3 ms·

The thing is, subscriptions for 'big expensive software' like Adobe/Autodesk stuff makes sense in a lot of cases. Avoids a huge up-front cost, and gives everyon

The thing is, subscriptions for 'big expensive software' like Adobe/Autodesk stuff makes sense in a lot of cases. Avoids a huge up-front cost, and gives everyone access to the latest version. (Having said that, I bought a copy of Photoshop CS5 outright about 10 years ago, and I still use that version. Would have paid a lot more if I was on a subscription for 10 years, and I don't use it frequently or skillfully enough to need the latest+greatest version) But we've got to a point now where the tiniest little utility wants a subscription rather than a one-off payment. And I'd blame it more on Apple than Adobe for creating the App Store model and then pushing subscriptions. Apple have also created the requirement (and cost) for developers of having to constantly update their software (just to support new OS versions or new hardware), whereas Microsoft's focus on backwards-compatibility enables a lot of software a decade or two old to still run on the latest Windows and latest hardware.

ghaff 4y ago
Yeah, I have an Adobe Photo subscription and that's mostly fine. I'd be upgrading Lightroom anyway and, if I did stop upgrading, it would presumably break at some point with newer OSs. But as you say it's a big nope for little utilities and/or other programs that I rarely use. Fortunately, it tends to at least be easier these days to export into a standard format for programs that have data locked into them.
interestica 4y ago
Adobe won't let you install certain older versions of software that you paid full price for and still have the install discs. CS3.
scarface74 4y ago
Microsoft’s insistence on backward compatibility comes with its own issues including the snails pace of moving forward with any new feature. If you use a Windows 10 Surface laptop today, you still will occasionally see Windows 95 dialogue boxes. Apple not only removed 32 bit compatibility in their OS’s. They also removed it from the actual hardware allowing them to improve their chipsets much faster than x86. Not mention that they can use the core OS with everything from watches, phones, computers, tablets, speakers, set top boxes and monitors (yes the latest monitors run iOS). It seems to have worked better for Apple.

ghaff 4y ago

Yeah, I have an Adobe Photo subscription and that's mostly fine. I'd be upgrading Lightroom anyway and, if I did stop upgrading, it would presumably break at some point with newer OSs. But as you say it's a big nope for little utilities and/or other programs that I rarely use. Fortunately, it tends to at least be easier these days to export into a standard format for programs that have data locked into them.

interestica 4y ago

Adobe won't let you install certain older versions of software that you paid full price for and still have the install discs. CS3.

scarface74 4y ago

Microsoft’s insistence on backward compatibility comes with its own issues including the snails pace of moving forward with any new feature. If you use a Windows 10 Surface laptop today, you still will occasionally see Windows 95 dialogue boxes. Apple not only removed 32 bit compatibility in their OS’s. They also removed it from the actual hardware allowing them to improve their chipsets much faster than x86. Not mention that they can use the core OS with everything from watches, phones, computers, tablets, speakers, set top boxes and monitors (yes the latest monitors run iOS). It seems to have worked better for Apple.