Prosumer Version for $89.99?

This has been a great thread and one that I doubt Adobe would ever see anything similar on forums discussing Premiere, AF, etc.

It's so nice to see users & purchasers (since they may not be one and the same) of a piece of software coming out in support of the vendor's pricing policies.

Yep DR is a great piece of software at any price; a fantastic piece of software at $300; and a mind-blowingly unbelievable piece of software for free.

N'uff said me thinks.

100%. I paid for studio version and later when I bought BMPCC 4k, I got another key along with the camera. It's just insane what you get for $300. I find every excuse to never use Premiere Pro again. So far it's going great, and I am mainly just editing personal projects from Editstock to submit to their editors for feedback. I was recently not able to figure out how to do a reverb ring-out in Resolve, so I asked here and someone helped me out. Another reason to not go to using Premiere, at all. I have uninstalled other editing software long ago when I used the free version of Resolve (v15).

tiered payments for profitable exploitation of the same software, would indeed make more sense.

For BMD? Or for someone who wants the $300 features for less money?

for those, who can't stand all this lies about the targeted high-end audience, while compromises and mass marked related revenue practices are more and more altering the software for the worse.

those other products, which only offer usable free editions for education and strict non-commercial use, but still try to make adequate profit from professional customers, do not have to change the real goals and specific qualities of the software as much as resolve. and i really like this kind of software, which is still targeted to this very small audience of serious film production.

over the last two years SGOs "mistika insight" was IMHO the most important example of such an side product just for educational purposes.
it wasn't a free toolbox for everyone, like resolve, but it opened a window, to study a kind of software, which still doesn't make much concessions to a mass audience, just because of their trifling entrance fees.
if you wanted more than just learning and basic personal use, you still had to pay a lot more or find some other agreement with the manufactures, to use their software in a non-professional or small boutique like manner.
but that's perhaps the unavoidable price, if you want to keep serious software free from to much compromises and marketing lies.

for those, who can't stand all this lies about the targeted high-end audience, while compromises and mass marked related revenue practices are more and more altering the software for the worse.

OK, then.

If you're a YouTuber, you either don't make money, hence it's a hobby, hence free version.
If you do make money, but the limortaccidibeppe 299$ version.

yes -- a free version for strict non-commercial utilization, but nevertheless full feature set,
and tiered payments for profitable exploitation of the same software, would indeed make more sense.

the foundry (nuke, nuke studio etc.) is more or less using this business model.

Doesn't make sense, because people will just take it and make ad-monetized videos with it anyways, even though that breaches the non-commercial use license.

Happens with all the other software that does the same. You can't trust those people.

This has been a great thread and one that I doubt Adobe would ever see anything similar on forums discussing Premiere, AF, etc.

It's so nice to see users & purchasers (since they may not be one and the same) of a piece of software coming out in support of the vendor's pricing policies.

Yep DR is a great piece of software at any price; a fantastic piece of software at $300; and a mind-blowingly unbelievable piece of software for free.

N'uff said me thinks.

Because the lower end users at Adobe just buy Premiere Elements. Adobe already has the "other, cheaper option" the OP is asking for.

And so does Resolve - Use the Free Version, and stick to the Cut Page.

[sorry -- didn't see you answer]

The foundry give you a crippled version for free (last time I checked).
Resolve is giving you a 90% working software for free, and most of the non free features, most people will never use then anyway.

yes -- the non-commercial nuke also comes with significant limitations!

i wouldn't says, they are more rigorous compared to resolve, but most of them are definitely chosen to accomplish a slightly different goal.

in case of nuke non-commercial nearly all of this limitations are obviously bound to third party license fees or mechanism, which would otherwise open trivial technical possibilities to bypass the intended restrictions. the presence of this limitations is indeed not always very comfortable, but at the end it's more the very strict non-commercial policy, which draws the most significant border, otherwise it's at least as usable for serious practical work as resolve for free.

in case of resolve the situation looks sightly different. even in the free version you are not limited do make profit by any license restraints. but on the other hand you will have to accept, that the actual limitations of non-studio are in many cases not motivated by reasonable measures, but often represent artificial hindrances in front of trivial low-end features just to motivate the upgrade. sure, the commercial edition comes as a bargain in comparison to this other mentioned products, but the associated transition to a pure mass market product without a more serious professional branch and its quality requirements also entails its obvious consequences.

The issue is that a lot of people have little interest in Studio, take a look at the free version and can't, say, render with hardware, so they move on and go use something else.

There is no harm in using Resolve Studio but merely touching 1/10th of what it does. I know of people who use it just to create occasional dailies and prep viewing copies. They rely on outside people to do final color and editing. Consider $295 the cost of entry. I can actually do quite a bit on an 18-month old laptop, and it's by no means a high-end model. I wouldn't consider it for high-end work, but for very modest tweaking -- like a YouTube video or something very simple -- it's fine.

but that's perhaps the unavoidable price, if you want to keep serious software free from to much compromises and marketing lies.

I'm confused. In terms of "lies," are you referring to Mistika or Resolve? This is a conversation about Resolve. I think BMD has actually been very forthcoming about what they do and what users can expect.