Photoshop upgrade no longer possible

Started Mar 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
David Hull
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,432Gear list
Like?
Re: Colin.... there are always other solutions
In reply to Marty4650, Apr 2, 2013

Marty4650 wrote:

The software makers certainly have incentive to rent their programs rather than sell them, but it still is up to their customers as to whether this can be successful.

My own feeling is that there simply aren't enough people who absolutely need the most full featured program. Those folks who absolutely need those programs will cough up the money and pay the rental fees, but the other 95% of us will find some alternative.

To be sure... the graphic designers and professional photographers will pay the price, because they may need the finest tools. But everyone else... the other 95% of us will find some alternative product to use.

Just like we buy "more camera" than we can use, we also buy software we don't really need. Hobbyists will often buy professional tools thinking that they may not need this today, but someday they might need it. But if the cost of having the best goes too high, then they start to look at what they might actually need, rather than what they just want.

I buy Photoshop and Microsoft Office upgrades because I like the new features, and the cost isn't that high when I upgrade every five years or so. But if you force me to pay a monthly subscription fee, then I will be perfectly happy to just keep using the older versions, or to switch to something cheaper, or even free.

I recently downloaded Kingsoft Office, a free program, and found it to be every bit as good as Microsoft Word and Excel. At least for my needs. And somehow this program uses the same file extensions I am used to, and works exactly like the Microsoft programs do. It even has the exact same interface. I would have thought this would violate some patents or something, but apparently it doesn't.

Also remember that a subscription fee isn't a fixed cost... it can change without notice. That $20 a month that I find intolerable could someday become $30 or $40 or $50 a month. I seem to recall paying $12 a month for cable TV around 30 years go.

In order to demand high prices a corporation must have a monopoly, or their products must be so much better that they can offer a good value proposition to their customers. And this just isn't the case for the vast majority of users.

Photoshop might be the best photo editing program, but for $240 a year rental fee, a lot of folks might do perfectly fine with Gimp, or some other alternative.

It is actually a licensing fee, not a rental fee. You are not renting anything; you are paying for a license to use their IP for a period of time. It has always been a license, the only thing new is that now the license now will have an expiration date.   There will, of course (as you point out) be alternatives, probably even from Adobe (like PS Elements for example). Having seen this evolve in the EDA industry over the last 30 years, I guarantee you -- it is coming, be ready to bend over, this stuff has value and they aren't going to provide that value for free.

-- hide signature --
 David Hull's gear list:David Hull's gear list
Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
GimpNew
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow