DXO Softwares on LINUX ! (please .....)

DxO PhotoLab Feature requests
101

Wine is not another platform, as you very well know Joanna.

For those who are not familiar with Wine, it is a framework to allow Windows apps to allow on other platforms without running all of Windows. Most applications run decently under Wine. The GPU acceleration of DeepPrime would be the most difficult part to port but Prime would run fine in CPU emulation. It’s quite possible to get an application up and running well in Wine with a minimum level of participation from the developer (usually it’s switching a few calls from being hardware specific to more generic).

Affinity Photo, World of Warcraft, Starcraft, .NET, The Witcher, Left4Dead, Adobe Photoshop CS6, iTunes all run very well under Wine. I see no reason why PhotoLab could not join this list.

I’m not even a Linux user but I can definitely see the advantages to DxO getting a foothold in the Linux market by supporting Wine for now. There’s something called mindshare, and the people running Linux are disproportionately influential in IT.

Have at it Holy Warriors, just don’t expect me to participate in your OS wars. Windows has been US commercial spyware since Windows 3.x (National Security was Microsoft’s trump card in the antitrust lawsuit), OS X joined the party in 2012 with OS X 10.6 and more specifically 10.6.8.

Apple-joins-Prism-in-2012

Before that Steve Jobs refused to deliberately compromise the privacy and security of Mac OS or OS X. Then he died.

102

Linux is a dead end (for the masses).

2 Likes
103

Linux is free and open source and an extremely versatile and efficient operating system so before you critisize it you need to know it’s roots as an OS that started with a command line interface. The GUI came later and there were many flavours which caused all sorts of problems for the desktop.

The power of Linux is as a server OS with more than 50% of all web servers running on Linux. Linux was never originally intended as a desktop replacement although these days it does a very good job.

If all the software I use ran on Linux I would be using Linux instead of Windows!

Don’t forget that Macs run a version of UNIX which is very close to Linux!

2 Likes
104

Actually, this is my main reason to use Macs. No matter if Linux or Windows (or the old Mac OS), I simply don’t understand enough of any of those OSs. Mac OS X was one of the first systems I know taking care not for the functions of programmers willing to implement but for the needs of users. I still remember the many moments when I used Mac OS X after some years of working on Windows and not believing how simple something can be. And I’m still convinced that the pricey Macs are the less expensive way to deal and work with PC in terms of “time needed to finish the job well”.

2 Likes
105

I think this is a key point. Linux might be fine for the sandal wearing, beard sporting, geek club, but I prefer to have a UI that is simple to use. Even the Xcode development environment is easier to use than Microsoft’s Visual Studio. And, believe me, I have spent long enough time with both to know which I prefer. Writing an app for Mac tends to be harder than for Windows, because the whole Mac ethos is to make life as easy and as intuitive as possible for the user - which is why I appreciate all the help Xcode gives me as a user trying to create easy to use apps.

Of course, not all apps end up being as easy to use as they could be but then folks wouldn’t have anything to moan about and wish they could use Linux instead :crazy_face:

As to privacy, I really don’t have that much to hide and have yet to find all these glaring security breaches that some say macOS hides. Now, if someone would deign to point out which specific flaws I should be aware of rather than preaching all is doom and gloom…

I did spend some time, a number of years ago, trying to create a multi-platform (Windows and Linux) app and ended up giving it all up when I got totally lost in trying to find which Linux libraries I would have to use for development in order to cater for the maximum number of Linux varieties.

Putting Linux on a server - of course. Expecting Joe Public to interact with it on a daily basis - it’s never going to happen. I really pity the French civil service who are compelled to use it.

106

I guess it depend the way you think. For me, Mac OS is awful, a lot of things are automated within it, and they usually do the exact opposite of what I want, so trying to get the os to do what I want is slow, and sometime impossible, and always confusing. And it can’t even handle touch screen, in 2022, what’s up with that? If Mac OS was the last operating system on earth, I’d quit using computers altogether.

I much prefer Windows. The reason is simple, with all its flaws, it works the way I think.

Linux is bearable to me. I don’t love it, but it is more secure than the other 2 options, and it doesn’t spy on you, so I trust it more.

1 Like
107

Examples would have been nice. I doin’t know of any automation I don’t want. And just to be clear, i use Windows to work with and Mac to work on my own projects. On a daily basis. I’m neither sorry you don’t get along nor do I want to convince you “Mac is better”. It’s not, it’s just different, but your post talks about an OS I don’t know. Or you don’t know it…

108

Oh no, I didn’t meant that DxO should provide anything for free. I wrote:

Lot’s of Linux users are willing to pay for software

Re-reading my post, I can’t see any comment regarding “free”. I am not a native speaker, maybe I expressed myself wrong? Linux people could buy a Windows version and maybe get a bit of help with running it using Wine, but not too much. I think most of them are used to do some research or trail and error. They could buy DxO software as it is.

I’m not new to DxO, but I’m new to DxO forums and I don’t know anything about existing problems regarding Windows and Mac. It is perfectly clear to me that I know too little. Therefore, I am only making a suggestion, but I am not demanding anything. As a freelancer, I would never demand free work from any company. :slight_smile:

1 Like
109

Neither am I. I just see some threads in this forum talking about problems which are on the “to-do-list” for long time. I don’t know how big the user base actually is and I don’t know who finances DxO’s lens and sensor testing. Now, if Linux users would buy Windows versions - what they could do today without any problem, I mean, buying never is an issue… then DxO could solve problems for their Windows version. But not the resulting problems of Wine or whatever train is transporting PL into Linux. And that last bit is simply not in the responsibility of DxO. The supported OSs get help (or not…) but who on DxO side should dive into Linux problems?

No, Linux is OpenSource, so please Linux devs, invent something good… What you also need to know: Windows and MacOs versions are developed by different teams in DxO, at least that’s what I often read here and the versions are also different, where MacOS is often behind with version numbers and functionalities. Since Linux as UNIX branch is closer to Mac OS X as another UNIX branch, I’m just afraid the already slower Mac-Team could get the task to make PL Linux ready. For how many users? In this thread less than a dozen. Stubborn ones, though, but without insisting nothing happens, right?

I don’t see a financial benefit or a technological gain for the existing (and at the end paying for development) customer base by DxO going Linux. If DxO wants to make customers happy they have plenty of opportunities and a wide variety of problems to solve, lenses to support properly, IPTC fields to tag correctly, get the database straight and less forgetting or enlarge the functions of DOP sidecars.

2 Likes
110

Holy warriors indeed:

  • Condescending about computer users “Joe Public”: check
  • Condescending about decades of free work done to allow unlimited computing to the world by dedicated developers: check
  • Condescending to French civil servants: check

Think different? No, not at all, think conformist and think small.

As to privacy, I really don’t have that much to hide

So because some people are unengaged conformists that means the state security organs should have unlimited access to everyone’s private and financial information? That’s what using either Windows or macOS means – there’s some worthwhile links in my post above which hint at the extent of the damage.

Well that’s an end to:

  1. political dissidents
  2. independent journalism (sources and journalists would all be arrested)
  3. democracy

When full knowledge of everyone’s private life is in the hands of the state security organs, there are no more independent politicians, we can elect whomever we want, the individual will be blackmailed to implement whatever policies the state security organisations see fit to impose.

Guess what, madame, that’s exactly where we are now.

Better to be silent and thought wise…

All of this chatter to prevent DxO from improving a few Windows call to informally make PhotoLab vaguely compatible with WINE. No one is talking about free copies on Linux or official support.

111

This is an oft repeated ERROR which non-software engineers fail to understand. Both UNIX and Linux are POSIX compliant as it MAC-OS . Actually to be more accurate both UNIX (all flavours) and MacOS are POSIX compliant. Linux is moslty POSIX compliant but not formally.
MAC-OS is dreived from BSD UNIX, Linux does not have a line of UNIX code in it.
There are a LOT of other POSIX compliant OS and RTOS, several I have worked on are cleared for in flight critical and controll systems use. Linux is most certainly NOT cleared for any in flight use.

Saying Linux and Unix are the same is like saying a Trabant and a Bentley are the same because both are blue cars.

112

What complete Rubbish. What is worse this is religious rubbish.
The least secure system is Linux.

Getting away from all the clap trap I know three outfits who did static analysis on the Linux Kernel.
Some code is good, most is mediocre and a lot is appalling. Recently there were 5 lots of malicious malware inserted into the Kernel and they got out into distributions. They have been removed now but there are multiple distributions with them in because there is no decent update system for Linux.
In sorting out that mess they found at least three ghost contributors who were thought to be state actors who were messing about with they crypto.
Also Ken Thompson when talking about the “UNIX backdoor” and explaining that it was only in an early Alpha version until it was stable went on to explain the myth and how it can be used in Linux today by almost anyone. So any Linux is easily compromised in a way not possible with Windows or Mac.

However if the Linux community really want Dxo then they can work on Wine to make Wine DxO compatible. Rather than the other way around.

As for the end of democracy… that would only be if people started to use wide open systems that all governments can hack. IE Linux

113

Wrong again. Linux can be locked down as the code is open source. Closed source private OS, at least in the United States, cannot be secure as by law they are required to allow as many backdoors as the NSA needs.

Of course, it’s difficult to lock down Linux, as any OS, but there’s hope there. And yes, the CIA and the NSA are actively interfering with multiple Linux distributions, but in most cases it’s without the knowledge and help of the developers as in the case of Microsoft, Apple or Google.

I don’t know if you remember Blackberry OS. RIM was very reticent to build in backdoors and it was a hard nut for the three letter agencies to crack. Amazingly enough Blackberry went up in smoke a few years later. I had a couple of Blackberry 10 devices. The OS was far superior to Android or iOS at the time.

Recently there were 5 lots of malicious malware inserted into the Kernel and they got out into distributions.

If one wishes to be secure on Linux, then the user should be running a previous release but with all security patches. New code will always have more bugs and security issues.

They have been removed now but there are multiple distributions with them in because there is no decent update system for Linux.

Are you running a different version of Linux than the ones I’ve run? All the update systems work just fine in my experience. No, it’s not centralised. There are multiple systems. That’s fine with me. It allows me to choose which distributor to trust.

I know I cannot trust Apple (law), Google (choice) or Microsoft (natural inclination) to provide updates without state-sponsored security holes. Individual users can be targeted now with the compromised code as all of the above insist on knowing exactly who a user is before s/he can download code. This is a great improvement for the spooks as they don’t have to put compromised code in wide distribution but can attack individual users through app stores.

With most Linux distributions, the user enjoys anonymous access to updates.

However if the Linux community really want Dxo then they can work on Wine to make Wine DxO compatible. Rather than the other way around.

If you had read a little more carefully, you’d have noticed I suggested minor modifications to system calls to make them more Wine compatible. That’s it.

If that makes you angry enough to build a pile of slander around Linux, hélas.

114

The only way of making Linux secure is to re-write it from the ground up. I knwo some who have looked at this but the job is too big (and not worth it as there are better options).

The NSA may have access to Windows and MAC-OS but everyone has access to Linux. The state actors I mentioned messing in the Linux Kernel were not from the USA, then again neither is most of the Sw in a Linux distribution. It comes from multiple unknown sources of unknown provenance.

One thing a recent test showed was that when patches are sent in for the kernel no one was checking the documentation and the software matched. In several the software had nothing to do with the documentation and known mallware was put into the kernel because no one properly checked it. Linus was complaining about this recently.

However you keep going with your religion of Linux and ignore reality.

You should read my replies more carefully … all I was suggesting was that if there is a market for DxO on WINE then the community can modify Wine so it runs DXO. If the community can’t be bothered there is clearly not a market for DXo.

1 Like
115

One difference with Linux which is substantial is that one doesn’t have to run all of the services. Under macOS (everything after Mojave 10.14), it’s extremely difficult to disable the two hundred or so background processes and routines which Apple insists on running at all times, even if a user chooses not to use iCloud or the App Store or any other Apple services.

The situation with Windows 10+ is similar.

As one can reduce one’s footprint on Linux very simply by disabling the services one doesn’t need to use, one can radically simplify the task of securing Linux. The hardware backdoors via firmware and EFI remain regardless of OS of course (thanks Intel).

all I was suggesting was that if there is a market for DxO on WINE then the community can modify Wine so it runs DXO. If the community can’t be bothered there is clearly not a market for DXo.

Yes, the Wine community should approach DxO with the requests for changes to make PhotoLab more compatible. On the other hand, DxO could open up new marketing opportunities by pro-actively reaching out to Wine to see if PhotoLab could not be made compatible on Linux. There would be quite a bit of positive press coming out of such an event.

The value of DxO PhotoLab on Linux would be goodwill and good press. DxO could use a lot more of both.

116

So what you are saying is Linux Gurus can limit their esposure. Non technical users can’t. However that is only limit not remove risk as all parts of Linux including the kernal can be, and have been, compramised.

So in the end you are saying that experts with all OS can limit their exposure. Yes we knew that.

The problem is that is is very easy to corupt Linux than more so than any other OS beacuse all the source is available. So at any time any Linux can be corupted by multiple players. With Windows or MAC-OS you have to get people into the relevant parts of the company and get it past testers in other departments. The same level of testing doesn’t happen with Linux.

As for Wine. the market for that appears to be less than 2% and of that number how many would want DXO? You are looking at maybe less than 1% of the market. The good will that would come from it is tending to zero and is not going to pay for the work in the resultant sales.

OTOH if the wine users wanted it they could make the adaptions at their end and with that good will DXO might see some value in supporting that community in the future.

DXO has a lot of goodwill and good press amongst the professionals without the religiousl fanatics of the Linux world. .

As for a Linux version… this is where we came in. The Linux market is far too small and fragmented anyway. If there was one Linux then you might have a case.

117

No, that’s clearly not what I’m saying. What I’ve said is that it’s impossible to secure Windows or macOS as the backdoors are built in at a system level. It’s doubly difficult to secure either of those OS as there are so many always-on systems. The only chance at a secure OS is Linux at this point.

Next, you (like all the rest of the anti-privacy crew) just blithely argue privacy is impossible and therefore even attempting to maintain one’s privacy is wrong. The first part is not true, the second part is craven defeatism, the consequences of which I’ve outlined above: compromised politicians, compromised business leaders, compromised journalists.

I hope you like what you see both politically and socially in the West now, particularly the United States but also Europe. The situation is a direct result of the lack of privacy and the attendant lack of respect for the law. There is no need to obey or follow the laws when everyone and anyone in a position of power (even a journalist) can be blackmailed. Regaining our privacy is the crucial first step to rebuilding our societies with leaders of integrity in all the four powers. Hence the fierce institutional opposition to real privacy (in telecommunications, in computing).

Feel free to carry your anti-Linux crusade into the grave with you. Not sure what exactly your agenda is but it seems coercive and unhealthy.

OTOH if the wine users wanted it they could make the adaptions at their end and with that good will DXO might see some value in supporting that community in the future.

Some people have had some success running PhotoLab 3.0 under Wine. The argument about who should move first here is details. Hopefully 1. an intrepid someone in the Wine community will move PhotoLab forward at some point and 2. DxO will help rather than hinder that effort.

If you don’t have something new and substantial to say about either PhotoLab under Wine or Linux, I suggest we stop here.

118

I don’t come here to read a load of political drivel. I come here to help folks run PhotoLab, FilmPack and ViewPoint.

Around the time that Windows 3 came out, there used to be a company called Digital Research and they brought out an OS called DR-DOS, as a competitor to MS-DOS. What was its advantage? DR also provided a WIMP GUI that was far superior to that of MS.

Unfortunately, just like Linux, it was so minority that there was a very limited range of software ever written for it and, inevitably, Apple did it better and Microsoft tried.

I switched to Mac a number of years ago because Windows was too flaky, unreliable and harder to use.

We all know that Linux is an extreme minority OS that you need to wear sandals and sport a beard to manage. Well, I do wear sandals but a beard is not something I would look good in. So I stick with an OS which allows me to concentrate on working rather than having to work, if not fight, to tame. It is hard enough to manage Windows - I’m certainly never likely to touch Linux ever again.

4 Likes
119

No beard here.

It is hard enough to manage Windows - I’m certainly never likely to touch Linux ever again.

Horses for courses.

120

A Wine PhotoLab user was here and did provide some specific useful feedback to DxO a few years ago. Feedback ignored (but at least promptly answered by the very kind and attentive @sgospodarenko).

1 Like