Adobe introduces subscription pricing model (Photoshop for $35/month)
adobe.com
adobe.com
So, $4k project, 12 days, used Photoshop, = $49/(12/30) = $19.60.
This would be hard to complain about as a client. For you, on every project you do, if you're a typical small design shop where net income is roughly 10%, you'll be adding 5% to your net income. Or, if you need two or three programs, then 15% to your bottom line.
Of course, if you're a freelancer, then you're adding $19.60 to your bottom line. But, I bet it would be nice to add those up, especially since projects tend to run long in days, not hours.
But more than that, they way I view someone like that is someone who would rather nickel and dime me to death than to just just honestly charge the rate they need to charge. I would feel there were going to be numerous little surprise charges on their invoices. And being a hired gun myself, who started out as a nickel-and-dimer, I would view the individual or agency as lacking in experience.
I'd see nothing odd with Adobe giving people who've leased for 6 months a 10% discount coupon to incentivize them to get a 'full' version ("you've like it so far - lock in our current pricing now and save!") Adobe gets more cash quicker, user's been able to try it out without a lot of cash down up front.
Your Landlord can't just create an infinite number of apartments on the fly and rent them to an infinite number of people at almost no extra cost to him.
With software, this is a very real possibility and rent to own makes perfect sense.
The minute Adobe says they will do this I'm in. I would love to be able to pay for 12 months and finally have my own copy.
At about that time, they may release a new version, and at that time, heck, I might just stay on the subscription plan so I get the newer one. BUT, if I stop, I still have version 5.5 that I paid for in full.
Incidentally, this is the same argument as with piracy vs. physical theft.
Edit: Now I could see paying that as a daily rate. If you work on this stuff 3-4 days a month it would cost less and feel like less of a ripoff to rent vs. buy.
But the example given--Photoshop--retails for $699. So that's more like 20 months to break even.
The people they are really going after are those that need to swap Adobe files (e.g. creative consultants and their clients): Inter-version compatibility is a headache for any participants who aren't on the latest version. Things could get particularly ugly if they start releasing features to subscribers that aren't otherwise available until the next version.
Edit: You can also upgrade student editions to full retail versions, so "having a copy" includes the student edition.
PS: For most non professional people a 400$ copy of CS3 is plenty. Next year they can probably upgrade to CS7 (for 200$) and then stay on a 2-3 year upgrade cycle after that.
Or something like $1500 if you happen to be European. This is roughly as fair and balanced as FOX News.
For example, I would probably pay a few thousand dollars for a license that allowed Photoshop to be installed on a dozen workstations, but can only be running for one user at a time.
At least around here, if you're not a full time designer you get GIMP not Photoshop. Adobe's leaving money on the table.
I've been hanging on to my copy of cs3 for quite a while, and it only grows less relevant over time. Eventually there will be a different solution, but at this time there simply really isn't any application out there with as battle-tested as a UI as what Photoshop has.
I think most of the sales that they "lose" are the same type of issues that the music industry faces: not a lost sale, just someone trying it out who wouldn't have bought anyway. I've never really seen any institutional or business piracy with Photoshop, just teenagers wanting to use it to mess around.
I'm not a designer, but I use Illustrator often. I just bought Illustrator 10 for about $100 and it more than meets my needs. How many truly relevant new features can really be added to a vector drawing program?
I think you are right regarding the Illustrator issue though, I still have CS2 on my machine and I don't think there has been a noticable change up to CS5, that might be why its one of the cheaper subscriptions??
Photoshop is constantly changing in my eyes, they introduced the 3d tool 2 versions ago and I would imagine they spend the next few versions perfecting it. At that point they introduce another big feature.
I think a lot of the time the upgrades are non essential though and are just a money spinner. Apple do it though once a year but they only charge a nominal fee for their software. Microsoft do it every few years but they are a rip off.
I know that if I was a Freelancer and my software was not covered by the company then I would be more inclined to go down this route than downloading it. I don't know many freelancers that start up and can afford the latest version of any of Adobe's products. They are the industry standard and they have people by the balls, this way they can try to get potential illegal downloaders interested.
So it is really a year at $35*12= $370.
Which doesn't seem so good anymore.
I used to use Photoshop daily, but I don't any more. I'd love to be able to use it though I would only use it casually. Their price point is still too high for me so I'm going without.