Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Jolly Roger Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps Subject: Re: Aperture ? Date: 28 Mar 2015 14:11:25 GMT Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates Lines: 50 Message-ID: References: <250320151230447827%nospam@nospam.invalid> <2015032608282050618-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMme.com> <260320151200041388%nospam@nospam.invalid> <2015032610045631856-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMme.com> <2015032611024832617-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMme.com> <270320152310077467%nospam@nospam.invalid> X-Trace: individual.net mGKKQD/SoweyqfvPgUXPSwYz/Zysc7sXrt1xiwUhGQXs2x9d4l Cancel-Lock: sha1:8tvuPL8DqoxyZdXXeyEzIM/4EuU= 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:28460 On 2015-03-28, nospam wrote: > In article , Jolly Roger > wrote: > >> >> If you don't ping Adobe, the software disables itself and is rendered >> >> useless. My point stands. >> > >> > As I said there is no immediate disableing, due to a failed ping. There >> > isnt even disabling after a refused credit card payment. They have a >> > very wide margin and they are not going to leave you high and dry >> > unless you actively discontinue the subscription. >> > >> > ...but you have an alternative you seem to be happy with, so carry on. >> >> Some of us want our software to work many years from now regardless of >> whether we are still shelling out money to Adobe on a regular basis to >> keep its servers running. I understand that you may not be in that >> group; but I happen to be one of them. Alternative solutions that don't >> have that ball and chain attached are naturally more compelling to some >> of us. > > where 'many years' is up until it stops working due to changes in os x Nope. Your blanket statement does not apply to all people in all situations. And neither does the software rent model. Not everyone throws their old computers away, and not everyone upgrades their operating systems to the latest versions on those computers. Such folks expect the software on those computers to continue to work correctly - without having to continuously shell out money from their wallets or keep them regularly pinging Adobe servers. Some people simply aren't happy selling that freedom to software companies in the form of rent fees. >> What I have been saying all along is some competing solutions actually >> offer a *lot* of the same functionality. And if you don't happen to need >> the functionality that isn't there, then those competing solutions can >> do the same things way cheaper and without the whole rent issue. I'm not >> sure why this is so hard for some people to accept, but it's true none >> the less. > > *if* a competing product can do what you need for less money, then by > all means choose the alternative. Gosh. I'm so glad you approve of my own personal choices! -- 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