$5/mo for top of the line software that will continue to get updates + new features + bug fixes is "really disappointing"?
It's a fine model if both models are available. You might spend some $ for some months to try it out, then you decide to buy it. But what they really want is for you to never ever stop paying, because you have a bunch of files and works you did that you "just might" have to open soon so you might as well keep the sub running...
Approximately all the math in Photoshop is wrong because it's not done in linear colorspace, the image resizing algorithms were bad for 1980, etc, but they can't change them.
Lightroom introduced a new better ML demosaic for raw photos, but they can't just replace the old one, instead it's a different "enhance photo" option.
Even if your same application continues to work forever, one of the following will happen:
- Complementary software evolves. E.g.: My old photo editor doesn't support new image compression formats
- Alternatives become more attractive. E.g.: I paid for a copy of Sublime Text but now I prefer VSCode because of its additional functionality, my old copy of Photoshop CS2 works fine but the new one will save me time during XYZ workflow compared to the old version.
- The utility of the application is exhausted. E.g.: I already played this single player game 10 times and it's not fun anymore, my copy of Final Cut Pro 6 can't produce 4K HDR movies that my customers demand.
I have used versions of After Effects of similar vintage. Premier and AE were doing 4K back then because that’s what Hollywood needed for their productions. Illustrator and Photoshop are mostly functional.
Likewise, my Nikon camera from 2011 doesn’t stop working just because it’s old. The tools in my garage are no less effective because home additive manufacturing exists.
If Apple decides to stop supporting the subscription based Logic Pro, I'd no longer be able to continue using it.
Furthermore, if it shares the same codebase as the macOS version, why would it cease development now that they share a common architecture? If anything, that would likely mean Apple had gone tits-up.
I'm not even an Apple user. I'm just calling it as I see it.
Nvidia, for example, meets the requirements too.
Why you would trust a company not to increase prices because they make their own hardware I am not sure.
I remember a bus company undercut by a new train service. The train was very affordable until the private bus service disappeared. Then, the price gouging started.
If we can compare that service with a SaaS I don‘t see why apple would be any different.
You've unintentionally alluded to the reason why single-purchase software is such a flawed business model. If I buy a piece of software from a company that's using a one-time purchase business model, I basically have to expect them to go out of business or constantly be on life support because their only revenue comes from new customers. Once their market is saturated, they're done.
Persistent licenses are really still licenses, not truly buy it and keep it forever product. The time scale is just longer. Aperture was discontinued, so now it's a matter of "good luck finding a machine that still runs it." While it's great that you got to keep the software forever, that doesn't guarantee the software has value anymore.
Almost all of the purchased objects in our life degrade in some way, whether it's fast or slow.
Also, I think that Apple's persistent license professional suite was priced well below cost to attract users to the Mac platform. In contrast, these are applications that are intending to turn a profit on their own.
On a system that can be virtualized the software may very well run forever.
I can virtualize Disk Defragmenter on a Windows 98 VM, but what value does that have?
I can virtualize Visual Studio ‘97, but what value does that have?
The examples of old pay-once software that has no value to today is basically endless. Even the ones that still have value eventually get an open source competitor that surpasses them.
For example, Gimp is certainly better than some very old versions of Photoshop, and a modern Linux distribution is better than an old version of Windows (even if you believe Windows 11 to be the best OS currently available).
If a subscription fee is what it takes to get some attention then so be it; $5/mo is certainly reasonable. But I wouldn't assert it as a foregone conclusion.
Cool. Who cares? Are you Adobe's target customer base?
https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/compare-plans.html
No, you're not.
I used to download 800mb Photoshop binaries
Now you visit it in a browser.
Which is better "customer experience"?
Also no offline support at all.
And they have access to all of my data because I have to upload it.
I just want to use lightroom to edit my vacation photos, I don't want to upload all of my photos over my slow internet connection just to edit them in a high-latency browser app. Also I'm likely traveling in a vehicle without stable internet.