Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
News

Adobe Considers Withdrawing from Asian Markets 507

Max Groff writes "This brief ZDNet article (printer-friendly version) describes how Adobe is considering leaving its Asian markets due to the apparently high levels of piracy across the Pacific. This change would not only cut off the marketing of Adobe products to Asian markets, but also halt the development of much of the company's Asian-language software."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Adobe Considers Withdrawing from Asian Markets

Comments Filter:
  • by danielrose ( 460523 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:27PM (#2865364) Homepage Journal
    Yes, ok. So now I can't legally buy it, and I used to.
    If I want it, I *HAVE* to pirate it!?
    Sounds like a great idea adobe.....
  • English version (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SETY ( 46845 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:31PM (#2865395)
    The English versions will just be pirated over IRC, etc. There are little windows tools to turn the English in programs into Chinese (or any other language). So withdrawing from the market will not really kill priacy. It is only worth withdrawing if your not making money (obviously).
  • Hmmm... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by hahn ( 101816 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:32PM (#2865399) Homepage
    I get the feeling that Adobe is not just doing this for financial reasons, but also to punish the area by not providing Asian versions of it software. It's too bad that they're going to stop development of Asian language versions, but if punishment is their goal, somehow I think that it will have little effect, and may even backfire.

    The thing is that while their programs set the standard here in the US and many companies now depend on their products, the same is not true in Asia, where Linux is actually being adopted quite rapidly, especially now with Windows XP having copy protection in place (although that hasn't stopped many hacked versions from being produced). This may in fact be a big boon to the Linux industry as more and more users may come to find more full fledged Linux graphics solutions (GIMP is getting there).
  • by skoda ( 211470 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:33PM (#2865407) Homepage
    I do not advoate software piracy. I've been weaning myself off of illigitimately copied programs for several years now, and encourage friends to also not use pirated materials.

    That said, I believe that the equivalent dollar cost in pirated products is highly mis-leading. People who pirate software wouldn't buy the programs if they lost access to it. They would just do without.

    Chizen said in the article that it can cost up to $750,000 to produce a Chinese-language version of a product, and extensive piracy makes it difficult for Adobe to recoup those costs.
    That said, I can appreciate theirt reasons for leaving. If they spend $750k to produce the Asian version, and don't sell sufficient copies to recoup costs and profit, then they should leave. My understanding is that most companies require a 15% return-on-investment from a product, or they shut it down.
  • by MathJMendl ( 144298 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:33PM (#2865411) Homepage
    Try as hard as you can to rationalize it, but if they are losing money there it makes good sense for them to drop out of the business there. I mean, cmon, piracy rates are over 90%! A vast majority of the software there doesn't make them any money and if they can't sell enough copies to recoup their losses, who can blame them?

    So, now the pirates have two choices: stop pirating (or at least to the same extent), or lose language support for their copies.

    I mean, they can pirate English versions still, but I'm sure they would prefer copies in their own languages. It is their own fault for this happening.

    I don't believe that they have actually lost $4 billion, because not everyone buys copies, but even if 1% of those people would have bought copies they would have lost $40 million.
  • by shpoffo ( 114124 ) <nospam@@@newalexandria...org> on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:33PM (#2865415) Homepage
    yea, scroll down and read something more interesting

    -shpoffo
  • by glrotate ( 300695 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:34PM (#2865417) Homepage
    The point is that they will no longer be creating localized versions for the Asian market. In other words they won't bother translating into the various Asian languages.
  • by PCM2 ( 4486 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:35PM (#2865421) Homepage
    She protested, saying it was legit because she'd paid 5 dollars for it on her travels in Malaysia.

    This is a great example of the wackiness of intellectual property law as it applies to software, in the eyes of most consumers. Because, for just about anything else except software, she'd be right!

    For example, yes, it is illegal to make pirated CDs of Britney Spears albums. But it's not illegal to buy one in Malaysia, or to own one in the United States! It's not even illegal to play one in a CD player!

    The software manufacturers have pulled an amazing fast one on all of us, by somehow creating a whole new set of rules to apply to their products. You can bet every other intellectual property-owning corporate entity in the world will stop at nothing until they can follow suit.

  • by 2nd Post! ( 213333 ) <gundbear.pacbell@net> on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:35PM (#2865422) Homepage
    Yes, it's justifiable to pay $600 for a flimsy cardboard box and a plastic CD.

    If you make $600 with said flimsy cardboard box and plastic CD, I think the product has paid for itself.

    Justification's from Adobe's view? If the $600 price funds the development of the next version of Photoshop and keeps employees and the company afloat, that's justification.

    Can anybody possibly justify taking property that doesn't belong to you?
  • Re:Go for it (Score:2, Insightful)

    by nomadic ( 141991 ) <nomadicworldNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:37PM (#2865436) Homepage
    and Asia can be a BIG market.

    For cigarettes, electronics, and cars, but the market for legally licensed software is actually pretty small.
  • by hacksoncode ( 239847 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:40PM (#2865453)
    Come on, folks, the article strongly implied, if not stating it expressly, that the reason they are considering stopping producing Asian language versions is that they don't make any money on them due to piracy.

    It doesn't hurt them at all to have English language versions pirated in Asia, in fact they probably prefer that to having their competitor's products pirated.

    But if it costs $650,000 to produce an Asian languages version of their products (a number I can easily believe, having done localizations of much smaller products), and they don't recoup that cost, there's no point in doing it.

    This is news?

  • by Wonderkid ( 541329 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:41PM (#2865470) Homepage
    Look, for 15 years US software houses have been charging nearly ten times as much money as they should for their applications. Our original AMX Pagemaker desktop publishing software launched in 1985 for the BBC Microcomputer sold for £40 (about $65), which was just within the budget of most people who needed it. Today your typical application or application suite is $300-$500. And then, you have to constanly pay to upgrade. And I'm a Mac user, so I now have to 'upgrade' all my apps from OS 9 to OS X which will cost thousands. What makes all this far more serious is the complete niavity of American business culture to the reality that the rest of the world (and I include the UK in this) have MUCH less money. To a Brit, spending £50 ($80 approximately) is equiv to a middle class American spending about £250 ($350). For those who do not believe me, if you're a Brit, go live in the US for a few years. If you're an American, come live here. So, in Asia, where the standard of living outside of wealthy communities is even lower than the rest of the Western world, the situation is even worse! Price it right, and people will PAY for it. People want their original user guide, colour CD insert etc. We did it! We created http://www.onumber.net at just £14.95 (about $23) a pop for 5 years, feature upgrades included. It's on the net, so why should we screw people for more? A little more global understanding and increase use of ASP business model, and mass software piracy will be a thing of the past.
  • by 2nd Post! ( 213333 ) <gundbear.pacbell@net> on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:44PM (#2865492) Homepage
    It's not that pirates wouldn't buy the software, it's that some pirates wouldn't buy the software, some pirates couldn't buy the software, and some pirates would have to buy the software.

    The question is how to separate all of them enough to target the payers, and get them to pay.

    People who do without aren't interesting to this equation or argument. It's the people who make money with the product, and people who need the product, that should be targetted.

    In a very fair market way, if there isn't enough pirates who can pay, if they had to, to support the product, the product should go away. If there is enough pirates who can pay, then they can afford to sell, as long as they can convince the pirates to pay.

    The question is how lack of an Asian version of the product will affect the market. Will Chinese users, for example, start to use English or Japanese versions? Older versions? Does this mean that Chinese OS X users will be, literally, up the creek?
  • Re:Uh? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Ryu2 ( 89645 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:44PM (#2865493) Homepage Journal
    They'll just come out with a translation "patch". With native OS support in Windows 2000 for Asian languages, all you really have to do is to load the Adobe binaries into a resource editor and replace the strings.
  • by StevenMaurer ( 115071 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:45PM (#2865498) Homepage

    Despite the whining from the (lets not mince words here) pro-piracy segment of the slashdot readership, this sounds like a perfectly sound business decision.

    Face facts people, corporations are not charities. If they can't get a Return On Investment, they need to invest money elsewhere. Nor will any other business simply step in, because they're not going to get any ROI either. This has already elminated entire markets. The Hong Kong movie business is basically dead because piracy is so culturally acceptable in China.

  • by Fillup ( 121335 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:46PM (#2865504) Homepage
    I completely agree! The BSA (bullsh*t association??) always makes these exorbitant figures about their purported losses, but yeah -- if you can no longer pirate photoshop 18.3, doesn't that mean you'll just keep using your real copy of 4.0? Or that you'll use the GIMP, or a more low-end product (even one from adobe?). I don't get their figures at all.

    and on your other point...Yeah I've finally gotten off of all Microsoft software, except that provided for free or gotten with a purchased machine. I downloaded their MS Office for my OS X machine, and it's just such a bloated feature-itis mess now, that I can't be bothered to even pirate it. Or buy it. I'm making do with a slightly more feature-light program that comes free with every mac (AppleWorks).
  • by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:48PM (#2865513)
    Your comparing two very different things. People don't need Photoshop to edit images, hell most people couldn't make use of most of the features even if the package was free. Photoshop and applications in its price range (and higher) are priced based on the work that went into them and the value of what comes out. If someone can use Photoshop to make an image for an advertising champain that they get payed thousands of dollars for then the 600$ price tag of Photoshop is well worth it. Having people bitch that they cant afford Photoshop to edit pictures of their grand kids is just dumb. There are lower end packages that cost less then 50$ which will serve their purposes just fine.
    Bottom line, if you think the software costs too much then you don't really need it. Go use something else, be it Gimp or Adobe Image Effects. Dont bitch and moan about the cost of Photoshop and don't condone the piracy of the software.
  • Re:Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Toddarooski ( 12363 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:50PM (#2865529)
    I don't think Adobe expects to curb piracy at all. But that's not really their goal -- their goal is to spend their R&D money in a way that they can get the most bang for their buck.

    If they have to spend $750,000 to develop a Chinese language version of Photoshop, which only sells a thousand legitimate copies (at $600/each), they've just lost money. They'd be better off putting their $750,000 in a savings account (except maybe a BofA savings account, which would charge them a $300K "We gotta count your money" fee) and selling only a hundred copies of their English language version in China.

    What's tougher to determine is if, by not creating a Chinese version, they're hurting themselves in the long-term. Let's say they don't develop a Chinese version of Photoshop. Somebody like JASC could develop a Chinese version of Paint Shop Pro and gain a large following in China. Then, if we assume that at some point in the future, the Chinese market is profitable, Adobe might be in trouble. Everybody in China will be used to using Paint Shop Pro, and might not bother swapping over to Photoshop.

    It's a question of determining when it'll be profitable to spend money developing Chinese language versions of software, and deciding just how much the Chinese care about getting a native language version of their software.
  • by eXtro ( 258933 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @07:51PM (#2865537) Homepage
    Adobe did a pretty legitimate job (which of course nobody here bothers to notice) in estimating software losses. They took the development costs for porting to Asian languages and subtracted how much revenue it generated. It came out negative, hence, they are actually losing money. They didn't do the usual procedure: number of illegal copies * retail price.
  • Good... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by yggdrazil ( 261592 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @08:01PM (#2865600)
    I am a programmer. I do it for a living. I make a living because people can't just take what I make and sell it without my knowledge, without paying me. These people make a mockery out of my livelyhood.

    We care about companies breaching GPL-licenses, and we should care about these people breaching the commercial software world's licences.

    Asia will never get a software industry of their own if they continue this way, and will be doomed to producing cut-throat priced commodity hardware for the rest of the world.

    I hope Adobe makes it real hard to use their programs on computers where the clock is set to Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur or Beijing time, or the internet connection reveals they are connected to .sg, .my or .cn ISPs.

    If they can't pay for commercial saftware, they'll just have to settle for GPL'ed alternatives!!!

  • I have known Chinese (in China) who own little more than 2 white shirts, a pair of pants, and a bicycle.

    However, they may use a computer at work to do personal jobs. They may run software on a computer at work that costs, in the U.S., more than their entire net worth.

    This is not lost profit for companies like Adobe. It is free advertising and free trademark promotion.

    No amount of law-making or law enforcement will make these people pay hundreds of U.S. dollars for Adobe Photoshop. However, advertise that you need someone who knows how to use Photoshop, and hundreds will apply. Is this a bad thing?

    People in the U.S. get little accurate news of other countries. They often unconsciously make the assumption that other people are as rich as they are.

    U.S. Senator Biden, who is an intelligent and educated man, and who is the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, doesn't even pronounce the words correctly, yet he talks of changing (my article, see the Biden interview) [hevanet.com] the Saudi government and controlling the development of the government of Afghanistan. If Senator Biden is like this, make a guess about the knowledge of other countries of the average Adobe executive.

    Adobe executives should not consider that every pirated copy is a personal attack on Adobe profitability. There are many social situations that require more social sophistication than that.
  • I pirate software (Score:2, Insightful)

    by TheKingOfCowards ( 551895 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @08:30PM (#2865733)
    On Pirating software:
    I myself pirate some software titles. Yet even I can see that this article is not about Adobe trying to stop piracy. Adobe's products are aimed towards businesses and professionals, not home users. I personally dont think they expect a home user to pay the $600 for the software. In fact they probably dont mind piracy by the home user because it would extends their user base. However I do think they expect someone who makes money from the software to pay it. The artists are the people who Adobe makes photoshop for. If you are an artist who has the cash it is probably in your best interest to pay for the software. Adobes continued existance would be a good thing for them.

    On the discontinuation of asian localization:
    Adobe is losing money when they localize the software. If they continued to localize while losing money it would go against all business logic. does 2+2=5? Also Asians can localize the software themselves. If some korean was using OS X and an adobe app used .nib files then all that is needed is to change some strings since OS X supports nearly all language formats.
  • by yerricde ( 125198 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @08:31PM (#2865736) Homepage Journal

    how does Adobe afford the production costs

    Release the non-trade-secret parts of the application as free software. That'll help a bit. Splitting the most proprietary parts into modules priced at $49.95 a piece might help further.

    and the support costs

    "No support except to registered users." That's one of the proposed models for making money off open source.

    and the bandwidth costs

    If they can get their install down to 10 megabytes (perhaps by not including all that d*rn clip-art), bandwidth becomes relatively cheap.

    if they don't make any money on top of the distribution costs?

    For downloadable software, bandwidth costs == distribution costs.

  • by victim ( 30647 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @08:39PM (#2865772)
    The Acrobat format is not proprietary. I have the entire spec in a binder right here. I downloaded it from Adobe and printed it freely, then used it to create code that writes PDF files.

    I have written web based programs that generate PDF without using any Adobe code. (When you need to be in control of the exact layout and 75dpi is not good enough, it is a great choice.)

    TeX is happy to make PDF files. My Mac is happy to write anything I wish out as a PDF file instead of printing. In linux I have a little program to convert postscript to pdf. No Adobe software required on those systems.

    I do tend to use Acrobat Reader for reading them, but I also use xpdf (launches much faster under linux) and, under OS X, Preview to read them.

    I don't even understand that part about scanned documents and .ps files. But I can't see spending much time decoding a paragraph that contains the phrase donkey jiz in it.

    It is possible that there is another format that provides precise display at high resolution in an easily navigable, on demand downloadable format, but I haven't heard of it. Long live PDF.
  • by nixnixnix ( 81148 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @08:49PM (#2865813)
    Everyone thinks they are the biggest market in the world, but here are some facts about china's "market".

    Out of 3 billion people, 900 million of them are rural peasants who don't have a pot to pee in. These are people that are so poor that they go for months without even seeing currency, let alone using it.

    100 million of them are rural farm workers who may sometimes receive a "paycheck", but who are not employed for long periods of time. These people make a fraction of what a McDonalds grill cook makes in the US.

    Of the remaining 2 billion, you have a tiny elite of maybe 120-80 million people who make money in a range that is remotely similar to the west. Of all the people who receive somewhere in a living wage range, maybe 500 million of them, save 40% of their income and use 60% to live. They do this because their economy is fragile and they are subject to losing their incomes rather easily. Compare that to Americans where 4% of people's income (on average) is saved.

    The Chinese do not have descretionary income to spend on software. This is what Adobe is really coming to grips with. If it were made to be incapable of stealing the software, they would just go without!

    Companies that make money in China are like Coke-a-Cola, Pepsi, Marlboro. These are companies that make 80-90% of their money outside the US anyway. The rest of the companies (like Adobe) tread water for years and never turn the corner. This is the reality of the Chinese market: they are an export economy with a weak domestic economy. A place where slavery was "abolished" in 1929. A place where children participate in forced labor programs to pay for their educations. Where you recieve the death penalty for selling a fossil you dug up in your own backyard to a non-Chinese buyer.

    (I have no idea why we have a normalized trade relationship with this country and yet Cuba is still under an embargo)
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 18, 2002 @09:08PM (#2865890)
    The article says that Adobe is considering withdrawing from the *CHINESE* market, not all *ASIAN* markets. Japan is currently Adobe's largest overseas customer, in large part b/c Adobe has better Japanese language support than any competitor. Adobe is not about to abandon that market.
  • by mosch ( 204 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @10:04PM (#2866055) Homepage
    which would of course lead to people running 5-year old software, reducing their software costs to zero, and effectively eliminating any incentive to produce new software. After all, if I were a VAR, I could sell people computers with Win95 and Office95 for $500 or the same computer with WinXP and OfficeXP for $1200, I bet I'd sell a lot more of the former than the latter.

    It seems to me that most slashdotheads don't care about intellectual property beyond making sure that they can get what they want without cost.

  • Re:The Gimp, Natch (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Captn Pepe ( 139650 ) on Friday January 18, 2002 @10:23PM (#2866105)
    This is a good point that really doesn't get made often enough -- namely, that every time a proprietary software company takes action to combat illegal sharing, they open the door a little wider to Free software. Usually this argument shows up when antipiracy measures are adopted to increase the cost of copyright infringement. One hopes that some of those who can no longer afford (or, as in this case, will no longer be able) to illegally acquire a given piece of proprietary software will turn to Free alternatives.

    Mind now, I don't fundamentally care how many users gFoo has. Userbase is important to Free software in a couple of indirect ways: some of those users will submit bug reports or patches, or help in other ways with development; also, many users of Free software make it difficult for proprietary vendors to lock users into their products through closed formats, much less force new users to their product by making such formats into de facto standards.

    Should Adobe go through with this withdrawal, I forsee (or at least hope for) benefits to Free software in that some former unlicensed users will go on to help make real Free substitutes for Adobe products -- e.g. Gimp has potential, but it ain't Photoshop yet -- or help i18nize various packages to their native locale.
  • Re:Go for it (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 19, 2002 @03:39AM (#2867311)
    Until paying for SOFTWARE (which takes a hell of a lot more talent and resources to create than books) is part of their culture, Fuck Em. All software companies should pull out, and destruct as much software on their way out as possible. Let the Asians starve for good software until they fucking get a clue and learn to pay for the software they need and desire. There's no excuse for piracy. Claiming "cultural" differences is just bogus and making lame excuses.

After a number of decimal places, nobody gives a damn.

Working...