Corel Vs. Adobe....

[CES020]

or my "Abobe Underwear"

Can you buy these outright or do you have to sign up for one of those month to month cloud subscription deals?

wayne k
guam usa

It's like a subscription service. You send in your dirty ones and they send back clean ones. The good news is they have your name sewn into them in Adobe fonts so you don't have to worry about getting someone else's with skid marks in them.

 

[GAC05]

It's like a subscription service. You send in your dirty ones and they send back clean ones. The good news is they have your name sewn into them in Adobe fonts so you don't have to worry about getting someone else's with skid marks in them.

:ROFLMAO:

 

[Rodi]

Hey, there is always Canvas...

http://store.acdsee.com/DRHM/store?...acd&Locale=en_US&Env=BASE&productID=219452100

I bought Canvas 8 for Mac just for the fonts, 2540 high quality URW fonts for cheeeeep.

But Rick, can't you steer people to Freehand instead?

 

[Bobby H]

I hit the jackpot one better back in the 1990s. An issue of Computer Arts magazine had (on its bonus CD-ROM) a full version of Deneba Canvas 7, an upgrade-able license no less. And it had over 2000 URW fonts on the disc too.

Didn't use Canvas all that much (as compared to Freehand, Corel & Illustrator) but many of the fonts came in handy.

 

[Joe Diaz]

Here's the problem Joe, you took figures I pulled out of the air and ran with an assumption on your part.

Forget the numbers... your hung up on that. They don't even really matter that much. The point was to show that eventually you can over come the cost of learning a new way of doing something. You could say it's stepping over a dollar to save a dime, but I can see some merit in that decision.
Hell I would consider trying something new if Corel went to subscription based pricing. I know we did for Estimate. And I know for a fact our decision to try something different was the right decision for us. You have to admit, it is a big leap in cost.

Do you really think someone can learn to be fluent with Corel in 3 hours a month? I doubt it.

"Fluent" has little to do with it, it's about getting to the same level you were in Adobe. It could average out to 3 hours a month over a year, Obviously that first month would be much longer than 3 hours a month, but by the end of the year you might be at the level you were using adobe.

So the figure you originally came up with could be right on the money for some folks. Also, don't assume that changing software means you start from square one. The knowledge of how designs are really constructed translates over across all design software. The software is just the tool you use.

Yet, you ran with that. I was simply using a number as an example and you assumed that I was trying to prove a case against Corel and you came in to defend the purchase of Corel.

I don't care if you are proving a case against Corel or not. I was just trying to show how long it could take to start making money if one were to use the numbers you came up with. What I find funny is that you can use those figures to make the point that the ""savings" he's after may actually cost him a whole lot more in the end" (your words), but get all crabby at me for using the same numbers to make a different point.

I wasn't suggestion one or the other. I was simply stating that there are things to consider.

And so what is wrong with me also saying there are things to consider. I may have suggested different things to consider, but are they any less relevant?

Again, my point is to figure out if things make sense for you in YOUR business.

No one has ever argued that. You're absolutely right. And at the end of the day that is what will most likely happen. Gary will make a decision on what he thinks is right for his business.

Here is a question for anyone that will be paying for an adobe subscription: Let say you go that route for 4 or 5 years, then decide to use some alternative to adobe. When you stop paying the subscription, will you still be able to use whatever version you were last using? If not, can you still open those newer version files on an older non subscription based version? I'm confused on how that works.

 

[JoshLoring]

Wow! Everyone has gone mad!

Bla bla.. All the real designers could cr@p the extra thousands out a month and who cares what the "upgrade costs"

Either Corel or adobe... If you can't afford the nest version... Get a new career because your not charging enough!

 

[David Wright]

Wow! Everyone has gone mad!

Bla bla.. All the real designers could cr@p the extra thousands out a month and who cares what the "upgrade costs"

Either Corel or adobe... If you can't afford the nest version... Get a new career because your not charging enough!

Wrong way to look at it.

 

[CES020]

I've never seen someone argue with me so much and say the exact same thing I said.

 

[Joe Diaz]

Wow! Everyone has gone mad!

Bla bla.. All the real designers could cr@p the extra thousands out a month and who cares what the "upgrade costs"

Either Corel or adobe... If you can't afford the nest version... Get a new career because your not charging enough!

I don't think it's a mater of affording one or the other, I think the point was if someone weren't super successful like yourself or if they were but were concerned about the costs of learning different software, the savings of owning one over the other will eventually make up that difference after which it will begin to payoff. A penny saved is a penny earned. The cost of Corel is such a minor reason to like Corel compared to the many other great things it brings to the table.

If you take the stance that any "real designer" could afford the extra cost of Adobe instead of Corel, then one would assume that any "real designer" could also afford the cost of switching software.

I've never seen someone argue with me so much and say the exact same thing I said.

I don't know, I haven't really changed my stance on this subject, perhaps it's just taken you this long to realize my original response to your post wasn't about me picking apart your comments. In fact, you were the one accusing me of trying to profit off of my posted opinion, which according to what you are now saying is "the exact same thing" you said. So it beats me.

 

[CES020]

In fact, you were the one accusing me of trying to profit off of my posted opinion, which according to what you are now saying is "the exact same thing" you said. So it beats me.

Wow, you really are able to read so much more than I ever say into a post.

What I said from post #1 is that you should do an analysis to figure out which one is most cost effective for your business.

You translated that into "CES is bashing Corel" and proceeded to do your own analysis on how cost effective Corel would be.

Then I said "I didn't say you should use either, I just suggested you do an analysis".

Then you said "I'm just using your numbers, and showing how wrong you are".

I said "My numbers don't mean anything, I was trying to say you there's more to it and the cost isn't the only factor".

Then you said "Hey, I'm using your numbers" about 3 more times.

I said "I don't care what you use, just realize there's more to it than the cost of the software" about 3 more times.

Then you said "You have to decide which one is right for your business".

I said "I know, that's what's I've been saying from the beginning".

Then you said "I don't see it that way".

Too funny......

 

[Techman]

A real designer would also consider the ever increasing costs of his tools. When said tool supplier raises prices above a certain level then its time to seek out alternatives.

I feel for me that adobe went above that point long ago and that some products are bloated with ever increasing useless augments. Especially when well discussed problems are not addressed over and over again. Such as illy's hard to grab whiskers on the node editing. Or, requiring add on plugins (extreme pathys) to make the product operate better.

 

[Gino]

Well, I don't think it matters much, what you're using... as long as you can make it work.... and work successfully for you and your customers.

I don't think some of us older guys/gals saw this coming when the software first came onto the market. We were all given a load of crap as to buy this computer, this tablet, this plotter, this software for thousands and thousands of dollars and you'll never have to do anything else. Yeah, that ended quite abruptly. It's been nothing but upgrading ever since.

Well, if you have a good business plan and good business going, you already have these expenses already figured in.

It's kinda like the guy/gal buys a huge printer and the inks come along with it. You set it up, start making signs and when you need you first set of inks.... you start crying about how much a bottle or cartridge of ink costs and then you look for the cheapest thing on earth when the cost is pennies a print to make. You people are really funny.

These are all things part of your overhead and anyone crappin' about the high costs, is just not running a successful business.

On another note.... I finally caught a first hand glimpse of the stupidity of arguing back and forth among members. Holy Crap is that entertaining, but so dumb. I have to admit, one can get caught up in it, but it is truly amusing. I'm so happy I amused many of you over the years. I have a few weeks left to do this and my New Year's Resolution this year...... is going to be to 'CURB' my voice on these kinda threads. :ROFLMAO:
​

 

[JoshLoring]

I think everybody has good points but ultimately I think the overpriced softwares are exactly what the industry needs.
If your a dedicated "real designer," you have ample free trials at your hand that can allow you to try each of the softwares and make your decision based upon the ability to learn. Cost shouldn't be an issue.

I don't want every dick and Jane grabbing a cheap software and claiming they can "photoshop this" or "illustrate that". It ruins the already overcrowded industry. If you can't afford the software, oh well. Leave it to the people that invested in school or busted tail to aquire the software and truly learn the tools.
It goes the same with the wraps industry. Printers used to be ridiculously priced and only those that could afford it could offer wraps which kept the pricing up. Now you can buy one for 10k and be a "wrap shop". It's stupid. It drives prices down and ruins the economy and profitability.
If Adobe and Corel charged 20k for their software, only real agencies would buy it. The rest would look at other career options. Raise it. Raise it raise it.

 

[Joe Diaz]

Well there's your problem. Your account of this conversation (if you can call it that) is much different than mine.

What I said from post #1 is that you should do an analysis to figure out which one is most cost effective for your business.
Never argued that. (Go back and try to find where I did)

You translated that into "CES is bashing Corel" and proceeded to do your own analysis on how cost effective Corel would be.
I did not say you were bashing Corel. But I did show how one could figure IF Corel is cost effective for them, and I simply used the figures you came up with to do so, not considering that this would send you over the edge. What I did is really no different to what you were trying to do, I just took your analysis one step farther. I never said you couldn't swap out figures with different ones that fit your business. There is where I think you got confused.

Then I said "I didn't say you should use either, I just suggested you do an analysis".
Never argued that.

Then you said "I'm just using your numbers, and showing how wrong you are".Never said I used your numbers to show people you were wrong, I just used your numbers to show that one could save money in the long run. If you don't believe it's impossible to save money by using Corel, than how could I prove anything wrong?

I said "My numbers don't mean anything, I was trying to say you there's more to it and the cost isn't the only factor".
and I would agree that it isn't the only factor. Never said it was. If your numbers don't mean anything that's fine but why is it okay for you to use them to make a point, but I can't to make a different point?

Then you said "Hey, I'm using your numbers" about 3 more times.

I said "I don't care what you use, just realize there's more to it than the cost of the software" about 3 more times. Obviously you do care what numbers I use because you have been pitching a fit about using the figures you came up with. And I never argued that the cost of the software is the only thing to consider.

Then you said "You have to decide which one is right for your business".
Point out to me where I said the opposite earlier on in the conversation. You are the ones reading into things here.

I have thoroughly explained my position now. I think most on here understand my point of view, if you can't I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to move on.

 

[Joe Diaz]

If Adobe and Corel charged 20k for their software, only real agencies would buy it. The rest would look at other career options.

LOL or I'm guessing we would see even more non professionals trying to use publisher to design their own signs, wraps, etc... :Big Laugh

But I get your point.

 

[CES020]

The sky may be blue.......

(just wanted to see if Joe would argue with me on that one too).

 

[oldgoatroper]

The sky may be blue.......

(just wanted to see if Joe would argue with me on that one too).

So, after Joe carefully, reasonably, logically and calmly addresses your "concerns", you would then imply that Joe is being nothing more than argumentative?

That is so childish.

 

[royster13]

I got a call on Friday asking is I could work from a Publisher file.......I said sure and wrote a 2,1250.00 order.....The client told me she had asked several other companies and all she got was no no no.....When I opened the file I thought to myself the others had not even taken the time to look at the file before saying no....I recreated the text and a simple logo in 5 minutes and sent the proof to the client for approval.....Easy money....

 

[CES020]

So, after Joe carefully, reasonably, logically and calmly addresses your "concerns", you would then imply that Joe is being nothing more than argumentative?

That is so childish.

He didn't address my "concerns" because I didn't HAVE ANY CONCERNS. Geez, I'm amazed at how no matter how many times I express the fact that I'm not, NOR WAS I EVER, suggestions one over the other, some of you just can't get past a predetermined conclusion that I was trying to make Corel look like a bad investment, which there isn't a single shred of evidence of me saying.

Maybe I should have rewrite the post so it follows my intentions when I posted it (I love the fact that some of you know what my intentions where when I posted it, yet you don't know me, have never spoken to me, and don't know anything about me or my opinions about this subject).

Let's try it again in terms you MAY be able to understand (although I'm sure I'll get more remarks from it).....

If Package "X" costs "Y" and package "T" costs "U", then you might want to consider factor "W" into the cost to learn it. It may or may not change your end result, but "W" is a hidden cost you should consider, as opposed to just whether or not Y>U. In the end, Y-U+W might very well equal a good number for your business, or it may very well not. That's only a decision that you can figure out.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

I don't want every dick and Jane grabbing a cheap software and claiming they can "photo
If Adobe and Corel charged 20k for their software, only real agencies would buy it. The rest would look at other career options.

There is something to be said for that, I know I don't have to worry about every Dick and Jane having EmbroideryStudio Level 3. I just wouldn't want another bill like that.