Forums | MacLife

I doubt anyone would ever want to copy your anus.

Certainly not Coxy's, but I've gotten bids from Apple on mine.

I see no problem with them implementing this copy-protection idea provided that, if it works, they reduce the price of photoshop some.  I mean, the reason that the program costs so much is because of pirates, right?  So if they figure out a way to keep people from pirating the price should come down a bit.

Although, Logic Platinum is pretty much un-pirateable (found this out when I wanted to try it out, with full intention to buy if I like it - still can't find a demo) and it still costs $800.  That's just too much.

Uh, no, the reason Photoshop costs so much is that it is ridiculously expensive to make.  Imagine how much it costs Adobe to pay the wages (and probably benefits) of the huge team of programmers, engineers, consultants, and testers who probably make close to $50-100/hour.  Now factor in marketing, the team of writers and designers who put together the manual for each version, as well as the startup/box graphics, and paying the salaries of executives, tech support, and other Adobe employees.  Since it takes 1-2 years for them to put together a new version of Photoshop, that's a lot of money to pay all of those employees, and Adobe still has to manage to pull a profit.  Of course, other Adobe apps cover some of those costs, but Photoshop is the flagship and receives the most development time (and thus costs the most to develop).

So, the reason Photoshop costs so much is because it costs a lot to make.  And don't forget that owners of a previous version get it for $180, which is nearly 1/4 the full price, so Adobe has to cover those exorbitant costs somehow, because everyone paying the reduced upgrade price just won't cut it.

Oh, and Logic is $700 from the Apple Store (online, and presumably at a physical store as well), not $800.  Wherever you're shopping is overcharging you $100.  Logic also costs so much because it's so expensive for Apple/Emagic to develop it and maintain it.

I would wager a guess that most people who buy Photoshop do so at the reduced upgrade price whenever a new version comes out.  If Adobe seriously wanted to just milk profits, they wouldn't even have an upgrade price.

As far as Windows and the Mac OS not costing so much, think of their respective market saturations, as well as the other software (and in the case of Apple, hardware) produced by each company which offsets/subsidizes the relatively low cost of the OS.  Basically 100% of Apple computers run the Mac OS, and 100% of Windows PCs run Windows.  Both Apple and MS produce expensive industry standard applications (Office in the case of MS, and Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, and Shake in Apple's case) which also account for much of the company's overall software sales and profits.  Microsoft deals with their profits not just on the price, but on sheer volume.  Those $200 copies of Windows may not seem like much, but they add up after basically 98% of the consumer market has purchased them in one way or another (either via upgrade or buying a new computer).  Apple has high hardware profit margins which subsidize a large percentage of their software development.

The business models for Apple and Microsoft are markedly different from Adobe's when it comes to software.  Adobe doesn't have nearly as many customers as Microsoft does, and Adobe doesn't have the hardware profit margins that Apple does.  Adobe's development and operational costs have to be covered entirely by their software sales.  Your analogy is flawed.

I am not personally affected by this activation since I own a fully legal copy of Photoshop. (And same with Illustrator, InDesign, Dreamweaver, etc. etc.).

I got almost all of my software off of eBay. I lurked around until I found an older version (with serial and either unregistered, or the owner is willing to transfer ownership). I got a copy of Photoshop 4 for a little over $100 this way, and then I upgraded. I just got Indesign 1.5 for $100, and I'll upgrade it later. Same goes for Illustrator, etc. etc. I NEVER have paid full price for any of my legally registered Adobe software. I just couldn't ever do it. What I do is perfectly legit and legal. And it saves me a bunch of money.

I also believe that educational software (at least with Adobe) can be upgraded  to full versions. So, if you qualify for edu versions, get them while you can, and you're set from them on!

then why doesn't Windows and Mac OS X thousands of dollars, I'm sure making and maintaining an OS is even more expensive. Face it, Adobe is charging a premium. I'm not saying it's not their right to do so but to be implying that they HAVE to charge 800-1000 dollars to make a profit is not correct. the cost to develop is probably only half that. All those pirated copies do cut into their profits though. Even if they managed to stop most casual pirates I doubt they'll lower the price, they'll milk the extra profits. Just like Apple will do when the next-gen CPU is released, which will most likely be cheaper to manufacture than the G4.

Wait, what?

you've got to factor this into your equation: windows and macos go on THOUSANDS more computers than photoshop ever will.  You're also no businessman.  You have no idea what the cost is to develop a piece of software for market.  You've got to pay coders (we're not cheap, y'know), you've got to pay the accountants, you've got to pay the art department, you've got to pay the manual department, you've got to pay manufacturing, you've got to pay advertising, you've got to pay...

You get the picture.  It is a wonder that any software company makes money at all.

That's why they charge so much for the software.  Like I said, MS makes their profits due to volume licensing and sales, Apple makes their profits primarily on hardware sales.  Adobe has their software and their software only to profit from (and not the luxury of hardware sales like Apple), and they do not have the volume of MS, so they charge a lot for their software, and make a tidy profit in the end, which goes to subsidize future R&D and sit in the bank in case of hard times.

Hell, if Big TCT man thinks that Photoshop is expensive, he should look at the core system for ProTools 24|Mix - $6,000 entry price, for software and 1 interface card.

Hardly make money at all? Please tell me you arent that naive!

Projects are bankrolled by profit made on previous efforts- thats just common sense, whether youre a start up company or a rich established one.

Think for a minute about other media- movies and cds. Waterworld cost the same per ticket as an independent low budget flick. Micheal Jackson's cd's sell the same as a punk rock album recorded on a fischer price tape deck. The price is made because thats what consumers will pay for a cd, or a movie ticket. You dont get a discount if it was cheaper to make- its what the market will bear.

Things in this world are not priced fairly- thats just the way it is- its not a fair world. Adobe chrges what they can get, and I'm sure if you investigated their public financial statements you'd know that they are by no means just scraping by. Adobe is like any other business.

Pro-Tools or ANY OTHER MEDIA TOOL/SOFTWARE that is going to be used by professionals to record records, edit movies, publish etc- is priced so high because most businesses can bear the price because they in turn will (hopefully) make profits by using the software and selling the product.

No kidding, Sherlock.  I said 'It's a wonder that they make any money at all' not 'they hardly make any money at all.'

Take the comment in context, bub.