PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

I tend to keep cars longer than most. My car is a 2004, the Mrs' is a 2000. There is no way I could keep a computer, much less software that long. I would like to keep my stuff until technology passes me by, or the darned thing wears out. Cannot do! THe computer my wife uses is one I had to replace because it could not display the video I took with my then new SX50 HS, it was too slow?? She still uses Quicken from 1995 on the Windows XP computer she inherited. When I replaced that computer for myself, I had to purchase new software because the old stuff wouldn't work with Windows 7. A new MS Office (2007 version was cheap), Quicken, and a few others. I am retired and my computer needs remain much simpler than when I was a Senior Staff Engineer for a Fortune 500 company.

Bill_de Loc: US

The auto industry seems to do alright by giving us a choice, buy or lease. If I choose to get a new car every couple of years or keep it until it doesn't run anymore it's your choice. And if you decide to buy a second car from another manufacturer, your first car still runs.

---

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Speaking of ludicrous, besides your nondescriptive title, who is this “us” you’re talking about? I’ve been enjoying photography immensely since age 12 up to an hour ago with no need for software of any kind! And I doubt that I’m alone.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

What happened one hour ago?????
(j/k)

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Titles are used to create attention. I guess it worked.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

I put my camera away for the day, other obligations take precedence.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

So long as no one wants to do a search later.
Edit: There is often some useful information in these discussions (though not from me in this one!), and a relevant title helps all of us.

Hank Radt

Actually, I respectfully disagree, as do a number of others in this thread. When I buy a software package, I have no expectations of upgrades for no cost - I buy the product as is. I do, however, expect it to work as promised, so if there are bugs, then I expect them to be fixed.

I do agree there ain't no free lunch. The best example is this forum. Yes, there is no monetary payment required to join, but it is not "free" (it does generate revenue from ads). Some of the "costs" are the lack of anything approaching an adequate search function, the time wasted in reading repetitive posts, the time spent trying to distinguish between apparent and actual objectivity, and the aggravation of reading posts from those who are having, shall we say, a bad day (or week, or maybe lifetime...).

I could've used the software that came with my camera, but I CHOSE not to, because, in economic terms, the "opportunity cost" of learning to use it was time I could spend learning a program that came closer to meeting my needs, and paid get something that I wanted.

CHOICE is the critical factor in competitive markets - if you feel, like I did, that I might be locked into something I could not get out of without losing all my work, you won't choose a subscription model. On the other hand, if you know you're going to use the product heavily, no matter what, the subscription model (including "free" upgrades), may be the best choice for you. Same with buying a car, whether leased or purchased outright - you have a choice. Where choice breaks down is what economists call "natural monopolies" (look it up if you're REALLY interested...) - electricity and cable companies currently fall into this category - and governments step in to prevent monopolistic pricing. However, "natural monopolies" don't last forever, as technology and new competitive models emerge (think landline telephones - AT&T - and airlines before deregulation).

My kids don't have cable (I do, I'm an old guy...), and don't need it or want it - they can find all the entertainment they want through other services (and, BTW, the cable companies are scared to death of this). Electricity? Think solar panels on your roof - if the price drops far enough, the electric utilities are going to be SOL.

So, you're right in that there ain't no free lunch.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

OK, OK, OK, "Us" in the title was far too generic. Maybe I should have typed "too many of us". Or something. The point of the sub-little rant is still valid.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

You cannot and should not try to please everyone.

It is a terrible mistake that dilutes any message into a muddy 'soup' that has no taste.

I am not kidding here.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Yeah Ol' Abe had something to say about that.

Hank Radt

..."too many of us" is still a cop out. "Us," in the vernacular (and especially in rants), generally means "me". If you want to rant, go ahead - but qualify it as your opinion and you might find others who agree. However, as soon as you start trying to lump others into your worldview, you're going to get a reaction.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

You know what? I made an attempt to keep things civil or pleasant.
Your follow up comment has changed that. For those with a modicum of intelligence it is more than obvious that my post was opinion. If you feel that somehow you were in fact personally included as part of 'us', I really don't give a damn. Save your interpretations of correct for someone who does. I don't have any use for someone, with whom I have never corresponded, to self appoint as editor in chief of my posts.

Hank Radt

You are correct. Have a nice day.

And welcome to my "ignore" list.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

I am honored