Multiple quotes from multiple sources... sorry about the lack of attributions. With that in mind:

Or ! they just pull together, buy Blender adding a call home kill switch subscription on it ( Shit happens ) the perfect deal !

Blender is open-source... if anyone tried to do that with Blender, someone else would simply fork the codebase, and Blender, Deviation Edition would carry on from there, open and free. For a parallel example, OpenOffice had this happen to it (by the now-defunct Sun Microsystems), but Libre Office rose from that codebase and is still open/free today (meanwhile OpenOffice is IIRC dead or close enough to dead...)

And let's not forget that many professionals actually use Turbo Squid models, which are far more pricey than those we use here at DAZ or Renderosity. Or, they make and rig their own.

To be fair, most of that is done because of IP (Intellectual Property) butt-covering - Turbo Squid backs up any liability issues if memory serves. Also, you get everything associated with your item (maps, mesh and often in multiple formats, etc). Making one's own content ensures that nobody will come along and harass you with lawyers (at least not for very long.)

Rendo does not (and for good reason will not) back up the wares they consign against IP violations, and legally only acts as a broker (or "carrier" of sorts).

Go on any major 3D software forum on the Internet and it is filled with enraged 3D users revolting against forced software subscriptions and threatening to switch to FOSS Blender as soon as possible.

Can you blame them? Threaten my livelihood and I'll revolt too, switching to another, my own homebrew, or an open-source toolset... and f@$k you while your sales drop to the point of insolvency... CG toolkits are a dime-a-dozen these days, and there are at least a dozen ways (and two dozen or more tools) to cobble-up a workable pipeline to get from rough sketch to finished still or animation.

Adobe was able to get away with it because they did it back when they were 'it' in the industry (seriously, Corel PSP was/is not considered competition in the pro illustration world, then or now), they built up a patent portfolio 10 miles deep, and they're ruthless about any competition that dares bare its head (either by M&A or by lawyer). But even they are going to have to face the music as their main software patents begin to expire in the next 5-10 years...

Put this way - only a big boy like Apple is able to make Adobe sit up and take notice (see also the reason why Flash is dead.)

Bondware makes a major announcement (I mean major, to the point of being spam g) that users will drive Poser development - you want plug-ins, write them; you want content, make it; you want improvements, get on with it; you need tutorials, write them; you want figures, model them.

You're not going to out-Studio Studio. Sorry, but that ship sailed back in 2005, and DS is parsecs ahead in that biz model. I do agree that a comprehensive SDK would be a solid idea (and expose as much as you can with it), and allowing actual (modern!) Python and/or a C/C++ gateway for plugins would be a massive benefit, but beyond that, emulating the competition this far after they did it is a recipe for disaster.

This might have been true at one point in time, but I don't think that's the case today. 15 years ago? Maybe. Today, not so much. Let's face it...SM nearly killed this software (or left it to die, whichever way you want to interpret it).

Yes and No. Poser isn't going to be a shop's mainline tool, so as long as you can load and manipulate P4/PP-level tech in it, it'll do what it's supposed to. I doubt you'd find a pro shop who would even think of clicking into the Hair Room, or dig into the intricacies of rigging materials just so... in their eyes, it was made for the slam-bang one-and-done projects, and that's what it gets used for, aspirations be damned. Anything more complex and you go crack open the Real Tools(tm) to get 'er done...

DAZ hasn't really positioned DS to go after the corporate Poser customers. At first, DS didn't even have a manual. Not many businesses are going to buy into software with no manual.

Points of Order:

At first (Version 1.0 release), DS did have a manual - I know because I wrote the thing; all 300+ pages of it, in PDF format. It quickly became obsolete though, and DAZ decided to try a wiki-based thing instead, in an attempt to let the content evolve with the application.

DAZ has always tried, and is currently still trying, to entice corporate customers into using it as part of a dev pipeline. This is why they pour time and effort into bridging to/from multiple toolsets, going all in with FBX import/export, etc... Now its bread-and-butter does come from the hobbyist (those slutware kits aren't buying themselves), but make no mistake - they want some of that sweet corporate lucre. No sane company would turn it down...