> It's that I had specific issues that they didn't address, and I didn't want to keep paying a monthly fee to be having those specific issues. So let me get th

> It's that I had specific issues that they didn't address, and I didn't want to keep paying a monthly fee to be having those specific issues. So let me get this straight. Adobe has adopted a payment model that allows customer to more easily switch to alternatives (thanks to no large upfront cost), while simultaneously making more changes overall to the software over the same fixed-period of time, but because those changes didn't match your exact needs in the moment you had them you switched to an alternative? How is Adobe the bad guy in this situation? Not necessarily saying your comment is painting Adobe negatively, but that seems to be the general feeling towards Adobe's subscription model in this thread. It seems like a pretty good deal to be able to minimize your investment in a software product.