Would you Adobe shills quit trying to convince people they want to pay monthly fees, no normal person does.
This is an insulting and ignorant comment.
Try out your math skills a little bit and work out the cost of ownership of the software purchase model for Photoshop and Lightroom and compare it to the subscription model.
Show us where it costs less in aggregate to buy Photoshop plus Lightroom and buy upgrades.
Here's my take on the numbers:
Photoshop pricing has typically been $600-700 with upgrades priced at $180 to $200. Lightroom pricing has typically been $135 (street, $150 MSRP) with $75 to $80 upgrades.
Breakeven point if you buy PS+LR for $735 is at just over six years when compared to a $10/mo subscription price if you never upgrade either product. That puts you around four major versions behind if you assume an 18 month major version release cycle.
If you upgade every
other major version at $255 for LR+PS upgrades you'll hit breakeven in about 21 years. If you upgrade at
every major version (assuming again the 18 month cycle) the purchase model is never cheaper than the subscription model since $255 every 18 months is over $14 per month.
Show me where the number are wrong. (yes there's a huge assumption that the monthly cost remains at $10/mo -- but thats the figure we have today)
However, the subscription model is a poor value if you don't need/want/use Photoshop. LR only $135 initial cost with $75 every 18 months becomes cheaper per month a little before two years and continues its advantage thereafter. The question then is whether LR Mobile adds some sufficient value to justify the cost difference.
