No wifey,Your examples are completely different to Zyk0tiK's point!
He's right you know.
Imagine a b3ta artist who couldn't express their art 'cos they couldn't afford the tools.
There is no need for software to be as expensive as it is.
(,
Sun 26 Jan 2003, 11:47,
archived)
He's right you know.
Imagine a b3ta artist who couldn't express their art 'cos they couldn't afford the tools.
There is no need for software to be as expensive as it is.
Oh pleaseThese are the same people who get on their high horses if somebody elses image turns up in the papers, like its theft.
Second, yes Photoshop is a powerful as f**k and costs a lot of money because it targets a professional market, who are perfectly happy to pay for this very reasonably priced product. It is crammed full of stuff that has nothing to with kittens. If you can't afford then there is Photoshop Elements which is the one targeted at you, it will do the same job for 60 quid. If you can't afford that for your art, then I guess we'll all just have live with out it. You could try a pencil.
Third I hardly think Adobe is a monopoly and no company can afford for its products to be routinely stolen, not if it wants to stay in business.
(Second, yes Photoshop is a powerful as f**k and costs a lot of money because it targets a professional market, who are perfectly happy to pay for this very reasonably priced product. It is crammed full of stuff that has nothing to with kittens. If you can't afford then there is Photoshop Elements which is the one targeted at you, it will do the same job for 60 quid. If you can't afford that for your art, then I guess we'll all just have live with out it. You could try a pencil.
Third I hardly think Adobe is a monopoly and no company can afford for its products to be routinely stolen, not if it wants to stay in business.
nicey,
Sun 26 Jan 2003, 12:12,
archived)