Originally Posted by Masked
I was actually discussing the entire publishing suite in it's entirety for a business...Which, is the actual licensing agreement...I've had my broker for @ 14 years...
Anyway, most of the costs I see are not accurate representations of the actual costs...This is a link to the ACTUAL cost page: http://www.adobe.com/products/creativecloud/buying-guide.html
The creative cloud, in itself, is worth the investment, IMHO and you'll come to find that the vast majority of professionals in the industry, agree with me.
Above/beyond that, this "suite" comes with an entire army of licensed fonts...Something that cost many of us, legitimate businesses, THOUSANDS of dollars/year; particularly publishers.
$50/month gives you the entire creative suite which, is actually well under what it costs...Beyond that, you can now have CS-whatever for $240/year...
Once again, as a professional that uses the entire suite, daily -- This is irreplaceable and as a beta tester of this service -- It's well worth the cost, the cloud alone is actually worth the cost.
Really don't care if the "hobbyist" disagrees because this product isn't designed for the "hobbyist"...
I disagree with you on this.
As a private professional, you pay 50$/month, and you don't keep the software. That is the major issue. No payment = no software.
This means that for the end of times, no matter what, you will still have to pay 50$ if
adobe doesn't increase the price, ever, if you still want to edit your files. Once you stop paying, your photoshop files, are as good as junk files.
Go explain that to a photographer from 40 years ago, telling him "you remember that negative you bought a year ago? give me 20$ or you can't use it".
Also, you don't look at the team price. Today, you can buy one application of the suite, and use it up to 3 computers.
Now, to use it at the same time on 3 computers, you need to buy the team suite, which is 70$ per computer.
This means that if you want to use the full suite on your main computer, your assistant on another, and a trainee on a third, you are not paying 240$/year. Its 210$/month.
You are not looking at the fine print my friend. You think its nice to suddenly have the whole suite, but once you stop, you can't use your files. Or if another suite from a competitor comes out which is better, you can't move to it, because you are locked with adobe.
For a professional photographer, 50$ a month isn't much. But as long as he pay adobe, and as long as adobe keeps the original price, he doesn't pay less in the long run.
Also you are completely forgetting the fact that you are still locked with adobe. You say 50$ / month is fine. What about 60$? What about 100$? What about 120$?
Once everyone goes subscription, and as the suite is the only standard today in the industry, what prevents them from increasing the price?
Hell, they can go to 1000$ a month. Why shouldn't they care? You can't go to another suite. I dare you switch to another product.
This is the main problem. You think 50$ is fine, but you are blinding yourself to the consequences.
Personally, I'm also a photographer.
I bought the CS5, and upgraded to CS6. I also own LR4 and will upgrade to 5.
I don't need nor want to pay 20$ a month to use the CS6. I want to buy it, and keep it as much as I want. To use it at home once I stop being a photographer, to use it 10 years from now, or 20, without paying 4800$ over that course of time for something which cost 650$.
The same as I bought windows, the same as I bought a rMBP, the same as I buy a stand alone game, the same as I buy a CPU. I don't want to pay overpriced subscription to something I should own, not rent.Edited by Defoler - 5/7/13 at 9:39am