The DAM Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 19, 2017, 06:50:11 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
28031 Posts in 5146 Topics by 2907 Members
Latest Member: kbroch
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  The DAM Forum
|-+  Software Discussions
| |-+  Choosing Software/Other DAM Applications
| | |-+  Robust and Reliable Software
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Robust and Reliable Software  (Read 3064 times)
Ken
Full Member
***
Posts: 186


View Profile
« on: June 05, 2007, 04:56:54 PM »

I have been evaluating a number of DAM programs over the last few months, and two features that I highly value in software are robustness and reliability.  While I have encountered few true lemons out there, I would like to know more about which programs users feel stand out among their competitors with respect to these two features.  I realize that we ask a lot from DAM programs, and that may be a big part of the problem, but it seems as if there are a large number of issues in need of attention in many of the products I considered.  I know it is not fair to judge a piece of software based upon solely upon comments posted in a company's support forum, since this is where problems are supposed to be discussed.  But, I am still amazed at the number of issues that get raised with DAM software.  In my work, which is not normally DAM related, I have several pieces of software that I normally count on to be stable and well behaved.  For example, I have a PIM program called Ecco, which I have been using daily since 1993.  It is an extremely stable program, in spite of the fact that its official support and development stopped a number of years ago.  Perhaps its not a fair comparison, but then what should I expect from a DAM program? Any thoughts and/or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Logged
peterkrogh
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5682


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2007, 08:04:26 PM »

Ken,
It's a hard question to get a real answer to.  All you can really hope for is a general idea of how many problems there are with a piece of software, what they are, and how to spot them.  If you happen to be a user that has bad problems - even if that represents only a small fraction of users - then the software is bad for you.

I agree that it's a bit surprising how many problems seem to show up, but DAM software covers a lot of ground, OS integration, Imaging capabilities, error prevention, and more.  Lots of places for things to go wrong.

Wish there was a more comprehensive answer.
Peter
Logged
Ken
Full Member
***
Posts: 186


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2007, 09:00:16 AM »

Thanks for the reply, Peter.  I do not mind a thread going unanswered, but the silence had me wondering if people were happy with their choices, unhappy but unwilling to discuss the issue, or these are just nor priority features in their selection process.  Your statement about covering a lot of ground might be at the heart of the issue.  I know that there is no way I could get my work done if spreadsheet programs behaved like DAM programs.  I also know that many of the authors work hard to make their programs reliable, but I wonder if there is a limit given all that we ask of them, especially in light of ever-changing standards and formats.  I am hoping that DAM software matures in the near future, and that stability is a byproduct of that maturation.

--Ken
Logged
Andre22
Newbie
*
Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: July 06, 2007, 11:05:12 PM »

Hi Ken,

I was looking through this forum trying to decipher exactly what DxO were doing (or trying to do ) with their DNG demosaisicing and other issues, spotted this section and saw your posts.

It seems you are in the process of working out a functional evaluation criteria for your work needs. Dealing with fast expanding libraries of images and image data has to be the hardest part of understanding the paradox of workflow. I say "paradox" because so many solutions attempt to compensate for some very basic file management functions in the OS that could have been there but went missing in action. This often creates extra processing loops at system level which can impact greatly on general efficiency. Work it is; alas, floweth not.

You could put it this way: to join this forum you are met by Mr Fierce Pooch. A "Fierce Pooch Approach" for DAM is much needed. Cutting through the catch phrases, the list-of-amazing-features, getting down to the essentials.

OK, back to you: after mulling this over, are you able to list in concise form your essential criteria? Can you write a summary for an imaginary "white paper" that describes the most suitable DAM solution for you? Or is it some more help / discussion re: actual criteria that you are asking for?

Andre
« Last Edit: July 06, 2007, 11:29:29 PM by Andre22 » Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!