| ▲ | andsoitis 5 hours ago |
| > Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro, Pixelmator Pro, Motion, Compressor, and MainStage — plus new AI features and premium content in Keynote, Pages, and Numbers — come together in a single subscription So Apple is copying Adobe's business model? |
|
| ▲ | bayindirh 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| No, all apps are available for purchase for a one time payment. I don't care about video, so I'll be buying Pixelmator now, and maybe music stuff later, and Video part never. So it works like before, if you want. |
| |
| ▲ | andrei_says_ 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Pixelmator is great and integrates well with Apple's tooling for batch processing. For video, the free version of DavinciResolve goes a very long way, and their Studio is a single-payment-life-time license. | |
| ▲ | bearjaws 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Available for purchase... for now. | | |
| ▲ | bayindirh 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | The only "...for now" event I have seen in last 20 years of Apple software is iWorks and Mac OS X become free. ...and they integrated some of the Aperture to new Photos app, which is again was a transition to free. Name me something a product, not a service which you can only subscribe in Apple's ecosystem. | | |
| ▲ | arvinsim 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Logic Pro in iPad is subscription only. | | |
| ▲ | asimpletune 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | They didn’t take away a one-time purchase option for it though. It just never existed to begin with so the op’s point remains. |
| |
| ▲ | ascagnel_ 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Name me something a product, not a service which you can only subscribe in Apple's ecosystem. The shows on Apple TV are only available via a subscription; there's no way to have a perpetual purchase (at least as far as that a la carte style of purchase is perpetual). | | |
| ▲ | dagmx 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | They specifically said “not a service” and you brought up a service. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | boringg 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Well really they are copying the original Microsofts suite packaging which everyone has copied over the years! But yes specific they are trying to take market share on Adobe. Its actually like taking on MS and Adobe together... but they aren't really taking on MS office. |
|
| ▲ | mirzap 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| How so? Apple's subscription cancellation is one click away, and you don't get overcharged when canceling. |
|
| ▲ | acomjean 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Subscription model so it’s adobes model. But you can buy “one time”. Though they have a tendency to just end product support (aperture software was canceled leaving a lot of bad taste for photographers that used it) Wonder what Adobe thinks of this. Their support for Mac was pretty important in getting OS X off the ground, now they’re competing with a unified stack. When I was a Mac user I remember buying Logic express 9 (I still have the disk). The price is a good deal, but you really are all in forever.. |
|
| ▲ | jpalomaki 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Depends on if you are stuck with the subscription for life, or if there's actually a reasonable way to unsubscribe. |
| |
| ▲ | bambax 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | You're never free to unsubscribe because you become accustomed to the tools, and use the file formats, etc. (That's why I don't do subscription, ever.) |
|
|
| ▲ | Someone 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| FTA: “Alternatively, users can also choose to purchase the Mac versions of Final Cut Pro, Pixelmator Pro, Logic Pro, Motion, Compressor, and MainStage individually as a one-time purchase on the Mac App Store.” |
|
| ▲ | tapoxi 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yeah but this is $129/yr, that's significantly cheaper |
| |
| ▲ | whywhywhywhy 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It’s cheap enough it’s not enough to fund development of Final Cut but also not enough money to bother spending time on it. Find it odd personally, just offering them free to keep hardware makes more sense than trying to push a tiny subscription revenue number. | | |
| ▲ | alwillis 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > It’s cheap enough it’s not enough to fund development of Final Cut but also not enough money to bother spending time on it. Find it odd personally, just offering them free to keep hardware makes more sense than trying to push a tiny subscription revenue number. Apple doesn't work that way. Unlike almost all other tech companies that are organized by divisions, Apple uses a functional organizational structure. So all of the software teams are under one head of software; there's no senior vp of the Final Cut division, for example. For accounting purposes, all software is lumped together. Apple made $391 billion in revenue last fiscal year; when you're making that kind of money, you can afford to do things for reasons other than the amount of money you could make. Whatever revenue Final Cut generates isn't required to fund the Final Cut team. | |
| ▲ | vile_wretch 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | $129/year is surely better than $300 once, 15 years ago. Though I'm guessing not offering it for free is to keep it distinct from iMovie and to maintain some semblance of "Pro"-ness (which I'm gathering is up for debate either way.. the last time I did any actual video editing it was on Final Cut Pro 5 so I'm out of the loop) | |
| ▲ | anticorporate 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's the problem that the whole industry is facing - the current generation of hardware is sufficient that hardware refreshes will continue to decline, and companies that want to keep milking us for money regularly need to find a new way to do it. | | |
| ▲ | alwillis 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > the current generation of hardware is sufficient that hardware refreshes will continue to decline If anything, Apple is refreshing their hardware much faster now compared to the Intel days. There's literally a new MacBook Pro and MacBook Air every year. And of course there are 3-4 new iPhones every year. | | | |
| ▲ | no_wizard 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sufficient for whom? At my job they’re still refreshing workstations regularly. They buy and churn hardware on a regular basis. Not quite “buying on release week” basis but some % of employees always getting new hardware at max specs in the design org Makes even engineering jealous sometimes | |
| ▲ | rstupek 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I hate subscriptions as much as the next person but how would you pay for continued development of software? Do you say a person can continue to run version X forever but if they want a new version they pay for it? | | |
| ▲ | anticorporate 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Do you say a person can continue to run version X forever but if they want a new version they pay for it? I'm not particularly interested in sustaining the financial growth of software companies. I did that for years and I'm done. But, what you suggest is literally what the software industry did for decades before subscriptions became the norm. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | pier25 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | One might argue it offers significantly less value too. |
|
|
| ▲ | F7F7F7 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Adobe invented subscription bundles? In that sense did the Creative Cloud copy iCloud? |
|
| ▲ | pjmlp 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| When there are no more new buyers to sell devices, or new versions of existing software packages, the only way to keep the curve growing for shareholders and MBAs is to sell subscriptions. It is also the only way to convince developers to pay for software. Having a part hosted on some server is so much better than whatever anti-piracy schemes one can think of, and provides the continuous growth curve for printing money. Thus subscriptions aren't going away in the modern software world. |
