Adobe’s humongous fees to license this truly unnecessary technology.

The printing industry is about craftsmanship, pride and excelling at providing the best customer service to your clients. Why would a print buyer switch to Kinko’s now just because Adobe has the Kinko’s print driver built
in to their software?

Kinko’s has offered a print driver for years and they still haven't been able to take your business away. You really think that by having the Adobe PDF Driver in some Adobe applications it will hurt your business?

How many of you complaining have actually used a PDF Printdriver to print your files? I have and I would rather use a knife to carve my marketing message in a rock or use smoke signals than to waste my time with PDF print
drivers.

But if you’re still upset about all of this why weren't you outraged in 2002 when Bill Gates announced Microsoft's deal with Kinko’s. Bill Gates got to together with Kinko's and created a service that would allow Microsoft Office customers to print directly from any Microsoft Word, PowerPoint or Excel file to any US Kinko’s location? Did not hear one peep from the printing industry. That deal did not nothing to increase Kinko’s business and neither will this Adobe deal.

Now if the printing industry really wants to get upset about something why doesn’t the industry take a more proactive role against its vendors? Yes your own vendors. They steal more business from you every second of the day than this Adobe/FedExKinkos deal will net in twenty years.

HP is one good example. This company has one sales team selling your their latest greatest Indigo printing press and at the same time another group of highly motivated members of their corporate sales team is out selling that same press to one of your clients. Or maybe its the members of the HP wide format printing group out selling that same device you just purchased to advertising agencies and design Firms. This is real business coming right off your balance sheet. What about HP investing $30 Million plus in Mimeo? Yet you still purchase products from HP? These are the deals the printing industry should be outraged about!!!

If it were me and I wanted to secure my business. I would stop wasting my time writing these letters to Adobe and get the entire industry behind outing HP and then the next vendor. At least you will be going after something that is actually hurting your current and future business and it’s a just cause.

 

By Dr. Joe Webb on Jul 16, 2007

There's quite a difference in some of the comments Jeremy makes. First, the vendors selling to users have to actually get money from those users for the equipment. Acrobat reader is free. Second, many of the technologies, such as HP wide format devices, were sold outside the printing industry, to photo labs, blueprinters, signmakers, and others before the commercial printing market started moving. It's a similar situation to Xerox in the 1960s and 1970s when they were considered as not selling printing equipment at all, and today, they are one of our most reliable and supportive suppliers for high volume equipment. Third, the HP-Mimeo deal is something totally different. THAT is something to really be upset about. Next time someone pays a lease payment or gets grief from someone about HP for being late on a bill, they should ask for a $30MM investment. I wonder if any dollars changed hands in that deal, by the way. It could be that they got $30MM of HP equipment and not cash at all. (Anyone have any details?) Fourth, this is Kinko's, as Jeremy reminds quite strongly. It's not like the production folks at LLBean are going to click "send" and print their latest catalog at the Freeport, Maine Kinko's, that's for sure. The Kinko's business is not doing well at all, and there's a reason for that.

Adobe can do whatever they want, including developing sales leads, as this program does, for whatever company they want. We're supposed to be entrepreneurs. Worse things happen to every shop owner every day that they have deal with. We were let down by someone who was thought to be neutral and unaligned. Now we know better. It's not like there aren't other tools out there. Thanks, Jeremy, for shaking us out of it :)

 

By Thomas D. Greer on Jul 20, 2007

"Perception is reality". A VDP software vendor has a product they sell to small print shops and in-plants. The design module of this tool generates a PDF proof. Reader 8.1 displays the PDF, and has a prominent Kinko's link/toolbar button. This creates enough FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the mind of the print shop owner that they balk at purchasing the software. That's how perception becomes reality. The above is a real scenario... it had to be addressed (add a watermark, lock the PDF from printing, etc.) That took time and money away from the VDP software developer. Add up patch distribution, time spent educating the sales force about the issue, and other factors and you begin to see how disruptive Adobe's move has been. This isn't just an issue of a quick printer's competitiveness with their local Kinko's office. It affects other software developers who have to address the objections and issues Adobe has raised.

 

By John on Aug 02, 2007

The rest of you need to get over it. Get out there and make a name for yourself. Quit blaming someone else's creative genius and deal making skills for your lack there of.

You are the people who will fail. There is a reason why FedEx is what it is and has the ability to command these types of deals.

 

By Dave on Aug 15, 2007

Samuel says: Quark 6.6 had Jaws, Harlequin/Global Graphics PDF engine to make PDF instead of Distiller/Adobe. Millions of PDF files came out free of an Adobe engine there, no problem. Have you ever seen a Quark pdf?? They are beyond lousy. As for Kinkos as a competitor for print shops - they may take one job from you, but every client I ever had that went to Kinkos came back. Maybe being open at 3 am is convenient for some, but the clueless & blank stare you get from that week's employee does not encourage repeat customers. They may have the copy business, but certainly not the print business.