The software subscription model (Page 2): There is room in photography for all sorts of people. Not everyone needs to make their photos worthy of wall hangings. Some of us might not...

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Nigel7 wrote:

The change to subscription by Adobe was driven by ... (show quote)

There is room in photography for all sorts of people. Not everyone needs to make their photos worthy of wall hangings. Some of us might not need to, but want to, and are interested in all the technical details. Some people just want a big folder of memories. Those people don't need subscription software.

While there is some truth to your description, pirating was probably a reason, but not the major reason. I wouldn't call the number of people using pirated software the 'vast majority', although there were probably a significant number of such people. IMHO, R/D management was probably one of the major reasons.

BebuLamar

Merlin1300 wrote:

I'm much happier with the $$$ in my pocket and being in the minority.
But that'$ the price they'll have to pay if they want to "keep up with the Joneses"
For minimal increase in functions and/or useable capabilities.

I am in the minority too but the probem with that is that businesses will cease to cater to us because it's not much money there to make. So we would have no choice.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

BebuLamar wrote:

I am in the minority too but the probem with that is that businesses will cease to cater to us because it's not much money there to make. So we would have no choice.

I disagree.

You may be part of a group that is not interested in having the ultimate software, but businesses will keep the software affordable because you can bring in more money when more people can afford your software. If you only cater to the people who NEED the ultimate software you are artificially limiting your clientele.

A lot of pennies add up to more than just a few dollars.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

DirtFarmer wrote:

There is room in photography for all sorts of peop... (show quote)

BebuLamar

DirtFarmer wrote:

I disagree.

You may be part of a group that is not interested in having the ultimate software, but businesses will keep the software affordable because you can bring in more money when more people can afford your software. If you only cater to the people who NEED the ultimate software you are artificially limiting your clientele.

A lot of pennies add up to more than just a few dollars.

If the group is minor that is not many the pennies don't add up. Even the thousands don't add up because there are only a few and those only want to pay once. They rather go for the majority making only a few bucks a month each but from millions of them and they keep paying forever.
In fact the subscripton model makes it seems much more affordable.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

BebuLamar wrote:

If the group is minor that is not many the pennies don't add up. Even the thousands don't add up because there are only a few and those only want to pay once. They rather go for the majority making only a few bucks a month each but from millions of them and they keep paying forever.
In fact the subscripton model makes it seems much more affordable.

Hmmmm....

Lets see, one package I bought for maybe $60, been using for, lets say, 10 years.
Basically $6 a year, pro rated.

Vs. $60 a year subscription for 10 years...
That's only $600.

But I didn't learn the new math, just the old way.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

But people like me who enjoy the technology find the subscription cheaper than springing for updates at regular intervals.

Different strokes for different folks.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

DirtFarmer wrote:

But people like me who enjoy the technology find the subscription cheaper than springing for updates at regular intervals.

Different strokes for different folks.

Updates?
What are they?

(Even at every other year it would be 50% cheaper.)

Subscriptions eliminate the choices of upgrading or not.
They change the choices to paying or not using.

BebuLamar

Longshadow wrote:

Hmmmm....

Lets see, one package I bought for maybe $60, been using for, lets say, 10 years.
Basically $6 a year, pro rated.

Vs. $60 a year subscription for 10 years...
That's only $600.

But I didn't learn the new math, just the old way.

New math or not. So many people bought things on credit and pay the minimum about and ended up paying many times the price but they feel it's affordable because they don't have to pay at once.
Photoshop was about $600 and a lot of people thought they could not afford that. They however feel they can easily pay $120 for a year.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

BebuLamar wrote:

New math or not. So many people bought things on credit and pay the minimum about and ended up paying many times the price but they feel it's affordable because they don't have to pay at once.
Photoshop was about $600 and a lot of people thought they could not afford that. They however feel they can easily pay $120 for a year.

Then there's people like me, I can, but I won't.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Merlin1300 wrote:

I guess we'll just have to vote with our wallets then.
Don't buy or 'upgrade' into a rental software arrangement.
Find a product you can purchase and be done with it. There are PLENTY such out there!

I vote with my wallet to use the PS/LR subscription, as it costs less than what I originally paid for the first version, and the regular upgrades. Adobe is constantly offering new features, and you don't have to wait and pay for for an upgrade. Software you "buy" will eventually not work on the latest computers and OSs, and then you will have to "buy" it again. Avoiding subscription software is not always cost effective.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

JohnSwanda wrote:

I vote with my wallet to use the PS/LR subscription, as it costs less than what I originally paid for the first version, and the regular upgrades. Adobe is constantly offering new features, and you don't have to wait and pay for for an upgrade. Software you "buy" will eventually not work on the latest computers and OSs, and then you will have to "buy" it again. Avoiding subscription software is not always cost effective.

Not always cost effective for some based on their needs or desires.
For some, like me, it is.

Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX

Nigel7 wrote:

The subscription is much cheaper than buying and updating the old versions.

I firmly believe that 85% of users only use 25% of the capability contained within Photoshop, Lightroom, etc.
Sure - if you're a true Pro and can justify (deduct) the expense, then MAYBE the subscription is worth it.
But for most - - - I doubt anything more recent than CS6 is worth the subscription.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Merlin1300 wrote:

I firmly believe that 85% of users only use 25% of the capability contained within Photoshop, Lightroom, etc.
Sure - if you're a true Pro and can justify (deduct) the expense, then MAYBE the subscription is worth it.
But for most - - - I doubt anything more recent than CS6 is worth the subscription.

I probably use 25% of Photoshop capability, but that 25% includes many features that have been added since CS6, which I use regularly. And any time I need to do something in PS I don't know, I can learn how to do it. Whether the subscription is worth it to you doesn't depend on your being a pro. Many advanced amateurs use it enough to make it worthwhile. I am a retired pro, so now it's not deductible, but it's still a bargain to me to use as a hobby.

Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX

JohnSwanda wrote:

I am a retired pro, so now it's not deductible, but it's still a bargain to me to use as a hobby.

Well then, I submit YOU are NOT within the typical 85% of users, but rather are in the 15% who understand and use the newer capabilities, and for you the additional cost is worth it.
Me - I probably only use 15% of PS capability.
Sure - there are others I could move to if the hammer came down, but I'm comfortable with CS6.
And far too old to change.