Message
Re: [colorvision_group] Re: Upgrade Program?
2007-10-22 by CDTobie@aol.com
In a message dated 10/22/07 2:35:31 PM, marko.mili@... writes:
For most people, it is probably choice between Spyder and Eye-One Display - both are similarly priced and seem to be of roughly comparable quality.
Well, three years ago, when Spyder2 and EyeOne Display 2 were both released, they were indeed quite similar devices. Three years later, Spyder3 is a whole generation newer, and Display 2 is still three years old. Not quite so comparable...
It is with printer profiling that I think Colorvision has a fantastic device. Although may be technically inferior to a device like EyeOne spectrophotometer,
Technically inferior if you want to analyse the spectra of lightbulbs, for instance. But for reading L*a*b* values from color patches, our spectro is as accurate, and ten times as consistant, as the EyeOne spectro...
at the fraction of the price it brings printer profiling in the price range where a mere enthusiast can get one - I am glad I got mine for only around $350 after rebate (assuming it comes). And although I got the suite just over a month ago, I am not at all sorry I didn't wait - the price is great and devices function well.
Precisely...
A much greater concern for me is software - just released version of Spyder3Print for OSX is incredibly still a PPC-only binary, 2 years after switch to Intel! Spyder2PRO, and possibly Spyder3 as well, are PPC-only binaries.
Spyder3Elite is newly written, and is a dual binary application. Spyder3Print is a rework of PrintFIX PRO, and is due for conversion to dual binary over the next few months. What matters more is functioning on the various platforms. Our applications work well on Mac PPC and Mac Intel and are the only color profiling packages that support Vista64.
That shows certain lack of effort and care as far as software development goes - maybe they are a tiny company and can't afford it, I don't know - I've learned to expect more polish rom $20 shareware, at least on the Mac side of things.
Yes, shareware doen't have to support ten languages, five platforms, and a host of other things, so they will always be first to rush into new stuff, just because its there. Applications like Photoshop (despite screams and cries for an instant Intel version) took longer. As a non-processor intensive application, Spyder3Print has an even longer window before its critical. I'm sure it will be Intel-Native well before it becomes a critical issue. The choice was to release a PPC version of it now, or wait until a dual version is available later. Despite your offhand criticism, I'm sure there are many users who will be grateful to have it as a PPC app in the interum.
It is a safe bet that Intel binaries will run longer then PPC - just as OSX on Intel doesn't run Classic apps, will next Apple hardware platform run PPC apps?
And S3Print will be Intel based years before that becomes an issue.
Will OSX 10.6 or 10.7 have Rosetta? Will I be left with perfectly functioning hardware I can't use because Colorvision didn't want to or couldn't afford to hire a good Mac programmer?
We have some of the best Mac color programmers in the world. Your perspective does not include all the factors we need to factor into our development.
For this reason alone, I am less comfortable with my purchase then I would be otherwise.
Lets see, in the last week we have, with no obligation, given you a free copy of our new software, to use with your older device. Thats more than you would get from anyone else in the industry. And we'll upgrade you to a dual binary version once it ships as well. I'd say your comfort level with your choice should be pretty high.
This kind of a thing is not isolated to Colorvision - this happens with many or even most hardware devices. Look at Canon DSLRs: they surpass Colorvision sales by a couple of orders of magnitude, and yet their current software look and feel is like it was made by someone with 6 months of Mac programming experience. I think there is a view that they are in it to sell hardware, and that software is a necessary evil.
On the other hand, Mac Minis don't take much space, and in a few years, when this software stops working on then current platform, I could probably get an old Mini for $50 and have a Mini Calibration Station (tm).
Sooner or later all your earlier peripherals will be too old to work with the latest operating system; though that typically is longer coming on a Mac than a PC. However your assumption that your DC 1005 spectro will have to work via PPC forever is ungrounded.
C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
Digital Color Solutions
Datacolor
CDTobie@...
www.spyder3.com
**************************************
See what's new at http://www.aol.com