Aller au contenu principal

Where are the keyboard command equivalents?

Commentaires

4 commentaires

  • NN109703UL2
    I have been asking for those all Beta and was told to be patient they woudl be there. WRONG. They have lost me as a user unless they return them.

    It is really sad that P1 doesn't even listen to their user base. They make radical changes to how their software works and when we ask for it back the way I have been using for all these years they just say ....

    Real shame. Now I have to find another RAW converter.
    0
  • Bernhard12
    Why have we to press tree or four Keys to get one command???
    Ctrl+Shift+Alt+L
    Ctrl+Shift+Alt+R
    Ctrl+Shift+Delete
    Ctrl+Shift+R

    WOW - SUPER COMBINATIONS

    even Copy Adjustments is terrible
    Ctrl+Shift+C
    Ctrl+Shift+V

    there are so many easy Keystrokes free...
    0
  • shewhorn
    I've suspected for a long time that Phase One has had fundamental problems with their management. Prior to starting my photography business I was a software engineer. From my experience it looks like there's a few things wrong.

    1) For the longest time the Mac and the PC versions were built from different code bases and not only that, completely different UIs as well. "Cross platform compatible" code is a mythical utopia at best based on the behavior of the processing algorithms, the different ways in which the Mac and the PC versions operated etc. it always struck me that these were two different builds that shared little if nothing. Not an efficient way to run a software company. From what I understand V4 is supposed to unite the two so hopefully they're on more solid ground for the future but it's frustrating that this wasn't done ages ago.

    2) In order to update support for cameras they have to update the entire application. Again, poor choices when it came to architecture. Perhaps there are technical reasons beyond my comprehension that make it more difficult to do things that way but recompiling an entire application every time just to add new camera support that has nothing to do with the features of the program well... that just kind of gives me the willies.

    3) Based on their behavior in the past I'm under the impression that they do not have a proper software quality assurance department. By "proper" I mean that the chain of management is... SQA manager answers to the CEO of the company and has the authority to veto any release and there's nothing that the marketing department or software department can do about it. This creates something VERY important that forces the engineering and marketing departments to have realistic expectations of one another because they are both ACCOUNTABLE for their performance. I'd betcha anything that the SQA is being handled by the software department or even worse... the marketing department (folks who are typically completely untrained in keeping quantifiable, non-subjective trackable metrics about the stability and reliability of the core code base and completely untrained in developing proper methodical SQA procedures which enable critical bugs to be found fast early in the development cycle thus allowing the software team to correct critical flaws in the core architecture BEFORE the product gets released to even in house beta)..

    I could be completely wrong there as this is merely all conjecture based on my own experience so if I am wrong, I offer my sincere apologies. It's always easy to play armchair quarterback but I tell ya, as a customer Phase One frustrates the heck out of me.

    Now to be fair one MAJOR feature they added which I've been waiting for is the support for four cores. I've noticed that v4 is making 100% utilization of all four core during part of the conversion process. This used to be an area that C1 was relatively weak in (although because of the UI and the concept of how C1 works it wasn't a huge deal breaker) compared to the competition but now it's tootin' right along so good job there.

    Cheers, Joe
    0
  • Len2
    "Cross platform compatible" code is a mythical utopia at best based on the behavior of the processing algorithms, the different ways in which the Mac and the PC versions operated etc.


    Absolutely. Different platforms are just different. Period.

    Problem is, it seems that if a program developed from a common codebase runs on platforms X, Y and Z, it almost without fail does so suboptimally on each of them (can you say J-A-V-A?... although it has many other dysfunctions and it kinda a whole 'nuther world). Something like WxWidgets, QT or even GTK, etc., is a much better solution, IMO, albeit a bit more narrowly constrained.

    It can be doggone difficult to tweak to individual platform advantages without seriously fragmenting the shared codebase. So, there's always that trade-off between relative development ease on one hand and specific platform performance / stability on the other.

    Looking at it from a typical Joe User standpoint, it's difficult to get excited that a program also runs on platform Y if I'm trying to use it on platform Z and it stinks there. I just want it to work optimally on my current platform; so what if it runs on the DeathStation 9000 as well. It seems accomplishing that optimization is often accomplished through multiple codebases.

    "Simpler" apps like, eg., Vim, can do it - They're essentially text-based, even in the "graphical" versions. Get much into graphics, though, and it gets hairy, from what I've seen.

    Tough decisions at times. Personally, from a user standpoint I have no problems with "like" apps walking and talking differently on different platforms. That's an interesting part of using different platforms. eg., making a Solaris app work like Windows stinks, and vice-versa. Different is good. 😎


    From what I understand V4 is supposed to unite the two so hopefully they're on more solid ground for the future but it's frustrating that this wasn't done ages ago.


    I wonder how .NET fits into their new portability mindset... ? I wonder if v4 is written in C# (at least on Windows)?


    In order to update support for cameras they have to update the entire application. Again, poor choices when it came to architecture.


    That's /scary/ ! Whatever happened to plugins/config files/drivers, etc.?


    I'd betcha anything that the SQA is being handled by the software department or even worse... the marketing department


    And that's even scarier... ☹️
    0

Vous devez vous connecter pour laisser un commentaire.