On Thursday 11 Nov 2010, Juha Mukari wrote: [snip...] > > I think it this way: realsoft could raise their software's price > really much if they would make it so great software that you > wouldn't need any other softwares if you got realsoft.
I think that this sentence, on it's own, says a lot, and I think it raises two important issues. The first is that I don't think that RS want to raise their prices: their ethos seems to be to try to provide the best combination of features and quality for a moderate price, and by doing so, make those features and quality more accessible i.e to those on a limited budget. The second issue is that if RS were to take on more people, to provide more features etc, and then raise their price, who would buy it? There are already many other established players in the high-cost region of 3D software, so why would their existing users, who will have years of learning and experience invested in their existing 3D packages, bother to switch to RS? Like anything else you might buy, RS is a trade-off, a compromise between price and functionality/capability. If price is of no importance to you, why are you using RS when you could simply pay a lot more money and use something else? Sure, RS isn't perfect, but then nothing else is either; everything is a compromise, and like I said in an earlier post, you pays your money and makes your choice. If you don't think that RS is good value for money then spend your money elsewhere but don't complain that you haven't got a Rolls Royce when you've only paid the price of a Ford. LeeE
