1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

OS Upgrade Treadmill

Discussion in 'General Technical Discussion' started by billtils, Oct 26, 2018.

  1. The post by ClixPix in this thread raises the question: if we are using a computer solely (or most of the time) for photo editing and cataloguing, is there any point in staying on the OS upgrade treadmill?

    I use an iMac running Sierra for those functions, but keep a slimmed down catalogue on my aged workhorse MacBook Pro running El Capitan. The photo software is Capture One Pro, the pre-PhotoLab NIK suite, and Affinity Photo, all of which run perfectly well on both machines, so why "upgrade" to Mojave, get caught up functional software compatibility upgrade queues, and have zero improvement to my photo capabilities?

    The key phrase in this discussion is probably "... using a computer solely (or most of the time) for photo editing and cataloguing ..." and OS upgrades that bring something useful (or desirable, which is not necessarily the same thing) for general computing could be a different thing. Mind you, having read a lot about Mojave I am totally underwhelmed; it just seems another step in the (i)ossification of MacOS.
  2. The only reason, given your singular use of the computer, would be security updates, fixes and enhancements. If the computer is not connected to the Internet, then those issues are moot.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Mojave is nothing to get excited about, imo. However, once Apple declared first High Sierra, and now Mojave would put my early 2009 Mac Pro out to pasture, it was game on.

    A 4,1 to 5,1 firmware flash provided High Sierra capability, and an installer patch developed by savvy techies, found on MacRumors, brought my warhorse to Mojave capability.

    Had the Apple declared unsupported status of my Mac coincided with the post Mojave 64 bit only world, I might have been less resistant.....*might* have been.:shifty: 

    iPhone/iPad transparency is fine, but I don’t need it for computing capability.
  4. My primary editing machine/software is a several years old machine running Windows 7 Pro and the now unsupported LR6. I keep the wifi adapter turned off. If I need to upload/download photos, software, etc, I do so via my laptop and use a USB stick to get things on/off my editing machine. Been doing this for several years now. But I'm starting to have some hardware issues and since I've gained enough confidence now with the stability of Win10 will probably replace the machine soon.
  5. Some years ago I tried the idea of using one machine for solely image processing and another machine for everything else.....and for me, that just did not work out well. I still have more than one machine but no one machine is restricted to a particular use or to a particular OS because of perceived limitations or issues. My machines pretty much replicate each other, all having the same OS and all having most if maybe not all of the same image editing and other photography-related software available. So for me, there is an advantage in being able to sit down with any machine and get right to doing pretty much the same things that I would do on another machine in the household and this also serves as another sort of "backup," too......if one machine for whatever reason suddenly burps and got into a seizure freefall, I still have all the basics at my fingertips on another machine. I also, of course, run regular backups on external drives, too!

    I use my machines for email, participation in this and other forums, for checking the national and world news, for other odds-and-ends of web browsing, and also for post-processing images I have shot, for watching videos and listening to music, etc., etc..... For just about everything I use the computer for, I really want and need to be using an up-to-date OS. I also value the concept of the latest version of an OS plus software updates provided periodically also including all-important security updates as well.

    Don't most providers of image-editing or DAM software also expect their consumers to be using and appreciating not just the latest OS for the user's particular machine, but also the latest image-editing or DAM software from them?
    • Like Like x 1
  7. I really began to wonder about this a few months ago when my MBP was 3 versions of MacOS behind the iMac and the only functional difference between the two was one had a larger screen and the other was portable; both were running the same photo software (and one of those - the NIK suite - was pretty long in the tooth but perfectly adequate). You don't say what make of computer you have, but I expect the Windows world has the equivalent.
  8. It is hardly a choice for developers of third party apps as Apple deprecates stuff in Xcode so fast that you are limited to the OS versions you can deliver to if you're using the current version of Xcode. And there are all kinds of hoops to jump through (sometimes impossibly so) if you want to use an older version on the current system.

    Apple used to supply the Digital Camera Raw updates as a separate updater package to provide native OS X support for newer cameras. Unfortunately, this ended in Sierra. Now, you must upgrade to the latest OS to get new camera support (FU Apple!). Dunno if there is a sound technical reason for this or it is just another barrier Apple puts up to get you on the latest and (greatest), bloatware ridden OS. But if I had to place a bet on this, it would be the latter.

    However it is not the end of the world. The official "Digital Camera Raw" internals provide support for Finder thumbnails, QuickLook, Preview, and Photos (who the hell uses that?). Dedicated raw converters and DAM utilities (Adobe, DxO, Capture, NeoFinder, etc.) have their own raw conversion support, so unless you need/want support for Apple's own apps, native Digital Camera Raw support is meaningless. While it is an inconvenience not to have native support for newer cameras for things like thumbnails and QuickLook, my experience has been that it is so slow you might as well just open the file in your photo app/DAM of choice.

    I have yet to determine whether the camera raw binaries in newer OS versions can be transferred to older OS versions to get native support for newer cameras, but I am working on it.
  9. Growltiger

    Growltiger Administrator Administrator

    In this post I link to below (see the last paragraph) I mentioned the backward compatibility issue on the two platforms, and gave a brief explanation of why it is so different:
    What happens if you stop your subscription to Photoshop CC?
    What this means is that there is nowadays normally no problem running old 64 bit versions of Windows (i.e. Windows 7, 8, 8.1), until they become unsupported by Microsoft (typically about 15 years). They can all run the latest applications. And in reverse, the latest versions of Windows can run the older software.
  10. Sorry -- I didn't think to mention what platform I use. Well, that's easy -- I have not used a Windows machine in YEARS...... People who have been around here for a long time know that I am an Apple fangrrrl big-time and have been since 2005! This is an all-Mac household, with other Apple devices also keeping the machines company..... :D  :D 
  11. Actually it is easy enough to check to see what is supported in the way of RAW by clicking on the black Apple logo, then "About this Mac" and then "System Report" and under "Software" one will find "Raw Support" with a listing of cameras whose RAW is supported..... They are pretty up to date right now, as they've got the Sony RX100 M6, which was just released in July, included. Don't know about the new Nikon Z series as I didn't think to look for that.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.