why ? healthy competition drives prices down... so let us oversell then.
I don't care, over selling is over selling. The text Phil wrote is not clear nor accurate. If you take it at face value, it gives the strong impression that moving from Photoshop to Corel has no implications on a workflow.
It absolutely does. Now if that matters to you or not is a personal decision. But IF I spent hours building path's in my Photoshop files only to find they are now gone once I've canceled CC and purchased Corel, I'd be pissed (both at Phil but more at myself at taking such a statement at face value).
To increase competition we should ignore the facts of the implications of moving from product to product, no matter the affect on our workflow? I don't think so. IF and WHEN Corel can support all the editing I've done in my legacy files, let's talk. That isn't the case today. And as such, I don't care about competition, I care about deciding if I should stay with CC or move on. After testing Corel, despite Phil's post, it's a deal breaker. You may feel differently but hopefully you'll feel that way based on the reality of "
Corel was very powerful with direct PSD support!"Perhaps Phil makes $8.95 per hour, and recreating functionality in Corel that Photoshop lacks makes makes the $1 per hour net a good deal for him. For me (and I'll not speak for others), sticking with the full functionality of CC at it's reasonable cost per month is a no-brainer in terms of cost per benefit ratio. But that's me.