DXO Softwares on LINUX ! (please .....)

DxO PhotoLab Feature requests
202

Blockquote 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.

Indeed… because there is no pro photo software on Linux (?). If some of them would work on Linux (CaptureOne, Affinity, DXo…), I would have long ditch Windows/MacOS… as many of my colleagues.

Blockquote 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?

Any standard x64 PC (so about 1,5 billion machines). Likely any modern Arm 64bit architecture.

203

So, what were you working on as a developer?

And why did one of the biggest development tool companies give up on their Kylix IDE so quickly? I was on their TeamB at the time and there was just no interest.

204

I don’t know what Kylix is and I have no idea what they gave up and why.

To my mind, it makes sense to move to Linux as Windows and MacOS are getting more and more user-unfriendly and not quite usable for serious stuff (no privacy, security issue, stability, API no stable…)

The forum here is about DXO software for Linux. And I stated my big interrest. While I thing it would be great and meaningful, I have no idea what is going on at the marketing team from them.

Cheers

1 Like
205

I don’t want to get in a middle of a he said/ she said argument that no one will ever win. I think it is probably a waste of time,

This all comes down to one immutable fact that the chances of DxO ever porting its software to a Linux platform is vanishingly close to zero regardless of any arguments you might make. This is a very logical assumption for most of the long time users of DxO’s software on this site, especially for the large number of posters here who have been beta testers for DxO at one time or another in the past. It is simply not going to happen.

Mark

2 Likes
206

Which is why, if you click on the link, you will find the Wikipedia article.

You’re beginning to sound like a Linux troll who has never really worked with macOS.

And you still haven’t said what development work you did

1 Like
207

And you are both right :slight_smile:
But as pointed out by @Pat91, it’s the question of market, resources, support, etc., i.e. money, the real thing.

1 Like
208

I like your reply.

Yes, the port is unlikely. But I wanted to stated my interest. A small steps.

I am using the MacOS almost every day since 2014. But more Windows as main machine since 2020.

I am not sure why I deserved such aggressivity. And not trolling.:troll:.

About my experiences as developer, I don’t think it’s relevant here.

Cheers

209

I don’t think you were trolling and you have a right to express your opinion and your hopes. Unfortunately, you are wasting your time trying to make a case for porting DxO’s applications to Linux. Maybe with the increasing prevalence and development of AI tools. a time will come when AI could do the port with minimal input from developers, but barring that, I wouldn’t hold my breadth.

Mark

2 Likes
210

Well, it seems like there are a lot negative feelings about the idea of making a PureRAW Linux version.
I’m awake, I like to daydream. Sometimes dreams come through.
We are few, but a growing customer base that hope for Linux port.
4% Linux users that’s more than 25% of the MacOS users, using Joannas numbers.
I used to be a software developer. Retired now. Databases. Oracle on Redhat/HPUX. Tools in Windows though.
Server side, Linux are used commercially without problem, but that’s another topic.
BR/Thomas

211

I may be wrong but I don’t think it’s that the users here are against DxO developing Linux versions of their software, it more that the users here are just pointing out why DxO are unlikely to ever do that.

1 Like
212

That is absolutely correct. If DxO wants to create versions of their software for Linux I don’t believe any of us would really care as long as development and support of the existing platforms didn’t suffer as a result.

As you said, I think any perceived negativity Is more a result of our arguments regarding why the likelihood of DxO porting its software is close to zero.

DXO is a for-profit enterprise. The expected increase in the user base would have to be significant enough to warrant the time, costs and redeployment of their limited resources.

Even if DxO could magically convert everything overnight, It is not clear that a sufficient number of Linux users would be willing to pay for DxO’s expensive offerings, especially since many Linux users often use free or inexpensive open-source software.

Mark

6 Likes
213

The only thing tying me to Windows is DxO.

Considering the changes Microsoft are making in removing Local accounts in the move to Windows 11, among other anti-privacy changes, I’m seriously wondering whether the pain of finding and learning new software to edit with will be worth not having to deal with Windows any more.

1 Like
214

Until two years ago my workstation was completely offline. I worked on Win7 with LR5.7 and other software, downloaded on a “gatekeeper” laptop and transferred via DVD. Refused to install anything which required online activation, even if it would take few seconds. Still it wasn’t 100% safe, even with autorun seemingly off and never using USB sticks (remember the stuxnet story?).

But 10-20 years ago it was much more risky to connect to the Internet than today, I think. It seems now that having Linux connected to the Internet is not much safer than using Windows, provided you have the right setup, don’t do silly things, and you are not prone to social-engineering. Also ISPs mostly got better in this respect.

The loss of privacy has both good (criminals identification, fraud detection, etc.) and bad side-effects (there are always greedy guys around, some with sick ego), but that’s a different story. You should just take care not to loose your data, which doesn’t depend too much on the OS used. Your privacy was lost long time ago anyway, I’m afraid.

BTW, you may have a read about French Internet encryption bans, a long story :wink:

215

Hello,

I use all three platforms: Linux, macOS (ARM), and Windows.
Since I purchased DXO PL, I no longer do image processing with open-source solutions (mainly Darktable) on my Linux laptop. However, it was nice to be able to get started with raw processing with a free solution.

Microsoft’s latest policies -and issues- are making me increasingly question keeping my main home PC running Windows.
A while ago, I made the effort to invest in upgrading my PC so I could move to Windows 11 without cheating (in anticipation of the end of Windows 10 support, and my hardware was getting old anyway), but ultimately, I hate working on Windows 11 (I’ll spare you the argument).
The only thing I still turn on this computer for is to work with DXO when my Mac is still at the office.

I’d happily upgrade this workstation to Linux, but then I’d lose an option for working with DXO PL.

Although I’m a new user, I’ve read through old threads about Linux and the replies that indicate Linux support will never arrive.
I’d like to point out, however, that although I use Linux—among other operating systems—I also use commercial software. And I suspect I’m not alone on this planet.
I have DXO PL 7, and I’d happily pay for an upgrade for Linux support (I currently have an offer in my client area for DXO PL 9 Elite; I’d be willing to pay more if it gave me native Linux support and if it would help support this work).

Multi-boot or VM options wouldn’t be satisfactory, unless I’m willing to install a discontinued Windows 10. So, off-topic.

Have a good day.
B.

(translated by g-translate, please disregard the approximations)

4 Likes
216

Same boat, roughly.

I work as a sysadmin (not very far from the DxO main office, hello guys), so I’ve been using Linux on servers and workstations on-and-off since my first use of a distribution around 26 years ago, back when mouse buttons had to be set up in the XFree86 configuration file and the sound card in the OSS configuration file, with the joy to run KDE 1.

Of course I’ve been using Windows as well, from 95 to 11.

I’ve seen all the progress made on the Linux side, with a solid boost these past few years thanks to a certain gaming company investing heavily in it, and at the same time I’ve also seen the continuous downgrade in user experience (especially recently) on the Windows side after XP.
Nowadays it’s clear that Windows is not a priority of Microsoft anymore (with so much AI-based code and QC that annoying bugs in 11 are now in the IT news every few days), so users should see the writing on the wall and plan to move on.

When the W10 EOL date has been reached, my employer forced my work laptop to upgrade to Windows 11, and it has been an experience so horrifying that the very same day I bought for my own machine a separate NVMe to install CachyOS and boot on it instead of either using an unsupported OS (10) or use one I hate (11) during my unpaid time because, to quote the robots from Yoko Taro’s biggest game: “this cannot continue”.

This also means that my DxO products are currently unusable unless I boot back to W10 (I won’t do it very often from now on) because I can’t manage to run them through Wine (yet?).

I started using OpticsPro with v11, then had each version of PhotoLab from 1 to 8 (except 7), and I often upgrade the other DxO software I own a licence for.
I’m only doing photos sporadically, so a lot of my motivation to upgrade was to support a fellow French company that do not force subscriptions upon its users.
This is still the case, but I’ve redirected most of my software budget to either open source projects or commercial projects with a working Linux offer, to put my money where my mouth is, so I’m on the fence about what to do regarding DxO products.

Reading these forums and YouTube comments show that I’m not the only one with similar thoughts and actions, and I may be early since I’ve been familiar with the Linux world for a while, but I think that software publishers should feel the wind turn and plan accordingly.
Having also some programming background (even if it’s mostly backend stuff) I know that it’s unrealistic to ask for a native Linux version from the start, especially if the TODO list is already full of projects that are considered high priority.

But PhotoLab already has a Mac version, which means that there is no part of the software that exclusively relies on pure Windows-specific code.
Maybe the devs have to maintain OSX-specific code in parallel to the Windows-specific code, but it means that abstractions are already here to support other systems.

If I’m not mistaken PhotoLab 9 still uses .NET Framework v4.8 from 2019: this is the last version of the “non-Core” branch of .NET, with the new versions being based on .NET Core which is open source and cross-platform.

From what I can see, upgrading to a recent .NET Platform version like v8 (or higher?) would help a lot with cross-platform development, maybe even refactor existing OS-specific code into more generic one, and allow at first to run PhotoLab in Wine easily, then later on to offer a native version.

In this sense moving to a more cross-platform approach would be part of the continuous refactoring that is supposed to happen in software anyway to avoid bit rot or technical debt.

I’m in no position to demand anything of course, but if there’s ever a change of policy, a beta version in need of Linux testers or even just a page saying “we don’t officially support Linux but here’s what should work (using Bottles for instance) if you agree that you’re on your own“, I’ll be here.

3 Likes
217

Forget Linux.

We already have increasing incompatibilities between Mac and Windows versions. And since PL9, the program crashes when I try to open images that were edited on a Mac.

218

Consistently with basic edits, or with certain functionality?

I’ve given up on PL9 for now for other reasons, and that DxO now documents dop as incompatible across platforms is a bad sign (even though up to PL8 it’s only been absolute paths in dop that have been the practical problem), but if if gets to the point that you literally can’t transfer edits across platforms and DxO doesn’t fix the issues then it’s the end of the PL road for me.

1 Like
219

I’m afraid that the end of the PL adventure is a decision I will have to make quite soon.

Reading you (I didn’t know about that issue across platforms :face_without_mouth: ) and this thread.

220

This is precisely why a more cross-platform codebase would be nice, because it would reduce those issues for both Windows and Mac users and open the software to more platforms at the same time: in this case everybody wins.

1 Like
221

This I don’t know.

It happened in two cases, when I wanted to check what had been done, whether there was an error, or something like that. Every now and then there are cases where things work or don’t work, but behave differently on the other operating system, and then it’s helpful to find out about the problem …

Furthermore, I was not talking about absolute paths and the like, which I could easily fix in such cases by replacing them with the “correct” command – or by simply deleting the offending one.