Just found out about this. Didn't think they would follow the Adobe rip off plan, but I guess at least the stand alone version is still available as a once off purchase.
Companies are affected by swings in sales, and very drastically. The subscription mode lets them have a more stable and predictable income from month to month. That means they can hire employees and know that paychecks can be met.
I don't see it as a rip-off at all, but some who seldom use the software can be hurt because the cost is too high. For them, there is always software that is aimed at their kind of usage. Pro level software is aimed at pro users.
Perhaps the next evolution will be priced on a per photo edited plan, 2 cents a image?
But only for Canon cameras...There's always Canon DPP.
But only for Canon cameras...
As a software developer I much prefer selling on subscriptions. It is much easier to manage the income and stops the need to produce these big changes to justify selling folks version 2.0. Subscriptions create a environment where software is upgraded incrementally and at a much more steady pace.
For them, there is always software that is aimed at their kind of usage. Pro level software is aimed at pro users.
I personally don't understand why Adobe doesn't support subscription for those that value that experience and traditional licensing model for those that value that arrangement. I think what you'd find is that the subscription model would enter the death spiral.
But you are missing half the equation, for the professional user, who by the very definition is a company, it is much nicer/easier/cost effective to pay a modest subscription/lease that is 100% deductible in that same financial year than to find a one off $100's or $1,000's fee every two or three years that has to be written down and depreciated.
A lot depends on where you live and the interpretations of the EULA of the software. Most income tax jurisdictions differentiate between purchases that last/are intended to be used beyond the tax year they are purchased, so the Adobe stand alone suit for many people was considered a depreciable asset that took several tax years to write down, however I don't know of a single country that considers a monthly lease a depreciable asset, it is a lease and fully deductible in the tax year it is spent.You don't have to depreciate over time.
I know with my company and others I know of and work with, we're not having to depreciate purchases like this over time. Granted, I'm not huge or large....but I write off 100% of my software and hardware changes every year in full.
I'm guessing it is beneficial for some companies to depreciate over time, but you don't HAVE to.
So, you buy software you can write it off in full that same year....it too is fully deductible.
C
You don't have to depreciate over time.
I know with my company and others I know of and work with, we're not having to depreciate purchases like this over time. Granted, I'm not huge or large....but I write off 100% of my software and hardware changes every year in full.
I'm guessing it is beneficial for some companies to depreciate over time, but you don't HAVE to.
So, you buy software you can write it off in full that same year....it too is fully deductible.
C
Exactly. That is what so many of the people who complain about the Adobe subscription model just don't seem to get, the software and the way to pay for it are both focused on business users, not part time or hobbyist users.The problem with that is that you are depleting your cash reserves with upfront costs. It's basic business 101 that you should conserve your cash. Leasing is popular with businesses not just because of the tax benefits, but because it also avoids having to make and possibly finance major purchases up front.
It also has made it difficult for those who made illegal copies, so people have had to pay.Exactly. That is what so many of the people who complain about the Adobe subscription model just don't seem to get, the software and the way to pay for it are both focused on business users, not part time or hobbyist users.
No, it's just market economy, the point where the supply and the demand currently meet.Kind of an elitist, self-aggrandizing statement and post.
No, it is easier to download an illegal copy than it is to register an account, give Adobe your CC details (which they have proven to be insecure with), make sure your ISP aligns with what they believe it should be given your address (can't have people paying a few cents less because they live in another country), receive confirmation email, then activate.It also has made it difficult for those who made illegal copies, so people have had to pay.
I do wish there was a model for infrequent users, but to do that might be too difficult and easy to hack. I don't think people would want Adobe checking each photo. Perhaps there could be a model where you prepay by the hour for usage. I don't think they believe that there is much demand for something like that.
How is $7.99 a month not a fair price for those three and ignore the 'free' 20GB, I do.I don't mind subscribing if it was at a lower price, all i want is lr classic, ps and camera raw. nothing else. no 20terabites of cloud space or whatever. just those 3 things.