Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Allan Wafkowski wrote: > I don't own Photoshop > because I won't pay $600 for it, and I'm uncomfortable using a purloined > copy. Still, there is something obscene about Adobe charging the amount > they do--unmitigated greed. I'm not much of a capitalist, I suppose. I do not see anything immoral about Adobe's pricing. They provide a product which sufficient numbers of people and companies find useful to pay $600 for. Why is this "obscene"? And why is it any different from the pricing of any other products? I do not own a BMW car because I do not wish to pay their price; instead I own an Opel. But I certainly do not consider BMW immoral or "obscene" for charging what they do. We live in a market economy and every seller is entitled to charge whatever s/he wishes, just as every consumer is free to make his or her decision based on the willingness and ability to pay. I can see that there may be moral issues in, say, the pricing of AIDS drugs in African countries; but pricing of Adobe Photoshop as a moral issue?! Please... Nathan - -- Nathan Wajsman Herrliberg (ZH), Switzerland e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch mobile: +41 78 732 1430 Photo-A-Week: http://www.wajsman.com/indexpaw2002.htm General photo site: http://www.wajsman.com/index.htm - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html