Is Adobe's upgrade cycle too short?

Question

I'm really happy CS4 includes the new multiple artboards feature. I find new uses and productivity enhancements for it in my work every day. But it seems like a lot of options that could be used with it were left out. No way to renumber or assign names to the artboards. No way to get back to the original Document Setup, that includes artboards. No default method for setting up master pages.
Its has been suggested that the reason for this is that the engineers didn't have time to fully implement all the options they wanted to flesh this feature out. Why not?
I think it's because they have to stick to Adobe's rigid upgrade release schedule, which seems to be around 18 months and which dictates that the product will release on a certain date, so you better make sure whatever features are included at least work to a "good enough" degree. They can be completed in the next release.
The problem is that the next release also has to include brand new features to justify an upgrade price, and there's insufficient time to revisit incomplete features from the previous version.
In my opinion, Adobe should add more time to the current upgrade cycle - or better yet, don't release it until the features are complete. More time between releasese would necessitate a timely, perhaps mid-cycle FREE dot upgrade, with bug fixes and minor enhancements, but for some reason (probably the short upgrade cycle) Adobe is loath do do this.
I know this flies in the face of the creative suite model, where every Adobe product has the same deadline. But it seems to me that what you get in quantity in this model, you give up in the quality of the individual products. I think the current schedule regime is simply asking too much of engineers (not to mention consumers).
This is pure conjecture on my part. For all I know, the whole schedule is completely driven by the engineers and their desire to get new stuff into the hands of users as soon as possible.

Answer 1

Well I have a little first hand knowledge of this, I was a part of a couple of focused groups that were held here in New York.
That focus group i particular had a strong influence on what Adobe should do. There may have been other groups that had a say but unless they said the same exact thing as this focus group they did not have the same influence.
This was what they wanted to know, how long was long enough before you want to see an upgrade. I thought two years but everyone else said 1 1/2 years and there was no two ways about it. This focused group was actually about Photoshop.
Then they said that an update should be a .01, .02, etc a point .1, .2, etc should be reserved for a upgrade that might be a free one for enhancing a feature that was new or old in which they found it necessary to improve which meant that it is not likely to ever be employed. that I went along with the first one about 1 1/2 year seemed a little rushed.
They also asked us about the slash screen and I thought the Photoshop one the showed us look more like Illustrator and that I would prefer a very clean looking splash screen that was more professional looking, very simply and efficient looking.
Everyone else seemed to accept that even though they pretty much disagreed with me on everything else. I know what I said had a strong influence about killing the splash screen they wanted to use originally, what made them ultimately clean up the splash screens later on I do not know but I do not think that had anything with what happened in that focus group. Not directly.
The policies that Adobe is now taking including the help online was also discuss and i do not really recall what the consensus but i seem to remember that they prefer to be able to access resources on line and they like on line tutorials over a help system and i think they were willing to pay for such services.
The group was made up of photographer professional & amateurs, art directors, production people, and one or two Illustrators about twenty people in all.
The art directors opinions seem to weigh the most influence in the group and based on how they asked the question it seemed geared to their needs most and so there was not reason to opposed their suggestions in a strong way.
Even though I strongly disagreed on a couple of issues there seemed to be no reason to oppose what they had to say as it seemed quite logical for the large user base.
So that is how the decision to upgrade every 18 months came about. At least after that it has always been 18 months.
It was user defined by a very strong demand.