Software suites like this cost huge amounts of money for bundles of tools that generally follow the 80/20 rule for any given user. The problem is, any given us

Software suites like this cost huge amounts of money for bundles of tools that generally follow the 80/20 rule for any given user. The problem is, any given user might need a different 20% than the next person. It makes it difficult for lighter versions of the software to compete, because there's always that one thing that they need, and is only in the high-cost package. This is a prime example of why a model like the Canon Cat or Apple's abandoned OpenDoc approach should be reconsidered, in my opinion. In those models (I think it's called a component model?), users buy interoperable tools instead of complete applications. Rather than opening a program, you open a document, and select which tools you want to use on it. The operating system contains the ability to open file formats, rather than individual programs. Programs are replaced by tools which can manipulate data once the file format has been read by the OS. For example, you might open a photo, and decide to use a magic wand selector by Adobe, but apply a filter from SumoPaint, a resize tool from Panic Software, and manipulate the text with a Microsoft tool. All of your tools would be in a "toolbox" that you could customize on the fly, much like you'd deal with a toolbox on a workbench. You don't go into your kitchen and turn on every appliance in the room when you just want a piece of toast - why should your computer act that way? Of course, the operating system itself would have to be built with that in mind in the first place - but is that such a crazy idea?