You don't have to replace all of Adobe CS to compete with Adobe CS. Not many of the folk I know with CS actually use the vast majority of it. For example I do

You don't have to replace all of Adobe CS to compete with Adobe CS. Not many of the folk I know with CS actually use the vast majority of it. For example I do almost no print work. All the stuff Adobe sweat over for the print folk - doesn't impact me in the slightest. In fact it gets in the way of the stuff I need to do since it adds complexity to the UI. In the Mac land a bunch of folk are switching to paid tools like Pixelmator and Acorn as alternatives to Photoshop for some work. They don't replace everything that PS dues, but offer what a subset of the PS audience needs for a substantially cheaper price with some arguably better functionality in a few places. I know people who have CS and Pixelmator, and spend most of their time in the latter and just bring up CS when they need something "clever". Both Pixelmator and Acorn seem to be doing very well for themselves - and I think both are still single developer shops. What nobody apart from Adobe seems to be really doing is the "suite" part - managing the integration well. For example - I would part with $200 in a heartbeat for a micro-suite that handled bitmap and vector work together to the same level that Pixelmator managed bitmap stuff, with some nice glue/plugins to support where I work (web apps, mobile apps, pushing out multiple resolution versions, etc.).