Alex, I understand this marketing race but personally I only watch my needs and I believe more in user feedbacks instead of the last trendy feature.
Necessity is the mother of invention (Platon)
Successful companies apply this philosophic citation to create successful products, not exclusively for sure, but that helps to define the roadmap and anticipate with a little nose, the future needs.
Thank you Alex for this precision. With a such background, users expectations reach a high level for the DXO products, that’s why we ask so much 
I personally think DxO should focus on what they do well and strive to do it better than anyone else. There are already plenty of contenders in the be like/be better than Photoshop market that people can pursue if they want that. At most, better integration of what DxO already offers and also get stronger in the mobile device platform (ie iPad, iPad Pro, and other mobile device forms – that is where I believe the future lies). On1, for example, is doing an admirable job in that respect and in pursuing Photoshop. However, as impressive as their product has become, On1 is always a secondary tool for me. When I want the most natural and beautiful results they will always be most easily accomplished with products from DxO.
I’ve experienced enough problems myself and heard enough complaints about the other swiss army knife programs going after Photoshop that I, personally, don’t want to see DxO being another. Those swiss army knife applications get bloated and end up requiring the latest and greatest computer gear to run well. Not everyone has that. Not everyone even wants that. Nearly everyone, I would imagine, wants great results on equipment they can afford.
DxO, keep doing what you do, integrate what you have, make it platform resilient, and do it better than anyone else.
Agree. I don’ t want such a Swiss army knife bloated software. Risk is real.
…will never be able to open a bottle 
Hahaha…correct, but you can always show it off as one of thousand possibilities.
ON1 Photo Raw is it perfect example of bloated software. Half of the dozens of “filters” are just variations of the same set of tools but each has its own set of sliders and other controls. It’s a bloated mess and performance suffers. PhotoLab, by comparison, is without bloat but requires you to understand how to use the tools to get the effects you want. And, of course, presets can be created which act like filters.
Mark
Have to agree the main ON1 is bloated, but I do like the portrait plugin which is concise and to the point
Weird how a company can get something very wrong and very right!