PL5 gives Mojave users the boot

They’ve done it. A mighty kick up the backside for us Mojave users.

One product less to chose from.


It’s the same story every year, DxO support the latest 3 Mac OS, maybe 4? Nothing new but would be nice having support for 5.
I’m on Catalina and I guess V5 will be my last otherwise I need a new computer.

1 Like

No Apple Silicon M1 native support… still “Intel”

1 Like

Minimum system configuration:
• Any CPU
• 8 GB RAM
• 4 GB available disk space
• macOS 10.15.7 (Catalina), 11.0 (Big Sur) or 12.0 (Monterey)
• Graphics card with 512 MB of video memory for handling GPU acceleration
Recommended system configuration:
• Intel® Core™ i7 4th generation or higher, or Apple Silicon
• 16 GB RAM
• 6 GB available disk space
• AMD Radeon™ Pro 580X or better for Intel® Macs

i belive Apple Silicon = M1

I´m a Mojave User myself so i am out (on Mac)


I only wanted to express that I am also very disappointed about PL5.
Of course PL5 runs on a Mac with M1 (Silicon) - using Rosetta-Translation.
Native Support by PL5 was discussed here in the forum but not delivered…

1 Like

PL4 ran on “Apple Silicon” without being native so that statement is not definitive in PL5 as it could still run on M1/Apple Silicon Macs using Rosetta translation.

No where in any PL 5.0 release notes does it say anything about adding native Apple Silicon support which is a real fail in an upgrade if it is true and I will seriously consider whether I will buy the upgrade.

It would be nice if someone from DxO would chime in and clear this up!

No more Mojave, still no native M1 support. All that for a few ‘improvements’. How lame.


1 Like

ok, now it makes sense to me.
I switched back to Windows a few years ago so i am not up to date, also my mac pro is from 2008 which still runs fine under Mojave.

1 Like

@Adrenochrom Yeah, I am in the same boat as you. I am using MacPro5,1 which does no longer support Catalina.

I am a bit curious about why people have been hanging back from updating their Macs if they want to update to PL5 but are running Mojave. I am sure that some machines are hardware limited and thus can not update to a more current OS, but if you can’t run PL5 because of its OS limitation why would you not update to a more modern version?

Let me make clear that I don’t automatically upgrade when new OS versions come out. I personally believe in keeping 1 or 2 releases behind, just to see if there are any serious issues, but then I upgrade. I just did that from Catalina, going to Monterey and if I still had Mojave and wanted PL5 I would just have upgraded.

I mean no offense. I am just curious.


I am not a Mac users but I understand that upgrading one’s Mac hardware is very expensive, much more expensive than upgrading Windows hardware. Several people have indicated that their machines running Mojave are able to run the current software offerings of DXO’s competitors and are upset that DXO does not also provide similar support for more versions of Mac OS. The cycle of new OS versions that Apple is implementing apparently means that every couple of years Mac PhotoLab users are forced to upgrade to a new OS and sometimes new hardware as well.

PhotoLab, and Optics Pro before it, have been running on Windows 10 since 2016 and new versions will probably continue to work on it until Microsoft ends support sometime in 2024. That means a potential of 8 years of not needing a new operating system or new hardware in order to run PhotoLab. I can understand why some Mac users are upset.


1 Like

As I said, I meant no offense. I was just curious.

Mac OS releases are free, so any cost would have to be related to the hardware and if the hardware is not compatible, then I can understand the reluctance to upgrade.

1 Like

Mojave is the last Mac OS that also supports 32 bit software.

So, some software programs and - worse still - some drivers for external hardware don’t work under the later versions.

For some things, software but particularly hardware, there is no easy replacement, sometimes none at all. Other things are very expensive to replace.

In my case, these would be an audio interface that would cost about 1000 euros to replace and a surround audio interface for which there simply is no replacement at all.

1 Like

My iMac is a 2015 model and last update that I can do is Catalina, which mean PL5 will be my last, if i upgrade from PL3. It’s a 5 yrs computer, why would I change it if everything run fine and smooth for everything i do? A 3k computer for a 79$ software…. Not even close for argument or explanation here.

1 Like

I was doing a basic web search wondering if it could be remotely possible to run Photolab 5 on Mojave. This confirms that’s a no. I have a lot of photo editing software that all runs fine now and I am loathe to change it. However, I looked again and Photolab 5 needs an Intel Core i7, and I have i5, so I guess I’m out all around. This setup is only 2 years old and already obsolete here.

1 Like

Which exact model number of Mac do you have?

I am running Catalina on a 2019 MacBook Pro 16" and could also run Big Sur if I wanted to.

If you can live with not upgrading your computer, why not accept upgrading your software later as well? I don’t get all this complaining.

Just use PhotoLab 5 for 3 years and update when you get a new computer sometime in the future. Nothing about the older software is broken.

With regards to M1 support:
M1 is supported just not a native binary. I don’t think there will be a huge performance difference judging Lightroom and Capture One M1 releases. The image processing already leverages M1/macOS frameworks.

[quote=“florisvaneck, post:17, topic:21685”]I don’t get all this complaining.

Just use PhotoLab 5 for 3 years and update when you get a new computer sometime in the future.[/quote]

Looks like you don’t get a number of things. Above all, the fact that PL5 doesn’t work on older Macs and all OS versions older than Catalina. So, recommending him to run it anyhow is lightyears beside the point.

I’m frankly getting a bit fed up with people who abviously aren’t Mac users telling us what to do.

1 Like

@Cove, your Mac is still good enough for many years of operation. If your setup does what you expect it to do, there is no need to update neither macOS nor applications. Newer versions of OS and Apps get you additional features, fix a few bugs and add a few new bugs…

PhotoLab 5 can’t be run on macOS Mojave because of DxO’s decision to not support Mojave.

I updated my 2019 iMac from Mojave to Big Sur a few weeks ago. This meant letting go a few 32bit applications. Once I decided to let these apps go (and still being able to use the files they created with other apps), the upgrade was no real pain. I used “Carbon Copy Cloner” to back up my Mac to two external drives before upgrading and “GO64” to test for OS-interoperability. I found a few current 64 bit apps that contain 32 bit components - but these apps work as expected in every day use on Big Sur.

1 Like

I am a Mac user running macOS Monterey. Likewise, I always update to the latest version, just like on my iOS devices so I can use and leverage the latest frameworks (in particular: The Neural Engine on my computer) and are well protected from a security perspective.

I am of the belief a computer is written off in 3 years from an economic perspective, and that’s how I buy them. Nonetheless, I use my Macs 3-4 years, and then they go to a family member for another 3 years of use. But those family members are happy with a web browser and don’t have high performance demands.

All your anger should be directed to Apple/Microsoft for doing yearly OS updates instead of 3-yearly OS updates, or releasing a LTS version (Microsoft does actually offer this nowadays). I don’t think you can expect small companies to keep supporting older OS versions.

As recommended before, use the version you have until you buy a new computer. If you don’t upgrade your computer and OS every year, why put that unfair expectation on your software products?