Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: PeterF on May 13, 2013, 07:05:45 am
-
Its true.
For $49.99 Adobe bundles 7 prime software packages together for $49.99 a month, which Adobe says is the preferred sales/purchase method for both Adobe and the vast majority of their customers. (Ps, Ai, Id, Dw, Ae, Pr and Mu)
So what is $49.99 divided by 7?
=$7.14
SO, according to Adobe, they will (and its best for them) receive $7.14 a month from the vast majority of their customers for the use of Photoshop for any given month.
Yes?
What does this mean in context of Adobe's single licensing price point for Photoshop of $29.99?
1. Its over priced, 4 times the price Adobe has set for themselves as being their chosen price point for their own profitably.
2. Adobe has set this price either to discourage single licensing of Ps - or - Adobe believes that those in the market needing only a single license are so utterly dependent on Ps that they can (and are) vastly overcharge these customers.
3. Piracy of Ps is not a concern to Adobe, as clearly so few copies of Ps are pirated that ceasing to overcharge for the product and thus making it appealing to fraudsters to pay for it instead of stealing it.
-
Have you seen the European prices for the same conditions, almost 2x US price ?!
Not serious Adobe, what do you expect ?!
-
Adobe has set this price for reasons of their own, which they have not shared with you ;-)
The question is whether we feel it worth paying that price for the provided service, or whether we feel there are alternatives that suit our individual needs better?
-
Regardless of their reasons, for good or bad, PeterF has a good point.
-
Even to take it a step further ... if U.S. customers sign up for the one year subscription for $20 a month .... Over a traditional 18 month version cycle period, what exactly is it that Adobe brings to the table via CC that they deserve to to be rewarded an additional $160 ... that's an additional amount in their pocket, and the absence of that amount in your pocket ... For me it isn't necessarily the amount of money, as it is in regards of what I will receive in return for the expenditure and how that expenditure will enhance MY bottom line ... Sure while it's true that $20 per month won't break the bank and many have said it's only a couple of trips to Starbucks ... but at least I can enjoy a decent cup of coffee in the process ... and Starbucks allows me to keep the cup if I want ... For me, I don't see how the additional funds I'd be sending to San Jose will benefit me in the process ... I'm all for paying what it takes to do my job the best way possible ... but commerce is a two-way street, the resulting benefit needs to be amicable and equitable for both parties to thrive and succeed ...
I still say, if the CC business model was indeed the be-all and end-all for even the vast majority of Adobe's traditional client base ... we would have tripped and fallen over each other a year ago to get in the gate when CC was first introduced ... then the perpetual license model would have gone by the wayside last week due to a lack of interest, not because it was too difficult for Adobe to support two licensing models.
So I'm over it. I'll use my current version of Ps until it dies an agonizing death and seek out an alternative in the interim. No matter if Adobe would offer a mega mea culpa over this in the future, I could never have any faith whatsoever that they wouldn't do something even more detrimental to my business later on. I'm also moving my entire RAW workflow to Aperture (been doing all my slideshows and books there for the past two years because of woefully inadequate offerings in Lr for those tasks), as well as seeking out a secondary option so I won't be left hanging if Apple ever pulls a similar stunt.