@berts74084431 wrote:
If for Adobe, the people who have "older hardware" (and that are most of there subscribers), are not a first priority. Than that says at lot about there attitute for there customers.
That makes no sense. The simple fact is that we're talking about resource-intensive code, which Adobe will surely refine as they develop it.
There's no call to take things personally - Adobe isn't out to get you.
You mention Topaz: I know from my own experience that it runs like a dog on what constitutes "older hardware" for its requirements - the fact that it's currently faster than Lr on your machine is pretty irrelevant as a data point: it just means that its requirements more closely match your machines capabilities.
A pure fluke, really - certainly not evidence of an evil Adobe agenda...
For further context: on my machine (which has a functional, though far from cutting-edge, GPU with 8gb of memory) files that take 15 seconds in On One Photo Raw take a minute in Lr; and ten minutes in DxO PhotoLab or PureRaw. Adobe is already far ahead of DxO in performance and code optimisation terms, and we can expect that trend to continue.
The point is that this is a simple fact of life: as software gets more and more resource intensive, we're all going to run into instances of software bogging down because it has surpassed the capabilities of the hardware it's running on.
So: we either upgrade our hardware; wait until the software is sufficiently optimised to meet our arbitrary expectations (which might never happen, of course); live with the longer processing times; or use something else.
Ascribing agendas to Adobe's imagined motivations is futile and unhealthy.
AdChoices