Adobe gives up on web-design product to rival Figma after deal collapse

Post by staplers » Fri, Feb 02, 2024, 6:46 PM UTC

zerkten wrote: post #221

jwells89 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moving to a subscription model is largely a symptom of that coasting. They couldn’t consistently come up with compelling reasons to upgrade to new versions of Creative Suite, with users being perfectly happy to run what they had for as many years as possible. They were always going to hit a ceiling on interesting features to implement, but they could’ve sold new CS versions on improvements in stability, performance,…

There is another element at play: modern software product management. I think revenues at the main driver, but behind that is the modern PM philosophy of hypothesis-driven development. In my experience, the average outcome is incrementalism in the extreme. PMs break every feature down as an experiment to try and measure the value. It often misses consideration of the whole product. Everyone is scared of taking a big…

Post by andsoitis » Wed, Feb 07, 2024, 4:08 PM UTC

TylerE wrote: post #123

duxup wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but did Figma even need to sell in the first place? I've worked a company that was profitable, operated well, growing ... but were sold and the CEO said (I'll get the words not quite right): "I fought for keeping independent and not selling, that's how I've kept that company and I wanted it to stay that way. But the offer was increased into the range where I didn't feel like I could survive a legal challenge (if it…

It is anecdotes like this that make me think that the public shareholder model is fundamentally flawed and a large part of why many American companies are struggling to truly build long term value, and many once great companies have been destroyed by beancounters to bleating calls of shareholder value.