|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> That's frequently the case for users of Adobe Photoshop as well -
>> especially CS: The people who tend to use it are the pros, not the
>> hobbiest user.
>
> And that's part of the justification for the price tag. If you're using
> this either the company has paid for it, or you're a professional who
> needs it...
That I don't mind so much. For example, an Oracle DB will cost you
almost as much as a small house (!!), but then again, why the hell would
you even need it if you're only a hobbiest? It's a tad overkill just for
sorting your CD collection.
> Like so much us proles have to wait
> until the spanking new features trickle down to the affordable software ;-)
Well, these days with open-source and all, for every big commercial
application, there's at least one OSS alternative that's vaguely useable.
MS Windows => Linux, OpenBSD, NetBSD, OpenSolaris, ReactOS...
MS Office => OpenOffice
Photoshop => The GIMP
Illustrator => Inkscape
Oracle => MySQL, PostgreSQL
VMware => VirtualBox, QEMU, Bochs, Xen...
In each case [except Office], the commercial version is greatly
superior, but the free version does work. So it's a case of how badly
you need a high-quality product.
What *does* annoy me is software which is both expensive *and* defective...
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |