CO7 Crashing all the time
I'm facing the fact that CO7.0.2 is simply not a stable product. It crashes very often and when it works, it does it with a low performance. I bought an upgrade from CO7 (yes, i paid money for it!) and now i'm unable to do my job.
What the hell are you doing? Will there be a release which increases the performance soon?
Working on SnowLeopard and P65+
What the hell are you doing? Will there be a release which increases the performance soon?
Working on SnowLeopard and P65+
0
-
Have you made any attempts to address your performance issues yourself? There are many of us, including myself, running 7.0.2 perfectly minus a couple of bugs.
Have you looked into turning off OpenCL? Is your computer up to the recommended system requirements? Have you looked at decreasing the preview render size?0 -
I'm having crashing problems all the time. When ever I start up the program it loads and then immediately crashed.
It's kind of embarrassing this happing in front of clients.
Going back to 6.
Shooting on a Canon 5D MKII0 -
[quote="NN634895535062048547UL" wrote:
I'm having crashing problems all the time. When ever I start up the program it loads and then immediately crashed.
It's kind of embarrassing this happing in front of clients.
Going back to 6.
Shooting on a Canon 5D MKII
Have you done some Mac maintenance recently, like repair permissions? And use 7.0.2?0 -
I am having a very similar experience, I can't even shoot a single shot, and yes, repaired permissions earlier today.
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
I am using CO 7.0.2 on a Mamiya with a Leaf Aptus-II 5, running Snow Leopard on a 2.8 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon.0 -
I returned to 6.4.4. Phase One should test these upgrades before releasing them to the public. 0 -
[quote="German7" wrote:
I returned to 6.4.4. Phase One should test these upgrades before releasing them to the public.
I can ensure you that the products are tested thoroughly before release. However, it's always a balance between development time, testing time and the combined amount before getting releasing it to the users. We try our very best to balance it right. If you have found a bug, please report it to the Support team through our website.0 -
[quote="jockes" wrote:
I'm facing the fact that CO7.0.2 is simply not a stable product. It crashes very often and when it works, it does it with a low performance. I bought an upgrade from CO7 (yes, i paid money for it!) and now i'm unable to do my job.
What the hell are you doing? Will there be a release which increases the performance soon?
Working on SnowLeopard and P65+
If you are working with sessions, please try to create a new one.
I would also recommend you update toOSX 10.8, and have a look your machine configuration. 16 gb of RAM, a fast SSD disk, and a good graphics adapter are highly recommended.
If you still experience random crashes, please try to set OpenCL acceleration to "Never" (from Preferences -> General -> Hardware Acceleration) and create a support case through our website ( http://www.phaseone.com/en/SupportMain/ ... pport.aspx ), and we will help you solve your problems.0 -
I experience very, very slow performance (in comparison to v6) with my Macbook Pro retina with 756gb SSD drive and 16gb ram when tethered with my Canon 5D3. On a shoot this past Friday, C1 crashed at least 8 times, some were right after hard reboots. The previews take 10+ seconds to snap into focus with each image. Is there a way to turn off completely the Lens Correction tool? I notice when I'm waiting for the preview to build that the preview looks like it's "undistorting" the image, which seems to take the most time. Pretty unacceptable. 0 -
10 seconds is or course way too much. The same goes for the crashing! However, the lens correction tool normally isn't the source of slow performance.
I would really like You guys, that are experiencing bad performance in one way or another, to create a support case from our website ( http://www.phaseone.com/en/SupportMain/ ... pport.aspx ) including the information requested here: http://www.phaseone.com/Search/Article. ... nguageid=1 .
It will also be most helpful if You can:
- Describe steps to reproduce,
- provide a good description of your problem, and
- Characterize when it usually happens.
- Provide 2-5 raws with settings (use the Export function or pack the files as .EIP (right click on the picture in a Session)0 -
Also, please update to 7.1 so we don't have any deviation between the version you are using and the new standard version for the software used internally.
http://www.phaseone.com/en/Downloads/Ca ... Pro-7.aspx0 -
Hello:
Thank you for your response and explanation. But the fact is that I still experience crashes with that version (7.0.2) of CO. I work in an environment where I have to stay productive and can not deal with the hassles that new versions seem to consistently bring on. So for the time being I will stay at 6.4.4 and later on update to a higher version of the software.
I may add that probably not everyone can upgrade to 10.8 the moment it comes out (particularly in a corporate environment), there is a lag time, and Phase One should account for their products continuing to work for earlier systems.
I will open a ticket if, after upgrading, I keep finding a bug (as you suggest), but I find it much less annoying to not upgrade when a new version gets released but instead waiting for a while. It would be nice to see that change.
Thanks,0 -
[quote="German7" wrote:
But the fact is that I still experience crashes with that version (7.0.2) of CO. I work in an environment where I have to stay productive and can not deal with the hassles that new versions seem to consistently bring on. So for the time being I will stay at 6.4.4 and later on update to a higher version of the software.
That's certainly fine but the higher version is 7.1, available as of today, and has a lot of improvement so if you get time I would suggest you upgrade.0 -
Will do, thank you. 0 -
Till this afternoon I was already looking for new RAW software because of all above mentioned.
Capture One 7 was turned into a nightmare and 7.01 didn't made it any better.
Version 7.1 running now nice, stable and fast till this far.
Only have to check if tethered shootings is working now for my D700.
And also mentioned before, better wait one month longer for stable software than this crap again.
Thanx.
Peter0 -
I had Lightroom so far. Today , after several recommendations i bought Capture One and was planning on using it for a shooting saturday.
Sadly, i can´t even try the Software out. It just crashes and crashes and crashes, special during tethered shooting (5DmII)
I´m using a MAC with all recommended Hardware. So i have no clue why this happens. Guess i paid a lot of money for nothing.
Thats the worst software i ever tried !0 -
[quote="NNN634976352769588504" wrote:
I had Lightroom so far. Today , after several recommendations i bought Capture One and was planning on using it for a shooting saturday.
Sadly, i can´t even try the Software out. It just crashes and crashes and crashes, special during tethered shooting (5DmII)
I´m using a MAC with all recommended Hardware. So i have no clue why this happens. Guess i paid a lot of money for nothing.
Thats the worst software i ever tried !
First, try to disable OpenCL hardware acceleration from Preferences.
Next, try to create a new session.
That'll take you a long way.
However, it is of course not supposed to crash, and this is not something we have experienced during testing. Please create a supportcase as quickly as possible, so we can get you back on track.
http://www.phaseone.com/en/SupportMain.aspx0 -
[quote="NNN634976352769588504" wrote:
I had Lightroom so far. Today , after several recommendations i bought Capture One and was planning on using it for a shooting saturday.
Sadly, i can´t even try the Software out. It just crashes and crashes and crashes, special during tethered shooting (5DmII)
I´m using a MAC with all recommended Hardware. So i have no clue why this happens. Guess i paid a lot of money for nothing.
Thats the worst software i ever tried !
Just out of interest ....
There is a 60 day fully functional trial option available for the software before you need to decide whether to part with any cash. Did you consider making use of that first? If not may I ask why not? Just curious.
Secondly ...
It's quite obvious that no one with a track record on commercial software production is going to release something that behaves as you have described it according to your experience. Have you sought any advice and guidance through the normal support routes we all have available - maybe including those who recommended it to you - before recording your apparent frustration in the forum?
If not may I ask why not? Just curious.
Grant Perkins0 -
I'm on 7.1, and C1 Pro 7 is not crashing all the time.
It only crashes when I try to build a larger catalog.
Which is why I still have access to 99% of my images.
It goes like this: I spend about 6 hours importing, and a few minutes after the import should be completed (but the system is still working on the previews), C1 Pro 7 crashes.
7.1 is still more of a beta version and does not work. Which is a pity as I like the processing engine.
But what good is the best processing engine if you can't get the images into it - because you need them to be in the catalog first.
In my opinion, the catalog should be optional, not mandatory. It can be a nice supplement for keywording and having all image previews handy (even of those on external hard drives).
It just doesn't work.0 -
[quote="SFA" wrote:
[quote="NNN634976352769588504" wrote:
I had Lightroom so far. Today , after several recommendations i bought Capture One and was planning on using it for a shooting saturday.
Sadly, i can´t even try the Software out. It just crashes and crashes and crashes, special during tethered shooting (5DmII)
I´m using a MAC with all recommended Hardware. So i have no clue why this happens. Guess i paid a lot of money for nothing.
Thats the worst software i ever tried !
Just out of interest ....
There is a 60 day fully functional trial option available for the software before you need to decide whether to part with any cash. Did you consider making use of that first? If not may I ask why not? Just curious.
Secondly ...
It's quite obvious that no one with a track record on commercial software production is going to release something that behaves as you have described it according to your experience. Have you sought any advice and guidance through the normal support routes we all have available - maybe including those who recommended it to you - before recording your apparent frustration in the forum?
If not may I ask why not? Just curious.
Grant Perkins
Well, I didn't do the trial, either.
I had used older version of C1 (non-pro).
I had the naive assumption that software that costs $ 250 to upgrade would work.
Trial versions are not about making sure the product works (that's assumed), but if you like it.
I like the way the C1 processing engine works and its intuitive controls.
It's the image organization that ruins it.
Phase One should have kept C1 Pro as it is: a RAW processor. I would have gladly paid the same money for it - less is more in this case. And have Media Pro for those who want a catalog.0 -
[quote="Hegel 59" wrote:
In my opinion, the catalog should be optional, not mandatory. It can be a nice supplement for keywording and having all image previews handy (even of those on external hard drives).
It just doesn't work.
The catalog is an option, not mandatory. Open a session and then you can have access to file browser and navigate to any folder of images you want and work on them. You don't even have to create new sessions for every folder. When your done working on a particular folder just navigate to a new folder and start working again.0 -
[quote="Hegel 59" wrote:
[quote="SFA" wrote:
[quote="NNN634976352769588504" wrote:
I had Lightroom so far. Today , after several recommendations i bought Capture One and was planning on using it for a shooting saturday.
Sadly, i can´t even try the Software out. It just crashes and crashes and crashes, special during tethered shooting (5DmII)
I´m using a MAC with all recommended Hardware. So i have no clue why this happens. Guess i paid a lot of money for nothing.
Thats the worst software i ever tried !
Just out of interest ....
There is a 60 day fully functional trial option available for the software before you need to decide whether to part with any cash. Did you consider making use of that first? If not may I ask why not? Just curious.
Secondly ...
It's quite obvious that no one with a track record on commercial software production is going to release something that behaves as you have described it according to your experience. Have you sought any advice and guidance through the normal support routes we all have available - maybe including those who recommended it to you - before recording your apparent frustration in the forum?
If not may I ask why not? Just curious.
Grant Perkins
Well, I didn't do the trial, either.
I had used older version of C1 (non-pro).
I had the naive assumption that software that costs $ 250 to upgrade would work.
Trial versions are not about making sure the product works (that's assumed), but if you like it.
I like the way the C1 processing engine works and its intuitive controls.
It's the image organization that ruins it.
Phase One should have kept C1 Pro as it is: a RAW processor. I would have gladly paid the same money for it - less is more in this case. And have Media Pro for those who want a catalog.
Hegel, your situation, as a previous C1 user (Express?) may be slightly different to the original poster who seems to be new to C1 based on what he/she said.
I an ideal world you are correct, software would work immediately it was installed, on all platforms in any configuration that was viable. If not viable it should not allow you to buy it. This concept is the basis of the iTunes model, a model that some people like and other do not like. So it is not a universally accepted model - which leaves us back with the basic problems of software development and some extremely complex variables for heardware, firmware and software combinations. Frankly I'm amazed that any software ever works. (At least these days we seem to have moved away, manly, from the situations that resulted when the installation of a new piece of software could mess up the operation of a different and entirely unrelated program running ion the same machine. Only shared drivers for various devices seem to have retained that potential.)
However, given an option to upgrade to a new version of something I already use, especially one where it is clear that some major work has been undertaken, I am almost always inclined to try a test first. It seems like a wise approach. With a point release I am less worried as I know whether or not I can easily step back. A heavily revised new version may well fit into your 'decide whether I lke it' categorisation for making a decision about whether to test first.
In the main, with just about everything, a first version may not be a great place to dive in if you don't want to risk some challenges. We know this but it does not necessarly stop us. The heart can rule the head.
As Steven48 has already pointed out if you are running 7 Pro you do not have to use a Catalogue. ( I understand you do have to use a Catalogue if running with 7 Express since Express never supported multiple Sessions anyway.)
I think I recall on another thrread that you said you already store your images in a structured folder systenm with naming you deem suitable for your purposes. I do the same (I suspect your structures may be more controlled than mine - most people's would be) and have always done so from pre-C1 days. Sessions work very well for me using that approach. I'm not at all sure that I will change to Catalogues. I was not converted by catalogues when using LightRoom (V1) and see little need to re-consider. For one thing I also have some legacy software I use for some key images that, with sessions, I can easily run alongside C1. I'm not sure that would be so easy with catalogues even with keeping the files stored outside the catalogue.
As yet I still have not tried V7. I don't have Macs nor a 64bit Windows system to install upon. That should change next week. I shall firstly test the new machine together with the software I expect to use with it. C1 V7 is right at the top of the list for that - trial mode to start with of course, partly because it avoids any hassles with registered software if the hardware has problems and is rejected but mainly because if I have problems I can still try V6 to measure performance differences compared to my old 32bit systems.
I tend to agree with your comments about keeping things simple and just having a good RAW converter but "the market" will never agree with that and so a developer has to respond, whether they like it or not, if they are to exist with more that about 50 clients regularly using their products.
A couple of decades ago the software industry identified that about 80% of all customer/client requested developments, when delivered, went unused or were not used as originally intended and designed. These days I suspect it is more like 98% as bloatware has taken over. But while we maybe all use 2% of C1 getting agreement on how to extend that with common use of other parts of the application is likely to be more trouble than it is worth. We might think of V7 Express as an approach to that challenge. It will be interesting to see the responses.
If you are using V7 Pro, have a look at sessions.
Grant Perkins0 -
From what I 've figured out - especially with the family of 7.x - COne does crash, when you close COne with an opened catalogue at a rate of nearly 100%.
If you close the catalogue first - wait a second, or some more - then close COne w/o any opened catalogue, in 80% of theses cases CONE does not crash.
I can't understand that POne claims that their software is really tested prior to release - and this does cover MP and COne both.
If I would present such results to my customers, they would fire me AND degrading my reputation within the part of IT I am working in!
Nikon had similar problems with Capture NX until version 2.3 - covering a range of more then 6 years - until they seemingly hired a "real tester". After that "effort" the crashes decreased down to something, one would call user-induced systems-problems.
Every crash report from COne indicates the same problems and errors - it is always the for Core ImageServer, which still runs concurrently as a "32bit piece of something" against 64bit-COne.
I really would like to review the tests-scenarios, the metrics, and depth of POnes testing - and maybe use them as a way on how NOT TO TEST prior to release.0 -
Hi Grant,
I am astounded you are defending the C1V7 debacle without having used the software. One of my main issues with the current state of affairs, is that everyone from Phase keep s making excuses and suggesting turning off processing & etc to stabilise this very broken piece of software.
You made a statement in an earlier post that no professional software organisation would release software that behaved as the user had described - Phase One has done exactly that. The testing and beta test program does not seem adequate, but more importantly the base code for V7 (pointing at the catalogue code and its integration) clearly has been poorly written. As a software developer (old hand - been doing it 30 years) and ex IBM QA engineer, I can tell you this is not how it is done. From using the software (very unsuccessfully) I have raised many formal bug reports, and it is clear to me from the behaviour at crash/hang that the major problem can be found in the multi-processing design of the software. There are deadlocks and crashes arising from a poorly designed architecture and very poor implementation. Thread processing deadlocks should not occur and there are obviously file access exceptions - multiple processes trying to access the same files and the exception conditions where a file operations fails have not been handled elegantly. I am using the very latest Apple hardware (15" Macbook retina with 16GB and SSD) and I have to turn of accelerated processing (OpenCL) as C1v7 cant deal with correctly. The Metadata handling is broken from poor design.
As a professional photographer, I have lost countless hours of valuable time trying to get images into and out of V7. I have lost files due to corruption and directories of images due to multiple import crashes. My workflow (which used Media Pro) was completely broken to the point where I struggle to get files out to customers. This is not acceptable. It is not acceptable for a company to release software like this with so many problems. My suggestion here (and I have privately to support personal) is that an external software engineer very skilled in multi-thread architecture and managing development teams is brought is for a full review of the internals and design of V7. Have a very good look at your object-oriented code as mostly objects hide or don't handle exceptions properly unless the person coding the object has done it correctly and the programmer using the object subsequently has done all the right things. I see this so often is young development teams. I suspect many parts need a complete redesign and importantly a re-write paying careful attention to exception conditions. I am to the point of not trusting the companies commitment to quality if they are prepared to release software such as they have and then try to defend it with "no one else is experiencing these issues" when clearly they are. I have only reported around 1% of the crashes I experience as I am trying to earn a living and expect software I have purchased and rely upon to work. If I reported every issue, I would be doing nothing else. It is time for Phase to do something definitive before losing a majority of its user base. I for one, no longer aspire to own a Phase One camera/ digital back as my trust is eroded.
I just need to be able to import/ access/process my stock-in-trade - my images. As you can tell, I am super frustrated - Phase, top talking about it and fix it. This is mission critical software for a photographer who relies on it.
BUT - overall, I cant believe you are writing on the subject without having used the software. I am still shaking my head0 -
[quote="LANEWAY" wrote:
Hi Grant,
I
BUT - overall, I cant believe you are writing on the subject without having used the software. I am still shaking my head
Mark,
Hmm. I use V6. I can understand the problems. Being able to stand back and be dispassionate in this situation may be an advantage but that is just my opinion and yours may differ.
I have experience of quite similar situations in recent times with other software. Unrelated to image processing or things like OpenCL. However some of the issues were very much related to the use of the latest and greatest core development tools released by some large organisations and how challenging that can be.
It's really not a case of defence here - I have, currently, no horse in this race though next week that may change. Just trying to point out some issues to an often anonymous group of people from unknown backgrounds and at the same time come to learn more for my own benefit in the near future.
I agree with you about testing methods and approaches but they have their own problems from a commercial perspective. One company I worked for for several years eventually, under new management but then only following a path set years before, took a large and complex piece of business application software through a considerable re-write and a delayed release until there were hardly any known errors left - even really minor cospmetics in obscure parts of the system. All the customers who took the update thought it was an excellent release and were delighted. 5 stars all round. The company then found that its market seemed to vanish (big upheavals and business strategy changes from the clients) and for some reason failed to respond to the market changes. I think they found it easier to concentrate on other products with which the new management had a longer relationship. The application just faded away over the next 2 or 3 years as far as I could tell. I was no longer there or involved in any way. All that testing and fixing effort seemed to have little point to it in the end. Great QA though and something I still fully believe in.
You may well be right in your diagnosis of problems with multithreading, I don't know. However image processing is by nature a rather linear activity and seeking ways to take advantage of parallel processing may well introduce some challenges.
There are other examples of what are essentially linear processing requirements that have struggled to find ways to adjust to the transition to parallel processing that the hardware developers have pursued in recent years. I was involved with the beta testing of one such a couple of years ago. The market demanded ever faster processing performance on ever larger data inputs. Gaming without graphics display in essence. Trying to find process speed using multicore processors designed mainly with multi-tasking in mind rather than linear single tasking proved to be a challenge. Compromises were required. New development tools, released by big name companies, did not work or had undocumented changes that only applied in some specific circumstances that no one knew to test for specifically. Presumably that's why they were undocumented - didn't seem worth the effort.
This was not an isolated example either - I know people who have expereinced similar problems from different sources.
18 months on and things got better - except that now there is a further need to make some fundamental changes to the underlying engine to allow users to do more with the systems. The core architecture required for that is just becoming broadly available in a relatively stable (hopefully) state. We will see. We hope to have learned from what has gone before - but still there will be commercial pressures.
The main changes for the next step are related to the underlying processing engine. In many ways there is a very distinct comparison to be made with C1 V7 despite the totally different target market. The challenges are very similar. Hence my interest.
Luckily I can live with C1 V6 for now. So when my V7 supporting 64bit machine (Windows) arrives next week I will trial V7 to see what happens but I won't need to introduce it to my workflow right away. It should be an interesting experience although I am hopeful that it will not be as "interesting" as yours has been so far.
Grant Perkins0 -
General advice to Mac users who have (serious) issues with CO7:
Perform a repair permissions with Disk Utility (or similar tool).
I have seen tremendous improvements in stability and usability from such a simple action.
Other troubleshooting suggestions are:
- reset the application (delete preference files, empty batch queue)
- run app and images from local drive
- rebuild volume (requires 3rd party tool)
- defragment volume (idem)0 -
[quote="SFA" wrote:
[quote="LANEWAY" wrote:
Hi Grant,
I
BUT - overall, I cant believe you are writing on the subject without having used the software. I am still shaking my head
Mark,
+1000 for Mark
...
Just trying to point out some issues to an often anonymous group of people from unknown backgrounds and at the same time come to learn more for my own benefit in the near future.
Grant,even if the community here is anonymous, this is no defense for writing bad code.
The background of all people posting here in this subforum may be different - but ALL HERE KNOW what they are doing and they, for sure rely more on proper running software and, which is more important, are dependent on running software, not trying and to fix errors or invent workarounds that occur from the poor SDLC.
...
You may well be right in your diagnosis of problems with multithreading, I don't know. However image processing is by nature a rather linear activity and seeking ways to take advantage of parallel processing may well introduce some challenges.
The primarily problem with COne (and MP) is NOT parallelism, and if you got Mark right, you might have detected that the problems are with the basics of coding, despite if parallelism is used or not:
proper coding OF OBJECTS!
proper instantiation OF OBJECTS!
proper release OF OBJECTS!
Trying to find process speed using multicore processors designed mainly with multi-tasking in mind rather than linear single tasking proved to be a challenge. Compromises were required. New development tools, released by big name companies, did not work or had undocumented changes that only applied in some specific circumstances that no one knew to test for specifically. Presumably that's why they were undocumented - didn't seem worth the effort.
...
Multitasking?
Multithreading?
Polyinstantiation?
Polymorphism?
What exactly are your referring to?
Take in mind that we are here in the Mac forum - and Macs are a "little bit" different from Windows, despite which version you are referring to.
AND: Beta-testing has primarily nothing to do with coding - beta testing is the point prior to entrance to the market and beta users should usually not have a broad knowledge of coding.
Beta testers from every community shall NOT be experienced developers (this step is part of the SDLC and never ever will see the light beyond the software development cabinet) but they should be EXPERIENCED USERS, and it seems that you are one of the latter.
The main changes for the next step are related to the underlying processing engine. In many ways there is a very distinct comparison to be made with C1 V7 despite the totally different target market. The challenges are very similar. Hence my interest.
POne does not develop the underlying processing engine - the core engine in COne is the Quartz Engine, and that comes from Apple. POne uses the API from Quartz, and as it seems, not quite well!
As you may not know, because you are from "the far side", Apple applications as well as those using the Quartz engine had not that amount of problems using either 32bit and 64bit Quartz engine, as it is apparent with COne 7.x
Preview runs - Aperture runs - Phocus from Hasselblad runs, and I never ever detected these massive problems using these applications, either on 32bit or 64bit Mac OS releases.
... C1 V6 for now. So when my V7 supporting 64bit machine (Windows) ...
SEE ABOVE - we are talking about Mac
---
The vast problems that occurs are crashes within the primary threat that initiates COne: All crashes are related to unreleased objects and instances and buffer overflows do cause he problems at the very beginning - despite if parallelism is (properly) used or not.
This MUST occur: if a shared-everything-application is reengineered as a shared nothing application by trial and error instead of changing the underlying model and architecture, additionally using possible incompatible libraries of 32bit and 64bit running concurrently together with unreleased objects and permanently allocated and locked system RAM, I would expect nothing else than permanent crashing applications.
Take care!
saludos redondos -
tom0 -
[quote="Paul_Steunebrink" wrote:
General advice to Mac users who have (serious) issues with CO7:
Perform a repair permissions with Disk Utility (or similar tool).
I have seen tremendous improvements in stability and usability from such a simple action.
Other troubleshooting suggestions are:
- reset the application (delete preference files, empty batch queue)
- run app and images from local drive
- rebuild volume (requires 3rd party tool)
- defragment volume (idem)
Yeaah that is what we expect from approved and tested applications!
- repair permissions does solve problems of bad coding, poor implementation and incompatible architecture
- this is the BEST advice, running COne in multi-peronnel professional photo studio scenario with centralised storage- who in the world will synchronsie all locally processed files to the company server at the end of the day! And, hopefully a SAN is not running - will you pay the SAN admin to do this job, while his primary job is exactly the other way?
- Who in the world will rebuilt the volume every 10 minutes? And who shall do this at the end of the day, if a SAN/NAS infrastructure seems to be corrupted? This means that personnel has to mirrored more than twice to do these recommended jobs!
- Is here anyone who ever defragmented a HFS+/NFS volume?
Happy workload!0 -
[quote="Thomas248" wrote:
SEE ABOVE - we are talking about Mac
---
tom
Hi Tom,
I realise that.
I had assumed that the Mac world was as error free as one could get and as consistent and anyone would wish a world to be. I have considered buying that philosophy but ... I have other realtionships that are Windows and not Mac. Plus in some roles I have worked in a Mac only environment (many years ago) and found it challenging. The entire worldwide company moved from Mac to Windows and solved my problem.
On that basis we could anticipate a Mac development house (I assume Phase One are a Mac house but could be wrong. However there are (or were) other Mac based development houses I had in mind at the same time ... some survive) would be mostly free from the random configuration problems (call that as wide as you might like) of the hardware/Firmware/Application Software trinity.
Should I reconsider?
On the other hand if you are saying that each and every platform has its own built in challenges and there is little or no consistency to work with ... I would not be surprised. I would also point out that is greatly extends the effort required to arrive at a widely based acceptance level for the performance delivered when a new release escapes into the wild.
I don't think I misread Mark's comments. He wrote about Objects and their relationship with mulithreading. Is that not a parallel activity?
I am aware that there are differences between the Mac World and the Windows world. Include the differences with Unix. Linux and, going back a long way, VAX and CTS. No matter really, it seems we all expect there to be no critical functional difference when the game starts and furthermore expect to be able to pass files from Mac to Windows and back again with no constraint.
I have noticed that the Mac forum seems more active than the windows forum fo V7 - hence my interest. I assume that the simple reason is that the majority of photographers have bought into the Mac way of doing things and so Mac's are extremely well represented amongst C1 users. I could be wrong. Maybe Mac's are under represented in terms of users and over represented in terms of problems .....? Well, that seems unlikely to me but I may well be wrong.
I agree with you about beta testers. Sometimes it helps to have a little very general knowledge and background to be able to best attempt to understand and interpret and usefully report behaviour when testing.
I also think it useful to have any test notes and plans from the developer. They (should) provide a basis for understanding what is and is not expected to happen. Once that point has been reached one can abandon "the rules" and act like a user. However one has to guard against extreme circumstances that might suggest a big red flag to be raised when in reality the perceived problem may never occur.
Maybe there is a case for "beta +" testing whereby, if a suitable number of testers can be found, the beta test concepts continue with a group of users who are techinically competent to carry out end of development code audits and write them up for the benefit of the coders in a consistent and knowledgeable manner?
However you seem to be suggesting that Mac the development team seems to have misunderstood, almost completely, what Macs are about. It's not impossible I suppose but I find it really hard to believe! I guess I have misinterpreted what you are suggesting ... 😉
On the other hand, all in all, perhaps I should feel more comfortable about my position as a Windows user even if the development objective may be to make the end user experience much the same no matter what technical platform the user happens to be running on. If I don't experience problems would that suggest the most of the issues seen are Mac related - maybe even Quartz related? Probably not. I doubt and of the adopted core development technologies are problem free. Maybe not even truly tested to a level we might agree is acceptable.
Really my point, based on experiences elsewhere, is that it is entirely possible to get a point with a development where you believe it is sufficient or more than sufficient for a good usable release after some extended period of internal and external user testing only to find that something, somewhere our in the wider wilderness does not perform as expected. If you are really unlucky there can be a lot of instances of a single previously unseen issue. Or maybe a few instances of many previously unseen issues - more difficult to diagnose and deal with quickly.
I have seen a number of examples like this over the years often originating from attempts to work with something that, apparently, had very complete "standards" written out and applied. Sometimes one found that the standards may be a little incomplete. Othertimes the standards were simply not always followed but even if you knew that you would never find all of the anomalies in testing - too many to discover and often in low numbers or isolated situations.
You make some very valid observations of course. But if the broad user base has a mix of users, irrespective of platform, where some have systems that just don't work at all and others have systems that have no obvious, frequent or serious problems when apparently using the same configurations (more or less) what can we really assume?
If nothing worked for anyone then the situation would seem to be very clear. As it is I think it is less than clear based on what we appear to know gathered through a spread of user experiences.
I think this response is more than long enough for now so I will stop at this point.
Bear in mind this is just my opinion and interepretation and your will be different. I have no problem with people seeing things differently from very different perspectives and starting points or, quite frequently, the same starting point!
You never know, in a week or so I may have exactly the same opinion as you ....
Hoping you find the expected stability soon,
Grant Perkins0 -
I agree with a lot of your comments Grant about software in general and how it should be, also I agree with Thomas. I think it is very healthy to be talking about the core code and code quality and help point the developers at where the problems lie so they can sort it out, rather than have to "hold your left leg in the air while disabling preference X and dont forget to hold down the option key" as a solution for using the software.
Any software vendor must have a focus on features and user needs, but at all costs maintain quality of released products. As I suggested in my comments, I am afraid that the code in C1v7.1 is suffering from fundamental design and coding flaws that may take a long time to fix with any certainty. Phase One's response to this crisis , will require substantial resources, both in experienced, skilled coders and more fundamentally a very hard look at their design, coding and testing process that is managing this group. If this doesn't happen immediately, I am afraid C1 will fail as a product as users are forced to use another product.
Please do understand that I have a vested interest in Phase getting this sorted out - I have well over 150,000 raw files, many with metatdata, ratings and adjustments in my library under C1. I cant imagine moving these over to another raw processor. That said I used LR4.3 as well as C1v7.1 for a shoot today to hedge my bets and compared the results in Photoshop. Very similar results, but the main issue I have with LR is that I can t specify the colour space I use (Joseph Holmes DCAM3), so I had to export to Prophoto and convert. But hey - it worked and client has the image.0 -
I hear the Pope is available at the moment? Perhaps Phase One should consider hiring him, because the only thing that would get C1 up and running perfectly would be a miracle 😂
Dave...0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
39 comments