What's nice about their subscription model is that there is no sunk cost when giving up. It's $5/month and you just stop paying it.
(I switched to Affinity Photo for editing but never found anything I liked for organization/library management. I just copy files around now. It ends up being OK because about 50% of my photos are from my phone, 25% are from a DSLR, and 25% are from film scans. Lightroom never helped me with phone or scanned photos, really, so I didn't give much up. Would still like some central self-hosted photo collector, though. Maybe Perkeep is what I want.)
Don't they try to get you to make a year commitment? I remember spending about 30 minutes with someone at Adobe getting them to cancel it when Lightroom was too slow to use on my Mac at the time (which had been more than fast enough for Aperture). After the second or third time that I told them I wasn't going to buy a new computer just for the privilege of running their software, they agreed not to charge a hefty early termination fee.
Be careful though, some card issues will forward the new card details on to (some?) services you have a payment agreement with.
Adjustment and FX layers don't translate, as well as some compositing and blending options.
For anyone who tries these programs, many of their developers and users hang out at https://discuss.pixls.us/
I really, really wish that was the case, but there's no competition for Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign.
Even after years of destroying their software with cloud crap, useless home screens, changing 30 years of muscle memory just because, all while adding a WebKit and Node.js instance for every new dialog box…
…nothing comes even close to any of those tools.
Pro software is hard.
I'd be fine with cloud subscription software if the TCO ended up being lower than buying a boxed product, but it's seemingly more expensive than it ever was. $10USD/mo doesn't seem bad, but if you're comparing to a two-year, $200 upgrade price, then you're spending $40 more and can't opt to skip the latest menu reshuffle.
If you assume the answers to these questions are "no", what is your response to GP?
Photoshop puts like 5 folders in Utilities folder for no reason in macOS and runs bunch of daemons (which apparently can be a cause of bad vulnerabilities) and is dog slow in performance compared to a modern alternative like Affinity Photo.
Market dominance surely puts customer satisfaction to the end of the line.
It was a small thing. With Photoshop I can open a .PNG or .JPG file, edit, and pick Save (cmd-s/ctrl-s) and it saves back to the .PNG/.JPG. If I added layers or something I can press Ctrl/Cmd-Shfit-E to merge it all down then Cmd/Ctrl-S. This means the workflow is fast.
Affinity has no such workflow. You can open a .JPG but you have to follow the export workflow to save back to .JPG which is tedious.
I had say 150 files to edit. I reasoned my time was worth more than $120 to pay for a current version of Photoshop than to put up with a slow workflow.
I also recently tried to use Affinity's batch processing features but they aren't ask good as Photoshop's. I think they are trying to be helpful in that they scan all the photos before you start so you can see what they are going to operate on before you pick "Go". Unfortunately that's not actually a good flow if you're going to process 100s or 1000s of files. Instead of getting stuff done you have to wait for Affinity for several minutes while it goes and makes a thumbnail of all 100 or 1000+ images just so you can then click "Ok, do it!"
From memory, in addition to sticking some pseudo-randomly named files in /System/Library, /Library, and -/Library, it would place a file in the root directory of all hfs+ volumes with xattrs set to hide and write-protect the file. Installers would then look for these files to check licensing status.
At the time, this was a fairly common trick with pro/prosumer proprietary software.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FlexNet_Publisher#Issues_with_...
That is 9 background processes for an app I haven't used in a week.