If you searched my previous topics you will find most of my questions are about new hardware. As I’m quite early adopter, I tend to buy most product I want on day 1.
But the only thing that stop me is by far DxO. I can’t use my Nikon Z50 and then Z5 because the lag of support from DxO PL and forced me to use alternative commercial software instead. And other softwares I used always support new hardware on the first day. The only thing that keep me using PL is the Prime NR which is still the best in the market.
Since Apple will release Apple Silicon Mac as soon as this year and even sold a development unit since July. I’m curious to know if DxO got hands on this unit and working to update this yet? It would be great shame if I buy a new Mac then have to wait for another 3-4 months to be able to run PL.
(Fortunately on macOS Big Sur current beta the PL3 run fine without crashing.)
The transition will not be super fast. Example, Apple has released new 27" iMacs that use 10th Gen Intel Silicon. And as far as the “Developer Mini” you speak about, rumor has it in terms of high powered graphics it is not a real development platforms and would not expect any company dealing high horsepower graphics to want to get involved yet.
So at this stage I would not even worry about it as any “real” hardware will likely not be released until mid-2021. The most likely first candidates that would benefit most would be the MacBook Air, which even in its current form would be quite anemic in using PL3.
Personally, I would not want to be one of the first guinea pigs to dive into Apple silicon Macs as there will likely be some severe growing pains.
But why Adobe, Affinity Photo and Pixelmator Pro all confirmed to support that from day 1? I don’t believe Photo Lab require any processing power more than those, especially Photoshop and Lightroom.
Also you don’t tell someone to not buy something. It is not solution. It is the same as when I was told don’t buy new lens because PL not support yet. My daily work are mainly business and presentation and sometimes lightly coding which I currently use MacBook Air; you don’t expect me to carry iMac everywhere for presentation right?
I also use PL once in a while in MacBook Air and it is not any slower than my 2017 27” iMac because it is already slow. I think the main reason PL is slow is software optimization. I also use Photoshop with nearly 100 layers and Pixelmator Pro to retouch loke 100 points in MacBook Air and still have no lag, while PL, even in iMac with 40GB RAM, is struggle to process when I retouch only 20 or more points. (This point is better be discussed in another thread someone already started. My point is that why DXO PL is slow to support anything new compare to other commercial softwares in the market.)
DxO is a relatively small company, unlike Adobe and Serif. They don’t have spare Devs waiting to work on the latest OS updates from Apple or Windows (unless there is a major bug)
Responding to every bit of new computer hardware immediately takes them away from developing DxO itself as well as lens and camera profiles.
It is understandable that people want to be at the cutting edge of tech in terms of computer hardware, but just how many DxO customers actually are?
I would rather they focused on improving DxO itself as well as cameras and lenses. That is why I buy the software in the end.
Free tip: don’t buy a new Mac with ARM silicon or accept the consequences of being an early adopter It will take at least 2 years before all mainstream software will properly support the ARM transition. Same for new cameras, on average it is always 2-3 months before they are supported.
There is a reason Apple calls it a 2-year transition project.
Apple Silicon is not just “a bit of new computer hardware” but an important shift in the Apple Mac platform, and possibly in the industry. A responsible developer that supports Mac as a platform should at least be thinking about what will need to be done, because in 2 years’ time everyone buying a new Mac will be using Apple Silicon. Before then, many people will need or choose to move as well.
On what are you basing this assumption? The last processor transition occurred when software was delivered on DVDs and developer tooling was way, way less friendly than today.
Also, it’s not a 2 year transition project to move to Apple Silicon. It’s a two year project to cover their complete line of products. The first product will be 100% Apple Silicon and everything you need to support it has been available since July.
Of course, let’s consider that DxO do not want to tip their hand as to when support will be forthcoming — it’s rare to offer precise timeframes — but it would be nice to know it is being worked on or at least is on the near term roadmap.
It will certainly not serve the customer base to be seen to be lagging behind on such major shifts.
Apple set a 2-year transition period. Any software provider delivering an ARM update in that timeframe is doing a good job. And according to logic, Apple should update all their Macs on Day 1 to support ARM. They won’t. The most professional oriented Macs will get the update last, because professional software happens to be the most complex and takes the longest time to update.
Also new ARM software will likely have many bugs and issues at launch. So any self-respecting professional will wait (they do the same with regular software releases).
So yes, DxO will need to support ARM. And the sooner the better, but they are in no way obliged to rush it out of the door just because there is 1 ARM Mac on the market which maybe 0.5% of their user base owns. And risk alienating their entire user base by a rushed release.
And agree that DxO at some point should provide a roadmap for this kind of transition, roadmaps are always welcome.
Yes it is just a “bit of new computer hardware” at this moment. Windows on ARM wasn’t a rip roaring runaway success.
I also don’t know anyone that would be trading an Intel Mac they just bought for an ARM within 2 years either.
Like any new platform it will have teething issues, potentially lots and that is before the software that people actually use (rather than the OS) is good to go. Software companies will also have to carry on working with Intel Apples for a while, meaning they will need to cover 2 OS’s at the same time.
Check what happened when they moved from the Motorola Power PC to Intel and what happened there (and the lawsuits they got too).
While DxO do need a timeline, pretty sure there is nothing at all urgent about it at this time.
Then you have to wonder what Nvidea will do when they control ARM…
I don’t have the energy tonight to respond to all of your points, but please let’s not hold up Microsoft as an example of how to break new ground. A chap I used to follow online coined Microsoft’s Law thus:
Microsoft bashing is easy but Windows 10 is a great OS, OneDrive a fantastic cloud service and Xbox a great gaming platform. I would even say Microsoft is progressing again while Apple is regressing into the Microsoft of the 90s, trying to dictate how I use my devices.
But your point is valid, the way Apple works guarantees that macOS on Arm will be a success. Apple can force that because they dictate their developers what and how to do.
Success for Apple? Very likely. It will take time for ARM machines to become the majority of their hardware base.
Doesn’t negate any of the points I made. They will still encounter issues as will software Devs and the need to support 2 platforms for a period of time. Not easy for small software companies to do.
Have used Macs since the the Mac Performa powerpc 7200 and Macs last a long time before being physically obsolete (as opposed to the policy of deliberately making them software obsolete such as OS install restriction files built into the installer). Even ran CS5 on a fish tank Mac!
Free tip: don’t buy a new Mac with ARM silicon or accept the consequences of being an early adopter It will take at least 2 years before all mainstream software will properly support the ARM transition. Same for new cameras, on average it is always 2-3 months before they are supported.
People’s requirements are not the same. I bought Intel Mac (and basically every Apple device with new tech) on day one and not regretted so far. I’m not new or unfamiliar with this industry because I work at a software development company too. And part of contract we signed with customers are to ensure our software support new technologies as long as it is the same platform or else risk being fined, as long as those platform are upgraded in contract period. There are always end users who are early adopters otherwise we won’t say that product is “released” if no one buy it.
The most professional oriented Macs will get the update last, because professional software happens to be the most complex and takes the longest time to update.
Apple even already demoed Final Cut Pro and Adobe Photoshop running on ARM development kit. I can’t think of any more professional software than these. Apple released tools (Rosetta 2, etc.) for developers to port their codes to ensure the app run on ARM day one. It is true that it is not easy but it is about how to allocate human resources to do this. If other company can and did this, you cannot say other than that the company doesn’t have willing to invest more in order to provide support.
———
All in all, what I can derived is that DxO has limited capabilities than other commercial softwares and cannot afford to support new technologies as fast as others. That’s supposed to be main answer. The rest are just excuses.
Is it “Microsoft bashing” when it’s true? Is it Apple bashing when you say “they dictate their developers what and how to do”. Because that is also true. Well… kinda… I mean, you can run most of Unix open source stuff on the platform for starters. And that’s without going near an Apple-provided tool. Although it’s probably easier with the enormous free toolset they provide.
If I wanted to start a battle I’d tell you the real problems I have with Windows 10 and M365, but that was utterly not my point. My point was the failure of Windows on ARM is entirely down to how Microsoft approached it. They dipped their toes and then waited for developers to bite. You’re not going to have to wait long for macOS developers to bite on an ARM transition, because Apple will dictate… errr… go all in on the platform and provide the tooling to make it work for everyone. Sorry, my mistake. They have already provided all the tooling.
Have you worked with Apple’s development tools? Have you watched the introductory or technical videos on how the transition will work? Have you learned the three ways that developers can provide software to run on Apple Silicon Macs? I have. Some performance problems aside, the DxO team have shown they can create very good Mac software, so I have every confidence they can do a decent job of supporting Apple Silicon if they prioritise it appropriately.
Mmmmm, I’m not sure how performance will go when something like PL is run under such a scheme. As noted previously, it’s no performance star at the moment so it may not translate well. Maybe DxO could take it for a spin and see for themselves whether this would be quick and acceptable. Because if it is, then there’s a big marketing win right away.
Wait, what? Is that a typo? Or did I miss something really big?
My working with Apple Dev tools or not has nothing to do with my post, thanks. Try reading it. Do they do a good job? Yes. Will it encounter problems? Likely.
// so I have every confidence they can do a decent job of supporting Apple Silicon if they prioritise it appropriately.//
So do I. You harp about Adobe etc already having demo’s ready. Might have noticed they are a hell of a lot bigger and have more resources than DxO. Also happens to be a nice sell for Apple too if they are ready, by getting the big names on board from day one of the release.
Again, DxO is a SMALL company with limited resources. Which do you think they should abandon - new cameras and lenses? Sorting out current PL bugs? Reduce planned features and releases? What percentage of early adopters are there using PL? Something has to give.
The fact that you will still be able to run the current version of PL, albeit performance unknown at this time, means they can plan rather than run headlong first into Apple Silicon for a few and throw the rest under the bus.
//Wait, what? Is that a typo? Or did I miss something really big?// Yep, was thinking of that DxO One One thing. My bad.
Adobe and Microsoft are two companies who got a head start because they knew about and were developing for ARM before the world knew it even it was official (the benefits of being that large and important to Apple). So this argument doesn’t hold any ground.
Of course we’ll offer a native version of PhotoLab down the road…
As pointed out by @florisvaneck, big companies (like Adobe or Microsoft for instance) may be able to ship a native version of their products from day one…
And they can because they have privilegiated relations w/ Apple, which is logic: Apple wants us to make the switch as fast as possible, and this only means “Get your software ready”. Apple reaches out to those big fishes to get as many as possible switchers when the first product will lauch.
DxO on the other side, as thousands of other small companies, just discovered the transition to ARM when Apple made it public.
Also, even if Adobe and Microsoft have given their “word”, they didn’t disclose any specific date
I’ll be (very) surprised if both the Adobe CC suite and Microsoft Office 365 environment will be available as native versions from day one…
… and if so add “probably with major workflow breaking bugs”. This happened in every major Adobe transition. Most of the time it is Lightroom, After Effects and Premiere Pro that break first.
2 Likes
m-photo
( Marc (macOS Sonoma on MBP16" Intel))
19
Yeah this is just to quick too soon… look what Adobe made with Photoshop for iPad… it is still not finished and good… just updating and updating to one day match the expectations.
Apps will work but certainly not with native support and with full functionality. This will take time.
I will be happy if DxO continue to support the existing base of users on mac Intel and at the same time starts its transition for a native Apple silicon App so it can be live in the next couple of years.
Actually I did not ask for native support but good to hear that DxO have plan. But what I really want to ask is: can it run at all or not and if it has work around?
Because I don’t want to buy software (i.e. upgrade to DxO PL4 in the future) that I likely cannot use most of the time. Like in situation this year when I bought Z50 and Z5 and cannot use DxO because it takes a few months to support and also no work around. Out of 9 months I could really use this software only 5 months. The rest I had to go back to Lightroom and Photoshop. So, let’s say if I buy a new ARM Mac this December, can it run at all or do I have to wait another year or two?
Photoshop on iPad, as much as unfinished the product are, can still be used. Yes I cannot do this and that but it runs without crash and can edit more than 20 points per image without lag, more than what I can currently do with DxO on Mac. I use only Prime NR and export DNG to do other works with Lightroom so just running without crash is fine because I don’t do much with it anyway.
It will take at least 2 years before all mainstream software will properly support the ARM transition. Same for new cameras, on average it is always 2-3 months before they are supported.