Keep Graphene simple sell features like in-apps

BigDave

Would be nice alternative to subscription to have a basic free graphene
and than a lot of features being able to buy separate like in-apps.
In this way you could customise your own version of graphene and decide to build the functions by yourself or buy em.
Just a thought.

NimbleBug

Yes That is Awesome...

jamie_c

I would actually hate that and it would turn me off from using it entirely. I think IAPs are a plaque on games and should be burned alive, I pray that model is never, ever adopted by other software packages.

Franto

I heard iAP's is the only effective way to circumvent straight up pirating of premium games. Since the pirates would have to buy the iAP even after pirating the game, and some games are just downright free with iAPs as the revenue stream due to this.

jay2dx

imagine the amount of bugs this system would generate, awful idea mate!

ant_lad

@BigDave I think this is a fantastic idea, the way I see it n my head. I came up with a way for this to be done awhile back and industry was hostile to it. I think it is coming, but won't be done correctly for some time. What I came up with would give users exactly what they want and give companies more revenue and much more data to collect and sell.
@jamie_c Imagine photoshop without a bloated interface and only the features that you use being front and center in the ui and at about 1/3 the cost

Armelline

I would pass on Graphene if it took this approach. Sell extra functions on marketplaces sure, but if it comes crippled from the start then I'll be very sad.

AngryBoi

@ant_lad said:

1/3 the cost

Just go on YouTube and look up "Photoshop free" I've never spent a penny on it and don't know why people do. There are thousands of tutorials on YouTube on how to get it free

ant_lad

@LamboDriva Once you let adobe into your system it is no longer free. They are harvesting large amounts of data and hoarding/selling it, they have been a data acquisition company for a long time now. If it is not legal and free, keep it out of the business system(s) you use. The main way adobe makes revenue is allowing other companies to prowl the halls of your computer using all the paths that adobe lays out. I would gladly go back to using adobe products if I could pay for and see only what I want to use on top of a base system. The average adobe user uses almost 15% of what comes in an adobe product. Over 40% walk away when presented with their ui, even free users

jamie_c

Imagine photoshop without a bloated interface and only the features that you use being front and center in the ui and at about 1/3 the cost

@ant_lad, I agree Photoshop and most of Adobe's software suffers from feature bloat, but that is due to poor design and trying to do everything under the sun instead of focusing on what each product should and used to do well. Adding IAP's is not a fix for feature bloat in my mind, it is money grubbing and irritating. When I purchase a piece of software I want to be able to use and learn every feature as needed, not have to purchase new elements each time I want to test out something new.

If Graphine or any other piece of software were offered with IAP's I hope there would at least be a fully functional version available at a higher cost. But I'd still hate to see traditional software pick up on the IAP bandwagon.

@LamboDriva, the reason you and everyone else should pay for Photoshop is because it is a product that a company and people spend their days creating and ultimately selling. They deserve and should be paid for their effort. By 'getting it for free' people are nothing short of thieves.

Armelline

People who complain that Photoshop is nothing but invasive feature-bloated software do not use Photoshop on a regular basis, at least not any recent version.

Some of the stuff it can do must require regular blood sacrifices at Adobe HQ. It's insanely clever software.

As for getting it free, you can get a much older version of it free without much difficulty. You're not actually getting it legally though.

jamie_c

People who complain that Photoshop is nothing but invasive feature-bloated software do not use Photoshop on a regular basis, at least not any recent version.

I'm a Creative Cloud subscriber and have been using Photoshop since about version 2.0 (not kidding... sadly) and use it every day. In fact I couldn't live without it or do my job without it. However I do only use the features I need which don't include any of the 3D abilities or video editing features. I guess I consider it bloated because I've been using it so long and used it before anyone ever dreamt of using it for 3D or video or a few other things. To me it's meant for photo editing and manipulation but that is only because that is what I need it for I suppose.