Zum Hauptinhalt gehen

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

C1 14.2 (M1 compatible) still on OpenCL for non-M1 !!!!

Kommentare

75 Kommentare

  • Claude CAUWE

    Then they should communicate about it - that is what is requested in my Tweet.

    And that would make sense as well to avoid bad press and increasing eager - The c20 > c21 didn't deliver much either after all, but was priced as usual.

    1
  • C-M-B

    That's the problem that CaptureOne is having: lack of clear and concise communication.

    Even this whole forum and the whole support system is a symptom of that problem, considering how little they contribute to questions that are posted here, how long people have to wait for a response when filing a request for support.

    They don't listen to their customers. Requests for new features have been and are being ignored - where's focus stacking, exposure stacking, panorama-stitching, HDR stacking?

    Instead we're getting new "features" like changing the exposure with a different gesture or a de-haze tool that's just a combination of clarity and contrast and only works within a very limited range.

    Great, thanks, I hate it. 

    That explains why they chose not to disclose any of these "features" for the pre-sale of the new version and then they hike up the prices only to then lower them for an unknown period with a code that will expire sometime in the near future - and at the same time they have illegal -80% "discounts" for products that were never once sold for the full price.

     

    2
  • ---

    @c-m-b  

    you summarised it very well and i totally agree. not responding to issues or customer requests is massage control used to uphold a fake image of a company which has changed radically in the last years. not to communicate with customer on all available channels is totally retarded this days.

    it is really funny to see that everything loyal c1 fans have assumed is wrong with adobe has now become the normal  in the c1 world.

    2
  • ---

    @claude 

    do you really believe you will get an answer this is not adobe or dxo ?  they are very experienced in ignoring painful questions they don't like.

    1
  • Claude CAUWE

    It is worth a try.

    They would be stupid to ignore it, bad buzzes can inflate very quickly. Bad press for them.

    0
  • HeKoVS

    I don't understand why they don't develop a universal binary app that includes METAL. An app that supports only the x86_64 architecture must run under Rosetta translation on Apple silicon. A universal binary runs natively on both Apple silicon and Intel-based Mac computers, because it contains executable code for both architectures.Affinity, Adobe and many others have implemented this and the speed increase under METAL is sometimes up to 40%. If you do not invest in competent software developers, the result is a product that has extensive restrictions and will not respond to customer requirements. I don't see any light here at the end of the tunnel ...

    2
  • Claude CAUWE

    Am afraid that the answer is just: they don't give a damn.

    Intel-based are "old" customers. So we have paid already.

    M1 was an obliged transition for them to not lose the "new" customers.
    So they did the absolute minimum: an M1 app that runs under Metal.

    And they leave the old Intel guys with no Metal development, as they want to earn money, not invest.

    Really despicable marketing - I tend to regret Adobe - and that says a lot.

    0
  • ---

    what we see now is the effect of a short sighted ignorance years ago when they decided not to move to metal, now they are somehow in the corner and do again what is best for their investors in the same way they did not want to spent money without immediate return before.

    0
  • Dave R

    I understand that beta testers tested 5 betas, the first 3 had metal support for intel machines. Reading between the lines it became obvious that while the M1 version would be ready for release by the end of May as promised that, due to the variety of software and hardware involve in moving Intel bases machines to metal, considerably more work was required on the intel version. I believe CO made the decision that it was better to delay metal on Intel than release a bug filled product.

    Dave

    0
  • Claude CAUWE

    We just want them to confirm that it is only DELAYED, and not scrapped because too much of an investment.

    But I haven't read anything such about this release.

    C1P is known the last times for very cheap solutions (dehaze tool, group edition, etc ...)

    1
  • Ivan Feign

    Their reply on Twitter

    “Metal for Intel processors is currently under development but we can’t comment on release dates yet, we’ll be updating all our channels when we have more information about it.”

    Yeah, let’s end this stupid policy. This is professional software, Phase One needs to be more transparent with its professional users, because this is far from the first time this lack of transparency has pissed off customers.

    Metal coming to Intel Macs isn’t some closely guarded industry secret, so why hide it? Hell, it could even say in the release notes “Metal for Intel Macs coming soon”

    Get with the times, even big ol’ Adobe has been more open than Phase One. If you haven’t noticed yet, we live in an era where customers don’t just blindly buy products, they engage with the companies they buy the products from.

    End the secrecy, hell, I’d even go as far to say that the NDA for PUBLIC betas should go, if people could actually discuss their beta issues and had been kept INFORMED, the lack of Metal on Intel wouldn’t have come as a surprise to most.

    2
  • Claude CAUWE

    Well, at least replied. Proves also that Social Media still have some traction. Good.

    So that already some step forward. Maybe it will come only to C22 - so we will have to pay for it ...
    after all, the planned release of Support for M1 only in September. They went faster - by doing only half of the Metal job...

    I agree that these times, customers engage with their supplies.
    Perhaps that's why some beta-devs were the first to leak the info that they have problems updating Intel code for Metal ?
    Are developers better communicants than the CEO ?

    As you say, the simple mention “Metal for Intel Macs coming soon” would have sufficed.
    But probably, that would have been legally binding.

    0
  • ---

    reality and fiction - from an interview 2 month ago

     https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2021/03/17/interview-with-capture-ones-ceo-rafael-orta

    "We focus very squarely on our customers and how we can speak to them very frequently."

    "I want to make sure that everyone who is a customer, trialing the software, or is interested in Capture One not only has an insight into what we can do today but also what we are building."

    "We will keep doing that and keep looking further into the future so that our community, the media, our ambassadors and influencers have good insight into the things we are working on and how Capture One is going to change in the future.I think we have been relatively good at engaging and listening. I also want to convert that engagement into dialog."

     

     

    0
  • Ivan Feign

    Of course the CEO would say that, because they have zero involvement with actually speaking to customers and probably just get reports from a bunch of yes-men about how great engagement has been.

    0
  • photo by FA

    I thought by now you all know how to reach to CEO ;)

    1
  • Rupert Pessl

    I wonder how many of the people here are professionals who do their own accounting and have the slightest knowledge of software development.

    All this whining/fake outrage about “missing” features is ridiculous. Every new feature is something that wasn’t there when you bought the software. That’s it. You bought a set of features at a given point. You did not buy the right to receive everything as a free update. Even if you have a subscription (which only means that you can use use the product of their intellectual property for a given amount of time).

    Just image you buy a car. Now some years later, the model gets refreshed, “luxury” features that weren’t there before (and probably trickled down from higher-end brands) where added, better safety, better mileage, etc.

    Are you complaining that you are no getting these new features as an update to your car?
    You have what you bought. You knew what you were getting when you purchased.

    If you bought on the hope that some day C1 will implement a feature you care about (because “the completion already has feature x”) you are in for a tough lesson.

    -1
  • Ivan Feign

    It’s not so much missing features or entitlement to said features, as it is a lack of transparency. There are plenty of software devs who are open about their development plans.

    1
  • Rupert Pessl

    And there are plenty of developers who are not. Some because they can't or don't want to share their ideas and progress. Again, as a customer you have what you purchased.

    They work on something new? Great, there will be a release day and you can decide if you're buying or staying with the thing you have. But there is really no need to demand transparency for new features that are currently being worked on.

    -1
  • Claude CAUWE

    @ Ruups

    Your comparison doesn’t hold.
    When I buy a car, of course i buy the hardware as it is at the moment. But all car manufacturers inject updated software even in older cars when they are still compatible.
    Here, buy buying an upgrade, we buy all updates available - as is stated by C1p- for that version.
    C1P boasted recently that they developed M- and Metal compatibility with the help of Apple, then yes, i expect to benefit from the same standards as the other Apple models are long as my hardware is Metal compatible

    1
  • Rupert Pessl

    then yes, i expect to benefit from the same standards as the other Apple models

    There you have it - you expected something. Not what they actually delivered but what you expected. Except for Tesla, the updates to a car don't do much in terms of functionality. Maybe they fix a thing or two, but that's usually about it (exceptions apply, of course).

    My point is that no one should buy on promises, announced plans but on features that are actually there. 

    -1
  • Marco Hyman

    There are plenty of software devs who are open about their development plans.

    And there are plenty of software developers who are not so open.  They'll release a feature when it is ready.  Your choice is to wait or go elsewhere.   You can also complain about the lack of transparency as if somehow the company owes you a peek into their development cycle.  They don't.

    1
  • Rolf Walter

    I am a long time user of C1P. During that time I had some serious issues (opened always a ticket) which could get fixed or found a workaround together with the support, nice people and good talking. One answer was that the problem with 'laggy' would be fixed by moving to metal. That's a year ago. And OpenCL is for some years declared as 'old and move away'.

    It's not a missing feature, it is an error.

    This year I had a problem with my 5 years old motorbike. Got new software and some replacements, no bill. 

     

    2
  • C-M-B

    @ ruuups, the problem is that CaptureOne is talking about including user input/listening to users about features. They claim that they want to know what we'd like to have and they create a user forum for feedback, open threads asking us what we want and then: nothing.

    Users have been asking for some features for years (!) -  way before they split up the PhaseOne/CaptureOne forums - but at least back then there was a real customer support service with people wanting to help you, responding quickly with precise and correct solutions and very often including a bugfix for your issue with the next update.
    But now there's no such luck. They're still willing to help but only so much.

     

    Also: if you're paying 349.00€ for a piece of software that is being sold with claims for "professional support" you'd expect them to fulfil that promise for at least 12 months. But nope. You get some updates until the end of the year and that's it.

    If you buy it in November not knowing about this "policy" you probably won't get any updates at all and then you're stuck with unfixed bugs on newer hardware, semi-working features and lousy integration of operation systems features. So you have to keep paying, hoping they'll fix it in the next version...or the version after that because you can't skip more than one version if you want to upgrade and not buy a whole new version...
    All that while they're hiking up the prices and trying to get you to buy the overprices featureless "upgrades" for limited-time-offerings.

    It's a shame.

    0
  • photo by FA

    The bit that I’m surprised, there are far more Intel based Apple users than M1 based Apple users and they haven’t pushed hard enough to optimise the larger group to have a faster experience.
    On a separate note, they are hiring engineers for cloud based applications. The future looks interesting for C1P

    0
  • Rolf Walter

    @photo by FA, amortization is an important point. RAM limited to 16GB and a very new system. Support/Issues for/with scanner and printers. I think the situation will change 2022.

    0
  • ---

    @photo by FA when I look at their linkedin job offers all 7 vacant jobs are for  marketing or sale

    0
  • photo by FA

    @Rolf So probably they had more problems with M1 machines that actually affected the overall performance.

    0
  • HeKoVS

    One fact that annoys me in general is the presumptuous ignorance of the support. Not the problems and errors that can arise in such complex software, but the fact that every input from the user is thrown off as trivial, inadequate and arrogant. If existing bugs, expected changes were categorized, summarized, discussed on both sides and published on a specific release date, this dissatisfaction and sometimes blatant mood would not arise here. We have all been asking for a revision for a long time (DAM, Metal), but there was never a plausible explanation, neither technically nor temporally. "You get what you paid for" means for me that the package should absolutely correspond to the technical conditions that are full bodied blown into the world by marketing. If this is not the case, then it is my right to object here and insist on a full agreement. For the immensely high subscription costs, I don't just want to be fed with a new DEHAZE slider, but also expect features that make my workflow easier and faster, meet the technical standard (Metal) and also set themselves apart from the competition. It was precisely for these reasons that I decided on C1 at the time. It's a shame that nowadays an app on a top-class MAC requires a response time (in seconds) for changes (styles, mask, etc.). These times should be behind us for many years.

    2
  • ---

    the raw software market has changed very much in the last 10 years with a lot more option available, some of them clearly outperform c1 in certain areas.  a combination of adobe and dxo for example is unbeatble in image quality and DAM and it is still cheaper than c1 !  this alone should be a reason to listen to their loyal customers because no marketing in the world can make this disadvantage in innovation and technology go away.  

    0
  • Dave R

    @CSP

    You need to look here for typical software job: https://careers.captureone.com/ad/software-engineer/72eq0y 

    0

Bitte melden Sie sich an, um einen Kommentar zu hinterlassen.