4 ms·

It's $199. It's only ever been $499 until 2013, when the price suddently dropped to $199, and it has been that ever since. Logic Pro is ridiculously cheap comp

It's $199. It's only ever been $499 until 2013, when the price suddently dropped to $199, and it has been that ever since. Logic Pro is ridiculously cheap compared to most other DAW out there. There aren't tiers, there's no upsell to unlock basic features like unlimited tracks, it's just a full featured DAW, the end. Heack, a license for the "full feature, but not bundle-padded, version of X" costs: - Reason: $60 (personal/limited commercial license) - Renoise: $75 (and is the only tracker-style DAW) - Tracktion Waveform: $149 - FL Studio: $199 (thankfully) - Reaper: $225 (unlimited commercial license, by the time you need this, you already have seven other DAW already, too) - Cubase: $329 - Studio One: $399 - Bitwig Studio: $399 - Ableton: $449 - Reason: $499 - Pro Tools: $499 So it's a great deal! ... ...but... ...$199 is also extreme expensive for people who bought a second hand mac, or have a hand-me-down ipad, and don't have two hundred dollars to casually spend on something they never played with because it's been out of reach due to a sky-high price. A subscription for Logic is the complete opposite of nuts. At $5 a month, someone can use Logic for 40 months before it would have been cheaper to buy it up front. That's more than three years, but which time you either know this is what you love, or you stopped using it already and moved on to another hobby. Heck, at $45 a year, that's four or even five years. Plenty of time to get your priorities straight and start saving if audio work brings you joy. The audio crowd got used to incredibly high prices for software, $100+ for an app or even plugin is considered "normal", and has made it completely impossible for kids or just people without disposable income to get into. Everyone knows this, which is why everyone who actually cares to get those folks into their ecosystem either dropped their prices, or now offers a subscription model in addition to buying a perpetual license for a specific version. And in an ecosystem where subscriptions are $9.99/mo (which they pretty much all are), $5/mo is a power move.

faeriechangling 3y ago
I've been poor before and $200 one-time is WAY less expensive than $5/mo recurring. If I can't afford to save $200 I sure can't afford to pay $5 recurring. Recurring subscriptions are for the wealthy, not the poor, the poor can do just fine with freeware or some 10 year old version of whatever. Paying a recurring monthly subscription isn't the only way to get a trial.
- TheRealPomax 3y ago
  Sounds like you're not a kid to me. I didn't have $200 to spend until I was halfway through college. But I sure as hell would have been able to afford $5 a month.
  - faeriechangling 3y ago
    I participated in the long and storied tradition of child labour to buy things I wanted. If you didn't have any money to spend until halfway though college other than a surplus of $5/month, than by saving for $200 you likely would have doubled your disposable income and you would have left school with a Final Cut Pro license on top of that. I'm sure kids will buy it, and they're going to be worse for it than when they paid $200 for a license. In any case, I can't emphasise enough how much paying a monthly subscription over a one time fee does not help the poor in general, at best it allows for you to shift expenses a few years down the road with low interest if you're some sort of temporarily embarrassed millionaire, which isn't the same thing as helping poor kids other than maybe some small niche. Being poor doesn't mean you should do more $5/month subscriptions, it means you can't get away with them nearly as much without getting punished by economic reality.

faeriechangling 3y ago

I've been poor before and $200 one-time is WAY less expensive than $5/mo recurring. If I can't afford to save $200 I sure can't afford to pay $5 recurring. Recurring subscriptions are for the wealthy, not the poor, the poor can do just fine with freeware or some 10 year old version of whatever. Paying a recurring monthly subscription isn't the only way to get a trial.

TheRealPomax 3y ago
Sounds like you're not a kid to me. I didn't have $200 to spend until I was halfway through college. But I sure as hell would have been able to afford $5 a month.
- faeriechangling 3y ago
  I participated in the long and storied tradition of child labour to buy things I wanted. If you didn't have any money to spend until halfway though college other than a surplus of $5/month, than by saving for $200 you likely would have doubled your disposable income and you would have left school with a Final Cut Pro license on top of that. I'm sure kids will buy it, and they're going to be worse for it than when they paid $200 for a license. In any case, I can't emphasise enough how much paying a monthly subscription over a one time fee does not help the poor in general, at best it allows for you to shift expenses a few years down the road with low interest if you're some sort of temporarily embarrassed millionaire, which isn't the same thing as helping poor kids other than maybe some small niche. Being poor doesn't mean you should do more $5/month subscriptions, it means you can't get away with them nearly as much without getting punished by economic reality.