In what is a hot take only if you're an Adobe shareholder, the MacBook Neo is the biggest sign yet that Adobe's subscription model needs some major rethinking.
It's 2026, and tariffs, war and inflation, amongst other things, have been hitting American wallet pretty hard. Apple was able to read the room and responded with the $599 MacBook Neo ($499 if you're a student or educator). There are other reasons the thing exists, of course. Apple wanted to lure people using cheap Windows computers with their iPhones. They wanted to corner the education market.
Actually, that last one is the one I want to address most.
Schools are notoriously cheap. Many districts rely on Chromebooks, devices that can't handle the most basic photo and video editing.
But that's where the Neo can take school computing to the next level, and where Adobe comes in.
The A18 Pro chip and 8 GB memory would be huge limiting factors in students using Adobe's software in Creative Cloud Pro, but beyond the performance, consider the price. A student Creative Cloud Pro plan runs $240 for the first year, and it's double that for the rest of a student's career. In just two years, a student will have paid more for Adobe's software than they will have for the laptop.
If Apple is targeting students with this laptop, so should Adobe, and here's how they can do it. Call it the "Creative Cloud Neo" plan.
First things first, it's unlikely the full (and in my opinion, bloated) Creative Cloud Pro suite of apps could run on a MacBook Neo, at least not at any fast speed. Keeping the same basic interface, but stripping off some resource-intensive features such as generative AI and Cloud Storage would help speed things up. We could also do without the generative AI credits and access to free stock footage/photos. Then, pare down the software list to the key things that Neo users (mostly students) would need, such as Photoshop, Premiere, Illustrator and InDesign. While there's a lot more productivity software in the Creative Cloud Pro suite, there's a lot of damage students and folks on a budget could do with just this software. And then make the whole deal $7 per month.
I specifically picked that number because it competes with Adobe's own $79 (for a three-year license) Elements package that consists of Premiere Elements and Photoshop Elements, but offers more software and, the key difference in my mind, an interface that looks and feels exactly like the "Pro" versions. There should be only minor changes that are mostly under the hood to get it to run well on a MacBook Neo, which brings us back to the core argument of this article. It would be a way for Apple to corner the education market with the MacBook Neo, and for Adobe in turn to corner the creative market for those buying the MacBook Neo. Beyond the technical challenge of getting the Pro version of Creative Cloud to run on a MacBook Neo, it's insane to spend half the cost of the laptop to run graphic design and photo/video editing software.
Maybe there's a middle-ground solution. Adobe, of course, would not want to give up the cash cow that is the Pro subscription, and so one possible solution could be to force the subscription to be tied only to MacBook Neo hardware. Or make it a student-only subscription, but with a price that sticks for four years instead of just one. I'm sure Adobe's bean counters can figure something out.
But who knows? Maybe people are fine paying the cost of the laptop for a year's worth of Photoshop. What do you think of the idea of a Creative Cloud Neo plan? Would you buy it?
6 Comments
I wouldn’t have thought creative cloud users would be interested in the Macbook Neo. Not with that limiting 8GB ram. It feels more like a laptop for students using social media (Zoom chats with family/friends) and writing a disertation in MS Office/Libre Office rather than anyone needing Adobe products. Also couldn't imagine Adobe offering a cheaper student subscription deal.
Isn't the reason lightroom as opposed to lightroom classic exists is to do the heavy processing in the cloud allowing users of power limited machines. For several years I ran the web version of LR on a Chromebook without an issue. Granted not being a pro, I wasn't trying to batch process hundreds of images, but if I were I have a robust machine not the, now dead, Chromebook or for that matter the Macbook Air that I now use.
I've been using Adobe software since 1988 (retired typesetter). Currently have the Lightroom subscription with Photoshop at $20 a month. I have had sporadic communication with them through the years telling them that I would spent $30 a month for just InDesign, Illustrator, and Lightroom as I have no need for Firefly, etc. I would call it the print CC, they have a photo CC. Canva is starting to make an impact in the corporate world, so it might happen, some day.
Adobe used to do this with the old Creative Suites, before it became Creative Cloud - it was called the 'Design Edition', alongside the 'Web Edition', 'Production Premium' and 'Master Collection'. Now you have to license the ones you need, or all of them, which is expensive. I would welcome smaller collections again for a lower price.
Whilst I see value in a simpler package for students, I don't think stripping out features to make it less resource hungry is the solution. I don't think it's that simple. It would likely need re-coding from the ground up. Also, the generative and AI features are genuinely useful. From the brief spell I had working in a college with design students, I believe they should have access to the full professional tools used in the industry. Stripping tools out that they can't learn to use sets them up to fail. I couldn't even show them how to install a font, because the system was so locked down.
That said, Adobe should take heed from what Serif have done with Affinity, offering their newest suite for free. The only difference between the free and paid tiers is AI tools. I would have given my right arm for software like that when I was a student/job seeker.
Perhaps Adobe should do a 'Snow Leopard' update, optimise their tools for lower-specced machines such as the Neo and come up with a more compelling plan for students. Bring back the Creative Suite 'Editions' for a start.
I also believe students should have access to the full stock library. In the UK, copyrighted images can be used for education under "fair dealing" for illustration, instruction, or examination, provided they are not for commercial use and are properly attributed.
All of these are great points. I wonder, though, is Serif going to always keep things free or is it a way to lock us in like Adobe did, albeit in a different way?