How quickly does Phase One iterate?
I'm pretty new to CO, so don't have any history to go by. How quickly does Phase One iterate CO? Not so much major X.0 releases, and not 0.0.X bug fix releases, but 0.x small feature releases?
If there was consensus for some new, less than headlining features (I'm not thinking something like keywords), are they typically rolled up into a X.0 release, or would there be a CO 9.8.2 one day, for example?
If there was consensus for some new, less than headlining features (I'm not thinking something like keywords), are they typically rolled up into a X.0 release, or would there be a CO 9.8.2 one day, for example?
0
-
We're told that with v9 we're in a new world, and that we'll see updates far more frequently.
So what went before is arguably not relevant.0 -
As far as I remember they released a new major version on average every two years, but with the introduction of the subscription licensing model they changed to a shorter cycle, so we saw version 9 already one year after version 8. The minor releases so far have brought small improvements, new camera/lens support and of course bug fixes. You can go through the previous release notes if you want to know what was releases in each major and minor version. Version 8 got 9 minor updates and I think that shows you what maybe to expect. 0 -
I agree. Since the release of version 9 you (I) cannot find the release notes of version 8 anymore on the website.
Version 8 had 3 minor udates for free (8.1 - 8.3), one or the other included some improvements/or a small feature if I remember right. I am currently on 8.3.3, the lastest available was 8.3.4, again, if I remember right.0 -
[quote="BeO" wrote:
I agree. Since the release of version 9 you (I) cannot find the release notes of version 8 anymore on the website.
Yes, you can.
Old downloads including old release notes are here:
https://www.phaseone.com/en/Download/So ... chive.aspx0 -
I still don't know how to find this, but the link works, seems you're much better in findings things than me... 🤭 0 -
[quote="BeO" wrote:
I still don't know how to find this, but the link works, seems you're much better in findings things than me... 🤭
On the download page https://www.phaseone.com/en/Download.aspx left bottom -> Archive. 😄0 -
😊 I looked at the adjacent box "documenation" only... 😂 0 -
My concern, as a very interested but apprehensive potential Capture One user, is how long it takes for C1 to be confirmed as being compatible with successive OSX releases - not just major releases, but even point releases. From following this forum very regularly, it appears to me that Phase One isn't in the developer loop with Apple on this, and/or just chooses not to respond to developer releases until after these are rolled out as final releases. I am right, aren't I?
I am unwilling to be constrained in moving to new OSX releases as they become available by having to wait many weeks, and even months in some cases, until C1 is confirmed, and has been updated if necessary, to be compatible.0 -
[quote="W.W. Webster" wrote:
From following this forum very regularly, it appears to me that Phase One isn't in the developer loop with Apple on this, and/or just chooses not to respond to developer releases until after these are rolled out as final releases. I am right, aren't I?
Don't think so and that is not what I have read on this forum. The problem is, that Apple sometimes changes things in the last moment and that doesn't leave enough time for other companies to test, fix issues, test fixes and release on time. The alternative would be that Apple waits at least a month or two when they have a final release candidate before going public to give 3rd part software developers the time to update their software. But that's not the case.
Another aspect is also that you just can't test every possible hard-/software combination beforehand. There are just too many combinations possible.0 -
Don't think so and that is not what I have read on this forum. The problem is, that Apple sometimes changes things in the last moment and that doesn't leave enough time for other companies to test, fix issues, test fixes and release on time. The alternative would be that Apple waits at least a month or two when they have a final release candidate before going public to give 3rd part software developers the time to update their software. But that's not the case.
While Apple sometimes does change things last minute, it is because they discovered a bug. Generally however, it's extremely rare that it would prevent an application from running if it was tested with beta-builds and the golden-master. There will always be bugs, both in the system and in the app. Although, not having your application ready for a new system release is no excuse. Everyone else can do it too. So W.W. Webster's concern is valid if it indeed does take months AFTER system release to get an upgrade out. Mind you, meanwhile Apple is already fixing their bugs to get new updates out, and time should be spent to ensure that the application still works with those as well.
Of course, no one is forced to upgrade to a new system release (unless you're buying a brand new machine) and given that there will be plenty of bugs in the beginning, a more conservative upgrade schedule should be chosen if one relies on C1 for their livelihood.0 -
I would be interested to see an analysis of the dates on which OSX updates went public and the corresponding dates on which C1 was officially deemed to be in conformance.
Believe me, I would like to be proven wrong! Only this issue, and the need for a serious DAM function (not merely that clipped onto v9.0) stand between me and an order for C1.0 -
I would be interested to see an analysis of the dates on which OSX updates went public and the corresponding dates on which C1 was officially deemed to be in conformance.
Believe me, I would like to be proven wrong! Only this issue, and the need for a serious DAM function (not merely that clipped onto v9.0) stand between me and an order for C1.0 -
[quote="dredlew" wrote:
Everyone else can do it too.
Are you really sure about that?0 -
Are you really sure about that?
Yeah, pretty sure about that. If it didn't work that way, OS manufacturers would never be able to release a new version, would they? This is why dev-kits and beta builds exist. For good measure, Apple holds a dev conference every year with qualified staff to guide and hold workshops on how to get you up to speed quickly with the new version. If you can't make it, all sessions are recorded and released on the dev portal.
After all this, you still can't get your application ready for the new release, then you have a distinct lack of care for your software customers. And they WILL jump ship as soon as there is an alternative. In the software business, you should never ever take your customers for granted.0 -
[quote="dredlew" wrote:
Are you really sure about that?
Yeah, pretty sure about that. If it didn't work that way, OS manufacturers would never be able to release a new version, would they? This is why dev-kits and beta builds exist. For good measure, Apple holds a dev conference every year with qualified staff to guide and hold workshops on how to get you up to speed quickly with the new version. If you can't make it, all sessions are recorded and released on the dev portal.
After all this, you still can't get your application ready for the new release, then you have a distinct lack of care for your software customers. And they WILL jump ship as soon as there is an alternative. In the software business, you should never ever take your customers for granted.
Hmm.
I'm fairly sure that even the likes of Adobe have been caught out by last minute changes more than once in recent times. Indeed in non recent times too thinking back to endless mentions of every new Mac update not having working Epson printer drivers (to pick one point from my memory).
Whilst I would agree with you sentiments about not taking your customers for granted that is exactly what big players at the top of the chain seems to do, leaving the smaller guys further down the drainage chute to deal with the rubbish as it arrives.
That is not a particularly new situation but the entire concept of "Agile" development seems to have been spun out of the challenges that the big players have with trying to move beyond whatever level of legacy they are stuck with at the moment. In effect this forces the people down the line to adopt "agile", formerly known in the trade as "fire fighting", if they are to survive. No point in spending a lot of time developing too specifically against stuff that may not actually make it out on a release. You double or maybe even quadruple the costs when you have to back engineer temporary fixes for an undetermined period.
Back in times when upgrades came in boxes and were likely chargeable you got at least some time to buy early, install, test, fix and be ahead of the game so long as you could do it all quickly enough to get your own distribution boxes ready before your customers got too excited.
Now it's all digital downloads and it seems so many people are so desperate for the latest "stuff" that they are willing to put their day to day happiness and, in some cases, their businesses on the line in order to be "first day adopters".
Quite why it that is OK if one is adopting from Apple or Microsoft, et al., and accepting things may not be quite right I don't understand. It certainly seems from comments lower in the pyramid that any problem at all is entirely unacceptable at lower levels.
If a developer elects to try to work with the latest and greatest new developments of a hardware manufacturer (or more likely a group of hardware developers in effect) or a software developer providing core development tools, they are accepting some uncontrollable risk that, on assumes, they feel is acceptable in order to obtain a small technological advantage for a relatively short period of time.
An alternative plan, often used in the past, was to shrink-wrap some of the more critical parts of one's application and self package it so one knew what was in the system and usable and avoided the "disappointment" of the bright, shiny new thing not working as expected.
It seems to be much more difficult to do that successfully today. Presumably the big players are keen to pick up new user licensing fees rather than bundle licences for their older technology.
Grant0 -
Yup, I do agree. And as for the likes of Adobe, they're not really known for caring about their customers, which proves my point. 😉 Adobe is still one of the only games in town, so they get away with it for now. Although, the competition is hard at work to change that and once a critical mass is reached, I think a lot will jump that Adobe ship. 0 -
[quote="dredlew" wrote:
as for the likes of Adobe, they're not really known for caring about their customers, which proves my point. 😉
No company cares for its customers - not one. Any that says it does is - to be frank - selling you something.
Adobe is absolutely no better (or worse) than Phase One here - neither is a charity, neither wants to be your friend, tuck you in at night, or be a shoulder for you to cry on when things get rough.
Their only interest in you, me, and every other customer, is what they can wring out of us in terms of their bottom line.
This insistence on "personalising" a simple business arrangement baffles me...0 -
But.
The objective question remains. Does PO get tripped up by Mac OS (or Windows OS) updates more frequently than "the rest?" Facts would be good to have.
Anecdotally, in recent times, I remember more trouble for CO than for LR, as an example. But is that really true? And is it true in general?0 -
Phase One isn't going to admit to it, Bob - and any other source of "information" on the subject is unlikely to be reliable.
I've seen no compelling evidence of it on here, though.
Yes, Capture One has problems on Mac OS platforms, but it has them on Win platforms too: but not knowing what percentage of Capture One users belong in each camp; and of those percentages, how many raise support cases, we have no idea about which platform is most problem prone. And as I say, there's not a cat in hell's chance that Phase One would publish figures on that.
It's a waste of time speculating about, Bob - and speculation's all we've got.
To be honest, you'd probably be better off asking Apple whether in the round (taking Phase One, DxO, Adobe etc. - all of which ecosystems I've been actively involved in - into account) they're finding that more problems are being reported back to them.
I suggest this because I see a surprisingly high number of complaints across the board about Mac-based problems affecting these providers and more, than I'd ever expect to see as a Windows user who is told on a regular basis that Mac is the OS to use as a photographer...0 -
No company cares for its customers - not one. Any that says it does is - to be frank - selling you something.
Keith, you might want to take off that tinfoil hat once in a while. The concept "customer service" actually does exist, even if you've never heard of it.0 -
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
Phase One isn't going to admit to it, Bob - and any other source of "information" on the subject is unlikely to be reliable.
It's a waste of time speculating about, Bob - and speculation's all we've got.
I suggest this because I see a surprisingly high number of complaints across the board about Mac-based problems affecting these providers and more, than I'd ever expect to see as a Windows user who is told on a regular basis that Mac is the OS to use as a photographer...
True.
But I've had (knock on wood) remarkably little problem with OSX updates - so few that I now regularly do it among the first wave of updaters. I wouldn't warn potential Windows switchers away from the Mac platform.
All developers can be tripped up, so perhaps it's just recent news about El Capitan and CO and not a trend.0 -
I have used Capture One with gradually increasing enthusiasm for several years and so far have never found an OS X incompatibility. I usually upgrade wishing a few days or at most a few weeks of the new releases of OS X. I believe that works all the way basic to Snow Leopard if not before. Certainly no problem since Mountain Lion. Their release cycle is getting more frequent.
Of course I have no insight as to what new releases will include.
I for one would love to see stacking. And better DAM.0 -
[quote="Peter762" wrote:
I have used Capture One with gradually increasing enthusiasm for several years and so far have never found an OS X incompatibility. I usually upgrade wishing a few days or at most a few weeks of the new releases of OS X. I believe that works all the way basic to Snow Leopard if not before. Certainly no problem since Mountain Lion. Their release cycle is getting more frequent.
Of course I have no insight as to what new releases will include.
I for one would love to see stacking. And better DAM.
No problem with El Capitan? PO themselves said there were incompatibilities that weren't resolved until v9.
And I second stacking and improved DAM.0 -
Just 5 cents, is any urgent specific need to jump to major version immediately. I usually wait and test on 1 machine until I upgrade my production macbook. OSX Maverics does a great job, so there is no urgent need to jump into EL Capitan. It is rather Apple breaking everything with major releases. So it is worth waiting then jumping ahead of train. 0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
24 Kommentare