John
I recommend Paint Shop Pro X7. It can do 99.9 % of what Photoshop can do plus uses PS's plugins yet its a heck of a lot cheaper. Its also 64 bits. 

Also PhotoPlus from Serif.
 

and GIMP and Paint.NET are both free

John
I recommend Paint Shop Pro X7. It can do 99.9 % of what Photoshop can do plus uses PS's plugins yet its a heck of a lot cheaper. Its also 64 bits. 

On the mark John.  I have used Paint Shop Pro for many years and it works for me.

John
I recommend Paint Shop Pro X7. It can do 99.9 % of what Photoshop can do plus uses PS's plugins yet its a heck of a lot cheaper. Its also 64 bits. 

I use Paint Shop Pro, but it's a really ancient version - pre-Corel IIRC. If GIMP doesn't do what I need, I'll look into the latest version for sure.

I'm not a fan of the subscription model but the photography deal Adobe offers currently isn't that bad. It includes, Lightroom, Lightroom Mobile, PhotoShop and a basic 2GB creative cloud storage dealie. I believe I paid 99e for a year's worth with some deal. Considering the price point of both products, I don't think that's unfair. I've bought software for more that I stopped using or had to upgrade within a year. Philosophically I agree with Craig on the rental vs subscription idea, however practically speaking for me the digital world changes so quickly that I'm just not going to use three or four year old versions of my main programs. Perhaps some odd utility but not my main DAW. I think it's more the idea of paying per month and not having an independent copy of the software than any practical differences or drawbacks, for most people.

Anderton makes a good point. So, let's say, after you've subscribed to Sonar for 2 years, or that you've paid for the software by 120% using the subscription price, that version of Sonar is free to use after that, along with its updates. In other words, because you bought it using the subscription price, you pay a little extra (like Interest) until you've paid 100% for the license, and 20% for the Interest, then you own the license forever. However, to get the next version, you need to re-subscribe, or buy it outright.
 
Waves does this with their WUP. You can own the license of the Waves plug-ins, but if you want to get the latest versions (and in many cases, free plug-ins, if you own the larger Bundles) in the future, you need to buy WUP. Although WUP is an annual or bi-annual cost, you still get all the free updates or versions. Believe me, I used to despise WUP. But after Waves capped the price and put incentives out there for early renewal, not to mention hosting massive plug-in sales, I'm ok with it now. Their support is pretty great, too.

brconflict
So, let's say, after you've subscribed to Sonar for 2 years, or that you've paid for the software by 120% using the subscription price, that version of Sonar is free to use after that, along with its updates.

We may be having some confusion about terminology.  In most cases, "subscription", particularly for cloud-based software/services, means you only use the function while your subscription is fully paid up.
 
It is certainly possible to define a "maintenance plan" or "update plan" where you may a recurring fee and are in turn provided all the patches and version upgrades that are released while you have you plan in force.  But that is not the common practice for what is called "subscription model".
 
I certainly hope Cake does not adopt the subscription model where you can only use the software while your subscription is in force.  And I really don't see a compelling reason to adopt a prepaid maintenance plan.  We effectively have that if Cake does annual releases.  I can see where the software vendor would like to see more of their user base move up to the most current version (both for revenue and a support cost reasons).  But by the same token, that is asking users to buy a pig in a poke. 
 
Cakewalk has done an very good job improving product quality and they continue to be a leader in adding useful function to the product, so I would go along with a prepaid maintenance model if that was the only choice because I trust Cake more than other software suppliers.  But I really don't see any big advantages for me over the current approach of more-or-less annual releases.

cparmerlee
It is certainly possible to define a "maintenance plan" or "update plan" where you pay a recurring fee and are in turn provided all the patches and version upgrades that are released while you have you plan in force. 

Actually, I think that's a pretty good model.

I agree, which is why I don't object to WUP. Judging by most people's responses I don't think it would be well received but I don't think it's a bad idea.

I use both Sonar X3 and Reaper.
If Sonar went subscription.....It would only be Reaper.