C1 20 Extremely Buggy - What's the next step?
Looking through and in some cases participating in this particular forum it's easy to see that C1 20 has had more than a bumpy start. It might be fair to say that bugs in software updates are par for the course, but the expectation is usually perhaps tricky UI glitches, or laggy rendering. Maybe even database hiccups.
But this time it looks like a number of the standard tools have all had some kind of nervous breakdown of some sort.
And, from experience, the "new" Capture One.com centralised support has been woefully inadequate and apparently completely unprepared for the slew of users like myself who have had a crucial part of our workflow disrupted, or worse, brought to a complete standstill.
Not so much as an acknowledgement from support, who have had to be continually chased to try to in some way get past a slow and generic automated response system.
"What is the operating system you're using. What versoion of this or that are you trying to work normal tasks on like you have been doing for the last 15 years, etc" (I paraphrase, but it's not just me receiving this flippant email).
What's next? When can we expect an update, or at least an acknowledgement that this release hasn't gone to plan. That the product was rushed to release just to hit the magic 2020 deadline, perhaps?
In the mean time, I thought it might be a good idea to start a list, and invite others to add to it.
I'll start
But this time it looks like a number of the standard tools have all had some kind of nervous breakdown of some sort.
And, from experience, the "new" Capture One.com centralised support has been woefully inadequate and apparently completely unprepared for the slew of users like myself who have had a crucial part of our workflow disrupted, or worse, brought to a complete standstill.
Not so much as an acknowledgement from support, who have had to be continually chased to try to in some way get past a slow and generic automated response system.
"What is the operating system you're using. What versoion of this or that are you trying to work normal tasks on like you have been doing for the last 15 years, etc" (I paraphrase, but it's not just me receiving this flippant email).
What's next? When can we expect an update, or at least an acknowledgement that this release hasn't gone to plan. That the product was rushed to release just to hit the magic 2020 deadline, perhaps?
In the mean time, I thought it might be a good idea to start a list, and invite others to add to it.
I'll start
0
-
- COPY AND APPLY ADJUSTMENTS - BATCH APPLY IS RANDOM AND UNUSABLE IN MOST CASES. SOMEHOW LINKED TO USER SET STYLES BROUGHT OVER FROM PREVIOUS VERSIONS, BUT STILL RANDOM PROBLEMS EVEN AFTER DELETING OLD STYLES.
- KEYSTONE CORRECTION - (As stated in this forum in other threads)
- REPRODUCING LAYERS - (As Stated in other threads - I don't use layers that often so I haven't properly looked at this, actually because I've been too busy putting out fires with the adjustments clipboard)
- CAPTUREONE.COM SUPPORT IS NOT VIABLE.
- ANYTHING ELSE?0 -
Jason2, please be aware that using capitals in your text translate as shouting. I do not think that shouting to other users is appropriate. As you know this is user-to-user forum.
Apart from that, I do not see the added value in a kind of collecting all issues thread. If can easily lead to repetition of what is discussed in detail elsewhere. With successive maintenance updates, already released and upcoming, any list becomes quickly outdated.
Detailed reports of issues are what really matters, both for helping users, and for giving Capture One the information they need to address the issue.
Last but not least, please be aware that a large number of users, including me, are happy users of Capture One 20. Not because we are fanboys, but simply experience little to no disrupting issues.0 -
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
Last but not least, please be aware that a large number of users, including me, are happy users of Capture One 20. Not because we are fanboys, but simply experience little to no disrupting issues.
I too have never had any problems with C1 12 or now C1 20, both have worked great, on my old MBP and now my new MBP, and I think this also needs to be told to people, I feel for all the people having issues but I do think some people come on to this forum before they buy C1 20 Pro to see what it is all about, I did, and maybe would of had second thoughts looking at some of the posts on here, glad I didn't, love the software, does exactly everything I need it too, whenever I need it too.0 -
About a decade ago I transitioned from a role designing radio systems to work in a software systems team.
What I learned there is that our smart customers never take the the first release of anything, nor do they take the first version of any new release. They start by testing the initial release in a non critical environment, and somewhere around the third to fifth dot release they start using it widely.
There is actually no bug free software anymore. This is not because developers are lazy, or managers are callous - competition is fierce, SW with new compettive features has to be released on time, and with a continuously increasing feature set, the stuff is just way to complicated.
I've learned from this - Apple releases its new OS in October - usually about Easter I will install it. I was on OSX 10.12.6 until last September, then I upgraded to 10.14.6. Not surprisingly, 10.14.6 is quite bug free. I might stick with 10.14.6 for an extra year.
For Capture One, although I participate in the Beta testing, However, I never take the X.0 release, nor the X.0.1 release. I usually start with the X.0.2 or X.1 release. I have 13.0.2.19 installed, but not relying on it just yet. If I do anything serious, its with Captutre One 12.
All that being said it is useful to have a bug list posted, that way one knows upfront what to be cautious about and what to avoid.0 -
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
Jason2, please be aware that using capitals in your text translate as shouting. I do not think that shouting to other users is appropriate. As you know this is user-to-user forum.
Apart from that, I do not see the added value in a kind of collecting all issues thread. If can easily lead to repetition of what is discussed in detail elsewhere. With successive maintenance updates, already released and upcoming, any list becomes quickly outdated.
Detailed reports of issues are what really matters, both for helping users, and for giving Capture One the information they need to address the issue.
Last but not least, please be aware that a large number of users, including me, are happy users of Capture One 20. Not because we are fanboys, but simply experience little to no disrupting issues.
Sorry Paul, but picking up on CAPS in a forum is fairly passive/aggressive considering the point of the post was to make a clear list and vent off about the problems I and others are facing, as well as the diabolical support from CaptureOne.com
I can accept that users like myself are in the minority with often very specific problems, but the fact is, in this case I am not the only one suffering with the new software. The vocal few who have the same problem(s) are having exactly the same problems!
Support emails (or lack thereof) suggesting that it's system requirements, or none of the above does nothing to help. Suggestions that other users are just fine could also be described as smug, insulting, or simply brushing the crumbs under the carpet.Eric Nepean wrote:
About a decade ago I transitioned from a role designing radio systems to work in a software systems team.
What I learned there is that our smart customers never take the the first release of anything, nor do they take the first version of any new release. They start by testing the initial release in a non critical environment, and somewhere around the third to fifth dot release they start using it widely.
There is actually no bug free software anymore. This is not because developers are lazy, or managers are callous - competition is fierce, SW with new compettive features has to be released on time, and with a continuously increasing feature set, the stuff is just way to complicated.
I've learned from this - Apple releases its new OS in October - usually about Easter I will install it. I was on OSX 10.12.6 until last September, then I upgraded to 10.14.6. Not surprisingly, 10.14.6 is quite bug free. I might stick with 10.14.6 for an extra year.
For Capture One, although I participate in the Beta testing, However, I never take the X.0 release, nor the X.0.1 release. I usually start with the X.0.2 or X.1 release. I have 13.0.2.19 installed, but not relying on it just yet. If I do anything serious, its with Captutre One 12.
All that being said it is useful to have a bug list posted, that way one knows upfront what to be cautious about and what to avoid.
Thanks Eric - I agree with most of what you say, and I tend to follow a similar pattern. It happened that in my case the timings were such that it 'made sense' to upgrade to C1 20.
I too have had to go back to C1 12, but the fact is that with no acknowledgement from Phase One about any of the described issues with 20 pointed out numerously in this forum (I haven't been over to the PC forum) it doesn't look good any time soon for a point upgrade for me and many others.
Glad things are working out for you, but unfortunately your comment doesn't actually help.0 -
A contribution to the issue is the dark patterns engaged to make users upgrade.
It's all well and good to rest on the laurels of software stasis but the reality is patches and point releases are not what they once were. This isn't XP SP1. We don't get 2 large releases a year during an OS release cycle. We get security point releases, and important ones at that -- multiple times throughout the year. If you want me to remain vulnerable to maintain the use of your software, shame on you.
Further, Capture One engages in this behaviour by way of making you pay for upgrades and enticing you with new features and promises of better, faster, more stable. When the opposite can often ring true.
Blaming the users and a narrative of eagerness to upgrade only exacerbates the issue as it misplaces the true source of the dilemma and merely masks it with a 'if you don't breath, the poison won't getcha'.
Finally, Jason, the condescending tones by those that would rather criticise the delivery than understand and engage the message... Well, let's just say it's not the actions of a single individiual... and do get used to it. It's quite prevalent here.0 -
"Suggestions that other users are just fine could also be described as smug, insulting, or simply brushing the crumbs under the carpet."
Damn right.
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
"Last but not least, please be aware that a large number of users, including me, are happy users of Capture One 20. Not because we are fanboys, but simply experience little to no disrupting issues."
Then we don't really need to hear from you, do we? Why are the majority of your posts telling people things are fine for you? What is your setup? How many (few?) files are you using? People who can't use the software do not want to hear you and others telling them it's fine. Your comments aren't helping anyone at all. Prospective users can go to the marketing pages, they shouldn't be here looking for reassurance that everything is just fine. It isn't fine and it isn't your job to launch yourself in front of the devs so they don't see the mess they've created.
"Apart from that, I do not see the added value in a kind of collecting all issues thread."
Of course you don't. Maybe it's time for you to be quiet for a while or longer. You're doing the opposite of helping.
I got the first response today to a case I started on DECEMBER 11 (that's shouting Paul) and it included this gem: "We haven't read each and every support request". But we're not supposed to make a list because why?0 -
This is a forum, and there are forum rules. These apply whether we are satisfied or angry. I made a kind remark to forum rule 11. That this resulted in aggressive replies at my address, emphasizes the need for these rules I am afraid.
It is no problem we disagree. That's perfectly fine. Just say it. But let's keep it polite. Thank you.0 -
mattcohen wrote:
unresponsive, unrelated, unhelpful, pointless.
The same could be said about your reply. Oh wait, I just said it.
Listen, this isn't solving anything. Venting is a human trait, but not what the forum is here for. Even knowing your problem isn't universal, while frustrating, can point to a solution. That said, I've grown tired of all this bickering of late. I'm signing out and might jump in again in a year or so to see if things have gotten any better. Good luck to all.0 -
"Venting is a human trait, but not what the forum is here for."
No, it's here for people to defend the company from their bad decisions and inability to fix their software. Obviously.
It's been 6 weeks since I reported my issues and I haven't received anything but time-consuming but worthless "help" and criticisms of my system (LOL).0 -
I mean it's quite amazing that everyone knows they rushed out 20 (12.x?). Headlining features were DOA (tethering/keystone/etc), things that worked before broke. Open CL broke. Beachballs everywhere, crashes too. 6 week old support tickets and no fixes. Support history deleted. Customers with no P1 downgraded in priority.
And some in here have the audacity to defend the company and attack the users who are being beta tested at retail cost.
Clowns. Tell me more about how tired you are of it here. And definitely tell me more about the rules and your poor poor replies (none from me) which it seems like you've earned 100%.0 -
I mean - in all fairness - the Catalina rollout was a nightmare.
It's not just C1 that has had issues from the start. Catalina rolled out and Adobe started having issues. To this day inDesign has bugs that haven't been around pre-Cat .. PS has bugs with the UX and every now and then needs to be moved around to snap out of it. The common denominator of *most* issues across the board is macOS release of Catalina. I'm not talking PC. I'm talking pure Mac. If you're not on the last version then disregard it. But every year when a new version is release it has hiccups. It's now 2 months into the new cycle - show me one piece of software that's on an annual release cycle that doesn't have issues the first few months. It didn't / doesn't help that Apple has changed their internals, either.
But it seems that every single year in November the C1 world turns to a giant bitch-fest. It's irrelevant if it turns out to be user error and it's irrelevant if it was a learning curve. Bottom line is annual releases have always had issues. Generally stopping at the point when Apple stops fixing all their bugs and switches to security releases.
I use it for work. I don't work in "Fine Arts" .. I work in a fairly fast paced production environment that needs accurate colors. 9 times out of 10 I have no time to contact them to lay out what happened and do my best to work my way around the issue. There's always an alternative path - nothing is singular. Of course there's always other software that seems to get less complaints on new rollouts . . .0 -
Weird that it's so difficult for people to understand that there's a new OS every year at the same time. Maybe rather than rushing out a point release disguised as a new version into the teeth of a planned OS cycle, they could have waited and fixed the bugs on their own time and money rather than those of us who are paying and waiting both for usable software and responses to tickets.
C1 MARKETED (all caps Paul) this software as ready. They even had a marketing campaign disguised as a beta. Everyone knew it wasn't ready but they kept offering discounts to pre-order and buy early. This can't help but erode trust in people who can see this situation for what it is.
Continue with the apologies though, it's important for professionals to be shielded from the product of their shoddy work.0 -
mattcohen wrote:
Weird that it's so difficult for people to understand that there's a new OS every year at the same time. Maybe rather than rushing out a point release disguised as a new version into the teeth of a planned OS cycle, they could have waited and fixed the bugs on their own time and money rather than those of us who are paying and waiting both for usable software and responses to tickets.
I think the idea of waiting until any crap has clearly been ironed out of whatever major OS releases have been showered on the unsuspecting public is a great idea.
Better yet the unsuspecting public could take it upon themselves to delay adopting and so avoid the ghastly annual word fight that these OS releases seem to create.
The problem seems to be that there are a number of computer users who, for whatever reason, seem intent on diving in to anything new and then expressing disappointment when things do not work as expected - despite warnings that they might not work.
It was always thus.
Years ago I worked on a project where the client, a significant computer manufacturer at the time, insisted on using their latest and greatest dual process Unix box despite the concern expressed by engineering that it would not be ready to release, even internally, for production work for a further 6 months.
They ignored the advice, went ahead without seemingly even attempting to discover what the potential issues might be ... and lost a large and complex chunk of their operational data load (some conversion, much typing on keyboard back then) after 6 months of work. That was three weeks before their extremely important and well publicised "starting to use the new system" date that could not be missed.
Coincidentally all of that happened in late November and early December of the year in question.
Suppliers in an increasingly complex computer environment are often going to find themselves caught between a proverbial rock and a hard place as far as customer expectations are concerned.
Delay the release as suggested and a significant part of the client base will line up to deliver a kicking.
Don't delay and then discover that some people have significant problems - probably another 30% of the user base - and they will deliver a kicking. Plus the original 30% who insisted a release had to be offered and now find themselves ruing that insistence (though perhaps not admitting it even to themselves.)
Google turned up this page link to the Adobe PS compatibility statement for the latest Catalina release.
https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/photoshop/kb/photoshop-and-macos-catalina.html
And this one for Lightroom (Albeit for Classic but maybe there is something similar for whatever the non-classic products are now called?)
https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/lightroom-classic/kb/macos-catalina-compatibility.html
The PS page seems to be dated either 15th Jan 2020 (according to a date on the page) or 14th Jan according to the Google link.
Not sure if there have been further updates but one would assume not without someone noting that the page had become out of date.
I would not no where to start to look on the Apple sites but presumably people are making their feelings known there as well?
Grant0 -
Jason 2 wrote:
.......
Thanks Eric - I agree with most of what you say, and I tend to follow a similar pattern. It happened that in my case the timings were such that it 'made sense' to upgrade to C1 20.
I too have had to go back to C1 12, but the fact is that with no acknowledgement from Phase One about any of the described issues with 20 pointed out numerously in this forum (I haven't been over to the PC forum) it doesn't look good any time soon for a point upgrade for me and many others ....
Yah Capture One's policy is that they never communicate release timing or content until the release. like it or lump thats not going to change.
In the past four years there has always been an update in April, and there is often an update in February or March. If your problem still exists after the April release, perhaps thats a good time to raise the issue again.0 -
SFA wrote:
Better yet the unsuspecting public could take it upon themselves to delay adopting and so avoid the ghastly annual word fight that these OS releases seem to create.
What do you think this does to the bottom line of Capture One's yearly profit margin?
What do you think this does to the overall security landscape of internet connected devices?
What do you think this does to the issues of camera compatibility?
These arguments of 'avoiding' the inevitable are mute. The issue isn't with an individual and their journey through the rubble. It's the fact there's rubble to begin with.
Stop. Assigning. Fault. To. Users.
There is no black and white 'delay or release'. There is a desire and a need for a concerted effort and more point releases to fix these bugs that co-incidentally take months and months to get resolved. Which just so happens to be towards the release of the next version and then lo-and-behold the bugs creep back into a new major release and you're scratching your head about your groundhog day reports and wondering why you're acting as a beta tester on a major product that has otherwise apparently gone through that type of rigorous testing.
Apply these excuses and apology stories to the hardware and tell me it's any different. The premise doesn't change. You're in business because of customers -- and customers don't care that despite half a billion revenue, you can't hire 50 interns to fly through a backlog in a month.0 -
photoGrant wrote:
SFA wrote:
mattcohen wrote:
Better yet the unsuspecting public could take it upon themselves to delay adopting and so avoid the ghastly annual word fight that these OS releases seem to create.
What do you think this does to the bottom line of Capture One's yearly profit margin?
What do you think this does to the overall security landscape of internet connected devices?
What do you think this does to the issues of camera compatibility?
These arguments of 'avoiding' the inevitable are mute. The issue isn't with an individual and their journey through the rubble. It's the fact there's rubble to begin with.
Stop. Assigning. Fault. To. Users.
There is no black and white 'delay or release'. There is a desire and a need for a concerted effort and more point releases to fix these bugs that inevitably get fixed towards the release of the next version and then lo-and-behold the bugs creep back into a new major release and you're scratching your head.
To your first question - I am well aware of the fiscal impact.
Either way.
What does it do to any business when you have to take on costs to fix other people's problems ("partners") while at the same time ending up upsetting one large portion of your customer base or another?
The security landscape is an interesting point. IIRC it was not so long ago that Apple were claiming they did not have the security issues that Microsoft were famous for.
"Why did that change?" Is a question that would be interesting to ask them.
And how come people on older systems seem to survive without the systems being bricked by viruses and whatever other nasties are apparently out there in the wild? (Rhetorical question - no answer expected from the forum since it is unlikely that anyone would know.)
Issues of camera compatibility are interesting. Maybe they could be overcome by a different approach. Likewise lenses. Separate them from the coding release cycle perhaps? I appreciate the potential complexity of managing releases and development and problems fixes AND doing do across 2 operating systems while responding to the additions of new cameras and lenses from manufacturers. (And, in the case of Phase, their own hardware product releases and development.)
And of course there are the other supported third party products to consider (Hardware and Software) plus changes for system hardware - notably GPU cards. It would be very easy for that entire set of considerations to get completely out of hand and make support extremely difficult for the supporters and highly frustrating for the users. Perhaps even more frustrating than is experienced today.
What is your solution and how would you make it cost effective?
The arguments are not "moot" at all. If there is a software company out there that provides totally error free code and perfect operation of its application across all of the platforms it sets out to support - I don't know it.
Can you name one?
I really doubt that the majority of users absolutely must have the latest and greatest OS updates and application updates at the moment of release or even with a few weeks.Take the mass problems out of the equation and there is a better chance of dealing with whatever level of problems were not, for whatever reasons, discovered during testing.
To keep repeating the same sort of problems year after year, whether supplier or consumer, is a poor decision and highly avoidable from the consumer's point of view in the majority of use cases. IMO. You may disagree and you probably will.
This is not a question of assigning fault. It's a question of people accepting reality and making appropriate decisions that best suit their circumstances. That is especially critical if running a business that relies on stable systems. Keep them stable if you can. If not then recognise the risk, how it might affect you and recognise how you could mitigate for it.
You want more point releases? Fine. Not so easy to manage and still get the "perceived" timing right. Adds to costs. How much are people prepared to pay? How much time do users have to check each point release if they are completely risk averse?
Maybe the answer is to channel support more than has been done so far?
So if one is committed to Phase cameras and the "DB" C1 software it's reasonable to expect a premium support offering.
For Enterprise users there is also and enhanced support offer as part of the package.
Perhaps something could be offered to enable rapid support for an additional fee - although how the different levels could be provided with personalised point releases that would make a real difference to them is harder to imagine.
Bugs creeping back into a system are certainly unfortunate and somewhat rare but it can happen and be initiated by several possibilities, not all of them easy to monitor. And of course sometimes the bugs are not so much code bugs as settings "bugs" that would be unlikely to be identified by general testing other than on the machine with the problem.
But really there are not so many of them even if the effects appear to be widely reported in some cases. "Widely" is a value that could benefit from some forensic assessment in that context.
Grant0 -
SFA wrote:
The security landscape is an interesting point. IIRC it was not so long ago that Apple were claiming they did not have the security issues that Microsoft were famous for.
"Why did that change?" Is a question that would be interesting to ask them.
It's very simple. You don't invest in attacking a target platform if the fruits of such labour aren't worth it. Apple's marketshare hasn't just increased, it has dominated. And thus the landscape has changed.SFA wrote:
And how come people on older systems seem to survive without the systems being bricked by viruses and whatever other nasties are apparently out there in the wild? (Rhetorical question - no answer expected from the forum since it is unlikely that anyone would know.)
Assumptions, and simply not fact.SFA wrote:
I appreciate the potential complexity of managing releases and development and problems fixes AND doing do across 2 operating systems while responding to the additions of new cameras and lenses from manufacturers. (And, in the case of Phase, their own hardware product releases and development.)
Let's take a look at another industry who lives with the exact same 'complications' as you describe. The motion industry. I have software licenses that range from $5 / month to $10k / year. There is not a single other piece of software in my workflow that I have the same level of frustrations with. There are multiple examples of hardware-software companies that strive and thrive in the current environment because they can pivot.SFA wrote:
What is your solution and how would you make it cost effective?
Drop the marketing bullshit about the support you'll receive. Charge more for the support you can afford to supply. I opted to purchase an enterprise license strictly under the pretense the support would be improved. More marketing lies.
Split the product into two releases. Long-Term-Release for bugs and camera updates and Bleeding-Edge for those that need new features at the expense of likely breaking old ones.
Have escalated support be an additional cost. If you're integrating C1 into a complex workflow on the daily, you'd be willing to pay to achieve this should someone be willing to listen and help. If you're trying to work out how to enable GPU support and you can't figure it out from the KB articles. Sure, get to the back of the queue and wait a few weeks for a response.SFA wrote:
The arguments are not "moot" at all. If there is a software company out there that provides totally error free code and perfect operation of its application across all of the platforms it sets out to support - I don't know it.
Can you name one?
That is not the point. When I see on the weather channel that it is sunny, and I go outside and it rains -- I am not surprised only disappointed. The arguments that are put forth in order to avoid dealing with these bugs is akin to not going outside.. Then you won't get rained on. We're all well aware of the complexities of software development (we're at the mercy of the result don't forget). Again the issue is the optics of blame and you cannot shift this to the user.SFA wrote:
I really doubt that the majority of users absolutely must have the latest and greatest OS updates and application updates at the moment of release or even with a few weeks.Take the mass problems out of the equation and there is a better chance of dealing with whatever level of problems were not, for whatever reasons, discovered during testing.
So quick to assume, again, that it's about the 'latest and greatest'. This isn't the case and you're using a very large brush.SFA wrote:
To keep repeating the same sort of problems year after year, whether supplier or consumer, is a poor decision and highly avoidable from the consumer's point of view in the majority of use cases. IMO. You may disagree and you probably will.
Yes, of course I will disagree. Some of us are in a position that we do not get to indulge the requirements for a quarantined workflow.SFA wrote:
This is not a question of assigning fault. It's a question of people accepting reality and making appropriate decisions that best suit their circumstances. That is especially critical if running a business that relies on stable systems. Keep them stable if you can. If not then recognise the risk, how it might affect you and recognise how you could mitigate for it.
Who needs to accept reality? You seem to make broad strokes regarding what is considered critical, and reliable and it does nothing to help those that don't align with those priorities. Case in point, Silverstack developers worked closely with DIT's to introduce features that would help their encryption workflow when working on shows developed by Netflix, etc. https://pomfort.com/silverstack if you see this level of engagement to appease customers from Capture One, link me up!SFA wrote:
You want more point releases? Fine. Not so easy to manage and still get the "perceived" timing right. Adds to costs. How much are people prepared to pay? How much time do users have to check each point release if they are completely risk averse?
We are already paying more. Fuck the costs, to be polite. If you've paid $200 for a C1-20 license, and your workflow is broken due to a bug that isn't fixed until C1-21 starts rolling around. What have you paid for, for the entire year? To say an influx of smaller releases that fixes minor bugs would be a problem just boggles my mind.SFA wrote:
So if one is committed to Phase cameras and the "DB" C1 software it's reasonable to expect a premium support offering.
For Enterprise users there is also and enhanced support offer as part of the package.
Ok, so the marketing that offered different levels of support with Capture One wasn't accurate to begin with, so you must spend $50k to get help on a software renaming bug?
I'll reiterate. I paid for an enterprise license solely for better support -- and I've received the exact same level as anyone here venting frustrations.SFA wrote:
Bugs creeping back into a system are certainly unfortunate and somewhat rare but it can happen and be initiated by several possibilities, not all of them easy to monitor. And of course sometimes the bugs are not so much code bugs as settings "bugs" that would be unlikely to be identified by general testing other than on the machine with the problem.
I run my own internal bug tracker for Capture One to catch regressions, unfixed changes, new bugs, etc. I can assume only that 'somewhat rare' is likely anecdotal on your behalf.
Don't even get me started on testing in general, the beta program, et al.0 -
Your solution to the level of service problem (at least by way of expectation if not delivery) - i.e. go for a level of premium service - could be expected to be a rational choice for your purposes.
I'm not sure everyone would come to the same decision, even among your peers undertaking the same levels and types of work that you do.
My Broad Brush comments are intentionally broad on the basis that across the mass of the user base and including the non-professional (in terms of "not reliant on photography for a living") users experiences and levels of frustration and perception of importance will likely very greatly. I suspect the same might be said for OS differences too. And probably a few other variable factors.
But not everyone has problems and if they do have some problems not everyone has the same problems. And in the case of the V20 release a lot of the problems that would have appeared in the Support system were not problems of functionality of the application. Rather they were more about the ordering and license issuing and activation processes. Seemingly not so easy to deal with when arriving in bulk and relying on a business partner for part of the reactivation activity.
Sure it should not have happened. But it did. By that time it was already too late to turn off the supply tap and stop the roll out even if people thought it was the right thing to do. After that point I would guess it was rather challenging to try to decide how best to go about the challenges.
Grant0 -
SFA wrote:
Your solution to the level of service problem (at least by way of expectation if not delivery) - i.e. go for a level of premium service - could be expected to be a rational choice for your purposes.
I'm not sure everyone would come to the same decision, even among your peers undertaking the same levels and types of work that you do.
I do not understand you. We both agree that maybe an honest and paid for enhanced support could be a solution to some of the pains and bottlenecks experienced by those who use this platform to its full utility.
I then tell you I've gone that route and experienced no better than those who are paying for a student license and submitting their issues via Zendesk with unsatisfactory results or response.
What are you trying to say here?SFA wrote:
My Broad Brush comments are intentionally broad on the basis that across the mass of the user base and including the non-professional (in terms of "not reliant on photography for a living") users experiences and levels of frustration and perception of importance will likely very greatly. I suspect the same might be said for OS differences too. And probably a few other variable factors.
To my point, which you missed -- I appreciate you're trying to wash the masses as an eager, feature-hungry upgrade machine destined to commit the fatal sin of breaking their setups on day 1.
What I'm trying to convey is that the general populus isn't as confined to your concepts as you'd hope. There's minutia to reasons needing to update software, whether the OS, 3rd party, etc.
I find it wrong to ask an end-user to not update their software. I find it a liability from a security perspective first and foremost, and that's a discussion I'd be more than happy to have with you in depth if you'd care to understand what ramifications these sorts of instructions can have on an end user further down the line. But I see the same advice thrown around time and time again.
Apple do not deliver end-user point releases without submitting developers' multiple stage beta's in order to mitigate whatever issues of incompatibility may arise. It is the responsbility of 3rd party developers to take users security seriously and commit resources accordingly to test the software against the latest patches in order to maintain compatibility.
These sorts of fixes takes developers a few days. This hasn't been the case here.
Again. Telling users not to upgrade their operating system software for security releases (major releases, are a fair and different argument) is wrong. It is flat wrong.SFA wrote:
But not everyone has problems and if they do have some problems not everyone has the same problems. And in the case of the V20 release a lot of the problems that would have appeared in the Support system were not problems of functionality of the application. Rather they were more about the ordering and license issuing and activation processes. Seemingly not so easy to deal with when arriving in bulk and relying on a business partner for part of the reactivation activity.
Do we frequent the same forum? Are we both speakers and readers of English? Are you really concluding that most issues with V20 have been about the licensing and pre-order fiasco at the start?
Sheesh.0 -
Suggesting that people just don't know what they're getting themselves into is pretty poor show. The problems people are having with the software, including myself, are many and often bedded in the core functionality of a software that clearly wasn't properly tested. We're not talking the occasional crash bug, or database corruption, or licensing bugs, which could be understood and corrected with a maintenance release. This is workflow and key tool malfunctions.
That's it.
It's not a user issue. C1 12 didn't have these breaks (for me). My OS is running as it should without issue. My Computer is maxed out and up to date. All, or any of my other software continues to work through OS updates.
No. This isn't my fault.
Support is TERRIBLE. Awful. And users coming on to the forums to defend Capture One is nothing short of smug and unhelpful at best, but in fact just gets in the way of fixing the problems. "There's nothing wrong with the software on my system, so it must be your computer, and therefore it's your fault that you upgraded" etc.
Capture One 20 shouldn't have been released. As far as I can tell it was released to catch the roll around of the decade. "We didn't want to call it C1-13, and we thought that the 20 nomenclature fitted the software going into the next decade blah blah blah marketing blah"
I fell for it, sure, but it came at a time when it made better financial sense to upgrade to 13 than it did to stay with 12.
They shouldn't have rushed the release. I don't care if they're competing with anyone. The product should be ready when it's ready.
And if not then they definitely should have re-enforced the support that is woefully inadequate.At this stage - I've had my support cases cancelled, and there is actually no point in starting up a new case judging by the claims in these forums about wait times.
What a balls-up0 -
photoGrant wrote:
I do not understand you. We both agree that maybe an honest and paid for enhanced support could be a solution to some of the pains and bottlenecks experienced by those who use this platform to its full utility.
I then tell you I've gone that route and experienced no better than those who are paying for a student license and submitting their issues via Zendesk with unsatisfactory results or response.
What are you trying to say here?
What I am saying is that your choice is logical and what I would do but I suspect others in your position might take a different view.
It's not a comment about the level of service you do (or do not) currently obtain at this time. Rather I wonder whether the attempt by the C1 team to differentiate the service has been adversely affected by the early problems for the entire revised support process that seem to be the result of the high number of cases (of ALL TYPES including the licensing and activation issues and whatever has been going on with OS releases from either primary OS source) and the problems involved with attempting to resolve a backlog that was not expected.
When the request numbers are extremely high the chances are that clients feel they are not getting the response they are entitled to - create another request and generally bombard an already overwhelmed system.
A bit like a client expecting some images and calling every 5 minutes to see how you are getting on. It doesn't help you but they feel a need to do it because it's important to them and the focus of their world at that moment.
If you have not been in that situation in a Support Desk environment the reality, of just trying to offer some sort of response to the reports of the same problem from multiple individuals when the problem is already reported multiple times and there is no immediate assistance you can offer, is one of the most frustrating experiences a support person can have. That's not a defence, just an observation based on experience.
You get to the stage where you are constantly just trying to deal with incoming messages that are effectively no more than repetitions and nobody gains anything from the activity.
If you have ever sent an email to a wide selection of addresses that some of which turn out to be "undeliverable" and then set an "Away" auto reply and head out of the office for a few weeks you will understand the sort of issues involved.
And the trouble then is that there is no way to "fix" the immediate workload problem. At least not a "fix" that would not itself just create another bombardment of messages.
That's one of the reasons to be wary of email based systems, in my opinion.
With a login based system - one would expect to be able to add a message at login to explain the situation. That would be much more effective, in my opinion, than can be achieved by email responses in most cases.photoGrant wrote:
To my point, which you missed -- I appreciate you're trying to wash the masses as an eager, feature-hungry upgrade machine destined to commit the fatal sin of breaking their setups on day 1.
What I'm trying to convey is that the general populus isn't as confined to your concepts as you'd hope. There's minutia to reasons needing to update software, whether the OS, 3rd party, etc.
I find it wrong to ask an end-user to not update their software. I find it a liability from a security perspective first and foremost, and that's a discussion I'd be more than happy to have with you in depth if you'd care to understand what ramifications these sorts of instructions can have on an end user further down the line. But I see the same advice thrown around time and time again.
Apple do not deliver end-user point releases without submitting developers' multiple stage beta's in order to mitigate whatever issues of incompatibility may arise. It is the responsbility of 3rd party developers to take users security seriously and commit resources accordingly to test the software against the latest patches in order to maintain compatibility.
These sorts of fixes takes developers a few days. This hasn't been the case here.
Again. Telling users not to upgrade their operating system software for security releases (major releases, are a fair and different argument) is wrong. It is flat wrong.
Actually no, my point is that many users are not operating at the bleeding edge of technology needs and still rattle along quite happily on older systems with older versions of OS's and no real NEED to update their version of C1 at all.
That may not be your situation and you may have very good reasons for feeling a need to adopt the latest and greatest because you operate in an environment where security risks are more likely than they are for others. I understand that.
For many that is not the case. There is no need for them to dive in to the changes at the first possible opportunity.
Capture One's message on this is no different to the message being put out by Adobe. that seems to suggest there is a lot more to this release than a "security " release.
Moreover there has never been a guarantee that a "security" release carries no risk. Quite the opposite on some occasions with Microsoft. Are Apple able to claim anything different?
Given that the reported security risks in some cases go back many years (e.g. Intel processors) and still seem to be flooding in (according to reports) from even the most recent system level developments after many years of ubiquitous internet connectivity one might wonder why the industry appears to be so incompetent - even the largest, richest companies with the most skilful workforces - yet security problems keep appearing. But that's a digression.
Your job means you are exposed to these potential risks far more than most. You have assess your perceived risk level accordingly. Others may be able to adopt a different position and would probably benefit from doing so for a few weeks after a release.photoGrant wrote:
Do we frequent the same forum? Are we both speakers and readers of English? Are you really concluding that most issues with V20 have been about the licensing and pre-order fiasco at the start?
Sheesh.
It would seem not (in answer to your multiple questions in the last paragraph).
My point was simply that the initial marketing/licensing "confusions" (too many separate types of issue to list) seemed to be going through the same support teams as the more technical issues for filtering purposes and even resolution. I reckon that created an initial unresolvable high level and unexpected message load that created a large and actively pursued (by the users) backlog of "cases" to deal with. It would likely have resulted in rapid growth of chasing messages that, despite being quite reasonable in themselves, would have the effect of jamming up the system. (See my earlier analogy.)
Once people actually got the installations installed and working some of the technical problems became apparent and another wave of calls for help arrived - well before the license issues were resolved it seemed. My guess is that was overwhelming the system and the people involved. An unpreventable (by that time) tsunami of emails hitting an already full (and new) system.
As some have reported this week, there has been contact with some people with long outstanding reports that seem to confirm that interpretation.
FWIW I submitted one relatively minor observation about the FAQ system back in early December and got a sensibly prompt reply. In response I sent some observations about the new system and what I perceived as the risks faced. I had replies to that too.
I have not had need to call on Support for anything else. I am still running the initial release at this time. (The first update had nothing relevant to me and I have not got around to doing the latest one).
I have one small issue but it's not worth reporting. It might be a regression issue - it came and went around the time of the V11/V12 update. However it might be more of a Windows or a settings issue since it also seems to have affected V12.
As it is only a niggle and I have stumbled across a way to get around it I'm not worried. A fresh report can wait until the Support backlog is resolved.
Maybe I am just lucky?
You would be horrified I am sure - I still use Windows 7!
And as far a I can tell that (the lack of real urgency to upgrade) is also true for many other users on both Mac and Windows who likely have no need at all to rush into a new version of anything without taking some time to discover whether others may be experiencing difficulties.
Not you - your work risks probably give you few options, although even then one maybe has to consider where the greatest risk lies and whether deferring an OS update for a few weeks (for example) is truly dangerous.
Microsoft's update policy for Win10 has been one of the reasons I am an Win 7 holdout. That and the reports of some rather dubious releases on a regular basis - despite apparently extensive beta testing - and the stability I have experienced with Win 7 since its development ended.
Grant0 -
SFA wrote:
What I am saying is that your choice is logical and what I would do but I suspect others in your position might take a different view.
What view is there to be taken? Customers need support -- customers aren't getting it to a satisfactory level. Attempts to offer 50 thousand dollar cameras or enterprise licenses to answer these woes isn't right.SFA wrote:
You get to the stage where you are constantly just trying to deal with incoming messages that are effectively no more than repetitions and nobody gains anything from the activity.
Yes, which is why I've pushed for the notion of a more transparent and forum based support system. I've been calling for this for 8+ years. These issues haven't crept up magically due to a variety of completely unlikely circumstances during a once in a blue-moon alignment of mishaps. This has been colour on the wall year after year after year. To make my point again, all of what you're saying is excuses that have been banded around mercilessly for years. Things have gotten to the point that these excuses are no longer viable.SFA wrote:
And the trouble then is that there is no way to "fix" the immediate workload problem. At least not a "fix" that would not itself just create another bombardment of messages.
Well, let's take a simple one line from the release notes and see how an hour of testing could avoid a week of un-necessary e-mails?
Tangent HDR/Highlight slider support was listed as fixed. It isn't. Had this been appropriately tested and mitigated prior to release, there wouldn't be a reason for another 30+ people to send more tickets in. But this is the users fault, and we should give Capture One some breathing room? No, mate. We kick up a stink and voice that this isn't acceptableSFA wrote:
That's one of the reasons to be wary of email based systems, in my opinion.
As opposed to what? Any attempts for help elsewhere has been met with hostility if the first thing that end user didn't do, was file a report via e-mail communication.SFA wrote:
Actually no, my point is that many users are not operating at the bleeding edge of technology needs and still rattle along quite happily on older systems with older versions of OS's and no real NEED to update their version of C1 at all.
I did understand the point you were making, and I was explaining that the old adage of rattling along on old hardware is not okay. You seem to conflate my passion for security and my personal workflows for my true passion, which is security for all.SFA wrote:
.
For many that is not the case. There is no need for them to dive in to the changes at the first possible opportunity.
Yes, sir. There is. With 0day's becoming standard back channel sales, with ransomware targeting anyone with an unsecure port, an old operating system and a bad day, with the worlds richest man having his most private images leaked and extorted... You're inviting insecurity by inaction and I will happily repeat myself. It's a fallacy to rest on this argument as the basis for what we're discussing.
If there are security patches, update. If the software you use is still under active development and taking your dollar -- it is on the developers of that software to ensure compatibility before, or very shortly after these types of releases. To point elsewhere is to blame the passenger on the bus for the driver speeding and crashing. Why can't you find it in your heart to push criticism where it belongs, here?SFA wrote:
Capture One's message on this is no different to the message being put out by Adobe. that seems to suggest there is a lot more to this release than a "security " release.
Which release are you referring to? If it's any OS security/point release (X.X.1, X,X.2, X.X.3) then please enlighten me with some facts. Otherwise we may be missing one another on this point.SFA wrote:
Given that the reported security risks in some cases go back many years (e.g. Intel processors) and still seem to be flooding in (according to reports) from even the most recent system level developments after many years of ubiquitous internet connectivity one might wonder why the industry appears to be so incompetent - even the largest, richest companies with the most skilful workforces - yet security problems keep appearing. But that's a digression.
It is not incompetence. It is an arms race. It is a profit driven motive. It is politics and it is more than putting your best programmers at work. To assume the industry is incompetent in this domain just screams to me that you're throwing baseless conjecture at another nuanced topic to help coerce a thin point.SFA wrote:
Your job means you are exposed to these potential risks far more than most. You have assess your perceived risk level accordingly. Others may be able to adopt a different position and would probably benefit from doing so for a few weeks after a release.
My individual needs and examples were one of many in an attempt to point out to you that you cannot simply assume 'everyone' is ok with stasis. You're wrong. There may well be a silent majority that are comfortable on Version 9, Windows 7, and don't make a peep. Why Capture One should care about those customers needs, I don't know.SFA wrote:
And as far a I can tell that (the lack of real urgency to upgrade) is also true for many other users on both Mac and Windows who likely have no need at all to rush into a new version of anything without taking some time to discover whether others may be experiencing difficulties.
You say 'anything' and I think it's important to make a clear distinguishing line between major releases, and point releases.
I think it's ill advised for anyone on production to wake up, and throw a new version of Capture One on their machine before they head to set.
I think it's wise to patch security holes that come in point releases.
When 10.15.2 came out, it broke Capture One tethering. Why? I've already explained that in enough detail on this forum -- suffice it to say, the wisest turn of events would be to double down on your broken software, immediately release a user-wide warning (which they did!) and have a fix available within 24-48 hours. Let's give Capture One 5 days, they're Danish.
What happened was a guideline to re-install/downgrade your operating system to continue tethering!
Just to really be clear, because I mustn't have been so far -- Users (full stop, not your ideology of them) should stay up to date for security reasons and not feature reasons. Feature reasons should be tested and introduced on an as-needed basis with enough testing to support a smooth transition.
When a situation like 10.15.2 happens, the blame is not the user. The fix is not to downgrade. The answer is not weeks for a fix. The conclusion isn't 'it only happened to a small set of feature hungry users'. Your brush strokes that you're so happily waving are paying dividends to those who are seeing the ignorance play out with confidenceSFA wrote:
Not you - your work risks probably give you few options, although even then one maybe has to consider where the greatest risk lies and whether deferring an OS update for a few weeks (for example) is truly dangerous.
When certain equipment on certain jobs, or certain post houses have certain contracts -- there are issues and audits that can make or break more than just your position. Again, you're missing the bigger picture.0 -
Whatever the reason, the fact is that the software isn't working as advertised - not just for me, but for other users. That still makes me a professional user BTW, irrespective of whether I should or should not have upgraded to the publicly available software that Phase One are selling.
What part of this doesn't make sense?
Professionally speaking Capture One should still be in version 12 and version 13 or 20 or whatever they think it should be called should still be in beta. At least.
It's not ready - and that's not my fault.
Ignoring the problem is about as insulting as it gets for me - a professional user and long time advocate of Capture One.
I can't use the software, and Phase One don't want to look at it.
Why is that?0 -
I am uncertain why you and @photoGrant seem to be yelling at Grant. He spends a lot of time trying to help his fellow users learn to use features or find workarounds for problems. It seems to me your anger (and everyone else's) should be directed a Phase One. Let them know how you feel using the support system - I have. In addition after each resolved case there is a survey on how they did handling the case. They are not getting good reviews from me so far. Jason 2 wrote:
Ignoring the problem is about as insulting as it gets for me - a professional user and long time advocate of Capture One.
Right and us users are not the ones ignoring your problem. Phase One is. And I include the cases of people here reporting that feature XYZ is working for them here. Just because I have a problem with some aspect of the software does not in and of itself mean that feature is straight up broken. If no one can get it work then it is. But if others are getting it to work then there could be a trouble shooting process that might get you up and working too. It is worth knowing what other users are experiencing. Hearing them say they have the same issue or it works for them *is* helpful.
Sorry that doesn't lead to an immediate fix for the person having the problem but it can begin to get you there. And if support is sub par it's all we have.Jason 2 wrote:
I can't use the software, and Phase One don't want to look at it.
Yeah annoying.Jason 2 wrote:
Why is that?
I strongly suspect that it is not for nefarious reasons but instead due to incompetence. Sorry but shipping software that is not ready is incompetent. Changing the support process without having a plan to staff it adequately is incompetent. Doing the second thing at the same time as a release is incompetent. Combining multiple instances of incompetence is extremely unfortunate.
I usually defend myself from badly managed releases by waiting to see how it is received too - as Grant suggests. I do not think that excuses software vendors from releasing stuff that is not ready but it happens so often I have chosen that path. I am simultaneously grateful for early adopters - otherwise the problem would not be found - and sympathetic to their plight - because there is so much incompetence in the software industry.
I just upgraded to v20 and am testing it out. So far I have only found the same problems I have had with v11 and v12. So, I am doing OK with it. We'll see what happens once I pull a few of the sessions I am working on into the catalogue.0 -
IanL wrote:
I am uncertain why you and @photoGrant seem to be yelling at Grant. He spends a lot of time trying to help his fellow users learn to use features or find workarounds for problems. It seems to me your anger (and everyone else's) should be directed a Phase One. Let them know how you feel using the support system - I have. In addition after each resolved case there is a survey on how they did handling the case. They are not getting good reviews from me so far.
Where am I yelling, Ian? I’ve been quite polite and clear and have only responded to make points. You're more than welcome to join in and rebut but do not denigrate my passions for better as attacks towards another user0 -
photoGrant wrote:
Where am I yelling, Ian? I’ve been quite polite and clear and have only responded to make points. You're more than welcome to join in and rebut but do not denigrate my passions for better as attacks towards another user
Fair enough. And you are right no one was actually yelling. I am definitely picking up on an argumentative vibe - which is understandable given how annoying this is. My main point was we should direct our frustration where it belongs and take it easy on each other.0 -
IanL wrote:
photoGrant wrote:
Where am I yelling, Ian? I’ve been quite polite and clear and have only responded to make points. You're more than welcome to join in and rebut but do not denigrate my passions for better as attacks towards another user
Fair enough. And you are right no one was actually yelling. I am definitely picking up on an argumentative vibe - which is understandable given how annoying this is. My main point was we should direct our frustration where it belongs and take it easy on each other.
To quell passion enforces obedience.
Let's stay passionate.0 -
Back to the point - Capture One 20 breaks stuff that used to work perfectly for years, and it's unusable for many professional users. What are they doing about it? Nothing as far as we can tell. There's no defending that. 1 -
Mark492 wrote:
Back to the point - Capture One 20 breaks stuff that used to work perfectly for years, and it's unusable for many professional users. What are they doing about it? Nothing as far as we can tell. There's no defending that.
Thanks for bringing this back to the original question.
Fact is C1 20 is probably the worst release from phase one in as long as I've been using phase one. C1 9 was super slow, but at least it worked.
The Capture One team should have put out a statement by now IMO, to at least give a timeline for the multiple fixes for problems that should never have been released in the first place.
I know you wanted the version to be called 20 to match the name of the year, but it wasn't ready and you released it anyway. That has to be some kind of problem fuelled by marketing and ego.1
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
30 comments