DxO has my money and is the center of my photo processing workflow now, Mark. I’m fully invested. I even do unpaid work for DxO at this point, promoting DxO software on DPReview forums.
But until DxO gives us more information on the extent of their plans for the DAM, I’m not going to drop the issue of DAM as my productivity depends on DxO working on 1. performance improvements 2. image quality improvements.It’s still possible to scale back the resources devoted to such a bottomless hole as a DAM.
In terms of the trouble that a database creates for a standalone RAW developer (which is what DxO PhotoLab 2 was when I bought in), please read my post on how the database prevents DxO from updating XMP ratings.
Anyone rating their photos in DxO PhotoLab must have considerably more patience than I do as DxO as a photo processor is very slow to switch between images (not an issue for processing but a huge issue for evaluation). I’ve made my case above for [why DxO is barking up the wrong tree with DAM in PhotoLab](Digital Asset Management in PhotoLab - #70 by uncoy and won’t make it again. I’ve offered detailed workflow notes for other PhotoLab users on how to manage photo selection and how to manage a library of finished photos.
DAM is a phantom need, a copycat feature and has little to do with the PhotoLab raison-d’être or USP which is ultimate image quality.