It would depend on the cost. Based on current Adobe pricing structure for their one time fees versus their Creative Cloud.
Now this is using Design Premium/Production Premium costs versus the entire Creative Cloud. I use those two Premium packages as I would imagine that more like then not (at least 51% of the time) people on here use Design Premium in their money earning workflow and don't need (not want, but need) the Master Suite level.
After 7 successive upgrades using the old method, you are actually saving money doing the old way then after 7 yrs of renewing your subscription service. That translates into more profit, because your tools are costing you less after a certain time. Not all subscription models are like that, but based on the pricing structure (currently in place) for Adobe's cloud versus using those suites (if you need the Master Suite then the cloud is the way to go, or if you need programs (again need, not want) that aren't offered other then through the cloud (which isn't me, but maybe you or someone else)).
Now if Adobe instituted 2 or 3 yr plans with respective discounts, I could see that changing the game, but as it stands now, that's what my math came out to. The biggest reason for this is due to with the old way, you still get upgrade pricing after that initial purchase. With the subscription model, you do not. That's the biggest reason for this. The only way to do that is to add longer contract plans with discounts. That would push back when the old method starts to save people money. Push it back far enough, then it become irrelevant. 7 yrs is still a feasible time for a return. It just depends on how you value the other factors as well.
Now, I eliminated a person's "want" from the equation. I did that, because if you just "want" to have something, then price really shouldn't be a deciding factor other then can I afford it. Not with regard to a C/B ratio between the two.
I'm not talking about the entire internet. I'm talking about a segment of it. Things do happen and you can't access things at a time. I had one hosting site that went down for a day. That was a day my website at the time wasn't up.
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. Crap like that happens, it's rare, but it does happen. It's how much risk value you place on a rare instance like that. Now is the entire internet down? No. But my website was. I honestly don't care why it was, but for a day it was. That's the kind of thing that happens. Go Daddy had their own problems. Stuff like that happens. If my embroidery software was online interface and their hosting place went down for a time, that's a time that I wasn't able to do anything. The internet wasn't totally down, but I couldn't use my tools, because they were.
That's true. That is a valid way to handle it, the other way is a valid way as well. It just depends on what that company wants to do to handle it. If all depends on what that employee needs to do at that
computer during work hours. If they actually need internet/server access to do their job.
Edit: I thought I would add this in there as well. Even though I used Design Premium/Production Premium as the base for my example here. In my particular instance, I can get by with Design Standard for my Adobe needs for my particular workflow. That means my savings are actually quicker to be realized versus going with the Cloud. Also my example is going under the assumption that you have to pay full price initially for your programs the old method. If you were able to get upgrade pricing when the Cloud first came out, that also would lower the time that it takes for that return. So my example is using the worse case scenario with regard to purchasing the programs the old method.
