There is no misconception -- almost everyone on this Forum understands that it's "perpetual use license" versus a "subscription license", not owning versus renting.

For almost all intensive purposes a "perpetual use license" is like owning and a "subscription license" is like renting. It's a simple comparison model that can be used for discussion purposes and that's why people make the analogy, even though it's not 100% precise.

With a "perpetual license" like the name implies you have purchased a license to use the software in perpetuity. You are correct, you don't own the software but you have the rights to use it forever as long as you don't break the terms of the use license. That is very similar to owning. In fact, unless you break the terms of the license -- no one is going to ask for the license back. ;-) That's the main reason "perpetual use license" exists -- mainly so you don't go breaking the terms of the use license.

In the end -- as this thread proves there are a huge number of people that dislike the subscription model, and many that are ok with it. In the case of PP software, a subscription doesn't have to be more expensive, but in Adobe's case it is, in fact, very much so. My take on it is if you think you're getting your money's worth out of Adobe go for it -- just don't fool yourself -- it is a lot more expensive than almost all the other PP alternatives that are out there. If you're a professional and can write off the cost -- I get it, but if you're an amateur photogropher, or an enthusiast like I am I really don't.

And for those that try to rationalize it -- by saying that it is just two cups of coffee a month, or whatever. Hey, if you think it's worth two cups of coffee go for it. The argument can easily also go the other way -- where many of us would rather save our money and have the two cups of coffee. Given the choice - let me see -- two cups of Peets or Starbucks coffee or the Adobe $10 a month subscription -- My choice is for the two cups of coffee.

Why do you say fear? Do you fear what you don't care for?

What's not to like?
Here's what I don't like. When you subscribe, you're being over charged. $10 a month sounds pretty reasonable on the surface, but think about it. $10 a month is $120 a year. After 5 years you've paid $600 and you still have to keep on paying. You can't say, "I don't want anymore updates, so I'll just stop paying and use what I have." No, you have to keep paying or you don't have anything.
Professionals can write off the subscription fees as a business expense. But if you're not a professional it's ca-ching, ca-ching, ca-ching on and on and on.

I don't fear subscription software, I don't use it because it's a scam.

Photography has been my hobby for more than six decades. When I began phasing in digital, I had to learn to use LCD displays. The early ones were painfully tiny, but even the larger ones can be frustrating in sunlight. I have learned to appreciate having exposure data in the viewfinder, and I see it as an improvement over live displays. Over the years, I've used cameras from most manufacturers. In recent years, I've rented equipment when going on vacation, but as my eyes have gotten older, the importance of good viewfinders and displays has become more important.

When I rented a Nikon D800e, I was very disappointed in the viewfinder. I was also disappointed in the viewfinder of the Sony RX1r. The viewfinder of the Sony A6000 was pretty good. I have not rented a Canon in the last few years.

What do UHH readers say? How do you like the viewfinders of such cameras as the Sony A6500 or the Sony RX100iv, particularly in bright sunlight? Are there good viewfinders with Panasonic, Canon, and Nikon? Do you have to press the viewfinder to your eye so much in sunlight that you get eye sweat on it? Is your viewfinder clear and bright? Does your nose get sore when you press your camera to your face?

Is there an Internet URL where the viewfinders of various cameras are compared?

I have not touched my D750 for a month. Took it out of the camera case yesterday, and to my surprise found out that part of the rubbery skin peeled off. I looked under the skin and saw that two glue spots dried out and unglued. I searched through the Internet and found out that this happened to quite a number of Nikon DSLRs, including the D750. I am planning on getting some epoxy and glue it back.

But before I do that I like to know if this happened to anyone else on this site. If so, how did you fix it. Thanks in advance.