>>For me personally I rather pay a reasonable amount of money for a tool/platform/service and get a responsible infrastructure that goes with it and supports it than picking up small pieces and piecing it all together by myself with trial and error

Agreed.
I started doing web development last year. Someone directed me at some free HTML editors and after gnashing my teeth for a few days I happily purchased Dreamweaver, which was worth every buck.
Adobe does a great job with Dreamweaver and they are entitled to make a reasonable profit for it.

On the other hand, one of my hobbies is digital photography, and recently when I needed some new editing software someone steered me to Gimp, a free open source photo editing platform.
It's not as slick or polished as Photoshop, etc, but it does everything I need and I'm not constantly bombarded with upgrade or renewal reminders.
Some excellent programmers somewhere did a great job with it and I'm thankful to them.

So in once case I pay and in the other I don't.

When I first came into the business, when discussing creative output, we used to say that "an infinite number of monkeys sitting at an infinite number of typewriters for an infinite period of time will eventually produce all of Shakespeare's plays and sonnets."
With today's tools, you'd have to amend that to say that a few good programmers sitting at a few good machines for a few weeks can produce just about anything they want to produce.

That means that the days of software monopolies are over and that anyone who wants to make money selling software has to be ready to do what Adobe does - do it better than the free stuff does it.