I assume you mean tablet support, not phone support, correct? iPad and Android tablet support certainly would be possible but would require the allocation of resources for dedicated teams to design and port PhotoLab tablet versions on to two different platforms. Then they would have to allocate resources on an ongoing basis to support these two new versions and periodically upgrade them. Frankly, I don’t see that happening anytime soon.
Mark
right.
I admit, that there are other (more important) things to be fixed first …
It would not just about creating an Android or iOS version though would it? It would be a different software that requires less processing power. I’m not a developer, but when I see how much difference a GPU makes to processing time, I can’t see any tablet version that would make me happy.
That aside (this is an honest question) what part of PhotoLab makes it intersting for use on a small screen like tablets have? (irrespective of operating system it is installed on)
What I would use is RAW development when you’re travelling. I often had situations where it would be really helpful to develop RAWs already away from home. And to be honest: the tabket screens are not so bad.
Regarding the computing power: others can do, too. Maybe we would loose denoise speed or even some of the AI denoise functions, but it would be worth to stay away from LR. Additionally you should not underestimate the power of mobile processors which are used in tablets.
An answer to that question would also interest me.
Screen not calibrated, highly reflective and really small. Plus, cluttered by a lot of tools, plus all tools need to be adapted to touchscreen use - soon the team for user interface design becomes more important than the team developing the core functions. And at the end is an app which needs constant work, as new OS functions make new OS versions, forces apps to adapt to that pace - and for what? For a much weaker performance?
Weight difference: iPadAir 5th gen (27 cm diagonal, + pencil + sleeve with keyboard) 1085 gr, Macbook Air (33.5 cm diagonal, M1) 1265 gr. And at home I use two screens, each twice the diagonal of the MBA.
And I still didn’t met the first photographer working (! not only viewing) his or her RAWs on an iPad or Android tablet. When abroad, I also like to check raw images on a bigger screen than the camera’s rear monitor, but a normal version of PL or C1 just is enough to do so.
Also, there’s a huge gap between wireless image transmission to mobile devices as manufacturer’s marketing sees it and as a user experiences it. But I admit, this experience of mine is a couple years old, I don’t try on a regular basis to find out if the apps now interact better. It drains the camera battery additionally.
Psychologically, as I’m in a generation we knew mobile phones as most expensive way to communicate while abroad and therefore kept the calls short or even shorter when the battery ran out, this plays a role when connecting a camera with a receiving device. I feel myself pushed to work faster because of that battery time. Kind of mind condition adding to a “well, I don’t need this crap anyway” feeling.
FWIW, the latest iPad Pro uses the identical M2 chip that is used in the MacBook Air (10 GPU core Version). However, as stated by others, the biggest hurdle is designing with a GUI that is touch screen oriented with the second biggest and likely the hardest is the extreme sandboxing of iPadOS and accessing photo files.
Sorry to wake up this old topic.
I’m really trying to move over to Linux (Mint).
I usually run my images though DXO PureRAW and doing final adjustments in other programs.
I bought Corel AfterShot Pro 3 yesterday as it was one of the few image/raw editors running in Linux.
Got a refound today as it could not open DXO PureRAW .dng files.
I’m one of the Linux users that don’t mind pay for programs that I want to use.
Now I have to use Darkroom, but I don’t like the GUI.
DXO PureRAW have a pretty limited GUI, would it not be possible to make a Linux version? As a start…
I believe Debian/Ubuntu version(s) would would cover a lot of users?
I’m just a user and so far most programs a want to use works fine when installing them in Linux.
I got a MacOS machine to run my daily personal business.
In the basement a got a dual boot Windows machine (Win11/Linux Mint) with a good display for imaging and gaming.
I only use Windows for the programs I really can’t find in Linux.
If there was something close to DXO PureRAW, I’d use it.
The gaming industry is slowly moving into Linux. (Steam)
The imaging industry not so much.
We Linux users will have to do with all the exellent freeware programs, but sometimes a choice would be nice.
When scrolling through this topic, it looks like some people really hate Linux. Well, don’t use it. I like it, and I think there will be more as it evolves.
FWIW
No doubt but that is not relevant to this topic.
Nor does alter the fact that the chances of DxO ever releasing Linux versions of their software is close to zero.
Sorry to burst your hopes,. This is an old topic which has been discussed to death. You have a better chance of winning the lottery. I am not going to rehash any of the many reasons that this is extraordinarily unlikely to ever happen.
Mark
Ok, might be a side track.
Was just hoping for not to get answers like: “I don’t like Linux”, “Linux have too many distros”, etc…
I think I saw a lot of the like when scrolling through the thread.
Not trying to be rude. Seeking for solutions. People don’t have to love Linux.
We can put that in another thread, but nothing to do with DXO as I see.
Yes, I’m sorry to wake it up. It was the only one I found about DXO and Linux.
I do believe times are changing, though.
I don’t know the percentage of people using Linux these days, but I think there are more than 2 years ago? Also more are willing to pay for programs?
When scrolling through the thread it mostly pointed out problem with GUI development. My humble suggestion was to port the DXO PureRAW to Linux as a start, as it is a pretty limited GUI.
I’m just a novice user to Linux and I know nothing about making installment packages. But so far everything I installed works ok.
I know it’s long shot, but maybe someone from DXO looks at this and thinks: “hmmmm…”
Man gotta have dreams…
/BR
With regard to Linux being even close to a mainstream OS, the times are not changing. DxO is a small company with limited development resources. For them to use those limited resources to port their current applications to what is essentially still a niche operating system in the hopes of eventually attracting a very small incremental number of users would be a poor business decision.
Transferring any of their limited resources away from their currently supported platforms would also have a negative impact on the development and support for their existing software versions and the expectations of their current user base on those platforms.
This is just not ever going to happen.
Mark
As an avid Linux user I have to support this request.
Porting to Linux isn’t rocket science. If e.g. BlackMagic Design can do it with DaVinci Resolve than Dxo should be able to do it as well with Photolab.
In the Linux world are many other apps that are available on Windows and Linux, perhaps Apple, many of them even developed by volunteers, and even camera apps.
Maybe but the amount of work this requires heavily depends on the external code libraries used by the program to port. If these tools don’t exist for the Linux platform, equivalent code has to be written from scratch.
Moreover, DxO have always used the Microsoft .Net framework for their apps (but I don’t think that this is the case for DxO PureRAW however - this has to be checked). Although a Linux version of the .Net framework exists, I’m not sure it is maintained at the same level as the Windows/Mac versions. So, if DxO were to extend the PureRAW UI using the .Net framework, this would also certainly be a problem.
There are so many problems to fix or missing features to implement in the DxO apps that I cannot imagine that they even think of porting any part of their code to Linux.
Keep dreaming if it makes you feel good…
That along with the multitude of Linux distributions that would have to be supported.
Only for Windows. Mac is written using the native Apple Xcode development tools and APIs. So far, I can’t find any shared code between the two platforms
This means that you get a genuine Windows UI experience on the Windows version and a genuine macOS UI on the Mac version.
On the other hand , the Nik Collection appears to be put together using QT tools and UI, which is why it doesn’t feel like either Windows or Mac.
As @Pat91 says, if you want to keep, on dreaming, carry on but don’t expect to wake up.
Blockquote That along with the multitude of Linux distributions that would have to be supported.
It is an issue. Acutally it WAS an issue maybe 10 years ago. Now, there are compatibility layers and an uniformity amount all the major distributions.
Most are based on Debian/Ubuntu or Red Hat/Fedora. Look at software like Davinci Resolve or pCloud, they just work flawlessly on Linux.
I am on the process to move to Linux for my Photo workstation. And I will. To get it running without having DXO actually working natively, I will let it run (amount C1) in a VirtualBox.
Anyone, DXo could just port PureRAW first, this one as limit UI which would be easier to port.
Vote UP!
I’m sorry Nicolas but, whatever you write in this thread, with only 35 votes in over 7 years, it’s hardly a hard economic case for DxO to spend vast amounts of money on development.
Let’s see, 35 times €240 = €8400. That’s not even enough to pay one developer for a month.
Bye bye then. And if you do get DxO running through VMs, please don’t ever contact either DxO or this forum, expecting help on a totally unsupported platform.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. And how many professional software companies have you worked for as a developer?
Sure… but it would/could attract more customers as DXo would be the only pro photo software available on Linux.
I am also a software developer.
Blockquote Bye bye then. And if you do get DxO running through VMs, please don’t ever contact either DxO or this forum, expecting help on a totally unsupported platform.
Why so much anger?
I am fully aware Linux is not (yet) supported by DXo. However, running inside a VM (so running natively) is supported.
PureRAW may also work through Wine.
Most pros I know use Mac or Windows. I don’t call a 4% market share, for all Linux software, not just photo, a convincing commercial argument.
In which domain?
But not directly by DxO. And do you include running code specifically optimised for Apple’s M series chipset? And what machine do you run Linux on? How can a non-Apple machine emulate M chips?
