But not everyone who uses Photoshop uses it for a business, and all that stuff about not owning the product is irrelevant, you're splitting hairs.

Let me phrase it another way then, what you're saying is that you prefer a system that constanly charges you for a licence you will never own, against a licence you would own once you covered the cost of one.  I'm sorry but no matter what way I look at it there is no sense in what you said.  It's absolutely impossible for Adobe's system to be better or fairer than the one Allegorithmic are offering.

I consider myself extremely intelligent, and even I can't figure that one out, how a person can prefer to pay for something they will never own, and to prefer it to a better systerm that would get them a permanent licence.  Honestly, I don't know how else to reply to such a thing because it defies common sense on every level.  I don't get how, after paying a subscription, you prerfer to not own a licence over being able to keep the one you paid for - it just doesn't compute.

There is no way on earth that Adobe's greedy system, one that constantly sucks on your wallet and leaves you with nothing, can be preferable to Allegorithmic's much fairer system that will get you a permanent licence at the end of it.  If Adobe's system is preferable to you then I think there's something seriously wrong somewhere, there must be.  It's like saying you'd prefer to rent a TV but never get to own it once you'd covered the cost, like saying you'd prefer them to take it from you rather than let you keep what you just paid for.

What you're saying is beyond my comprehension, it just doesn't compute, but like I said, I'll leave you to it.  I don't mean that in a condescending manner either, I really do mean I'll leave you to it, mainly because it seems so idiotic that I cannot fathom it.  You got me on that one Shane, I honestly don't know how else to respond to it other than what I just wrote.

Nope ... just doesn't make sense ... doesn't compute.