Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Jolly Roger Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps Subject: Re: Aperture ? Date: 26 Mar 2015 16:38:30 GMT Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates Lines: 82 Message-ID: References: <250320151230447827%nospam@nospam.invalid> <2015032608282050618-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMme.com> <260320151200041388%nospam@nospam.invalid> X-Trace: individual.net YZl5Q/aQaiLtwermwv0XWgjcHvTh8OsHwsLdN/kktduCcOcQtm Cancel-Lock: sha1:czt8KsxG3rXAD3fSZ3Nw7/Wm2aw= X-Face: _.g>n!a$f3/H3jA]>9pN55*5<`}Tud57>1Y%b|b-Y~()~\t,LZ3e up1/bO{=-) User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Darwin) Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.apps:28411 On 2015-03-26, nospam wrote: > In article , Jolly Roger > wrote: > >> Meh. Renting may seem like a bargain compared with the exorbitant prices >> Adobe charges you to *purchase* their software, but it's still >> expensive, and there are drawbacks, such as the fact that you have to >> connect to their servers regularly or the software just stops working. >> You do give up some freedom in return for that *cheaper* price. > > once a month it needs to ping, possibly less if you get the yearly > plan. big deal. It's a big deal to me in principle, because the software *disables* itself if no ping is made. I find that *very* distasteful. In contrast, you can generally expect software that you purchase rather than rent to continue working indefinitely as long as your system remains compatible. It's fully within your control. > how many computers are off the grid for more than that? That's not the point. All it takes is *once* to significantly inconvenience you. The cost savings of renting software is really a ball and chain. >> Have you checked out Serif's Affinity Photo?: >> >> >> >> It's in public beta at the moment - free download. At $40, it gives >> Adobe Photoshop a run for its money - literally. And Affinity Designer, >> the functional equivalent to Adobe Illustrator is very nice. > > no it is't. "It isn't"? Designer isn't very nice? Designer isn't functionally equivalent to Adobe Illustrator? Or were you referring to Affinity Photo giving Photoshop a run for its money? Please explain. >> Both have allowed me to completely remove Adobe Creative Suite from >> my system - good riddance: > > then you didn't actually need creative suite. And how would you know that? : ) I really don't see how you are qualified to make that statement. You don't know much at all about what my particular needs are, or how I have used Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator for the past few decades. >> >> >> Personally, I'm *much* more comfortable with paying a one-time fee of >> $40 for a stand-alone app that does most everything Photoshop does and >> doesn't require me to keep dishing out more money indefinitely and >> regularly pinging some remote server for the "privilege" of the software >> not outright refusing to run. Granted, I should realistically expect to >> pay for an Affinity upgrade at some point in the distant future, but it >> still won't be anywhere near to cost of Adobe's prices, so the >> cost/benefit ratio is still better. Long live competition! > > it's not even close to what photoshop can do. It certainly does a whole lot of what Photoshop does. The majority of the features I use in Photoshop are there: layers, adjustments, effects, channels, masks, most or all of the same tools and tool adjustments, color spaces, file formats, and so on. And Serif seems to be adding more and more functionality to bring it closer to Photoshop as time goes on. It seems to be a very close competitor to Photoshop to me. So which missing pieces of functionality make it "not even close" in your opinion? > photoshop elements is about $50 street price. you don't need the full > photoshop. I don't need Elements either when Affinity Designer does the same types of things for $10 cheaper. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR