Can I be so bold as to explicitly request that we don’t request any new features for PL7?
Since seven is widely regarded as the “perfect” number, how about making PL7 the release where everything that is in the backlog finally gets perfected?
Something like Mac/Windows parity would be a good place to start. Then start to gnaw our way through the annoyances and bugs list.
Think 
Amen to that!!
Mark
You will not get a free game by writing down 7 times the 7.
And if behind every 7 are 7 backlog points, then we have 49 backlog points, but nobody knows which.
I will concentrate on my advent calendar which starts Thursday…every day one surprise…it’s more satisfactory
That gets my vote!!
The much reclaimed image comparison view I could live with (both for the same image in multiple versions as well as for finished versions). But you have my vote.
I want to see some of that backlog make its way into PL6 minor updates! But DxO needs to fix a lot of bugs first and finish what was released incomplete. So sure, I’ll vote for this.
You have also got my vote.
I agree with that.
Anyone know what the backlog contains ?
Now that is a deep question. 
I guess a simple way to discover that is to look at the topics posted to the “Which feature do you need?” subcategory under “DxO PhotoLab” here. Any post from DxO Staff (particularly Svetlana G. and Steven L.) will likely indicate if it’s in the backlog or not. Happy searching! (It’s not that hard, fortunately.)
and I have some old bugs I had been told by support were to be fixed, most never have.
Great poll… I agree… but I guess before everything gets fixed we will get a new UI so everything will get fixed one time only 
Hey Franky,
I hope all the stuff you wrote down and collect in the one post you have started, and I forgot which one it is 
I think I’m also influenced with the “forgotten virus” of the DXO empirium 
I started several of them including that of the differences between the Windows and mac versions, here
But also:
#1 Bug fixes in point updates to PL6.
#2 Robustness in PL7. Add all the “you should be able to…” bits to existing features.
For #2, my list would include the ability to re-order watermark presets and export presets, for example. Another big one could be to improve the basic UI for readability.
Great idea… but you’re kidding, right?
Let’s think about a DXO product manager’s goals. They do not include a fully mature, carefully-tuned, deeply-functional, all-round-great, raw-developer: the BBEdit of raw development environments.
That’s on the top of OUR list; not theirs.
Their list is much simpler: sell more copies of PhotoLab next year in a competitive environment that is dominated by “innovation” and, um… “splash”.
Although I’m sure (no, I’m not) that DXO loves the regulars on this forum and holds their opinions and wishes dear (bet they don’t), it would be a safe bet that “Clear Vision Plus XR [x-ray]” and “DXO Smart Lighting AI” are at the head of the Memo that Product/Marketing has already sent to the CEO/CTO.
You’re all going to buy Version 7 even with those “so-called bugs”. So suck it up, kids.
Your pal, The Grinch.
Lightroom was reprogramed one year and that was when it was a yearly program. Like PL it had built up years of bugs and was much faster after the new version. I expect there is a large part of the PL code that no one knows how it works or even what it does, most programs go like it as programers move on. It could be as with Lightroom a time when redoing the program IS the big sales attraction.
I’m sort of thinking “but DxO doesn’t make a turnaround of 4 billions/year”. Also, can’t help it and don’t take it bad (at least not worse than anytime): when I look around in the forum, the average age of DxO customers doesn’t promise very open minds (or daring courage) to changes in anything “used to be so for years, so why change it?” 
I like your statement @PeterGallagher and just like to add: the DxO managers just need to keep the EA troop busy and happy to investigate new bugs. So there are two main groups: the deep diving alpha testers as volunteers and sort of “alternative quality lab on unpaid basis” and the investors (with a big overlap between the two). It’s kind of an adventure playground for the young at heart. 
Edit: 2 typos corrected
The problem in photography is the age of those doing it has always been high, family commitments cause people to drop out and fallowed by a minority returning latter. It is also expensive, the cheaper ranges have been replaced by phones so there is a mass phone use and an increasingly small camera one. This is the problem DxO refuses to face as its one that is at both ends of the camera use range, people moving up from phones I think will stay with with programs that work with there phone as well as cameras. Then there are these with cameras moving onto phones either as well as or in some cases age related enforcement (my wife can’t carry a camera now). It a declining market for cameras and an aging one so in many ways the age of the four users reflects this and the loss of phone support incress this problem for DxO.
The phone support or the lack of in PL - is it really a problem for a wide range of phone users who harvest their apps in the various app stores, not bothering about RAW? Or is it something for more experienced photogs who like their RAW developers (take your pick) and want just from time to time do something with their phone pics? For a filter-based phone-photo improvement app PL is too expensive and (worse) too much effort to learn.
Therefore I don’t understand the wish for phone support in PL. Like I don’t understand Greek or Portuguese. I think PL users are the workarounders amongst all other RAW developer clients and used to special apps for everyting?
Phone support, i don’t know when you use the phone’s equivilence of Rawfile the optical corrections and stacked images which are HUGHE in combined lenses phone’s use these day’s are already applied in the phone rawfile.
If so then it’s “easy” to support a phone format. No additional optical corrections based on labtesting needed only HQ denoising, prime is probably to difficult to implement.
I gues that most are happy if they can use the phone rawfiles and run there flavor over it in dxo pl on pixel based files. Instead of using cooked oop-jpeg’s and alter those.