PShop should be free or cheap!
Damian
have you ever dubbed of music without thinking about
it. Or recorded movies on video tape? If a person
were to spend thousands of dollars on software that
just sits idle on the computer most of the time and
is obsolete in roughly a year who is getting the big
bang in the rear-end?... the little guy trying to
make it on a shoe string budget or the multi-million
or billion dollar executives and their gangs. If
these people would offer $30.00 instead of 500.00+
dollar programs for the just inquisitive average
person I think everybody would pay with no qualms.
Thats why I'm on this news group now. I have an old
version PS4.0 that somebody gave me years ago when I
first got the computer. To this day I have yet to
make a penny off of it but only spent hundreds of
dollars worth of my time trying to learn it. It's
gotten out of date and is the only program that
seems to give me no problems with my scanner and
helps keep everything together. It is finally
crashed for good I think so I wanted to know if
someone else could send me a copy of a newer
version, even your old one if you have moved on to a
newer version, or direct me toward a decent area
that I could get one. I haven't costed Adobe 1 penny
since I've had it and I only recommended it to other
people through the years... I was a walking
advertisement for them. It' been good fun but I
could never justify paying so much for it when I'm
only a fiddling around now and then. I'll pay you
thirty dollars instead to help you purchase your
next upgrade :-)
I would be most appreciative if anyone could help.
Please reply here or directly to my email if you
wish to.
daim...@yahoo.com
Warm Wishes,
Daim
Frederick Maryland, USA
RossF
Try Photoshop LE. It was made for people who can't justify the cost of
the regular version for their budget. Don't blame Adobe if you can't
make money with PS. Hundreds of thousands of people do.
Ross
Laurence_Payne
needs without the price of the 'pro' application.
Yes, wouldn't it be nice if we all just paid what we wanted to for
everything!
Gwarsbane (Nick Julian)
the middle of a great battle, a little cricket named Damian wrote:
>Really! Look at it this way: How many cassette tapes
>have you ever dubbed of music without thinking about
>it. Or recorded movies on video tape?
There is a problem with your logic. The reason why people are not
getting arrested on-mass is because there is a law in effect called
the VCR law. It effectively allows any person to make a single copy
of a song on audio tape, and it allows you to tape a tv show.
You are not allowed to make a copy of anything that has a copy-write
warning that says you are not allowed to make a copy of it.
The law also says that you can not make mass copies of it to sell or
give away.
For software you are allowed to make a SINGLE backup copy of the
program. If you sell or give away the original software you have to
either give that copy with the software or destroy it. You are not
allowed to keep it for yourself.
The law is designed to allow a person to tape a show to watch it later
or to allow a person to make a mix tape and listen to it in their walk
man.
A person is not allowed to make copies of stuff and then sell it or
even give it away.
If everyone just gave out copies of software and no one bought it then
we'd either be living in the star trek universe where they don't need
money and people do things because they want to (which would be nice)
or our whole economy would collapse and we'd be living in a Mad Max
type of world (which really wouldn't be all that nice).
>If a person
>were to spend thousands of dollars on software that
>just sits idle on the computer most of the time and
>is obsolete in roughly a year who is getting the big
>bang in the rear-end?...
How many people have enough money to buy thousands of dollars worth of
software, to have it just sit around. Myself I only buy what I need
not just what I want. I plan out my buys and so far I haven't had a
piece of software sit on the shelf except for when I bought upgrades
for those products.
I use all the software on my system, none of it sits idle. I may only
use it a few times a week or I may use it only a few times a month,
but it still gets used.
>the little guy trying to
>make it on a shoe string budget or the multi-million
>or billion dollar executives and their gangs. If
>these people would offer $30.00 instead of 500.00+
>dollar programs for the just inquisitive average
>person I think everybody would pay with no qualms.
Then we'd have millions of people that think that they are artists
instead of the thousands that we have to contend with now.
>Thats why I'm on this news group now. I have an old
>version PS4.0 that somebody gave me years ago when I
>first got the computer. To this day I have yet to
>make a penny off of it but only spent hundreds of
>dollars worth of my time trying to learn it.
Well if you didn't try learning it when you are on the job then you
wouldn't have spent hundreds of dollars worth of you're time to learn
it.
Personally I try to keep up with the newer versions of software, no
matter what the cost. If its 30 bucks then it comes out of one pay
check. If its 300 bucks then it comes out of a few pay checks. If
its 3000 bucks then it comes out of quite a few pay checks. Either
way, I still buy the software legally and the programmers still get
paid and the company doesn't go under.
Do I think Adobe is worth the 1000 bucks Canadian, hell ya. Do I find
it hard to buy software that is 1000 bucks Canadian, hell ya.
>It's
>gotten out of date and is the only program that
>seems to give me no problems with my scanner and
>helps keep everything together. It is finally
>crashed for good I think so I wanted to know if
>someone else could send me a copy of a newer
>version, even your old one if you have moved on to a
>newer version, or direct me toward a decent area
>that I could get one. I haven't costed Adobe 1 penny
>since I've had it and I only recommended it to other
>people through the years... I was a walking
>advertisement for them. It' been good fun but I
>could never justify paying so much for it when I'm
>only a fiddling around now and then. I'll pay you
>thirty dollars instead to help you purchase your
>next upgrade :-)
Why not put some money away per pay check and save up for it. Ya
that's an idea.
I only dabble around in it and I still think it should be paid for
instead of stolen.
Jim Radcliffe
auto...
My wife would like a big diamond ring that I can't afford.. I'll steal it...
theft
My son wants a PS2 but they cost too much.. I'll steal one for him... theft..
A guy in Maryland wants a copy of PhotoShop because he can't pay for it... I'll
give him a copy... copyright violation... another form of theft.
Quit whining and save for it like the rest of us. I didn't like forking over
the money any more than you but unless Adobe is paid the product will never get
better. There are tools and there are Great Tools.. you generally get what you
pay for. The last time I looked our economy was based on capitalism.
So, suppose you get your free copy of PhotoShop and develop some incredible
artwork that could be sold... do you want to make money from your efforts? Or..
should we assume that you would be willing to let everyone on the planet rip you
off? I think not.
Judging from your logic I assume you are in your late teens to mid-twenties but
regardless of your real age it's time to grow up and live in the real world.
There are no free rides.
Jim
Damian
> Yeah, cars shouldn't cost so much either.. so I'll
steal one.. grand theft
> auto...
>
> My wife would like a big diamond ring that I can't
afford.. I'll steal it...
> theft
>
> My son wants a PS2 but they cost too much.. I'll
steal one for him... theft..
All your examples have a real world material value,
as in material. What value is in a plastic disc? How
would you like it if John Denver or whatever artist
or band insisted on charging you $500.00 or $1000 or
whatever just to own a copy of their music??
> Quit whining and save for it like the rest of us.
I didn't like forking over
> the money any more than you but unless Adobe is
paid the product will never get
> better. There are tools and there are Great
Tools.. you generally get what you
> pay for. The last time I looked our economy was
based on capitalism.
Adobe Paid??? Get real. They all have made their
millions from what I have heard and read. How about
sharing a little bit of this prosperity with they
others on the lower end. Even a program that is
charged a toll or something.
> So, suppose you get your free copy of PhotoShop
and develop some incredible
> artwork that could be sold... do you want to make
money from your efforts? Or..
> should we assume that you would be willing to let
everyone on the planet rip you
> off? I think not.
If every product was an original, like in art, the
price should high. But we are talking copies! In the
art world the more copies made the cheaper the
price. Thats how Capitalism works!
> Judging from your logic I assume you are in your
late teens to mid-twenties but
> regardless of your real age it's time to grow up
and live in the real world.
> There are no free rides.
Don't worry about my age.
This is an argument that is almost a
republican/democrat
design: Should the haves continue to have
considerably
more than the have nots or should they be made to
look
at things in a more humble way and share with others
a
little more. A good unique car like a Lamborghini
has to be built each time by
a whole crew of mechanics, engineers and
assemblers. Plus
the materials have to be purchased, machined, formed
and
finished each time for every car. One isn't made and
the some magical golden button pushed to put out
thousands at a time!! The programs already
are done and the creators have already made
considerable
fortunes off of them. What does it take to copy a
program on a disc, package and send it?
How would you like it if John Denver charged you
$500.00 to have your
own copy of "Rocky Mountain High" to play? And it
was
bound to quickly self disintegrate so you almost had
to
get a new version every couple of years?
Lamborghini's
will last a life time if taken care of and most
certainly will gain value as the years go on!!!
Sorry,
but your explanations smell of profiteering and
human
magottry.
How about having some sort of timer that
allows so many hours of use until another segment of
time has to be purchased...sort of like a toll
bridge or
something? Why do so many people have to stay on one
side of the shore because they can't afford the toll
fee? The only alternatives are Ferries and tugboats
that don't even
let them make it all the way across before they
start
spinning in circles.
Daim
Darrell
They wouldn't last very long because it wouldn't be worth it. Photoshop
is worth the price because it's a sophisticated, high-end application.
In the hands of somebody who knows what they're doing it can pay for
itself in short order.
> They all have made their millions from what I have heard and read. How about sharing a little bit of this prosperity with they others on the lower end?
Why should they? At what point has a person made enough money and has to
work for free?
Stop resenting others' success and make your own. If you don't like
being on the lower end, put in the time and money that Adobe programmers
and developers did. Or, continue to complain and demand, and see where
that gets you.
Dorothy Combs
When software companies don't make money they fade away. Metacreations
had some very good products. Now they don't. The bottom line was that
they were not showing a profit. So they sold these products to other
companies like Corel. Metacreations is still in business but the
products we all loved are somewhere else. Now people that would like
Kai's Power Tools version 5 are out of luck because Corel is sitting on
it. This is what happens when a company doesn't continue to make money.
Adobe has to keep good programers on payroll and keep improving the
product. There were endless questions about when would PS 6 be out. If
Adobe didn't keep ahead of the competition they would soon be out of
business. Another company would be taking over. You seem to think that
the plastic disk doesn't represent hours of work and investment by
Adobe. You cannot compare a computer program to a few hours in a
recording studio. The music business also protects their copyright on
what they own.
I am not a professional graphic person and I don't make money from my
computer programs. This is my hobby. It is relaxing and enjoyable. So I
do not mind the money I have spent on my software. I would like the
latest versions of Adobe...I still use PS5 and my CorelDRAW is ver. 5
which is very out of date! You look at your time with PS as work you
should have been paid for. I look at my use of Adobe or Corel as a
wonderful time. I guess it could be compared to the man with a home
workshop. He comes home from his regular job and starts making funiture
or whatever to give away using his thousands of dollars worth of
equipment.
My thought on people that write about not wanting to pay for software is
that not paying bothers them. That is why they come on the ng and try to
justify it.
Dorothy
Jim Radcliffe
> as in material. What value is in a plastic disc? How
> would you like it if John Denver or whatever artist
> or band insisted on charging you $500.00 or $1000 or
> whatever just to own a copy of their music??
The market would not bear the price and they would be forced to lower the price.
That's the way capitalism works. According to your line of thought.. we should
only have to pay a quarter to go see a movie... it's only a copy right?
> Adobe Paid??? Get real. They all have made their
> millions from what I have heard and read. How about
> sharing a little bit of this prosperity with they
> others on the lower end. Even a program that is
> charged a toll or something.
Do you believe that it costs nothing to run a company? Do you believe
programmers and designers work for free? You obviously don't understand the
costs involved in R&D and running a large company, not to mention shipping the
product, tech support, advertising, etc. Would you have us believe that if you
became extremely successful that you would just give your profits away?
> If every product was an original, like in art, the
> price should high. But we are talking copies! In the
> art world the more copies made the cheaper the
> price. Thats how Capitalism works!
No, that is not how capitalism works.. Capitalism works this way...
A product is developed.
The public wants the product.
The creator (Adobe) sets a price.
The market (public) will either buy the product or not.
If the product is not bought the company goes out of business or lowers the
price to a level at which the public decides it is a value and buys the product.
When it comes to intellectual property, which PS is, you can't sell it for 50
cents because that is all it costs to create the CD. The company is in
business to make a profit. They're not there to to insure that every person on
the planet has (almost) free software.
I think PS is overpriced too, but it is the right of the company to charge
whatever they wish. It is also your right to use competing products to hurt
their market share. I believe in capitalism. If I create something of value
and have the chance to sell it to the public.. it is my right as the creator of
the product to set the price. The market, over time, will force me to adjust
that price if competing products become cheaper and perform as well as my
product. So far, no other product on the market is on par with PS.. therefore
the price remains high.
> Don't worry about my age.
> This is an argument that is almost a
> republican/democrat
> design: Should the haves continue to have
> considerably
> more than the have nots or should they be made to
> look
> at things in a more humble way and share with others
> a
> little more.
Spoken like a true democrat.. or socialist. This country offers numerous
opportunities for anyone, regardless of political beliefs and their station in
life to advance and better themselves.. the problem with "providing" everything
for the have nots is that they will never learn how to do anything for
themselves.. just rely on others to do it for them.
>A good unique car like a Lamborghini
> has to be built each time by
> a whole crew of mechanics, engineers and
> assemblers. Plus
> the materials have to be purchased, machined, formed
> and
> finished each time for every car. One isn't made and
> the some magical golden button pushed to put out
> thousands at a time!! The programs already
> are done and the creators have already made
> considerable
> fortunes off of them. What does it take to copy a
> program on a disc, package and send it?
> How would you like it if John Denver charged you
> $500.00 to have your
> own copy of "Rocky Mountain High" to play? And it
> was
> bound to quickly self disintegrate so you almost had
> to
> get a new version every couple of years?
> Lamborghini's
> will last a life time if taken care of and most
> certainly will gain value as the years go on!!!
Oh please... stop. You really don't understand capitalism.
> Sorry,
> but your explanations smell of profiteering and
> human magottry.
I won't take that personally.. you're just mad.
I have a feeling that if you had the chance to make heavy profits off of
whatever it is you do, you would not turn down the money. I have no vision of
you making millions and then handing it out to the have nots. I understand your
desire to have something of great value for nothing.. we all would like that
dream to come true but it will not happen. No one stays in business by giving
away their product.. or their profits.
> How about having some sort of timer that
> allows so many hours of use until another segment of
> time has to be purchased...sort of like a toll
> bridge or
> something?
Someone would just give them a crack for the timer.. so why bother with a
solution that would just aggravate people.. imagine the timer running out on a
deadline and for some reason you can't get connected to buy more time. It's a
bad idea.
PhotoShop LE is a great tool... it's only $99... hell, if you buy the WACOM
graphire tablet, also $99... you get it for FREE with the tablet. There's your
free version of PhotoShop... oh, but I guess you have an issue with WACOM for
charging that ridiculous $99 when the tablet was made in Taiwan for about
$2.00.. not to mention all that cheap labor that must have been exploited.
Sorry Daim, it's how the real world operates. Nothing personal against you. In
a perfect world it would be great to pay $5.00 for a legitimate, boxed version
of PhotoShop from Adobe...but it just ain't gonna happen.
Jim
Damian
sold as uninflated reasonable valued seconds to
those who don't plan on using them for profiting in
any way. I will look into the light version which I
didn't think about before. And I did buy a Wacom
tablet years ago for $300.00 without the software
included. At least they know how to assess the real
value of their product (IMO).
I still would like someone to sell me their older
version for a good price if you don't need it
anymore
daim...@yahoo.com
Regards,
Daim
Jerry Cargile
>What value is in a plastic disc?
Well, I have a plastic disk that is worth over $600. I have other
valuable plastic disks that are also valuable. I made copies of these
valuable disks, just in case they became damaged some way. I will sell
you any of these valuable disks, along with the copies. Just remember,
the price ain't gonna be cheap. I guess I could let the PS 6.0 go for
$650. *If* I sold it any cheaper, it would lose it's value. Hope you
can understand that. ;>)
Jerry
.......
andrew
bp
very profitable, almost monopoly type margins.
Jim Radcliffe <res0...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:KYK26.206$GX6.1...@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
> > All your examples have a real world material value,
> > as in material. What value is in a plastic disc? How
> > would you like it if John Denver or whatever artist
> > or band insisted on charging you $500.00 or $1000 or
> > whatever just to own a copy of their music??
>
> The market would not bear the price and they would be forced to lower the
price.
> That's the way capitalism works. According to your line of thought.. we
should
> only have to pay a quarter to go see a movie... it's only a copy right?
You pay so much to see a movie because the actors get paid ungodly amounts
regardless if the movie flops or not.
>
> > Adobe Paid??? Get real. They all have made their
> > millions from what I have heard and read. How about
> > sharing a little bit of this prosperity with they
> > others on the lower end. Even a program that is
> > charged a toll or something.
>
> Do you believe that it costs nothing to run a company? Do you believe
> programmers and designers work for free? You obviously don't understand
the
> costs involved in R&D and running a large company, not to mention shipping
the
> product, tech support, advertising, etc. Would you have us believe that
if you
> became extremely successful that you would just give your profits away?
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
Doesn't look like they are starving, those profit margins are "fuck you
customer we have no competition so we will overcharge you"
>
> > If every product was an original, like in art, the
> > price should high. But we are talking copies! In the
> > art world the more copies made the cheaper the
> > price. Thats how Capitalism works!
>
> No, that is not how capitalism works.. Capitalism works this way...
Capitalism, in America. ROTFLMFAO, look at the net companies, the web was
supposed to be the great equalizer allowing David to compete with Goliath.
Hmmm, looks like the corporate monoliths have stolen the show and all the
Davids have dot-bombed.
>
> A product is developed.
> The public wants the product.
> The creator (Adobe) sets a price.
> The market (public) will either buy the product or not.
> If the product is not bought the company goes out of business or lowers
the
> price to a level at which the public decides it is a value and buys the
product.
>
> When it comes to intellectual property, which PS is, you can't sell it for
50
> cents because that is all it costs to create the CD. The company is in
> business to make a profit. They're not there to to insure that every
person on
> the planet has (almost) free software.
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
Look at those profit margins, looks like a well protected franshise to me.
>
> I think PS is overpriced too, but it is the right of the company to charge
> whatever they wish. It is also your right to use competing products to
hurt
> their market share. I believe in capitalism. If I create something of
value
> and have the chance to sell it to the public.. it is my right as the
creator of
> the product to set the price. The market, over time, will force me to
adjust
> that price if competing products become cheaper and perform as well as my
> product. So far, no other product on the market is on par with PS..
therefore
> the price remains high.
So little you know. PSP 7 which is an excellent package that uses many
Photoshop plugins as well as Corell plugins will never get the endorsement
of professional trade mags because they don't have the money to advertise in
those mags like Adobe does. Hence PSP will never achieve the market
recognition it should.
>
>
> > Don't worry about my age.
> > This is an argument that is almost a
> > republican/democrat
> > design: Should the haves continue to have
> > considerably
> > more than the have nots or should they be made to
> > look
> > at things in a more humble way and share with others
> > a
> > little more.
>
> Spoken like a true democrat.. or socialist. This country offers
numerous
> opportunities for anyone, regardless of political beliefs and their
station in
> life to advance and better themselves.. the problem with "providing"
everything
> for the have nots is that they will never learn how to do anything for
> themselves.. just rely on others to do it for them.
Agreed, the other problem is the barriers that are placed upon people by the
governemt. Want to start a business. Get office space because if you get
busted doing commercial work from a residential zoned area, you will pay a
fine. Don't forget all those fees and licenses and registrations and cpa
and attorney feesbecause the government has to make everyhting so damned
convoluted.
The fact is, only the privelaged can even think about starting a company.
That is a shame in a country like the United States which is supposedly the
bastion of capitalism. Hopefully a good dozen years of republicans will
bring some hope. Only problem is, once the government takes your rights and
freedoms away, they never give it back.
>
> >A good unique car like a Lamborghini
> > has to be built each time by
> > a whole crew of mechanics, engineers and
> > assemblers. Plus
> > the materials have to be purchased, machined, formed
> > and
> > finished each time for every car. One isn't made and
> > the some magical golden button pushed to put out
> > thousands at a time!! The programs already
> > are done and the creators have already made
> > considerable
> > fortunes off of them. What does it take to copy a
> > program on a disc, package and send it?
> > How would you like it if John Denver charged you
> > $500.00 to have your
> > own copy of "Rocky Mountain High" to play? And it
> > was
> > bound to quickly self disintegrate so you almost had
> > to
> > get a new version every couple of years?
> > Lamborghini's
> > will last a life time if taken care of and most
> > certainly will gain value as the years go on!!!
>
> Oh please... stop. You really don't understand capitalism.
Not sure if you do either.
>
> > Sorry,
> > but your explanations smell of profiteering and
> > human magottry.
>
> I won't take that personally.. you're just mad.
>
> I have a feeling that if you had the chance to make heavy profits off of
> whatever it is you do, you would not turn down the money. I have no
vision of
> you making millions and then handing it out to the have nots. I
understand your
> desire to have something of great value for nothing.. we all would like
that
> dream to come true but it will not happen. No one stays in business by
giving
> away their product.. or their profits.
There is a difference between profits and illegally protected profits. Do
you think a billion dollar company like Adobe plays by the rules. They buy
the rules.
--
B.P.
http://www.ispelunker.com ** Web directory and more
http://www.virtualbrokers.net ** Investments
http://home.earthlink.net/~woogieoogieboogie/navemulator/nnemupre.html
** NN emulator for IE 5+ **
**** This is an extra line in my sig to piss the sig cops off ****
Kirby Inwood
their theft of software.
"Jim Radcliffe" <res0...@gte.net> hypothesizes:
Fungusamungus
the record producers who set the prices. Thirdly, they CAN charge 500 bucks
a pop if they wanted to, but they don't. Know why? because nobody would buy
it! Adobe charges only what the market will bear, and there are many, many
consumers (from personal/solo professionals to full on corporations) who are
more than happy and willing to fork over what Adobe is asking for it. THAT
is capitalism, my friend.
--
Fungus, Shitake Warrior Supreme. Kicker of Truffles.
Lose your mind to reply.
"Damian" <ds...@frederickmd.com> wrote in message
news:%2K26.540$8r2....@newshog.newsread.com...
Fungusamungus
discounts. PS5 sells for around 150-300, and version 4 even cheaper. Again,
capitalism at work. Why would anyone charge nearly full price when for the
same price for an older version, when a consumer can get the newest version?
--
Fungus, Shitake Warrior Supreme. Kicker of Truffles.
Lose your mind to reply.
"Damian" <ds...@frederickmd.com> wrote in message
news:D3M26.551$8r2....@newshog.newsread.com...
Jim Radcliffe
"Kirby Inwood" <jki@NOT THIS PARTkirwood.com> wrote in message
news:35ao4to6o1v4447o3...@4ax.com...
> There is no point in responding to the petty thieves who try to rationalise
> their theft of software.
>
I'm not sure Damian is a petty thief, which is why I responded. He sounds more
like a young man that doesn't understand why you must pay for something. He
also seems to be a bit confused as to why any company has a right to charge
whatever they wish for a product. If that is the case, and any of us can make
him understand that stealing the software will hurt all consumers, then the
purpose of the response and this NG will have been served well.
Jim
Chris Kelly
get caught and go to jail. No one will get hurt. You don't steal
because it is WRONG.
"Jim Radcliffe" <res0...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:b3136.70$0i3....@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
Jim Radcliffe
"bp" <no_spa...@ispelunker.com> wrote in message
news:BpU26.37131$3B5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> To see how well Adobe is doing see http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html looks
> very profitable, almost monopoly type margins.
> http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
>
> Doesn't look like they are starving, those profit margins are "fuck you
> customer we have no competition so we will overcharge you"
The issue is not whether the company is starving or gouging the public. The
issue is that any company has a right to make as much money as possible. If
their product is not worth what they ask the marketplace decides whether they
stay in business.
> Capitalism, in America. ROTFLMFAO, look at the net companies, the web was
> supposed to be the great equalizer allowing David to compete with Goliath.
> Hmmm, looks like the corporate monoliths have stolen the show and all the
> Davids have dot-bombed.
The web was not "designed for business." It was part of a defense program.
Institutions, businesses and individuals later adopted it as a way of doing
business and exchanging information... much like what is happening in this NG.
Some have made money from it, some have not. I have a number of clients that
have found their websites to have brought in business they never would have seen
otherwise. Other clients still have gained no value from the web, not because
it doesn't work but because their business plan doesn't work.
I was in meetings with Mark Cuban when he was running broadcast.com out of his
house.. he's now one of the wealthiest men in the world and owns his on NBA
franchise.. not bad for a little guy as you call them. If you think that
everyone that puts up a website is going to get rich you're buying in to the
wrong bag of PR.
>
>
> http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
>
> Look at those profit margins, looks like a well protected franshise to me.
And your point is?
> So little you know. PSP 7 which is an excellent package that uses many
> Photoshop plugins as well as Corell plugins will never get the endorsement
> of professional trade mags because they don't have the money to advertise in
> those mags like Adobe does. Hence PSP will never achieve the market
> recognition it should.
I disagree. I have used PSP and liked it but found it lacking. I put off
buying PS for three years, using Corel PhotoPaint and PSP until I finally
decided to fork over the money. Why? Because neither of the other packages
were as good as PS. If they had been, I would not have spent the money.
Your logic is flawed. The graphic designers and hobbyist of the world are aware
of PSP. I see PSP mentions in print in many magazines and news groups.. even
digital camera magazines talk about it all the time as being an alternative to
PS. Further, I have never been influenced by an advertisment for Adobe
products. I have always been moved to purchase by using demos and listening to
what other users of the product have to say about it. I never listen to company
hype no matter what the product is because no company will point out a weakness
in their products, just the good stuff and they will probably exagerate that.
> the other problem is the barriers that are placed upon people by the
> governemt. Want to start a business. Get office space because if you get
> busted doing commercial work from a residential zoned area, you will pay a
> fine. Don't forget all those fees and licenses and registrations and cpa
> and attorney feesbecause the government has to make everyhting so damned
> convoluted.
>
> The fact is, only the privelaged can even think about starting a company.
> That is a shame in a country like the United States which is supposedly the
> bastion of capitalism. Hopefully a good dozen years of republicans will
> bring some hope. Only problem is, once the government takes your rights and
> freedoms away, they never give it back.
I agree with you in part. The laws and regulations and fees do make it
difficult to start a business in many cases but they do not keep anyone from
becoming successful. A good idea, product, etc. will always make money. I have
seen it happen over and over again. But the key to all of this is the
individual. It comes down to how badly they want to succeed and their
understanding of how to make their business plan work. If you are a true
believer in yourself and your business, you can make it work. Many businesses
fail because their owners lacked the managerial skills and the work ethic to
make it happen. And, it takes time, in most cases, for any company to startup,
gain customers, market recognition and turn a profit. Yes, it's easier for a
large corporation than an individual but you have to remember that the genesis
of almost every large coroporation at some point in time began with one
individual and a great idea. They don't just appear out of think air.
> > Oh please... stop. You really don't understand capitalism.
>
> Not sure if you do either.
See if this changes your mind. I developed a piece of software on a PCjr in
1985. I spent a year working on it.. it was somewhat of a hobby. When I was
done I let the company I worked for use the software at no charge so it would
have exposure. Since I developed this software on my own time it was my
intellectual property. Individuals from other companies would visit and see
this software in action... "How much would you charge us for that?" they would
ask. "$1,500.00 per copy" I would answer. Over 350 companies paid me for the
software.
My cost: a floppy disk, 30 pages of paper for the manual, $2.00 for the
shipping fee. I turned $3.00 of material and my idea into $1,500 per sale... I
think I have somewhat of a grasp as to what capitalism is about.
>
> There is a difference between profits and illegally protected profits. Do
> you think a billion dollar company like Adobe plays by the rules. They buy
> the rules.
I will agree with your first statement above... but you will have to explain how
Adobe's profits are "illegally" protected. As for Adobe playing buy the rules
or buying them.. It still boils down to this. If their product was no good they
would be out of business. The market determines who stays in business... no
product... no profits.... you are out of business.
Jim
Jim Radcliffe
news:Ws136.94$nN1....@dca1-nnrp2.news.digex.net...
> It probably won't hurt any of us if he steals it. He probably will not
> get caught and go to jail. No one will get hurt. You don't steal
> because it is WRONG.
I agree, but in the long run... if EVERYONE felt they should just steal the
product rather than pay for it.. the company ends up out of business.. that is
what would hurt all of us that use the product... not to mention many copanies
raise prices due to "shrinkage" of their product.
Chris Kelly
I would have brought up the larger picture, but only someone with
respect for the work and worth of others would understand that
line of reasoning. It takes a person who understands and believes
in things like the common good to understand these areguments.
Theiving little shits really don't care, and aren't worth it.
Chris
"Jim Radcliffe" <res0...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:KR136.95$0i3....@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
Grant Hood
<35ao4to6o1v4447o3...@4ax.com>...
>There is no point in responding to the petty thieves who try to rationalise
>their theft of software.
You mean like you just have done?
Grant
Shawn
> I was in meetings with Mark Cuban when he was running broadcast.com out of
his
> house.. he's now one of the wealthiest men in the world and owns his on
NBA
> franchise..
GO DALLAS MAVS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WOOHOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sorry, couldn't resist a quick cheer for the home team....
~~shawn.
Chris Kelly
work.
Does that make two of us?
"Grant Hood" <gr...@gphood.no.spam.force9.co.uk> wrote in message
news:zg336.4183$I5.78220@stones...
Jeffrey W. Eggenberger
poster. Photo shop should be free, food should be free also, and cars, and
everything. I also think that I should not have to work to get these things.
Health care should be free to anyone that requires it. Fresh water should be
free also, and clean air.
A great man once said: To each man according to his needs, from each man
according to his abilities. That man was Karl Marx, the founder of the
communist revolution. Unfortunately, it just doesn't work in practice. Very
few persons will put forth the effort needed to produce enough for a net
growth in a society using such noble and honorable dreams. We require the
evil hunger for wealth and material goods to grow. Hence our embrace of
Capitalism. Is it a perfect system? Of course not. One of our problems it
thievery. Hence the need for laws and punishment. If you steal a loaf of
bread, or Photoshop, it is stealing, and the law will make every attempt to
find you and punish you. It may not be right, but it is necessary for the
continuance of a capitalist system. Get used to it.
"andrew" <and...@no.mail> wrote in message news:3A4BD54D...@no.mail...
Bill Maples
Internet is not petty thievery? Cost the consumers 2.6 billion
dollars annually. No, I don't guess that is petty! Hypocrisy?
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000 17:59:13 GMT, "Chris Kelly" <cke...@imsi.com>
wrote:
Grant Hood
Returning some of Kirby's 'compliments' is an enjoyable bit of sport.
Regards
Grant Hood
West Yorkshire, UK
Small selection of work now online at
http://www.gphood.force9.co.uk/gallery
Chris Kelly wrote in message ...
Chris Kelly
doesn't give a shit. In fact, since we are both very interested
in photography and digital imaging I am encouraged to read
through this stuff. Oh, by the way, I work in financial services
in NYC and my employer values me enough to also be paying
for an MBA degree from a top school, while I work for him.
Any other silly comments?
"Bill Maples" <wma...@westga.edu> wrote in message
news:v9sp4t4khd58evbnj...@4ax.com...
Grant Hood
>So... Stealing time from your employer so you can goof around on the
>Internet is not petty thievery? Cost the consumers 2.6 billion
>dollars annually. No, I don't guess that is petty! Hypocrisy?
Uptight or what?
Geert Zandman
there IS more to this story, Software can be paid for in MANY ways.
Just selling a box with a CDrom is the most simplest.
Why not use a licensing system with different pricing for different users.
I live in the Netherlands, here at least 50% of the software is illegal.
Simple rule of thumb, just play with the software at home -> get a
"free"copy, if you really make USE of the software then buy it.
Wordperfect was the most copied software in Holland, WP didn't mind, because
people used WP at home, so the companies these people work for only bought
WP.
Their employees simply demanded that.
Smart thinking of these WP boys, use illegal copies for your benefiet
instead of fighting it.
Back to Photoshop, I don't pay $ 1000,- for home software.
Why Adobe doesn't introduce a licensing system for all the home users, I
don't know.
It could bring them a lot of extra cash,
Compare it to MS Word, it used to be a $500 product, now you get it free
with most new computers.
Solution, Photoshop cheap addon for your new Compaq Presario...???
Geert
"Damian" <ds...@frederickmd.com> wrote in message
news:IOy26.509$8r2....@newshog.newsread.com...
Jeffrey W. Eggenberger
"Geert Zandman" <Geert....@T-online.de> wrote in message
news:92ivun$bsg$05$1...@news.t-online.com...
Bill Maples
have accused you of stealing time from your employer. Your employer
sure is lucky to have you.
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000 21:21:45 GMT, "Chris Kelly" <cke...@imsi.com>
Jim Radcliffe
"Geert Zandman" <Geert....@T-online.de> wrote in message
news:92ivun$bsg$05$1...@news.t-online.com...
>
> there IS more to this story, Software can be paid for in MANY ways.
> Just selling a box with a CDrom is the most simplest.
>
> Why not use a licensing system with different pricing for different users.
You'll have Department Heads of companies buying home license versions and
taking them to work... still theft, still misrepresentation.... in a nutshell
fraud.
> I live in the Netherlands, here at least 50% of the software is illegal.
> Simple rule of thumb, just play with the software at home -> get a
> "free"copy, if you really make USE of the software then buy it.
> Wordperfect was the most copied software in Holland, WP didn't mind, because
> people used WP at home, so the companies these people work for only bought
> WP.
> Their employees simply demanded that.
> Smart thinking of these WP boys, use illegal copies for your benefiet
> instead of fighting it.
So the employees dictate what legitimate software purchases a company will buy
based on their illegitimate use or theft of the software for home use?
Interesting concept. Not quite a moral one but interesting.
> Back to Photoshop, I don't pay $ 1000,- for home software.
> Why Adobe doesn't introduce a licensing system for all the home users, I
> don't know. It could bring them a lot of extra cash,
That's what PhotoShop LE is for... $99.00 instead of $600.00
> Compare it to MS Word, it used to be a $500 product, now you get it free
> with most new computers.
Aren't your forgetting who makes the operating system and why it benefits them
to supply a free copy of Word with every new computer? If Microsoft didn't make
the operating system you would not see Word provided for free..... it's called
incentive marketing. They know that what most people are used to using at home
will probably be what they would like to use at work... as you mentioned
earlier.
> Solution, Photoshop cheap addon for your new Compaq Presario...???
Never happen.... unless Adobe starts selling systems for Graphic Artists. I
wouldn't hold my breath.
jim
Bill Maples
It just seems rather hippocratic to self righteously label an
individual using an illegal copy of an application as a "petty thief",
while, ostensively, stealing from your employer - be it time or paper
clips. Of course no one can be sure of the truth uttered on any
newsgroup, but I suspect that most, if not all computer owners are
felons in one way or another. Have you ever downloaded an MP3? Did
you ask about the copyright first? Have you ever purchased one
application and put it on two personal machines? Do you wish to label
all the kids (8 - 16) who copy each others albums as "petty thieves"?
Do you read the complete licensing agreement of an application? Did
you ever make a back up copy of an application, before it became legal
to do so? Did you ever sell or give away an application without
getting the permission of the providing company to do so? (The
indefinite pronoun "you" as used here is generic and not meant to be
personal.)
I, too, object to piracy, but I'm not too concerned with the private,
not-for-profit user. If you contend this latter population is wrong
in "stealing", I concur. But my concurrence is directed toward ME not
judgmentally toward others. On the other hand, those who hawk their
booty for profit should be tracked down and prosecuted to the full
extent of the law. But let's not advocate a witch hunt. The mere idea
of an FBI agent pounding on the door of a private citizen suspected of
having an illegal copy of Photoshop, as intimated by someone in this
newsgroup, is absolutely ludicrous! The only way to stop piracy is
to have every computer accessible by the various application companies
so they can randomly check your computer for pirated applications.
Mr. Gates would like to do that! Do you folks want that too?
Now I've pontificated more than I should have, and even delved into
sarcasm with one individual, so back to lurking. [grin]
Dorothy Combs
It is nice that WP didn't mind that it was stolen in your country. WP did mind
here. One of our junior colleges, a two year community supported...which means
tax payers, had to pay a big fine...many thousands dollars, because they were
caught using WP that they didn't pay for. The amount was in our local news
papers but since this was a lot of years ago I don't remember the exact
amount...I am thinking about $20,000 though. Software companies will send people
into businesses and schools to check that they are not stealing software or
using one copy on many computers. That is what the college was doing. WP now
belongs to Corel. Wonder why?
Dorothy
Damian
> The only way to stop piracy is
> to have every computer accessible by the various
application companies
> so they can randomly check your computer for
pirated applications.
> Mr. Gates would like to do that! Do you folks
want that too?
Well the goal as I've heard it is to get rid of
personal home computers all together!
Just like the old days (some still do this) when
workers had a monitor and keyboard at their desk and
the mainframe was somewhere else in the building.
The futurists (rich and famous computer gurus of
today) foresee a day when their companies will be
the mainframe and everybody in the world will have
to be connected to them to have any kind of service
at all. That would get the petty thieves either out
or convicted rather quickly.
RossF
wrote:
>I guess it's what. It just seems rather hippocratic
...only if he took the oath. :)
> to self righteously label an individual using an illegal copy of an
>application as a "petty thief", while, ostensively, stealing from your
>employer - be it time or paperclips.
A thief can be called a thief by anyone who recognizes theft. Someone
who steals software is a thief. If they don't like the word - tough.
The accuser's work habits are irrelevant, and hypothesizing about them
seems to be a ploy to shift focus from the discussion.
>Of course no one can be sure of the truth uttered on any
>newsgroup, but I suspect that most, if not all computer owners are
>felons in one way or another. Have you ever downloaded an MP3? Did
>you ask about the copyright first? Have you ever purchased one
>application and put it on two personal machines? Do you wish to label
>all the kids (8 - 16) who copy each others albums as "petty thieves"?
>Do you read the complete licensing agreement of an application? Did
>you ever make a back up copy of an application, before it became legal
>to do so? Did you ever sell or give away an application without
>getting the permission of the providing company to do so? (The
>indefinite pronoun "you" as used here is generic and not meant to be
>personal.)
>
Nobody's perfect. When someone does something illegal or immoral, then
they have to take the criticism. If their only defense is that other
people do the same or equivalent thing, then they have no defense.
>I, too, object to piracy, but I'm not too concerned with the private,
>not-for-profit user. If you contend this latter population is wrong
>in "stealing", I concur. But my concurrence is directed toward ME not
>judgmentally toward others.
Without judgement, right and wrong are meaningless concepts. If a
thief is too sensitive to accept judgement, then they should keep
quiet about their illegal activities.
>On the other hand, those who hawk their
>booty for profit should be tracked down and prosecuted to the full
>extent of the law. But let's not advocate a witch hunt. The mere idea
>of an FBI agent pounding on the door of a private citizen suspected of
>having an illegal copy of Photoshop, as intimated by someone in this
>newsgroup, is absolutely ludicrous!
It's ludicrous to suggest that the condemning of software piracy in
this group could lead to anything more than further awareness of the
issue.
>The only way to stop piracy is
>to have every computer accessible by the various application companies
>so they can randomly check your computer for pirated applications.
>Mr. Gates would like to do that! Do you folks want that too?
Piracy can't be stopped. The more people who come to realize that it
is stealing, that it is wrong, that it won't be condoned, the less
there will be. It's ludicrous to take a wishy-washy attitude about it
just because we can't stop it completely.
Ross
Bill Maples
this very moment, is a credit card look-alike with a small, foil-thin
chip (0.5" x 0.37") . The chip can be programmed to be used for a
bank card, id card, medical record card, insurance cord, and a "key"
for accessing key board & monitor of participating sites. The key
boards/monitors connect to a common server. The chip dictates what
applications you can access. It also keeps track of your work and
allows access to your grades or other personal information. This
latter configuration is being tested in selected schools. SUN is the
builder of this system.
If this spills over to home usage, it would certainly put a stop to
piracy. On the other hand, I believe that it would lower the price of
software usage for the individual. For instance, if one wanted to
learn PS6, a free tutorial might be provided. Then if you wanted to
pursue a project, a higher fee, or an hourly fee, might be charged.
Perhaps this is the wrong newsgroup to be discussing this, but if
anyone is interested I'll post a snapshot of the card. It's really
neat.
Although I find the SUN system the "system" of the future, I really
hate to see us go in that direction. But as you said, we did it in
the early days...just a key board with green and white computer paper.
[g]
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 02:10:41 GMT, "Damian" <ds...@frederickmd.com>
wrote:
bp
> news:BpU26.37131$3B5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > To see how well Adobe is doing see http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
looks
> > very profitable, almost monopoly type margins.
>
> > http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
> >
> > Doesn't look like they are starving, those profit margins are "fuck you
> > customer we have no competition so we will overcharge you"
>
> The issue is not whether the company is starving or gouging the public.
The
> issue is that any company has a right to make as much money as possible.
If
> their product is not worth what they ask the marketplace decides whether
they
> stay in business.
When a company has a protected revenue stream, there is concern. When that
revenue stram is protected enough that the company can overcharge you due to
artificial barries, then there is a cause for concern.
>
> > Capitalism, in America. ROTFLMFAO, look at the net companies, the web
was
> > supposed to be the great equalizer allowing David to compete with
Goliath.
> > Hmmm, looks like the corporate monoliths have stolen the show and all
the
> > Davids have dot-bombed.
>
>
> The web was not "designed for business." It was part of a defense
program.
> Institutions, businesses and individuals later adopted it as a way of
doing
> business and exchanging information... much like what is happening in this
NG.
> Some have made money from it, some have not. I have a number of clients
that
> have found their websites to have brought in business they never would
have seen
> otherwise. Other clients still have gained no value from the web, not
because
> it doesn't work but because their business plan doesn't work.
Oh, don't forget, computers weren't "designed for the web," the web took
advantage of the capabilities of computers just as e-commerce took advantage
of the capabilities of the web.
>
> I was in meetings with Mark Cuban when he was running broadcast.com out of
his
> house.. he's now one of the wealthiest men in the world and owns his on
NBA
> franchise.. not bad for a little guy as you call them. If you think that
> everyone that puts up a website is going to get rich you're buying in to
the
> wrong bag of PR.
Every time i hear one of these stories, it turns out that the little guy was
1. Either from a wealthy family
2. Sponsered by a much larger corporation.
> >
> >
> > http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
> >
> > Look at those profit margins, looks like a well protected franshise to
me.
>
> And your point is?
The point is that the typical multibillion dollar company has to struggle to
maintain 5% or 10% profit margins due to competition, when you see 32%
profit margins, there is little to no competition.
>
>
> > So little you know. PSP 7 which is an excellent package that uses many
> > Photoshop plugins as well as Corell plugins will never get the
endorsement
> > of professional trade mags because they don't have the money to
advertise in
> > those mags like Adobe does. Hence PSP will never achieve the market
> > recognition it should.
>
> I disagree. I have used PSP and liked it but found it lacking. I put off
> buying PS for three years, using Corel PhotoPaint and PSP until I finally
> decided to fork over the money. Why? Because neither of the other
packages
> were as good as PS. If they had been, I would not have spent the money.
For some applications this might be true, but fo rthe majority of users is
it so. Does the web design house doing low end graphics and touch up of
stock photgraphy and clipart need photoshop, would PSP be a much better
choice. Especially the newer version 6 or 7 which contain much of the
functionality of Photoshop and is extensible through Photshop plugins.
>
> Your logic is flawed. The graphic designers and hobbyist of the world are
aware
> of PSP. I see PSP mentions in print in many magazines and news groups..
even
> digital camera magazines talk about it all the time as being an
alternative to
> PS. Further, I have never been influenced by an advertisment for Adobe
> products. I have always been moved to purchase by using demos and
listening to
> what other users of the product have to say about it. I never listen to
company
> hype no matter what the product is because no company will point out a
weakness
> in their products, just the good stuff and they will probably exagerate
that.
You miss the subtle points of advertising. Advertising is not meant or
designed to force you to make a conscious decision.
>
> > the other problem is the barriers that are placed upon people by the
> > governemt. Want to start a business. Get office space because if you
get
> > busted doing commercial work from a residential zoned area, you will pay
a
> > fine. Don't forget all those fees and licenses and registrations and
cpa
> > and attorney feesbecause the government has to make everyhting so damned
> > convoluted.
> >
> > The fact is, only the privelaged can even think about starting a
company.
> > That is a shame in a country like the United States which is supposedly
the
> > bastion of capitalism. Hopefully a good dozen years of republicans will
> > bring some hope. Only problem is, once the government takes your rights
and
> > freedoms away, they never give it back.
>
> I agree with you in part. The laws and regulations and fees do make it
> difficult to start a business in many cases but they do not keep anyone
from
> becoming successful. A good idea, product, etc. will always make money.
I have
> seen it happen over and over again.
If that idea or product can get recognized. Often it is not and the person
lacks the resources needed to gain the attention. Without proper
protection, that idea or product is likely to be swiped or the person wll
get screwed royally.
> But the key to all of this is the
> individual. It comes down to how badly they want to succeed and their
> understanding of how to make their business plan work. If you are a true
> believer in yourself and your business, you can make it work.
It takes more than being a believer in yourself. The world is full of people
who believed they could but couldn't overcome the barriers and lost
everything. It is the rare few who actually make it even to the point of
breaking even.
> Many businesses
> fail because their owners lacked the managerial skills and the work ethic
to
> make it happen.
Yes this is very true
>And, it takes time, in most cases, for any company to startup,
> gain customers, market recognition and turn a profit. Yes, it's easier
for a
> large corporation than an individual but you have to remember that the
genesis
> of almost every large coroporation at some point in time began with one
> individual and a great idea. They don't just appear out of think air.
Hmm, I was a very successful stockbroker and wanted to open my own brokerage
firm. I had fellow brokers to open the firm with, several million in client
equity and the work ethic, knowledge and skills to succeed, what I didn't
have was $250,000 to open the firm and pay all the deposits and fees with
all the regulatory agencies and clearing firms. All that just for the
privelage of of calling a client and saying "hey buy this stock." That is
called a barrier to entry. On top of that, there is increasing pressure
from the SEC and NASD to stop independant brokers and small firms from
trading with clients, basically what that means is that a stockbroker can
get fined up to several million dollars for trading a client a few times a
month, but the discount houses can advertise urging clients to trade 50
times a month for free.
I left the brokerage business because of all the regulation crap. What has
happened since then, the 25 to 30% a year my clients achieved was replaced
by 0% returns over the same time period and a 50% loss for this past year.
Note at the time my main stock recommendation was Venator (Z:NYSE) which has
risen over 300% in that same time frame. See
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=Z&d=5y I left the business in feb 1999.Wall
Street overregulated themselves out of at least one very talented
stockbroker and I am only one out of several hundred thousand stockbrokers
who left the business. Oh and in case you doubt my abilities, look up KM,
RAD(wait a few days as the stock is a bit higher due to recent news), and
BS, then come back in a year and tell me how good I am.
Almost every industry is like that, the barriers are way to high so even
with a good idea, good product, good service etc... the ability to get off
the ground is very difficult..
>
> > > Oh please... stop. You really don't understand capitalism.
> >
> > Not sure if you do either.
>
> See if this changes your mind. I developed a piece of software on a PCjr
in
> 1985. I spent a year working on it.. it was somewhat of a hobby. When I
was
> done I let the company I worked for use the software at no charge so it
would
> have exposure. Since I developed this software on my own time it was my
> intellectual property. Individuals from other companies would visit and
see
> this software in action... "How much would you charge us for that?" they
would
> ask. "$1,500.00 per copy" I would answer. Over 350 companies paid me for
the
> software.
>
> My cost: a floppy disk, 30 pages of paper for the manual, $2.00 for the
> shipping fee. I turned $3.00 of material and my idea into $1,500 per
sale... I
> think I have somewhat of a grasp as to what capitalism is about.
1985 and was a lot different world than 2000. Not to be rude, but what
happened why is the software no longer being sold, why were no derivitive
products released.
>
> >
> > There is a difference between profits and illegally protected profits.
Do
> > you think a billion dollar company like Adobe plays by the rules. They
buy
> > the rules.
>
> I will agree with your first statement above... but you will have to
explain how
> Adobe's profits are "illegally" protected. As for Adobe playing buy the
rules
> or buying them.. It still boils down to this. If their product was no
good they
> would be out of business. The market determines who stays in business...
no
> product... no profits.... you are out of business.
Was an XT or 286 running DOS better than an Amiga. The Amiga was cheaper,
more efficient, easier to use, had more applications and was multitasking.
Why aren't we all using Amigas today? What About Atari, same thing?
Micron Electronics, MicronPC.com makes better computers than Compaq and Dell
and Gateway (at least every magazine which reviews these types of things),
why isn't Micron Electronics the #1 pc maker.
Silicon Graphics makes the best computers in the world, why are they nearing
bankruptcy due to invasion by an inferior x86/windows technology.
Sure there are opportunities, but the guy who wishes to open a coffee shop
is not going to be able without a tremendous cash outlay. if the building
fees and governement crap doesn'r kill them, the inability to find a
distributor who will sell to a larger clients competitor will and if that
doesn't, dunkin donuts and Starbucks will slowly kill from the sides.
Of course there is always the one who gets lucky witht he pet rock, but even
noew that has turned into corporate cabbage patch dolls and tickle me elmos
and pokemon.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for free enterprise, but it saddens me to see
and ever shrinking pool of possibilities and a government who only makes the
matter worse.
--
B.P.
http://www.ispelunker.com ** Web directory and more
http://www.virtualbrokers.net ** Investments
http://home.earthlink.net/~woogieoogieboogie/navemulator/nnemupre.html
** NN emulator for IE 5+ **
**** This is an extra line in my sig to piss the sig cops off ****
angieb
news:IOy26.509$8r2....@newshog.newsread.com...
Everything I want should be free or cheap! I think Lexus cars should be
free!!!
If a person
> were to spend thousands of dollars on A CAR that
> just sits idle IN THE GARAGE most of the time and
> is obsolete in roughly a FEW YEARS who is getting the big
> bang in the rear-end?... the little guy trying to
> make it on a shoe string budget or the multi-million
> or billion dollar executives and their gangs. If
> these people would offer $300.00 instead of 50,000.00+
> CARS for the just inquisitive average
> person I think everybody would pay with no qualms.
> Thats why I'm on this news group now. I have an old
> CHEVY CHEVETTE that somebody gave me years ago when I
> first got MY LICENSE. To this day I have yet to
> make a penny off of it but only spent hundreds of
> dollars worth of my time trying to KEEP IT RUNNING. It's
> gotten out of date and is the only CAR that
> seems to give me problems with OIL SPOTS ON MY DRIVEWAY. It is finally
> crashed for good I think so I wanted to know if
> someone else could send me a NEWER CAR,
> even your old one if you have moved on to a
> newer version, or direct me toward a decent area
> that I could get one. I haven't costed LEXUS 1 penny,
> I only recommended it to other
> people through the years... I was a walking
> advertisement for them. It' been good fun but I
> could never justify paying so much for it when I'm
> only DRIVING around now and then. I'll pay you
> thirty dollars instead to help you purchase your
> next CAR :-)
>
> I would be most appreciative if anyone could help.
> Please reply here or directly to my email if you
> wish to.
Sorry, I couldn't resist!! ;-)
ab
Jim Radcliffe
> > news:BpU26.37131$3B5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > > To see how well Adobe is doing see http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
>
> revenue stram is protected enough that the company can overcharge you due to
> artificial barries, then there is a cause for concern.
Before I respond let me just say that it seems that your background suggests you
have more insight into the area being discussed than I... However..
You still have not explained how Adobe's revenue stream is "protected"
> > I was in meetings with Mark Cuban when he was running broadcast.com out of
> his
> > house.. he's now one of the wealthiest men in the world and owns his on
> NBA
> > franchise.. not bad for a little guy as you call them. If you think that
> > everyone that puts up a website is going to get rich you're buying in to
> the
> > wrong bag of PR.
>
> Every time i hear one of these stories, it turns out that the little guy was
>
> 1. Either from a wealthy family
> 2. Sponsered by a much larger corporation.
There is no denying that people from wealth or corporate backing have more of a
chance to succeed at just about anything they do.. my point is that ANYONE has
the chance and opportunity to succeed in this country.... even with government
rules and regulations and a screwed up tax system.
If you are suggesting that EVERYONE should succeed ... that would be nice but
let's face it, it's not a perfect world. There are millions of successfull
people in this country, quietly going about their business and making money...
We hear about the Mark Cubans and Bill Gates and tend to believe they were
somehow charmed, gifted, or had help from Daddy or the family... it's not always
the case. Some do make it on their own.
> > > http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
> > >
> > > Look at those profit margins, looks like a well protected franshise to
> me.
> >
> > And your point is?
>
> The point is that the typical multibillion dollar company has to struggle to
> maintain 5% or 10% profit margins due to competition, when you see 32%
> profit margins, there is little to no competition.
You've made my point for me.. The reason Adobe is so succesful and can continue
to gouge us is that they are the best at what they do. Look, if there were a
better product I would buy it... especially if the price were lower. I bought
PSP, Corel PhotoPaint, XARA, PhotoShop LE... and I finally realized that
PhotoShop worked the best, was the most flexible and offered the greatest number
of possibilites for me.
I don't believe they are being "protected" by anything other than the public
accepting and believing (through use of the program) that they are the best
graphics program available.
> Does the web design house doing low end graphics and touch up of
> stock photgraphy and clipart need photoshop, would PSP be a much better
> choice. Especially the newer version 6 or 7 which contain much of the
> functionality of Photoshop and is extensible through Photshop plugins.
I am in business for myself. I buy what is needed to get the job done. I then
write off the cost of the purchase on my taxes. It's the cost of doing
business. The first week I had PhotoShop I created a design for a client that
paid for the software. I could not have created that design without PS.. The
choice to use PS of PSP is an individual decision and NOT controlled by Adobe.
Individual needs and program capabilities force us to make the choice to buy PS
or PSP or some other program. The fact that some people can not afford PS is
unfortunate but Adobe has the right to charge what the market will bear... When
PSP becomes a better product or something new arrives on the scene to not only
challenge Adobe but beat them... the price will come down.
> You miss the subtle points of advertising. Advertising is not meant or
> designed to force you to make a conscious decision.
Before my Internet/web career I had 30 years in broadcast media, mostly radio.
I understand the process well. The purpose is to sell the product, get bodies
in the store, name recogonition, and product hype.. it is nothing more than
psychological warfare carried on at the corporate level.... just to keep the
brand/product in the consumer's mind so that if someone says "What should I
buy?" that brand will come to mind. Advertising is one thing I do understand
quite well... been there.. done that... for longer than I care to remember.
By the way, I went to two three computer stores yesterday... not one of them had
or carried PhotoShop on their shelves.. everyone of them had PSP as well as
Corel products. Adobe was represented by a few products but the store did not
carry PhotoShop... they could special order it... this was CompUSA, MicroCenter
and an indepent store.
> If that idea or product can get recognized. Often it is not and the person
> lacks the resources needed to gain the attention. Without proper
> protection, that idea or product is likely to be swiped or the person wll
> get screwed royally.
So how would you propose to remedy what appears to be the law of the jungle?
> It takes more than being a believer in yourself. The world is full of people
> who believed they could but couldn't overcome the barriers and lost
> everything. It is the rare few who actually make it even to the point of
> breaking even.
I repeat the question...what is your suggested remedy?
>I was a very successful stockbroker and wanted to open my own brokerage
> firm. I had fellow brokers to open the firm with, several million in client
> equity and the work ethic, knowledge and skills to succeed, what I didn't
> have was $250,000 to open the firm and pay all the deposits and fees with
> all the regulatory agencies and clearing firms. All that just for the
> privelage of of calling a client and saying "hey buy this stock." That is
> called a barrier to entry. On top of that, there is increasing pressure
> from the SEC and NASD to stop independant brokers and small firms from
> trading with clients, basically what that means is that a stockbroker can
> get fined up to several million dollars for trading a client a few times a
> month, but the discount houses can advertise urging clients to trade 50
> times a month for free.
Yes, it does appear the deck is stacked at times.. but if the fees and "cost of
entry" were not there, every con man in the country would be able to open shop
and bilk the public.. the country would be full of "businesses" whose business
was to grab your money for unqualified advice or services... let's face it, you
and I have both had experience with companies that we thought shouldn't exist
because of their service or business practices.
>
> I left the brokerage business because of all the regulation crap. What has
> happened since then, the 25 to 30% a year my clients achieved was replaced
> by 0% returns over the same time period and a 50% loss for this past year.
> Note at the time my main stock recommendation was Venator (Z:NYSE) which has
> risen over 300% in that same time frame. See
> http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=Z&d=5y I left the business in feb 1999.Wall
> Street overregulated themselves out of at least one very talented
> stockbroker and I am only one out of several hundred thousand stockbrokers
> who left the business. Oh and in case you doubt my abilities, look up KM,
> RAD(wait a few days as the stock is a bit higher due to recent news), and
> BS, then come back in a year and tell me how good I am.
>
> Almost every industry is like that, the barriers are way to high so even
> with a good idea, good product, good service etc... the ability to get off
> the ground is very difficult..
>
I don't doubt your abilities or your expertise. Your view and mine are just
somewhat different. It seems you want someone to step in and tell Adobe that
they can't make these profits or charge $600 for their program. It is their
right. I don't like the price either but it is their right to charge whatever
the market will bear. What would you have them do?
> 1985 and was a lot different world than 2000. Not to be rude, but what
> happened why is your software no longer being sold, why were no derivitive
> products released.
The software continues to be sold... two sales this month... paid for Christmas
and some college fund. The main problem with the program is that broadcast
technolgy (hardware, etc.) advanced to the point where my software was no longer
needed as much as it was in the late 80s. My market was vertical and advances
in technology impacted my market.. somewhat like the hit Liquid Paper must have
taken when typewriters went out the back door computers came in the front door.
> Was an XT or 286 running DOS better than an Amiga. The Amiga was cheaper,
> more efficient, easier to use, had more applications and was multitasking.
> Why aren't we all using Amigas today? What About Atari, same thing?
>
> Micron Electronics, MicronPC.com makes better computers than Compaq and Dell
> and Gateway (at least every magazine which reviews these types of things),
> why isn't Micron Electronics the #1 pc maker.
>
> Silicon Graphics makes the best computers in the world, why are they nearing
> bankruptcy due to invasion by an inferior x86/windows technology.
>
I understand you point... Beta was/is superior to VHS but look what happened. I
understand your point but not as it relates to the issue that started this
thread, which was: PhotoShop should be free....
PS is the best program (IMO) for graphics design and editing. PSP gets a lot of
press and the price is definently right.. I still maintain that if PSP ever
reaches or surpasses the flexiblity and abilities of PS.. you will see the price
of PS go down... Adobe is in a similar battle with Macromedia over Flash..
let's see if their protection and name recognition wins that battle. I don't
believe it will.
> Don't get me wrong, I am all for free enterprise, but it saddens me to see
> and ever shrinking pool of possibilities and a government who only makes the
> matter worse.
I understand.... I feel your pain.... and to a degree, I agree with you.
I've enjoyed the exchange.
Regards,
Jim
angieb
news:BpU26.37131$3B5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> To see how well Adobe is doing see http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
> very profitable, almost monopoly type margins.
>
>
22.7% is a monopoly type margin???? Sounds to me like it's just a company
who knows what they're doing.
You would probably benefit from taking some business classes: you'd find out
that the goal of the corporation is NOT to be nice to people; it's NOT to
give them free stuff; it's NOT to provide goods and services to anyone and
everyone as cheaply as possible. The goal of the corporation is to increase
shareholder wealth (i.e. make as much money as they can!!).
Marketing strategies can consist of selling lots and lots and lots of stuff
at a low margin, relying on sheer volume to make money (Wal Mart is a prime
example of this), or to sell a relatively small quantity of stuff at a high
profit margin (Adobe PhotoShop, for example . . . but you can look at almost
any luxury-type, "exclusive" item and you'll find the same thing). The
business executives have to pick the point at which profit is maximized. No
matter how cheaply Adobe could sell PS, it's just not a product for the
everyday man or woman: it's just too complicated and most people have no use
for it whatsoever! If they cut their price by a factor of 10, could they
realistically expect 10 times as many people to buy it? No! So they don't.
Let's face it: Adobe has no moral obligation to anyone -- it's not even an
issue here. Nobody NEEDS Adobe PS in order to survive, especially not
someone just dinking around with it as a hobby. It's not like it's some new
cancer drug or something!
ab
PS - Microsoft profit margin = 42.0%. Microsoft = monopoly (as determined by
US court system).
angieb
news:92ivun$bsg$05$1...@news.t-online.com...
> Compare it to MS Word, it used to be a $500 product, now you get it free
> with most new computers.
>
> Solution, Photoshop cheap addon for your new Compaq Presario...???
>
It's really not a fair comparison. MS Word is a word processor, something
that the "everyday" person would find useful. Photoshop is a high-end
graphics program, something that the "everyday" person would find way over
their heads.
That's why many scanners, digital cameras, etc. already ship with free
copies of image manipulation software, be it PS LE, ArcSoft, or a myriad of
others. That's actually a better comparison to the word processor example.
People who are just playing around with computer graphics and can't afford
PS already have a whole myriad of free or cheap products from which to
choose.
ab
Geert Zandman
>
> "Geert Zandman" <Geert....@T-online.de> wrote in message
> news:92ivun$bsg$05$1...@news.t-online.com...
> > Hi all,
> >
> > there IS more to this story, Software can be paid for in MANY ways.
> > Just selling a box with a CDrom is the most simplest.
> >
> > Why not use a licensing system with different pricing for different
users.
>
> You'll have Department Heads of companies buying home license versions and
> taking them to work... still theft, still misrepresentation.... in a
nutshell
> fraud.
NO, Home licenses are not supposed to be used in companies.
>
> > I live in the Netherlands, here at least 50% of the software is illegal.
> > Simple rule of thumb, just play with the software at home -> get a
> > "free"copy, if you really make USE of the software then buy it.
> > Wordperfect was the most copied software in Holland, WP didn't mind,
because
> > people used WP at home, so the companies these people work for only
bought
> > WP.
> > Their employees simply demanded that.
> > Smart thinking of these WP boys, use illegal copies for your benefiet
> > instead of fighting it.
>
> So the employees dictate what legitimate software purchases a company will
buy
> based on their illegitimate use or theft of the software for home use?
> Interesting concept. Not quite a moral one but interesting.
What has moral got to do with this...?? I really don't know...!!!!
If a company is looking for a secretary , and most secretaries only know how
to work with WP..
they can choose for another software product, but that would make life only
difficult.
This caused that for many years WP was "GOD" in Holland, and MS Word was
nonexistent...!!!
Clever thinking by the WP boys...!!!!
>
> > Back to Photoshop, I don't pay $ 1000,- for home software.
> > Why Adobe doesn't introduce a licensing system for all the home users,
I
> > don't know. It could bring them a lot of extra cash,
>
> That's what PhotoShop LE is for... $99.00 instead of $600.00
Home Users refuse to work with Micky Mouse Programs anylonger, PaintShop Pro
is the only real alternative
to Photoshop, this doesn't bring Adobe any revenue though...!!!!
>
> > Compare it to MS Word, it used to be a $500 product, now you get it free
> > with most new computers.
>
> Aren't your forgetting who makes the operating system and why it benefits
them
> to supply a free copy of Word with every new computer? If Microsoft
didn't make
> the operating system you would not see Word provided for free..... it's
called
> incentive marketing. They know that what most people are used to using
at home
> will probably be what they would like to use at work... as you mentioned
> earlier.
You are RIGHT here, I agree
>
> > Solution, Photoshop cheap addon for your new Compaq Presario...???
>
> Never happen.... unless Adobe starts selling systems for Graphic Artists.
I
> wouldn't hold my breath.
Neither do I, but it is a nice thought...?? isn't it
Regards
Geert
Geert Zandman
demand first class programs.
Photoshop LE is Micky Mouse Ware. An insult to serious users.
Home users DO require a different pricing policy.
It is a simple calculation, sell 100 boxes of $1000, or sell 10000 boxes of
$200...(just an example without any backing..!!)
best regards
Geert
"Jeffrey W. Eggenberger" <jeff...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:92j3e3$vpg$1...@slb3.atl.mindspring.net...
Geert Zandman
I thought Schools were SUPPORTED by companies by means of gifts like used
computers, free software, etc..
Fines for a school are contra productive for the companies involved and for
the schools and for society...
Illegaly copied software by businesses is another story, no excuses
here...!! simple...!!!
WP in Holland didn't mind HOME use of its software, because they knew that
they would earn enough in
the professional market.
WP was crushed by MSoffice, Corel made a mistake buying WP..!!
Regards
Geert
"Dorothy Combs" <dotc...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3A4D240D...@mindspring.com...
RossF
<Geert....@T-online.de> wrote:
>Home users can no longer be treaten as second rate computer users, they
>demand first class programs.
Then, unless they want to be first-rate thieves, they buy the program
like the rest of us.
>Photoshop LE is Micky Mouse Ware. An insult to serious users.
It's not made for "serious users". That's why it's so much cheaper.
>Home users DO require a different pricing policy.
Home users have no special rights that entitle them to anything. If
they want a product, they pay what's asked.
Photoshop is not as high-priced as many apps designed for the
professional market, probably because Adobe is able to sell it to so
many amateurs and hobbyists. If they're able to sell it to so many
amateurs and hobbyists, then the price must not be that unreasonable.
>It is a simple calculation, sell 100 boxes of $1000, or sell 10000 boxes of
>$200...(just an example without any backing..!!)
>
It is a simple calculation, but it's not a simple world. Reducing the
price does not guarantee a boost in sales that more than compensates
for the price reduction. If Adobe lowered the price to a dollar, they
could sell it to millions, and then go out of business. Maybe you
should get a job with Adobe, and share your secret to success with
them. :)
Adobe can sell their products for anything they like. If they wanted
to charge twice as much, that would be their right. The marketplace
determines whether the price they set will be successful for them.
Ross
bp
> > > "bp" <no_spa...@ispelunker.com> wrote in message
> > > news:BpU26.37131$3B5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > > > To see how well Adobe is doing see
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
> >
> > When a company has a protected revenue stream, there is concern. When
that
> > revenue stram is protected enough that the company can overcharge you
due to
> > artificial barries, then there is a cause for concern.
>
> Before I respond let me just say that it seems that your background
suggests you
> have more insight into the area being discussed than I... However..
Ok and to be fair, you background with graphic apps suggest you have much
more insight into the capabilities of the products. What I am speaking
about is mostly what their profit margins indicate and how it relates to
competition. In addition, it should be noted that high end product makers
usually enjoy higher profit margins, but they are usually not the dominant
product on the market .. eg SGI workstations, Feraris etc...The most
prevelant product will always be the low end eg.. Hondas, E-machine etc...
The most stable and largest (revenue size) company will be mid-line makers
eg... Ford Taurus, Dell computers. For Adobe to be the largest, high end,
most dominant and profitable is unatural in the business world.
I will mention PSP a lot, please note I am not a graphics designer and my
work with either PSP or Photoshop is very limited.
>
> You still have not explained how Adobe's revenue stream is "protected"
When a company has unusually high profit margins, it is an indication that
tthey have a product which enjoys a "monopoly" or "near monopoly" status. A
"near monopoly" status is basically that there are competitors, but hey are
so limited n market share that they are really not competitive.
If youy have followed the Microsoft trial you will note some similiarities
between Adobe and Microsoft. The two most important are
1. Unrealistic profit margins
2. no real competition.
A situation like this arises from a "protected" revenue stream which outside
sources benefit in helping to protect those revenue streams. This can be
large corporate contracts where use oc a competitors product is grounds for
a higher licensing fee, advertising rates inflated for competing products,
contracts with product manufacturers which preclude using a competitors
product or anything else which gives one company's product an uncompetitive
advantage.
Take for example a low level web design which does brochreware for small
businesses, basically 4 page websites done in Front Page and using stock
photography and clip art. There are zillions of these companies and chances
are they use Photshop for the minimal and low level graphics work they do.
Why, there are much better and easier to use programs for this type of work
than Photoshop, but they still insist on spending 3 times as much for say
100 licenses for their staff. I would suggest that somewhere the managars
have read that Photoshop is the defacto standard application for graphics
work. The fact that PSP was more engineeered for web-based work and at the
risk of starting a war here, PSP 6 or 7 is a better product for most web
work due to it eing an easier program to use and having many built in
features which are often used in web-graphics. I may be totally off base
here as my graphics ability is quite slim, but as a user of both Photshop
and PSP, I find PSP easier to use and more than adequate for any web work.
Now for more advanced graphics work, obviously Photoshop ius a much more
powerful program and offers a lot more than PSP
>
> > > I was in meetings with Mark Cuban when he was running broadcast.com
out of
> > his
> > > house.. he's now one of the wealthiest men in the world and owns his
on
> > NBA
> > > franchise.. not bad for a little guy as you call them. If you think
that
> > > everyone that puts up a website is going to get rich you're buying in
to
> > the
> > > wrong bag of PR.
> >
> > Every time i hear one of these stories, it turns out that the little guy
was
> >
> > 1. Either from a wealthy family
> > 2. Sponsered by a much larger corporation.
>
> There is no denying that people from wealth or corporate backing have more
of a
> chance to succeed at just about anything they do.. my point is that ANYONE
has
> the chance and opportunity to succeed in this country.... even with
government
> rules and regulations and a screwed up tax system.
This I disagree with, the barriers to startup are not only expensive, but
probably too confusing for most people. I remember the frustration I had
setting up my first corporation, what a nightmare.
If the opportunity exists, it exists in the services sector or in software
>
> If you are suggesting that EVERYONE should succeed ... that would be nice
but
> let's face it, it's not a perfect world. There are millions of
successfull
> people in this country, quietly going about their business and making
money...
> We hear about the Mark Cubans and Bill Gates and tend to believe they were
> somehow charmed, gifted, or had help from Daddy or the family... it's not
always
> the case. Some do make it on their own.
No I am not saying everyone should succeed, but I am saying is that everyone
should have the opportunity to try and to fail. Where are the
opportunitites. Where can someone outside of software succeed in their own
business without tremendous start up costs.?
neither of the people you mentioned above were average people who came up
with a better idea or great product.
>
> > > > http://biz.yahoo.com/p/a/adbe.html
> > > >
> > > > Look at those profit margins, looks like a well protected franshise
to
> > me.
> > >
> > > And your point is?
> >
> > The point is that the typical multibillion dollar company has to
struggle to
> > maintain 5% or 10% profit margins due to competition, when you see 32%
> > profit margins, there is little to no competition.
>
> You've made my point for me.. The reason Adobe is so succesful and can
continue
> to gouge us is that they are the best at what they do. Look, if there
were a
> better product I would buy it... especially if the price were lower. I
bought
> PSP, Corel PhotoPaint, XARA, PhotoShop LE... and I finally realized that
> PhotoShop worked the best, was the most flexible and offered the greatest
number
> of possibilites for me.
What work do your do? Because it offers those features, do you use them?
It is often to easy to get cought in the "I need this feature" trap without
ever needing or using that feature. I am very guilty of this. I have
thousands of dollars of software simply because I might one day need them
and because I am an idiot :-).
>
> I don't believe they are being "protected" by anything other than the
public
> accepting and believing (through use of the program) that they are the
best
> graphics program available.
But who makes that belief? Who creates the percieved need?
>
> > Does the web design house doing low end graphics and touch up of
> > stock photgraphy and clipart need photoshop, would PSP be a much better
> > choice. Especially the newer version 6 or 7 which contain much of the
> > functionality of Photoshop and is extensible through Photshop plugins.
>
> I am in business for myself. I buy what is needed to get the job done. I
then
> write off the cost of the purchase on my taxes. It's the cost of doing
> business. The first week I had PhotoShop I created a design for a client
that
> paid for the software. I could not have created that design without PS..
The
> choice to use PS of PSP is an individual decision and NOT controlled by
Adobe.
> Individual needs and program capabilities force us to make the choice to
buy PS
> or PSP or some other program. The fact that some people can not afford PS
is
> unfortunate but Adobe has the right to charge what the market will bear...
When
> PSP becomes a better product or something new arrives on the scene to not
only
> challenge Adobe but beat them... the price will come down.
I assume you are in the graphics design business. Have you taken a look at
PSP7. I would be really interested in seeing a professional graphics
designer make a fair and unbiased comparisan. I believe many of the
comparisans are made between PSP5 and Photoshop 5. PSP 6 and 7 have
leapfrogged PSP5 by tremendous bounds. A comparisan between PSP 6 and
Photoshop 5.5 using the same plugins would be very interesting.
>
> > You miss the subtle points of advertising. Advertising is not meant or
> > designed to force you to make a conscious decision.
>
> Before my Internet/web career I had 30 years in broadcast media, mostly
radio.
> I understand the process well. The purpose is to sell the product, get
bodies
> in the store, name recogonition, and product hype.. it is nothing more
than
> psychological warfare carried on at the corporate level.... just to keep
the
> brand/product in the consumer's mind so that if someone says "What should
I
> buy?" that brand will come to mind. Advertising is one thing I do
understand
> quite well... been there.. done that... for longer than I care to
remember.
Okay, then you are aware that almost any decision you make is usually based
upon some type of product hype. While a tool used in your trade might be
more based upon need, this is also very rare.
>
> By the way, I went to two three computer stores yesterday... not one of
them had
> or carried PhotoShop on their shelves.. everyone of them had PSP as well
as
> Corel products. Adobe was represented by a few products but the store did
not
> carry PhotoShop... they could special order it... this was CompUSA,
MicroCenter
> and an indepent store.
TYhe Comp USA here has Photoshop on the shelves but it is under the regular
apps section and not inder the graphics section. this CompUsa here is
always moving their crap around so that may change tommorrow. I do wish
they had a bit of consistency in their products from day to day.
What you say is interesting though as it may indicate that PSP is making
inroads into that middle tier market where Adobe had sales which didn't need
the product bu t brought it because it was the only one available. If this
happens, expect to see Adobe's stock and margins come crahing down. You can
also expect to see Adobe bring their prices down as PSP will also start
cannibalizing some of the higher end sales also. this si very similiar to
what AMD is doing to Intel. AMD smothered Intel in the low end market and
forced Intel to drop the prices of the Celeron, now the Athlon is going
after the mid level markets with Duron squashing the Celeron with
performance. While AMD knows and the benchmarks support it, the Athlon can
compete with the P4 but AMD knows that is an area they will waste time and
money trying to penetrate. AMD has all but destryoed Intels business model
which relied on unrealistic profit margins in the mid tier and high end
systems while haing the low end serve as a loss leader. AMD and Jasc PSP)
seem to be following the same strategy, hit them in the knees, then the
stomache and finally pop them in th ejaw for the knowout. Kinda
interesting. One day you may hear that an Athlon 1.2 mhz system with PSP 7
is the preferred graphics solution :-)
I think Corel is a self fulfilling prophesy, the perception of them being a
toasted company will destroy sales, who is gonna buy from a near bankrupt
company.
>
> > If that idea or product can get recognized. Often it is not and the
person
> > lacks the resources needed to gain the attention. Without proper
> > protection, that idea or product is likely to be swiped or the person
wll
> > get screwed royally.
>
> So how would you propose to remedy what appears to be the law of the
jungle?
Prior to the early 80's American business was mainly on main street, where
for a small amount with little interference and a lot of ambition, anyone
could open a store or shop and give it their best. The big corporations
encouraged small businesses to open shop and sell their products. Micheal
Milken came on the scene and and created an M&A frenzy which forever
destroyed the main street business. The big corporations had to consolodate
their resources for fear of being swallowed up by milkens War chests of
capital. Consolodation meant less intimate relationships with the small
Main Street businessman, the corporations needed a more efficient way to
bring their goods and services to market and to the customers on Main
Street. solution, mass retailers like Walmart, ship the product to Walmart
and let Walmart distribute to main street. Every major industry has gone
through this transformation and the marketing effort went from the loyal
army of Main Street merchants to mass national; advertising. the result,
the death of the Main Street merchants. Some survived because their markets
were overlooked by Wall Street, but that is still changing, witness Regis
Hair Salons consolodating the hair cutting industry.
Look around, where is the local electronics shop, the local furniture store,
when was the last time you went into a strip mall to buy your computer
stuff.
What is left, specialty retailers and restaurants and these are being
replaced by the national specialty retailers and national restaurant chains.
How can Main Street compete with a company backed by the unlimited
aquisition funds of Wall Street.
Can it be stopped, no, it cannot, every industry will eventually be
consolodated under a Wall Street consolodator until the Main Street merchant
is nothing buit a memory in a Noman Rockwell painting. Waht happens after
that, then we go global (actually that has already begun in mature
industries like telecommunications and automobiles), the cycle will continue
with the national companies being swallowed up or kicked out by the glabal
companies. When will it stop? My best guess in another 20 or 30 years
there will be no more main Street, and no more national companies. There
will be a handful or international conglomerates trunning the show cross
cultures and cross governments.
The web and commerce on the web was supposed to allow Main Street to compete
on a global basis, but it failed and is now a marketing tool for the large
corporations
>
> > It takes more than being a believer in yourself. The world is full of
people
> > who believed they could but couldn't overcome the barriers and lost
> > everything. It is the rare few who actually make it even to the point
of
> > breaking even.
>
> I repeat the question...what is your suggested remedy?
Read above, IMO there is no remedy, we are in the process of a
transformation that started in the early 80's and outside of a few hiccups
will continue and will do so until there is probably only one corporation or
just a handful.
Very true, but should the barriers be so high, I for one am a licensed
stockbroker and att he time was licensed to do business in every state which
cost me over $6000 alone as well as a $100,000 bond being secured..
Shouldn't hat have been enough? Another $250,000 to line the poskets of
others is not protecting the public.
Here in Florida, we have to get an occupational license to do anything.
Hell any job today requires some sort of license. I remember back in 1992,
I had just graduated college and entered the brokerage business. I put
myself through college and nearly bankrupted myself and made myself homeless
in doing so. Being a beginner, I had a lot to learn and a very difficult
test to pass. The Series 7 exam is considered the most difficult
professional license to achieve with over an 80% failure rate.
Anyway, I took a weekend and nighttime job to supplement my income while I
learned the Brokerage business. In the brokerage business you get a $1000
month salary while in training and then you get commissions after you pass
your license and have demonstrated the ability to deal with clients. In
return the brokerage firm takes over half of your commissions. So I worked
as a security guard at an upscale community in upstate NY. The pay was only
a few hundred a week, but combined with the pathetic training fee and
several thousand in gifts from the residents during the holidays, I was able
to get by. Then the state of NY decided that all security gurads needed to
take a 6 week course and get licensed to be a security guard. Okay, the
company had to pay the exam and school fees, that meant my job now became a
commodity for the security companies to get grants ffrom the government to
train and hire unskilled workers. My job was replaced by a licensed minimum
wage worker. I was no longer able to continue training at $1000 per month.
I had to leave the brokerage business right because I could not afford to
continue my training. I took a job at a local harware store because it paid
enough to pay the bills, great, I ruined my life attending college to work
at a job that I could have gotten anyway. Luckily I had passed the series 7
and after a few months of the hardware store, I had an offer which paid
enough to cover my bills while I built my brokerage busineess. Here comes
the governement again, now on a crusade to shut down all thses small
brokerage firms who take small companies public and "artificially inflate"
the prices. Can anyone say Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, the two biggest
manipulators of IPO's and the main reason why internet companies with
nothing and no business model wen t public at $5 and were orth $200 in two
weeks. Anyway, the SEC shut down my firm, went to another, the SEC shut
them down. Overall the SEC shut down 7 firms I worked at. Over the past 7
years that also totalled over $150,000 in unpaid commissions. My choices,
work at a Merryl Lynch and let them take 80% of my commissions, or do
something else. The smaller firms paid me up to 70% of my commisssions. My
$200,000 to $250,000 yearly commission production which led to $150,000 +
income at the smaller firms would mean a $40,000 income at Merryl Lynch. My
production would have been much higher had the SEC not kept shutting the
firms I worked at down and I kept losing clients because of it. Yes I could
have taken the 20 year route through Merryl Lynch, bu there you are not in
control of your own destiny, you do as they say and if they screw up. all
your hard work is destroyed.
Anyway, what should have lead to a $1,000,000 yealy production and a
$500,000 yealy pay job was taken from me because the of the government. I
did my part, I put myself through college, I worked the 20 hour days, I
supplied the ambition, work ethic and klnowledge to succeed. I created a
path for myself and set a future for myself. Along came the governemtn and
basically said "fuck you." Why did they do this. The smaller firms on
Wall Street were the last place in America where anyone with enough brains,
drive and work ethic could succeed beyond imagine
So in the land of opportunity, a person like me who grew up in the streets
of NYC with no family and on my own since I was 16, did everyhting
imaginable, placed everything on the line, did what was considered socially
impossible (obtaining a college degree given my background), served 4 years
for my country in the USAF and worked my ass of ended up wioth an
opportunity for a $40,000 a year job at Merryl Lynch while taking a 75% pay
cut.
Maybe now you can understand why I do not think the opportunities are there
for the aberage person or even the super ambitious. FWIW I am currently
president of two small non revenue producing companies, actually one of them
was sold so it is really only one now and I work as an ASP/SQL web/intranet
developer for a small local company. I am not starving and make much more
than the average American and more than I would have had I not put the
effort in, but nowhere near where I would be had the government not
interfered.
Maybe one day the database at iSpelunker will be worth something and maybe
one day I will complete the PHP based web spider I am working on, but that
will be a while down the road.
It is nice to be able to actually discuss different points of views without
getting into a flame war. I applaud you for this as it seems to be getting
rare on usenet.
Okay, don't get me wrong, I am not advocating anyone interfere. the last
thing i would like to see is anyone interfere. I would like to see a
competitor give them as trong showing. I am pointing out that their profit
margins are very suspicious. What you mentioned above about PSP being on
the shelves may change that scenario and IMO will.
>
> > 1985 and was a lot different world than 2000. Not to be rude, but what
> > happened why is your software no longer being sold, why were no
derivitive
> > products released.
>
> The software continues to be sold... two sales this month... paid for
Christmas
> and some college fund. The main problem with the program is that
broadcast
> technolgy (hardware, etc.) advanced to the point where my software was no
longer
> needed as much as it was in the late 80s. My market was vertical and
advances
> in technology impacted my market.. somewhat like the hit Liquid Paper must
have
> taken when typewriters went out the back door computers came in the front
door.
Okay, I am glad and hope you can leverage yourself off of this. If you
don't mind me asking, what does the software do.
>
> > Was an XT or 286 running DOS better than an Amiga. The Amiga was
cheaper,
> > more efficient, easier to use, had more applications and was
multitasking.
> > Why aren't we all using Amigas today? What About Atari, same thing?
> >
> > Micron Electronics, MicronPC.com makes better computers than Compaq and
Dell
> > and Gateway (at least every magazine which reviews these types of
things),
> > why isn't Micron Electronics the #1 pc maker.
> >
> > Silicon Graphics makes the best computers in the world, why are they
nearing
> > bankruptcy due to invasion by an inferior x86/windows technology.
> >
>
> I understand you point... Beta was/is superior to VHS but look what
happened. I
> understand your point but not as it relates to the issue that started this
> thread, which was: PhotoShop should be free....
Okay, maybe I should have paid more attention to the title and made my
position a bit clearer. No I do not believe it should be cheap or free, not
do I believe that anyone should interefere. I was merely pointed that
their profit margins suggest the lack of legitimate competition and this may
be due to illegal barriers.
>
> PS is the best program (IMO) for graphics design and editing. PSP gets a
lot of
> press and the price is definently right.. I still maintain that if PSP
ever
> reaches or surpasses the flexiblity and abilities of PS.. you will see the
price
> of PS go down... Adobe is in a similar battle with Macromedia over
Flash..
> let's see if their protection and name recognition wins that battle. I
don't
> believe it will.
What was the last version of PSP you have used. I prefer PSP because I
really have no need for Photoshop, actually I don't even need PSP as my
graphics abilities and needs and minimal. I could realistically perform
what I need on Delux paint on my old Amiga or Atari ST. BTW, if you are
doing web graphics and looking for a way to really shrink those gifs without
losing much quality, take a look at running them through an Atari ST GIF
program. The color pallette of the GIF will always remain with 256
available colors, the colors no used are simply marked as the same colors
which allows them to be compressed better, which is why reducing colors
makes the gifs smaller, but a 16 color gif will still have 256 pallette
entries. I sometimes use my Atari ST as it eliminates those extra unused
pallete entries and gives me true 16 color 16 color pallette gifs which
decrease the size another 20 to 50%.
>
> > Don't get me wrong, I am all for free enterprise, but it saddens me to
see
> > and ever shrinking pool of possibilities and a government who only makes
the
> > matter worse.
>
> I understand.... I feel your pain.... and to a degree, I agree with you.
>
> I've enjoyed the exchange.
So have I :-) I think maybe we should take this to email if you wish to
continue. You can use b...@ispelunker.com as the email in the reply to will
not get to me and in...@ispelunker.com will give you an autoresponder
All the best.
--
Dorothy Combs
The schools and most of the colleges in California are supported by taxpayers
and the colleges also charge tuition...community or junior colleges have a very
low tuition. So it was taxpayers that had to pay the fine. None of the computer
classes that I took at the community college had free software. It was all
licensed and paid for by the school. The computers we used were purchased by the
school. There is a big theft problem at most schools so the computer rooms are
kept locked and only instructors or monitors have keys to these classrooms.
Dorothy Combs
I know many people with computers. There is no one, of these friends and family,
that uses PS. One friend does use a simple photo editing program that came free
with her digital camera. So this is the type of program that the average digital
camera buyer will use, and I cannot see them making a mad dash to buy Photoshop!
Dorothy
Fungusamungus
"angieb" <abbdrbDon...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bwo36.248919$w61.2...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
> Damian <ds...@frederickmd.com> wrote in message
> news:IOy26.509$8r2....@newshog.newsread.com...
>
>
> Everything I want should be free or cheap! I think Lexus cars should be
> free!!!
Actually, Lexus cars are free. It's the 65000 dollar carphone that it comes
with that you have to pay for
:Ş
bp
> Geert,
>
> The schools and most of the colleges in California are supported by
taxpayers
> and the colleges also charge tuition...community or junior colleges have a
very
> low tuition. So it was taxpayers that had to pay the fine. None of the
computer
> classes that I took at the community college had free software. It was all
> licensed and paid for by the school. The computers we used were purchased
by the
> school. There is a big theft problem at most schools so the computer rooms
are
> kept locked and only instructors or monitors have keys to these
classrooms.
That is actually such a shame. In the old days companies found wisdom in
investing in the education of their future employees. Guess there are no
profits to be made on Wall Street by investing in a future work force.
Maybe those 850,000 unfilled tech jobs could be filled with a little
corporate help int he classroom.
Shawn
> A great man once said: To each man according to his needs, from each man
> according to his abilities. That man was Karl Marx, the founder of the
> communist revolution.
Actually, and this is just my being anal here, Marx did not found the
Communist revolution, or even Communism. That was Lenin/Trotsky/et.al.
Marx himself would be more accurately called a scientific socialist.
:)
~~shawn.
angieb
news:HxA36.6492$IL1.2...@news2.atl...
Tee, hee! :-)
Shawn
> You'll have Department Heads of companies buying home license versions and
> taking them to work... still theft, still misrepresentation.... in a
nutshell
> fraud.
Well, the reverse is acceptable?? From my v.5.5 license agreement:
"1.4 HOME USE. The primary user of each computer on which the Software is
installed may also install the Software on one home computer. However, the
Software may not be used on the home computer at the same time the Software
on the primary computer is being used."
> Aren't your forgetting who makes the operating system and why it benefits
them
> to supply a free copy of Word with every new computer? If Microsoft
didn't make
> the operating system you would not see Word provided for free..... it's
called
> incentive marketing. They know that what most people are used to using
at home
> will probably be what they would like to use at work... as you mentioned
> earlier.
Actually, I would maintain that programs such as Word are NOT included on
new systems gratis. You are paying for them. Go to Gateway's site and step
through the custom system design area ... you can choose from among limited
software packages for your box, and note the respective price adjustments.
Word (and everything else, for that matter) is included for a price. An old
computer of mine came bundled with PSP. I wasn't charged for it, near as I
could tell. It was shareware. I owned PS, so I deleted the damn thing,
rather than pay for it.
I don't understand why it would be so impossible to have PS bundled with new
systems, if ordered as a custom-built machine? The price of the machine
would reflect the software it came with, and Adobe would get their money
either way. If the casual user would prefer to buy a system with MGI
PhotoSuite or whatever, then they can. It (OEM bundling) will never happen
because Adobe would have to create marketing deals and strategies and
incentives (etc.) with ALL major OEMs so as not to slight one or two of
them.
I may be off-base here, but I've noticed a slight trend throughout this
thread that really bothers me: the tendency to imply that casual users
should just butt out of PS entirely (unless they use the LE). Maybe that's
not what is really happening?? I would hope not. I don't agree with using
software that isn't truly your own, but I also don't care for elitist
attitudes based on whether or not someone paid for a CD.
Anyway, I didn't chip in on the last thread like this, so I figured I would
have a turn at it this time...
:)
~~shawn.
angieb
news:C6L36.62353$Z9.39...@news1.rdc1.mb.home.com...
>
> "Jim Radcliffe" <res0...@gte.net> wrote in message
> news:eG836.619$Dn1.3...@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
<snip>
>
> I may be off-base here, but I've noticed a slight trend throughout this
> thread that really bothers me: the tendency to imply that casual users
> should just butt out of PS entirely (unless they use the LE). Maybe
that's
> not what is really happening?? I would hope not. I don't agree with
using
> software that isn't truly your own, but I also don't care for elitist
> attitudes based on whether or not someone paid for a CD.
>
> Anyway, I didn't chip in on the last thread like this, so I figured I
would
> have a turn at it this time...
> :)
>
> ~~shawn.
>
Shawn, I don't interpret the thread the same way that you do: I do not
believe that people are saying that casual users shouldn't be able to use PS
if they so choose. I think what everyone is beefing about is casual users
who want to use PS and then bitch and moan about how much it costs and how
it should be free or cheap. I think the point that many people are trying to
make is that Adobe markets PS for the professional user, so the price
reflects that. They also have software marketed for the casual user (LE) and
its price reflects that.
Adobe is under no obligation to price PS for "casual" use if they are not
going after the casual market with that product. I'm a casual user, not a
graphic designer, but I paid for my copy because I wanted it badly enough.
Back when I wasn't sure it was worth all the money, I didn't bitch about PS
being so expensive: I used PSP.
ab
Shawn
> Shawn, I don't interpret the thread the same way that you do: I do not
> believe that people are saying that casual users shouldn't be able to use
PS
> if they so choose. I think what everyone is beefing about is casual users
> who want to use PS and then bitch and moan about how much it costs and how
> it should be free or cheap. I think the point that many people are trying
to
> make is that Adobe markets PS for the professional user, so the price
> reflects that. They also have software marketed for the casual user (LE)
and
> its price reflects that.
No, no one is SAYing it. Perhaps erroneously, that's just the vibe I've
been getting....
> Adobe is under no obligation to price PS for "casual" use if they are not
> going after the casual market with that product.
No, they aren't. But can any of us REALLY say that we're more than happy to
have parted with our $609?? Can any of us REALLY maintain that we would
rather shell out an extra $450 for some essentially print-only features that
are unique to PS, as opposed to PSP?? If you USE those advanced
print-oriented features, then sure; if you don't then you're being ripped
off. Adobe has gotten my money because I've used PS since version 3; I
practically learned my GD skills on that program. I like PS. But more and
more, I'm finding myself using Fireworks due to its intelligently
web-centric orientation. Not to mention that I got it for half of PS's
price tag. And it produces output that is no less "professional" than
anything Adobe offers.
IMHO, Adobe has the potential to get itself into serious trouble. By
relying on the "professional" market (or those amateurs who have pro
budgets), they will lose a lot of ground in the marketplace. They are
already thinking about it, and are starting to play catch-up. More
professionals are learning other software packages all the time, and those
other packages are getting used more and more for just-as-serious work.
Photoshop is here to stay, and it should be! I have no argument for the
quality of the program! But I will not upgrade to version 6 (I don't need
it), and I suspect that I will not upgrade to 7 or 8 either. My work
entails electronic delivery of my images, and Adobe's offerings just don't
beat the competition in this regard. Especially considering the 2:1 price.
~~shawn.
Chris Kelly
for the products with corporate licenses. Its not that the other will not
work, its that not doing it leaves a corporation open to legal action.
You have to deal with audits of what software you are using - depending
on what you are doing (financial services companies using reuters feeds
for real time information can be audited at any time).
More importantly, however, you leave yourself open to attacks from
disgruntled employees. If the company does this, a pissed off employee
only has to make a few calls to really screw the company. It is far better
to just pay up.
Chris
"Jim Radcliffe" <res0...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:eG836.619$Dn1.3...@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
>
Chris Kelly
am working on Wall street - in the top hedge fund servicing company
in the world. I know YOU know what the opinions on the street are
concerning stockbrokers. Oh, by the way, you could have started that
company easily - but technology is putting stockbrokers out of business
by the busload.
"bp" <no_spa...@ispelunker.com> wrote in message
news:lGd36.47107$RC1.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Chris Kelly
to create some good barriers to entry (industry standard, high switching
costs) that we should steal the program? Are you saying that because
they have done what every business wishes it could do, that it is then
alright for people to be thieves?
Or are you saying buy the program and invest in Adobe?
Chris
"bp" <no_spa...@ispelunker.com> wrote in message
news:IYu36.1807$cW3....@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Chris Kelly
both high schools and colleges. They pay and then hook the students up
with good, high paying jobs.
Chris
"bp" <no_spa...@ispelunker.com> wrote in message
news:NsB36.4279$cW3.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Philip Pemberton
news:ua8m4tkpq8fd5fpfk...@4ax.com...
> Try Photoshop LE or Paint Shop Pro. All the facilities a dabbler
> needs without the price of the 'pro' application.
I've used Paint Shop Pro (now in its 7th version IIRC) before. It's a great
budget image editor. About 1/5th of the cost of Photoshop, too.
> Yes, wouldn't it be nice if we all just paid what we wanted to for
> everything!
>
>
> >To this day I have yet to
> >make a penny off of it but only spent hundreds of
> >dollars worth of my time trying to learn it. It's
> >gotten out of date and is the only program that
> >seems to give me no problems with my scanner and
> >helps keep everything together. It is finally
> >crashed for good I think so I wanted to know if
> >someone else could send me a copy of a newer
> >version,
--
Phil.
http://www.philpem.f9.co.uk/
phi...@bigfoot.com
PGP Key Fingerprint:
1FA6 6C7F A2FD BB15 84BF
4993 2B27 0628 E54E 33B1
Philip Pemberton
news:IOy26.509$8r2....@newshog.newsread.com...
> Really! Look at it this way: How many cassette tapes
> have you ever dubbed of music without thinking about
> it. Or recorded movies on video tape? If a person
> were to spend thousands of dollars on software that
> just sits idle on the computer most of the time and
> is obsolete in roughly a year who is getting the big
> bang in the rear-end?... the little guy trying to
> make it on a shoe string budget or the multi-million
> or billion dollar executives and their gangs. If
> these people would offer $30.00 instead of 500.00+
> dollar programs for the just inquisitive average
> person I think everybody would pay with no qualms.
> Thats why I'm on this news group now. I have an old
> version PS4.0 that somebody gave me years ago when I
> make a penny off of it but only spent hundreds of
> dollars worth of my time trying to learn it. It's
> gotten out of date and is the only program that
> seems to give me no problems with my scanner and
> helps keep everything together. It is finally
> crashed for good I think so I wanted to know if
> someone else could send me a copy of a newer
> newer version, or direct me toward a decent area
> that I could get one. I haven't costed Adobe 1 penny
> since I've had it and I only recommended it to other
> people through the years... I was a walking
> advertisement for them. It' been good fun but I
> could never justify paying so much for it when I'm
> only a fiddling around now and then. I'll pay you
> thirty dollars instead to help you purchase your
> next upgrade :-)
rights" to them. If whoever you sell them to likes them, and you've done
enough different pics, they may well pay you enough to buy a full, legal
version of Photoshop. Or, put a bit of money in a jar every month and then,
in a few months, you should have enough for an upgrade.