From: Whisky-dave <>
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id x8mr7080232qka.22.1513872148116;
Thu, 21 Dec 2017 08:02:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by with SMTP id w204mr1028776vkw.12.1513872147424;
Thu, 21 Dec 2017 08:02:27 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 08:02:27 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <p1ge1h$10q7$>
Injection-Info:; posting-host=; posting-account=Fal3rgoAAABua4brvRuRwdmPfigIDi6x
References: <>
<p0rg46$1tqe$> <131220171132354803%nospam@nospam.invalid>
<> <181220171608156123%nospam@nospam.invalid>
<> <p19er6$101g$>
<> <p19rj5$1fqt$>
<> <p1dv0l$1cnf$>
<> <>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
From: Whisky-dave <>
Injection-Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 16:02:28 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Body-CRC: 4255705303
X-Received-Bytes: 3503
Print Article
Forward Article
On Thursday, 21 December 2017 13:47:37 UTC, Mayayana  wrote:
> "Whisky-dave"<> wrote
> | Are you differntiating here between updates and upgrades ?
> |
> | Updates are usually to fix bugs, whereas upgrades are meant to add 
> something. extra.
> |
> | Most updates are free or should be I;d say.
> |
>    That can be tricky. I find it often depends on
> the company. And the definition of each can vary.
> Microsoft once jumped 2 versions with Internet
> Explorer just to catch up with Netscape version
> numbers. On the other hand, OSX has been at version
> 10 for years, apparently because they just love
> saying "X".

X does mean 10 in roman numerals and it;s still basically the same sort of unix under the hood so no
real reason to change the name for the sake of it.
MS jumerd from 8.1 to W10  and they charged for the update unlike Apple who made it free and since
then all system upgrades/updates have been free.

>    My disk imaging/partitioning software, BootIt,
> is made by a generous person who provides updates
> to each product for years. He doesn't really define
> upgrades as new versions.

great considering the lastest version seems to be from 2009  things have changed since then.

>   By contrast, with Corel's AfterShot Pro it's typical
> to get only one minor update. If you buy a new
> camera there's a good chance you'll have to buy a
> new version of ASP in order to get RAW support for it,
> because they won't support their older software.
> I'd call that sleazy, but at least the product is
> reasonably priced.

It depends what you want to do, but most camera manufactires have a product that can edit their own
RAW format.