Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'm not sure what your point is. Photoshop is fairly priced? The problem with greed is that when people think they might get a piece of the action, it no longer remains greed, but becomes "normal business practices" and quite acceptable. Greed is rampant in the software industry, but it's overlooked in large part. Programmers want to get paid salaries that only greedy corporations can muster. Paying $600 for Photoshop makes the little guy feel important. I know people who use it for nothing more than auto-levels who couldn't wait to upgrade to version 7.0. There is a strangeness about people buying programs that they will only use one tenth of. You're right, there is a lower cost option, but Adobe didn't produce it to be nice. Photoshop Elements is a stab at the folks who would not, or could not, buy Photoshop 7.0. The hope is that the Element buyers will "grow up" and realize that they just can't live without the full version. And people will. Who can live with only ten features you don't know how to use--go with 7.0 and you'll have a hundred features you don't know how to use. Of course, Photoshop is not to blame about unused features. After all, it did all it could to make the program intuitive, right? Allan On Will wrote: > Perhaps you would be better off sticking to the Single Malt > thread. You seem to be regressing to a period more than a > decade old when the battle for fonts was a make or break > issue for Adobe. (for person's not currently imbibing, a > brief history can be found at > http://www.truetype.demon.co.uk/tthist.htm ). Certainly by > 1995 true type fonts were readily available from such > companies as Corel which was often bundled at the time with > many computer systems (I just loaded all of their True Type > fonts into my computer). > > The light versions of Photoshop will handle nearly all of > the manipulations required by the typical amateur > photographer. Plus what you learn with the light version is > applicable to the full versions in case you get serious. If > you choose to learn something other than what is the > industry standard, fine...it's your time. > > My office uses the LE version of Photoshop which came > bundled with scanners and cameras. Works fine for us. We > also have Illustrator 10 which is used by the graphic-guru. > We have 25 licenses for Adobe Acrobat v.5. We didn't buy > these licenses in a frivolous manner since we make the > Buffalo squeal before we buy anything (for our non-US > readers, the US 5-cent piece has a buffalo on it and to make > it squeal means we are really cheap). > > Adobe is one of the cheaper software companies whose > products we use. If you want to get expensive, get into > vector, rather than raster, application programs. > > Bill Larsen > Terra Bella, CA > Vector 'r us > > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html