Sorry, but I don’t see anything like that in the linked document.
Neither in English nor in French.
I’m not saying that a document with this promise doesn’t exist, but I can’t find it… and yet I searched!
It was there.
1 Like
As I said, DxO REMOVED THE REFERENCE. It was there and now is not. They did this sometime after February 26, which is when I posted the link in post #3.
I confirm. This is a questionable practice. What has been announced can be possibly corrected, along with apologies, by another announcement if the former was a mistake. Rewriting history by deleting documents is not really acceptable, IMHO.
1 Like
My take on this topic:
I followed the release of PureRAW 4 quite closely. I have some information that was provided by DxO at that time.
For me, the key element, which seems to be the only legally valid one, is the release notes. And as early as version 4.0, it clearly states: “Note: currently DeepPRIME XD2 only supports Bayer images; X-Trans RAW files are not compatible. PureRAW will revert to DeepPRIME XD for these specific RAW files.”
This note will be repeated exactly when version 4.6 is released. So, much more recently.
The point that may pose a problem in DxO’s communication:
I finally found the version of the web page mentioned above. This archive is from September 2024.
It states: “DeepPRIME is compatible with almost all cameras from major manufacturers, including Canon, DJI, Hasselblad, Nikon, Panasonic, Pentax, Olympus/OM System, Sony, Leica, and more. DeepPRIME XD2 will support Fujifilm X-Trans files in the near future.”
It is now known that DeepPRIME XD2 will not support X-Trans files. But the removal of this information isn’t necessarily due to a marketing position, but more likely to a technological change in 2024, since DxO went directly from DeepPRIME to DeepPRIME 3 for PureRAW 5.
In any case, whether I’m right or not about this analysis:
- DxO did announce “for a period” that DP XD2 would support X-Trans
- but it was never stated that this would be the case in PureRAW 4.
I know this seems like an ambiguous explanation, but from a strictly legal perspective, I don’t see any fault on the part of DxO.
However, in terms of communication, that’s something else we can still discuss…
Product-wise, XD2 is XD2. XD2s is XD2s. You can’t have different versions of either in PureRAW 4 and PureRAW 5. So PureRAW 5 has XD3 and DeepPRIME 3, not some modified version of XD2/XD2s. X-Trans support wasn’t added to XD2 or XD2s as DxO said would happen, with no warning and no addressing the expectation of people who bought PureRAW 4 for eventual XD2s support of X-Trans. If you say XD2s is going to support X-Trans, then that means PureRAW 4 is going to support X-Trans. Plain and simple.
1 Like
I couldn’t say it better.
Sorry, I’ve been away for a while, but I see others have responded to you. All I can add is that DxO has replied “coming soon” to some people (myself included) who wrote to them to ask about XD2 support for X-TRANS sensors. In this entire thread, you have been arguing as though you were in a court of law and DxO were your client. Why? What we can retain here is that many of us feel that we have been lied to be the company, and that, at the very least, DxO has made misleading statements about their support of X-TRANS. I am not interested in whether these statements can be qualified as lies in the legal sense or not. I feel cheated, others do too, and that’s just a fact. I have never been treated that way by Adobe, ON1, and Skylum, to name just a couple of photo software companies I am a customer of. Sometimes, difficulties arise. I’ve been a software developer myself, so I know that things don’t always work out as planned. When that happens, one needs to communicate with one’s customers, explain things, and perhaps apologize for having raised expectations one is not (yet) able to meet. DxO’s attitude is perhaps the most infuriating thing about this whole episode: they either don’t give a damn or they do a heck of a fine job acting as if they didn’t. All the power to you if you understand this attitude; I, for one, do not,
This case reminds me of my good ol’ days as a system engineer at Big Blue (back then, they were still “big”). There was a (stupid) in-house saying, stating that “Life would be good if it weren’t for the customers”. Sometimes, I get the feeling that DxO suffer from the same syndrome.
2 Likes
Yes, it was a press release … referenced here.
