Apparently, Adobe deliberately allowed pirating of photoshop, to maintain its status as a standard. Deny oxygen to competitors.
Adobe has always struck me as a company that understood software economics really well and really early on. They'd make money from proprietary stuff, then give it away before it made an opportunity for a competitor.
Actually, it's probably less the understanding, than the actual acting on it.
> Apparently, Adobe deliberately allowed pirating of photoshop, to maintain its status as a standard. Deny oxygen to competitors.
I can't confirm whether it's true, but I once read that Microsoft takes a similar approach to the unlicensed use of Windows in less wealthy nations. Even disregarding that it would likely be a losing battle, they'd rather it remain the norm than push people to the alternatives.
It's not just Adobe & Microsoft either. Lots of large companies with "product lines" do the same thing. e.g., an office equipment manufacturer might prefer that your entire office runs on their machines, even if it means that some of their machines have to sell at cost, or as a loss leader. If everything from paper printers, to bulk scanners to ID card printers are all sold by Acme into the same corporation's offices, it makes it much harder for AcmeCompetitor to get a foothold.
I used to work for a company that had a couple of "me too" products that they barely made any money on, but it was worth it to them to block a sale to the competition.
> Apparently, Adobe deliberately allowed pirating of photoshop, to maintain its status as a standard. Deny oxygen to competitors.
I've often wondered about this claim. I've heard it as well, from many different sources. I could never find a source, every time I've looked, it's a web of "I've heard".
Obviously Adobe wouldn't issue a press release to this effect, but does anyone know where this wisdom originated?
That's a good point could be just rumors but it does have a strong foundation of truth to it. One of those things that seems like we will never know for sure.
So true, and now that it's subscription-only, I only use Adobe when I don't have an employer willing to pay for my subscription. When I'm in a job that's less graphics-oriented or just messing around with personal projects, I use Affinity, even though I prefer Photoshop.
Similar situation. Learned Photoshop in high school for an art class, got really good with it in college because my school gave it to us for extremely cheap. But now I don't have it, it's too expensive to pay for, I'm unwilling to pirate, so I've been getting pretty good with Gimp.
Adobe has always struck me as a company that understood software economics really well and really early on. They'd make money from proprietary stuff, then give it away before it made an opportunity for a competitor.
Actually, it's probably less the understanding, than the actual acting on it.