macOS Big Sur is compatible with most 2013 model Macs and later. macOS Catalina is still supported by Apple and supports 2012 models and later. The waste is created by people wanting new shiny.
I 100% support this and voted!
This is not only about software. I’ve even had to ‘downgrade’ my new Mac mini 2020 from Catalina to Mojave or I’d have lost the use of most of my audio hardware, some of which can’t be easily replaced. Quite frankly, I’m fed up with this rat race, advance warning or not.
One factor in any buying decisions should be vendor support. Check for a track record of keeping software updated. Printer and scanner makers are notorious for not bothering to provide updated drivers, but some are much better than others.
Please, DXO, don’t abandon us that have been supporting you for so long, just because we all can’t afford new computers! I CAN get along with the old programs, but would seriously miss any new improvements that you will make to your amazing software, even if it would save me some money!
I also made this request over a year ago at Topaz Labs. I spoke with a Technical Support Engineer. And he confirmed to me to take this into consideration, and that I would soon have a good surprise for the old machines and OS, and indeed their update improves the speed of execution on the “old configuration”, to note that they haven’t optimized their software for the M1 Macs yet. No need yet since Rosetta 2 does the job.
So this commercial policy is possible and is even a growth factor for software development companies. You just have to follow the right path and not neglect your loyal customers.
Now it’s up to you to see … But know that this is a fundamental movement and that many will not follow, either for ecological or economic questions … the votes for this post confirm it …
I agree! I have also contacted Topaz and hopefully DXO will follow suit; a LOT of us older folk cannot afford to upgrade to a new machine every couple of years, and I’ve been using all of DXO’s products since before it became PL, and would hate to be “locked out” of the new innovations. DXO is wonderful software, and hopefully they wont want to abandon their “old (in both senses of the word!)” customers, who have been supporting them over all the years!
A lot of users stay with Mojave to be able to run Adobe CS5/6.
There seems to be a sadistic element to your joy in punishing users who don’t buy the latest and update to the latest (not upgrade, but update, I haven’t seen a genuine upgrade for a long time). Many of us here believe in stepping with a lighter footprint ecologically and are indeed running computers which cannot go past 1. High Sierre and/or 2. Mojave. There’s been no significant improvement to OS X since about El Capitan 10.11. I’ve updated for two reasons: recent graphic card support like the Radeon VII (which I have running with full hardware acceleration, despite Apple deliberately crippling the Radeon VII with the default kext) and for Photolab.
As Photolab is cross-platform, most of the underlying frameworks Photolab uses are not OS version or Xcode dependent. DxO choosing not to continue to support older versions of OS X is mainly a result of the developers refusing to run an older version of OS X and Xcode for testing (Apple deliberately makes this difficult).
Inconveniencing the users to please young developers is a very poor commercial strategy. Someone at DxO seems to be persuaded that Photolab is a tool for the young and hip. From what I can see the hardcore photographer community skews to middle-age and older, and the Photolab core users even more than typical. These exact people are those who buy €300 RAW development suites. Alienating DxO core users and evangelists/advocates would be unwise. Making it impossible to upgrade without buying all new computers would qualify.
The first bit of software from DxO which I have not bought it the update to the Nik Collection, largely because Nik 4 is less compatible (dropping C1 support, just for the fun of it) and generally more fragile. This is a bad precedent. I sincerely hope that Photolab 5 will offer Mojave support as otherwise Photolab 4 will be the last DxO product I will purchase in a long time.
Dismissive latest-greatest bandwagon Apple clackers will not make up for the lost sales by abandoning active versions of OS X. DxO is forewarned, as you might say.
I have been a professional Mac developer and consultant for many years now and can’t agree that it is mainly about not wanting to test on older machines.
I was working on an iPad app for pilots of private jets, several years ago, when the 64bit bombshell landed and we were suddenly faced with the need to recompile 32bit cross-platform code written for the FreePascal compiler, which had not then been updated to 64 bit and was out of our control.
So there can come a time when it is no longer feasible to keep old code going due to having to introduce a whole slew of
#ifdef … #endif statements to cope with both platforms.
Fortunately, we were able to keep going for a while but when 64bit became mandatory, the project had to come to en end.
The reality is that it is really difficult for a developer to work on new stuff, made possible by new APIs, always looking over their shoulder to see what they have to leave out of the version that is meant to run on the legacy system because the “latest and greatest” feature that customers have been screaming for simply isn’t possible without the latest APIs.
I would think that the computational power required for features like DeepPRIME would be very difficult to achieve on a 32bit architecture.
Nonetheless, it still hurts having to upgrade a computer, just to run the latest version of the OS
Joanna, thanks for your note. OS 10.11 does require a 64-bit machine. Of course, I wasn’t suggesting supporting OS 10.3 or even 10.6.8 in 2021.
The new API business would carry more weight if Photolab were coded in Swift with AppKit. As a cross-platform app, Photolab is far less dependent on native API’s. Whether it “hurts” or not to upgrade a computer, I won’t be doing so to run Photolab, That’s a bridge too far. It’s up to DxO how many customers they wish to lose and how many rich upgrade fees they wish to give up by insisting on supporting only two years of OS X going forward.
There is no good excuse for DxO to be on the cutting edge of denying users the ability to run their software. I understand Apple’s attitude to pushing users to the latest versions of their OS. The sooner Apple can pull the rug out from support for older computers, the sooner they can enjoy a big pay day forcing users to buy new computers. DxO is not paid by the number of computers Apple sells, but by the number of users who can and do buy their software. Narrowing that market is silly.
Most of the image software makers understand this issue much better than DxO and current versions of their software run on versions of OS X as far back as El Capitan or failing that, on Sierra or High Sierra. Based on its launch date Photolab 4 should, at the very least, supported High Sierra if not Sierra.
I’m starting to vote with my wallet with DxO – normally I’d have bought Nik 4 and PureRAW just out of solidarity. As DxO is not supporting my OS choices (I have High Sierra in use), as I said, I’m starting to vote with my wallet. Do me a good turn and I’ll do you a good turn. Do me a bad turn, I’ll be less eager to help you.
Right now I can only run Photolab 3 on my 17 inch matte screen i7 quad processor portable computers (High Sierra). Was forced to work on it on the weekend and missed the conveniences of Photolab 4. Did not miss a single feature of Mojave though. Strange that DxO is doing Apple’s dirty work of pushing hardware upgrades of more than capable hardware.
Maybe the “business” logic isn’t in Swift but the UI stuff is definitely AppKit - take a look at the resources in the app bundle
I’m no sadist and nor do I fall into the trap of highly emotive epithets to make my arguments.
So I walk and catch a train on my daily commute and continue to drive a well maintained, now-15 year old car, but my purchasing of 9 computers in 34 years (with six of those going to new owners) makes me a ‘heavy stepper’ ecologically speaking. Gotcha.
Another thread I am unfollowing.
I didn’t think my request was so successful. It appears that this is a fundamental movement, it is logical, because the renewal of OS at Apple is not normal. An OS should only be renewed every 3 or 4 years. Now they are badly finished, lots of bug and the user becomes the betatester. Also, as I said companies like Serif and Topaz are listening to the user. A good path to follow for DxO, I think …
We are not asking for the impossible and support for 10.6.8, as @Alec Kennear says, just a little longer support … Now it’s up to you …
Taking DxO out of the equation.
I don’t think any software vendor should have to cater to Apple’s constant changes. I’m a PC user, but I own, use and support MAC’s 100% of the time in my dally life. I acknowledge that MAC’s are great for creativity.
The M1 does have great potential, but once again Apple is forcing people to accept a new hardware architecture, one that has (frequent) limited hardware and software support (also compatibility). They did the same with Catalina when they killed support for x86. Get your wallets out folks. Software vendors are not dictating Apple’s business decisions.
Apple continues to be boutique computing. Approx 15% market share compared to MS. I meanwhile can still use just about every piece of hardware from 2 - 10 years ago, and most software to. Look back over the years. Parallels, Boot Camp, VMWare Fusion… why >>> so you can run windows on your MAC… Ridiculous. Yet, you have to pry a person’s MAC from their cold dead hands. Keep them and feel cool. I sure won’t stop you, but don’t blame DxO for choosing not to support a company that changes it’s hardware, OS standards and compatibility with the weather. Apple - Just wants your money $$$. How many times have we all had to buy new adapters just so we could charge our iPhones. After 10+ years of that I moved to Android. At least that has only changed twice in 10 or so years.
I’m not saying MS in infallible, but at least they have standardized on a sustainable architecture that doesn’t disrupt the (enter your desired word here) out of peoples lives, livelihood, etc.
Its not that DxO is purposely turning it’s back on people who choose to use MACs. It a business decision, and understandable as far as I’m concerned. Apple (Rotten to the core) isn’t here to give you longevity, they are here to make money. You have to accept that when you chose to invest in their business model.
So you drive crappy cars but insist that everyone buy a new computer every three years and keep the latest OS on it. Weird thing, this new totalitarianism.
A very interesting argument and one that well-known Mac guru and photo gear tester Lloyd Chambers has an entire series called Apple Core Rot. I’m still on Apple OS not because of Apple but because of the high quality third party software which runs on that platform. I would like to have started my computing career on Linux but it’s impossible to go back in time twenty years. Switching at this point, would cost me years of productivity over the next five years (probably five years, three years productivity).
While Microsoft has done a much, much better job with backwards compatibility and hardware continuity, there’s one downside and it’s a big one. Microsoft Windows was the original state-sponsored spyware. Users have never enjoyed any privacy on Microsoft Windows since the eighties and enjoy even less now.
Supporting both – albeit imperfect – commercial platforms makes sense. What does not make sense is doing Apple’s dirty work for them, pushing people off of their existing computers and existing OS. DxO should be accommodating and welcoming users, not driving them away with a stick (Photolab OS requirements, ending Nik compatibility with C1, Adobe classic photoshop plugin format). DxO has had some brilliant ideas, but it would be great if they would stop with the own goals.
I would love to switch to PhotoLab5. I am running macOS Mojave on my MacPro 5,1 workstation. However, Catalina or later is no longer supported on my MacPro
DPL 5 works with Catalina for sure - I also use it.
I was not referring to DPL 5. Catalina or later is no longer supported on my MacPro. That is why I can not switch to DPL 5