Why? I am still using Office 2007 without any problems at all and communicate with a lot of other people since I among other things is sitting in a condominium association board.
Forever - Well, ten years is forever in the IT-world and more than 16 years is even beyond that horizon.
A long time I used Scapbook+ (screencapture+clip library) which was one of the early Windows-programs from the end of the eighties (remember Windowss 2.x ??) :-). I think I used it for 20 years (that´s two x forever, isn´t it. I loved it. Finally, it got incompatible but I still have the disc somewhere.
topaz isn’t subscription but a 299$ cost, sure you’ll keep it
Well it is a bit more complicated on macOS. Apple tends to change API more frequently and is continuously cutting the tail. So older software is sometimes no longer compatible.
But you pay an annual fee to get upgrades.
you have 1 yr of upgrade, no extra fees that i can see on their website. the upgrade you have to pay is when your license is over and you want the next, like DxO going from PL6 to PL7 has fees but if you stick with PL6 that’s it, keep using it.
Why do I feel like this same sentiment was dismissed 2 days ago?
“Subscription” is a dirty word even though it means different things to different people, and different vendors. It’s a kind of stereotyping.
Let’s judge such a move by DxO if and when it happens (or if they ask for our input). There are so many variations and we have no idea which they would choose. Even they probably don’t know now, unless a change is imminent.
Still many Mac-owners seem to be very happy with their OS and their computers
Sure, but the people jumping from tuft to tuft trying to avoid the subscriptions might soon have nowhere to jump. It feels very unsustainable in the long run.
I agree. Many are, but I am not. A completely personal decision. Hence I made the switch back to Linux and am very happy about the decision. But as I said it is a purely subjective decision and a matter of taste.
And it leaves you in a complex multi dependency RAW developer situation.
In worst case not even able to easily pick up where you left off a few edits without going back buy/subscribe to a plethora of apps.
Don´t you miss all the industry standard applications??
Linux on personal computers is such a small niche still today after all these years.
It really never took of.
Actually not at all. Fortunately I do not need these applications (neither at work nor at home). All tools I need are basically available on Linux. Yet, PL or Affinity would be nice to have also after my final switch back.
Have been a Linux user since 1993 with a period of macOS in between. I simply love to have the control, no spying, privacy. And the chance to make/implement changes to the programs I use if needed.
I’ve been using FRV since it came out. It’s perfect for culling. Fast, even on a-few-generations-old hardware - but I’ve never used it as a DAM. It’s not free, but cheap enough that buying it was a no-brainer.
No Spyware and a perfect privacy? Are you hinting that all the Internet terrorists are on Linux, and that is why Linux is a safe haven?? Sounds like being a neighbor of the biker gangs Hells Angels or Bandidos.
… or is it because no one is using it … or just a smal little fraction of the worlds users?
When I think of Linux I think of THE Network OS of the eightees and early nineties with maybe 80-90% of the PC networking market that in no time lost it all to Microsoft and in order to survive got a totally brilliant business idea - I’m talking about Novell.
Instead of developing their own Network OS-platform, they could let all the worlds enthusiastic altruist developers gathered around LINUX doing all that job for free for Novell too and then they could just package that software and sell it as THE Novell version of LINUX with a nice and reliable support as a major selling point. Even the Chinese seem to love LINUX, don’t they? :-). Don’t you also think it rubs a little?
For me it looks a lot like the whole LINUX altruism is getting played by some old charks like Novell, IBM and HP among others. The first two have that in common that they lost the big OS-battle in the nineties to Microsoft. Suddenly they have gained some wind on the Network OS-market and got at least a bit more competitive when they don´t have to fund all the R&D by themselves anymore. Unlike the PC OS they have had better luck on the servers.
Yes FRV isn’t free but really affordable, it’s not a DAM, but you can use it for your DAM.
I use PM as FRV came after i started using PM, great tool (the best) to built my own library/catalog, PM is there to import, cull, tag, keywords and browse my folders, and export images to PL or other software to be process.
it’s all about how you keep your stuff, some use software “DAM” while other make their own, either way works.
At least PM and FRV can display side by side images. Ha ha.
I like it. It´s a very clean interface. It´s very fast and produces very nice previews both of RAW and JPEG-files. It might be perfect for all that don´t care that much about either all the EXIF-elements EXIF Tools can handle or IPTC and/or XMP metadata too for that matter.
If you use PhotoLab, FilmPack, ViewPoint, and the Nik Collection, then a subscription price lower than the combined component price makes sense. This would be good for some customers (me, for instance) because had I been able to go for a subscription, I would now be on PL7 instead of PL6 and on FP7 instead of FP6. DxO are not adding much I want or need in PL, and now that the entire Nik Collection has been updated, I find it hard to believe that I will see a need to update to what comes after Nik6 for a while. The result of all this is that I do not upgrade, hence no added revenues for DxO. A subscription would keep my software up to date and generate a revenue stream for DxO; frankly, I canot understand how this can be perceived as anything other than a win-win as long as the subscription is not mandatory and people can still buy outright if that’s what they prefer.
For the last 8 yers, I paid a total of $1,030.96 for the Adobe subscription (ACR, Lightroom, Bridge, and Photoshop). In the same time frame, I spent $837.70 on DxO software; it is slightly less because I do not systematically upgrade. With a subscription, I would be on the latest software version for all DxO products, and DxO would have a more regular revenue stream.
Oh, and with Adobe, my cost is entirely predictable. No such nonsense as, hey, there’s a new version of PL, but do not update yet as better deals will almost certainly become available on Black Friday. It all resembles a flea market deal and not a professional business transaction.
It’s a matter of survival: DxO needs to secure a revenue stream or they will go under. They can do this by raising upgrade prices, by only allowing discounts when upgrading from the last major version, or by offering subscriptions. I perfectly understand that you want to own your preferred software, but the consequence may be that the maker of your preferred software will not be around for long,
You make some good points. Another thing to consider is the infinite number of beta testers available when updates role out. Because of the large number of users, a great amount of feedback is available right away to determine what works or what needs to be changed in a more timely fashion. This pushes the software companies to advance their products in areas where others lag behind. AI masking is just one example. Personally I feel the monthly cost is just a part of doing business to have a much more advanced set of tools available and consistent updates for newer cameras and lens in the marketplace.