Can "most people" afford paying $600 yearly fee to edit images? Are "most people" concerned if they fail to make a yearly payment and loose access to all their projects because of vendor lock-in with Adobe's products? Most people I speak to about this are very concerned about this, although they may not know that these problems are caused by Adobe apps being non-free. (But not knowing the cause of a problem doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist)
> Being "free software" does not shield you from criticism.
I agree totally. I just don't think that suggesting proprietary alternatives in this context is particularly helpful as they also lack features of freedom, e.g. sharing, privacy and absence of vendor lock-in.
> And it is not Adobe's fault that the developers of that software do not have a feature. That's entirely on the developers of those programs.
If Adobe freed the source code of Photoshop, how long do you think it would take for missing features to make it into Gimp?
> They care if it makes their life easier, and allows them to get a task done.
... except if the task involves working with other people who may not have access to that software, or may not want to run proprietary software, or may not want to give up their privacy or freedom.