Brutal performance from Pro 10
I see that I'm not the only one who has been disappointed by the Pro 10 upgrade for Mac.
I have been experiencing brutally slow response since before Christmas as well as brutally slow response from customer support. The suggestions that they've provided have not worked.
I finally requested a return to the version of Capture One that preceded Pro 10 and was told how I can do that but have not yet received a reply to my request for a refund for what I paid for Pro 10.
I really like this software when it's working well but this has been an absolute nightmare made worse by the 9-5 business days only on-line customer support system Phase One has.
This is totally aggravating.
I have been experiencing brutally slow response since before Christmas as well as brutally slow response from customer support. The suggestions that they've provided have not worked.
I finally requested a return to the version of Capture One that preceded Pro 10 and was told how I can do that but have not yet received a reply to my request for a refund for what I paid for Pro 10.
I really like this software when it's working well but this has been an absolute nightmare made worse by the 9-5 business days only on-line customer support system Phase One has.
This is totally aggravating.
0
-
I have gone back to C1P9.3 and have found it vastly superior to C1P10 in performance. Furthermore I also have PC laptop with windows and have seen none of the performance problems that experienced with C1P10 for Mac. Did someone at PHasew ONe offend someone at Apple or something? Who knows but if the problem can't be corrected I would still like a refund for what I paid for the C1P10 upgrade for Mac sinc that is my main image handling computer. 0 -
[quote="ashamota" wrote:
Furthermore I also have PC laptop with windows and have seen none of the performance problems that experienced with C1P10 for Mac.
So I wasn't the only one who came to the same conclusion regarding the the vast difference in performance between Windows & Mac. 😊0 -
I am tired of all the yearly updates from Apple and third party softwares. I have decided to stay with Yosemite and C1 version 9.3. It still has some bugs but... 0 -
I dont understand way the admin publish
Fast upgrade bevor tesing it well.
They promiss a fast good proformence in c1 10 wich
Is to bee realy a fix bug for 8 or 9
Peopl writing here what happy day and somthing
Realy discusted to understand . Now
The upgrader are disapointing aboute it
Way you upgrading when you see
No use for it.0 -
[quote="CAPTURE NIKON D700" wrote:
I dont understand way the admin publish fast upgrade bevor tesing it well.
Of course they've tested it well - on their machines - before releasing it. You know this.
10 was also put out to a long public beta before release too - did you contribute to that?
As to why releases happen more often now - that's entirely our fault.
I've seen this with every software I regularly use, with Phase One being in an arms race with Adobe, DxO and other competitors, and customers (us) always impatiently complaining about slow release cycles; lack of The New; this competitor having a "must have" feature that Capture One has to match...
No wonder software companies feel the pressure to churn out new product. And no wonder that new releases aren't always perfect.
But again: did anyone complaining on this thread contribute to the beta test?
I did - for Windows, admittedly: but doing so allowed me to conclude that an upgrade to 10 would not be an "improvement" for me (even though actual performance was fine) - as you suggest it was really just a bug fix for problems with earlier versions.
If you'd all have done the same, maybe the performance problems you're complaining about would have been identified and fixed before release, eh?0 -
[quote="ashamota" wrote:
I see that I'm not the only one who has been disappointed by the Pro 10 upgrade for Mac.
I have been experiencing brutally slow response since before Christmas as well as brutally slow response from customer support. The suggestions that they've provided have not worked.
I finally requested a return to the version of Capture One that preceded Pro 10 and was told how I can do that but have not yet received a reply to my request for a refund for what I paid for Pro 10.
I really like this software when it's working well but this has been an absolute nightmare made worse by the 9-5 business days only on-line customer support system Phase One has.
This is totally aggravating.
I am sorry to hear you find CO 10 not working for you.
Please see my response in another thread (the first part): viewtopic.php?f=68&t=25210#p1179340 -
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
As to why releases happen more often now - that's entirely our fault.
As a software vendor when you start providing a subscription model you need to make regular major/minor releases so that your customers see some value in maintaining a subscription service. Hence why I love Adobe CC subscription.[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
But again: did anyone complaining on this thread contribute to the beta test?
In hindsight I could have done some beta testing however, I can't risk doing that on working projects especially when I am shooting with my client next to me.Plus finding time to beta test properly is hard back to back shoots.0 -
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
[quote="CAPTURE NIKON D700" wrote:
I dont understand way the admin publish fast upgrade bevor tesing it well.
Of course they've tested it well - on their machines - before releasing it. You know this.
10 was also put out to a long public beta before release too - did you contribute to that?
As to why releases happen more often now - that's entirely our fault.
I've seen this with every software I regularly use, with Phase One being in an arms race with Adobe, DxO and other competitors, and customers (us) always impatiently complaining about slow release cycles; lack of The New; this competitor having a "must have" feature that Capture One has to match...
No wonder software companies feel the pressure to churn out new product. And no wonder that new releases aren't always perfect.
But again: did anyone complaining on this thread contribute to the beta test?
I did - for Windows, admittedly: but doing so allowed me to conclude that an upgrade to 10 would not be an "improvement" for me (even though actual performance was fine) - as you suggest it was really just a bug fix for problems with earlier versions.
If you'd all have done the same, maybe the performance problems you're complaining about would have been identified and fixed before release, eh?
Well I was never given the opportunity to do a Beta Test actually and I totally reject the idea that it's the customer's fault for demanding some new and fresh ... I never do that and in fact but if a company decides to put something out before it has been thoroughly vetted by the least technically savy people they hope to sell to then they are following a business model that may not serve them well in the end.
Even now as I try to return to Pro 9.3 I fine that I cannot open the files because they have been staine by Pro 10 somehow and cannot import all of the files together again without losing the file organization I've been working with.
Thank you Capture One for wasting countless hours and hours of my time dealing with this BS upgrade. I think I should get triple my money back but I'm not even sure I'll get what I paid refunded.0 -
[quote="ashamota" wrote:
Well I was never given the opportunity to do a Beta Test actually and I totally reject the idea that it's the customer's fault for demanding some new and fresh ... I never do that and in fact but if a company decides to put something out before it has been thoroughly vetted by the least technically savy people they hope to sell to then they are following a business model that may not serve them well in the end.
Even now as I try to return to Pro 9.3 I fine that I cannot open the files because they have been staine by Pro 10 somehow and cannot import all of the files together again without losing the file organization I've been working with.
Beta testing has been open to anyone since some point in version 9 development.
There are communications about sort of thing if you have signed up for receiving information.
You can also test a new release for 30 days without having to commit to it.
I appreciate that testing on a test database may not always be possible if you run a single large catalogue ... but that would be the best way to test.
I think it is fair to say whilst some of you clearly have problems there are others, probably many others - perhaps the great majority, who do not.
It would certainly seem that Windows users have nothing like the sort of problems you are experiencing and if all of the Mac users had such problems I doubt it would be possible to log onto the forum at all for people registering their frustration.
Several of the User beta testers who sometimes post on here claim long time experience of software development and testing. I would imagine there were several hundred of them, maybe several thousand, and that should have resulted in a far wider range of hardware/software configurations than would be possible from an in-house test programme.
The World of Agile development, as sketched by Keith a few posts back, pretty much demands that sort of approach if people need (or wish) to take advantage of the latest technology.
It has been like that for a while. I think Apple have led the way on forcing change upon their users more than most but the rest of the world seems to be catching up.
Historically there have been several points at which backward compatibility for the database and/or process engine have not been an option. This is true for all software development that I am aware of and I would think that most people people are well aware of that constraint by now and make their decisions accordingly.
The program advises about the one-way conversion.
It also makes a copy of the the previous version just in case you need it.
It sounds like you do so I hope you have retained that copy. If you need to re-install the v9 software it can be downloaded from the Phase web site if necessary. Not everyone offers that possibility.
As a complete guess, based on previous schedules, I would anticipate a first revision update for V10 quite soon. It might address your problems but then it might not.
It seems baffling that some people seem to have severe problems and others none at all even though they are using the system in much the same way so far as has been reported.
Perhaps there is some combination of circumstances - firmware/software/hardware/file types/whatever that cause problems for a few. If so that may take some clever work to identify the connections and figure out the cause(s). There must be a heck of a lot of possible combinations even when using Macs.
Grant0 -
ONe contributor to this thread mentioned that Pro 10 doesn't work with Sierra but I think most Mac users would have that installed by now.
As for being aware of things in the Technisphere, I am not a Techie and I have only been making minimal use of computers until getting back into photography a couple of years ago.
My interest is photography not computers and this is actually the first time I have even heard of beta testing. There may have been some warning somewhere about the lack of backward compatibility but it wasn't very apparent and even if it was why would I expect to need to have it from a company that likes to create the impression that it is fully proficient at building it's software.
It seems to me that there may be a problem with the system that Phase one is using for doing the testing of it's products that needs to be sorted out because I can't imagine they want to have unhappy customers. In my case it's not just a matter of being unhappy it's a matter of being being bloody annoyed at the prospect of having to practically reimport images folder by folder and then have duplicates taking up space on my computer because one set is unusable by the version of Capture one I have that works half decently for me after spending good money on the whole Capture one package.0 -
I understand the frustration and now that you have described your situation I can also understand why you had complete faith in upgrading.
Personally I have always been rather wary even for business oriented systems (nothing to do with photography) with which I have been involved during pre-release testing. There are so many things going in with the technology that the software vendor cannot control (unlike the old days of far from Agile development ...) that I am usually amazed that anything works at all.
I think you have been unlucky but that is little consolation for you.
It may be useful experience for future decision making ... although we do seem to see in the forum many seasoned tech campaigners diving into this sort if accidental trap time after time so we can conclude that the lesson may not be that easy to understand and apply!
Bear in mind also that remote diagnosis of a problem that has not been detectable in house is always going to be a challenge and more than likely it will seem like a very fragmented response. Eventually things will start to make sense to everyone but it will likely be very frustrating in the meantime.
Grant0 -
I think that a lot of the problem is due to the open-loop support system (for both normal issues and issues reported under the beta testing).
From the submitter's perspective, issues are marked as "resolved" without any clear indication if this is because the issue has been fixed, been accepted for a fix, or is deemed unreproducible. I have raised several performance issue reports, including the TIFF issue. In each case, the report goes in to what is to me a black hole - and I get no feedback if the next release version contains a fix or not, and if I should re-test with the failing case.
IMO, this makes beta testing almost pointless and very frustrating from the tester's perspective, and also causes a lot of frustration with issue reporting in released software.
I think resolving these problems would hugely improve the link between user-feedback and the quality of the software - which I also think is quite poor as of the current release, particularly given that performance was one of the headline sales features used to persuade people to upgrade.0 -
[quote="Mark BCN" wrote:
I think that a lot of the problem is due to the open-loop support system (for both normal issues and issues reported under the beta testing).
From the submitter's perspective, issues are marked as "resolved" without any clear indication if this is because the issue has been fixed, been accepted for a fix, or is deemed unreproducible. I have raised several performance issue reports, including the TIFF issue. In each case, the report goes in to what is to me a black hole - and I get no feedback if the next release version contains a fix or not, and if I should re-test with the failing case.
IMO, this makes beta testing almost pointless and very frustrating from the tester's perspective, and also causes a lot of frustration with issue reporting in released software.
I think resolving these problems would hugely improve the link between user-feedback and the quality of the software - which I also think is quite poor as of the current release, particularly given that performance was one of the headline sales features used to persuade people to upgrade.
The QA-department is where your beta-feedback goes. With the limited resources we have available, we decided to only contact users about their beta-feedback, if we were missing information on the specific bug.
I know this can be frustrating, however, _ALL_ reports from beta-testers submitted during during a beta-period are read and processed.0 -
Hi Christian,
Yes, I understood that - and I have had several (excellent) contacts with the engineers. The problem comes because it is unclear if a given issue has been fixed or not in a release, and whether or not it is worth re-testing. I know I submitted a bug report against the TIFF issue, but I have no idea what happened to it - and when I later found more information about the problem there was no way for me to update the report.
I know that both support and engineering are somewhat overloaded. However, many issue trackers do allow users to follow the state of reports, update them if needed, and also know when to re-test if the problem is thought to be fixed. There is a lot of value in this given that the beta-testers and also normal customers have access to a much more diverse and real-world array of hardware/software systems than you can hope to replicate in house.
Unfortunately, support gets all the customer flack while engineering get all the management flack. But someone should probably be berating management/marketing for pushing for a release perhaps sooner than would have been ideal (and just before a holiday...).0 -
Good points Mark.
The scheduling of releases must be really tricky, whether a new version or a point release in version.
Things to consider include not only availability of fixes or new development but also the need to keep up with OS releases (especially whatever Apple have made available), new computers (Apple again mostly) and subsystems like GPUs, new camera releases, new camera software releases and their effect on e.g. tethering if it is a supported facility, sometimes new lens releases (especially if they are Phase lenses), business requirements, major trade shows and other matters, some of which I doubt I could even speculate about.
Then there's Bayer array vs Fuji sensor considerations and new product area development that will lead to more in the future but has to start somewhere presumably guided by existing client requests. Eizo calibration and Tangent device support for example.
Nevertheless the points you made are valid. One suspects a revised strategic approach might be worth considering although how feasible such a change might be I have no idea.
On the other hand I could relate the story of a complex business product (top end of the market at the time) where the Quality drivers meant the release was deferred for about 6 months longer than the "final final" plan's target. Around 1000 mainly small bugs were fixed and the final release had just one known problem which was, as I recall, a trivial spelling error on a window in an obscure module that no clients were known to use.
Customer updates went perfectly when they eventually got around to them. All looked good ... but it made no difference in the long term as existing customer went through their own changes, closed or were sold off or simply decided on a different strategy and management for the developer, who had bought into the company about 18 months before the final release, lost focus because they then owned 2 similar products and preferred the one they had spent year developing.
Eventually what was left of the business morphed into a different market.
Excellence, continuity and loyalty count for little it seems - in both directions. 2 years ago who was expecting Apple to bin Aperture? Look at the problems that has created!
Grant0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
15 comments