Alright, it's time for the 3rd round of replies. It's turning into a seriously long thread, I feel like by the end of this discussion we will become good friends...
This time I'll try to leave emotional judgments and biases aside, and simply focus on facts. I'll also use some equations, as
Die Launische Diva started this trend.
Fact N1
Pix Insight was introduced long time ago, 2005 to be exact.
Source:
https://pixinsight.com/astrophotocl/outreach/pixinsight_eccai_2006.pdfFact N2
Up until recent times, when Siril 1.2.0 was introduced, PixInsight was clearly the only software that offered many of the necessary functions. You could use Photoshop, but long exposure to it would cause severe nausea and mental suffering, so that was clearly not an option for many people. Moreover, even if you did master Photoshop, the results would be way worse than what PI + addons get you right out of the box.
Source:
andrea tasselli in one of the previous posts on this thread
Fact N3:
Establishing a complete monopoly over the market, PixInsight started charging exceedingly high prices for their software, with no option of subscription-based usage, forcing people to pay inappropriately large amounts of money right at the beginning. The free trial doesn't give them any credit, as after the free trial is over, you'd still need to pay half a grand to continue using it, and if you spend 45 days learning the interface, you'd probably do so...
I can already sense people saying, "But you paid 4K for your rig" - first of all, I did not. Second of all, comparing hardware and software prices is as pointless as arguing that if your laptop costs 4K USD, then Windows 11 running on it should cost 500 USD - as "Bill Gates also needs to feed his family"
To support my claim of how inappropriate PixInsight prices are, I composed a graph of specialized software
entrance prices. (Actually, my robotic friend did, his name was GPT-4 or smth along the lines)
Source: ChatGPT4
Now let's dive into economics for a minute. I don't know what your backgrounds are, but I took a few econ classes in uni, so I'm familiar with the subject.
Adam Smith, a Scottish economist and philosopher, is often regarded as the father of modern economics. He is best known for his influential work "The Wealth of Nations" (1776). In it, Smith famously wrote, "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." This quote encapsulates his belief in the power of self-interest within a free market system, a concept further illustrated by his idea of the "invisible hand." This metaphor describes how individuals' pursuit of self-interest inadvertently benefits society as a whole, guiding resources to where they are most efficiently utilized.
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_SmithThe point being - in a free market capitalist system, a part of which I assume all of you are, the individual is driven by self-interest.
Therefore, a quote by
Jan Erik V seems irrational to me: "I'm only pointing out that normally things aren't free, and to pay a relatively small one-time fee for premium software is neither democratizing access nor is it monopolizing or making space any less available for anyone. It's downright normal and there are several choices of software out there. At least I expect to be paid for my work hours, why shouldn't they?"
Why would the consumer even care about the profitability of a company that is offering them a service/product?
The consumer only cares about the affordability and efficiency of his own "consumables."
This exact phenomenon, which I've noticed among many PI users, reminds me of the so-called "Stockholm Syndrome," a proposed condition that explains why hostages sometimes develop a psychological bond with their captors.
So many PI users, across so many forums, are screaming outloud: "PI is not even that expensive"; "a year of Photoshop subscription costs you more"; "everyone needs to be paid for their work," etc.
And one might ask themselves, why would someone defend a company that not only forced them to pay an insane amount of money but also left them with no proper tech support or documentation, as
Die Launische Diva and
George Hatfield have mentioned in their replies above.
Why would people defend such a company? The only scientific explanation I have - Stockholm Syndrome.
Over the years, the abuse and lack of alternatives developed a sense of determination to justify such undergoings and prove themselves that it was all worth it, even though it wasn't, just as
andrea tasselli highlighted a few replies earlier.
To sum it all up, I'll finish with an equation myself:
(The amount of time and money invested into PI × self-induced Stockholm Syndrome of its users) ÷ demonopolization of the software market by alternatives like Siril = popularity and userbase growth of PI.
To end on a positive note, here is another briliant creation of my robotic friend, hope you guys like it
. Siril has its own photometric calibration and gradient correction tools. Furthermore, if I am not mistaken, Siril plays well with Starnet and GHS.
and I completely hate that, even if I find Lightroom to be a brilliant piece of software. Out of curiosity, do you know how hard is to end an Adobe subscription?
