Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

[rant] Seriously? Software pricing is officially nuts

<< < (4/6) > >>

Dormouse:
But even if I'm not a pro photographer, I'm still a fairly clever person who could benefit from an explanation of how a product like this is different enough to spend this kind of money on.

Somebody like me would be very  interested in understanding just what that something is that separates the "pro" from the "consumer" version. In short, what is the unique sales proposition that differentiates it from lesser or competing products.
...
But I guess if I were a photographer, I wouldn't be asking to begin with. ;D
-40hz (November 18, 2009, 03:09 PM)
--- End quote ---

There's a crude comparison on their website giving an idea of the features that differentiate the products.
I agree that if you were a pro photographer (or a very keen amateur), you wouldn't be asking the question because you would already know what features you are looking for in the software.

I can't say I've ever considered ACDSee Pro as really being one to consider in that market though.

As for price, this really is all about efficiency whether for Pro or Keen Amateur market. Both have a lot of photos to process and little time to waste on doing it. And the price is not a major issue as it is only a fraction of the price of the equipment being used (and usually only a fraction of the price of the equipment being replaced annually). And part of the need for updated software is the need to keep up with the new bodies.

zridling:
There's a cutpoint to what any individual program is worth. Josh makes a good point: if you need it, you need it. Justify the cost. Carol the flip side: if you don't need it, enjoy the last good version as long as you like.

Also consider that most DC members are extraordinary users, i.e., they use more than one program that requires annual licensing or subscription fees. To me it's similar to going to a restaurant and being served an $90 steak. That better be one damn fine steak! Moreover, I feel bad paying that much for a steak, when I could cook my own perfectly to my liking for $15.

Carol Haynes:
Carol[/b] the flip side: if you don't need it, enjoy the last good version as long as you like.
-zridling (November 18, 2009, 05:24 PM)
--- End quote ---

I got upgraded to ACDSee Pro (v1) for free IIRC. It was really buggy and their RAW engine for Canon was awful. I reported the problems and was told they would be fixed in version 2. The problem had been there through previous versions of the non-Pro vbersion so I wasn't going to pay something like $150 on the off chance they may have fixed a serious issue in a Pro product.

I use Adobe LightRoom now. I got a free version 1 (as I used to use a product Adobe bought out and they migrated customers to LightRoom) and I paid for the upgrade to version 2 which was considerably cheaper than the ACDSee upgrade prices (probably 50%) and actaully I have software that really does work with rendering that is probably best in class just about.

tide:
There's another part to the lifetime license equation. Many of the people who buy lifetime licenses do not use them forever. Their needs change or they find something better and therefore don't require lifetime support.

It's a little like those mail in rebates. People base their purchasing decision on the lure of those rebates but something like only 25% of them ever actually end up mailing in the rebate request. Mail in rebates become a profit center for a business.

iphigenie:
Although the official price of ACDSee pro 3 is US$169.99 and that is not much more than the official price of ACDSee Pro 2 was ($10 more?) - i think the upgrade price is aroun 80. Not cheap, but not in the league of other similar pro products.

Still, I am hesitating too  :-[

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page