Fred A

Not trying to flame.  If you read my 1st 2 posts, I was following the procedure Mike had outlined for updating the older versions of qimage; I wasn't asking for a Ultimate version, I was trying to get back to my prior state when I overwrote the msdraw.dll file with that from the latest Ultimate download which now uses an incompatible msdraw file.

When Ultimate was introduced, Mike indicated that while no new features would be added, OS and new cameras would be supported on a biannual basis.  The fact that we could use the msdraw.dll allowed Mike to focus on Ultimate to the betterment of the product.  In the "every other year" topic Mike had indicated that

"The next time the retired versions will be updated is likely sometime after Windows 8 is released.  After that (likely sometime in 2013), we're going to stop software updates altogether on the retired versions.  Any updates to the retired versions (cameras for example) that might happen after that will happen via patches.  For example, you can patch your Qimage right now to read all the raw photos that Ultimate will read including the A77.  It won't read them at the higher quality achievable in Ultimate, but it does make the retired version compatible with all the latest cameras and that's all you would have gotten via an update anyway."

That is an extremely reasonable position on Mike's part and I applaud him for it as the retired versions are still available for sale.  In the future, I will buy Ultimate but at the moment Studio does fit in with my work flow, my needs and my computer's limitations.  

Mike

Thank you

Maggietobias

Mike

Would do that but then would not be able to read raw files from Sony A77.   Reason downloaded new version was for wife's Nikon p7100 files capability.

Previously you had indicated that the way to update the raw camera reading was to use the trial version of QU and extract the msdraw.dll file.  I did that for the Sony A77.  When my wife updated her camera, I downloaded the current version which included that camera in the update information and transferred the file.  There was no indication in the notes that this was an incompatible file and that updating prior versions for newer camera is no long possible.

Possible to get a prior Ultimate version of mcdraw.dll that included the A77 file as that worked?

Having problem

Installed the mcdraw.dll file from QU 2012.219 into folder of Qimage studio and everytime open folder with raw files receive this error message "Acess violation at address 040D33A0. Read of address 040D33A0".  

Error message will not clear no matter how many time "OK" pressed.

Can't go back as no longer have prior Ultimate file as overwrote under trial install.

Appreciate any help or prior file

Maggietobias

Mike

Is it possible to separately post the file "msdcraw.dll"?  At sometime, I would like to try "Ultimate" but not now as I'm trying a lot of stuff and I don't want to use my trial just to obtain the file.  I also just got sony's slt-a77 camera and learning to use it.  Not being able to use Qimage Studio would definitely not enhance my printing.

Thanks

Maggietobias

Mike

think you mean 2/14/11 not 2/14/10  also incorrect in change history

Mike

You missed version CS2 April, 2005 and version 1 in Feb, 1990 (CS5 is version 12 introduced in 4/2010 thus 11 versions in over 20 years)

However, your nitpicking about this extraneous s*** is really beginning to piss me off.  Your current business model isn't different from others and your whining about all the free support over the years is tiring after awhile.  That was your decision.  I wasn't one of your customers from the beginning so I can't speak to the early days and the rapid incorporation of features (I assume similar to what's appears to be happening in QU) which is really market research.   I found the discussions/help in the forums interesting but by the time I'd advanced enough to arrive at that problem since I'm not full time doing this, I had difficulty finding it.  I would have preferred that the manual was more frequently updated to reflect that knowledge and added changes than trying to search for it in the forums.

You don't discuss the issues that people have expressed in this section but rather berate them for feeling disappointed and grumbling about feeling left behind.  The questions/feelings brought up regarding competitive discounts are real and shouldn't be glossed over.  It's your business and you can do what you want but I find that your attitude is different from your past discussions/help and thus disturbing and you should reflect on it and how it is affecting our relationship.  
 

Mike

I wasn't trying to be argumentative.

My comment on the Adobe discount was relative to Jeff's offer for an upgrade from Photoshop Elements 7 (an older version of PE) to Photoshop for a 50% discount.  PE7 and PS CS5 are significantly different programs.  I did not suggest that you should have offered a 50% discount although that would have been nice.  I said I understood your dilemma in offering any discount as previously it was only the difference in version pricing and QS and QU were essentially the same product price at the time of introduction.  You chose a price point to maximize your sales but it created a problem relative to your treatment of old customers as the price of QS previously and QU were identical.  

Since you appear to be caught up in nitpicking on analogies - Adobe doesn't do a version change every year - there's been a minimum of 2 years between versions in the CS series which is approximately the time at which you will also get 50% of the purchase price.  QU has no longer Free upgrades for life so your policy is currently essentially the same as Adobe's except that you collect your 50% over 2.5 years versus Adobe's at time of version change and that they offer a discount on upgrading from a competing product to encourage sales.

Terry

This is an irrelevant discussion because the various RAW pre-processing programs are not identical and do offer differences in features and ease of achieving an effect.  While I have no intention of getting into a feature by feature discussion, I find the gradated filter in Photoshop RAW processing that allows maximum differentiation between sky and clouds up high with minimum effect near the horizon where land meet the sky similar to that of a polarizing filter useful and quick.  You might be able to do the same in QS but not as easy nor in its variations.

Both Adobe and Bibble do not make permanant changes to the RAW files but rather use an associated file similar to Q.  The ability to transfer your processed RAW file from either of these programs and then finishing the job in QU would be beneficial without having to make the conversion to a jpeg or tiff file as the final step prior to QU.  I'm fuilly aware that tone targeted sharpening can work on RAW files in QU but I can't get my other adjustments to QU because it won't read Adobe's or Bibble's preprocessing files.

Let me add a few thoughts and comments.

When first notified of QU, I was annoyed as there seemed to be very little difference between the Studio Edition and the Ultimate and there was not upgrade path.  As time has gone on, QU has evolved and the tone targeted sharpening is a significant added capability from prior editions.  If QU had been introduced with this, I would have grumbled about lack of upgrade path similar to that for Adobe whiich Jeff identified but said ok.  I understand Mike's problem in "upgrade" as in prior editions, you paid the difference in price and Mike has opted not to increase the price above that of Studio prior to QU introduction - so what we as Studio users would have expected was paying a minimal charge plus the annual fee and a lot of grumbling if it were more.  Calling it a new product and providing an opportunity to purchase the new product at a discount similar to what Adobe or Corel does would have worked for me and NO subsequent bitching.  Regarding Mike's offer of camera profiles, this isn't a benefit to me personally as my camera is not one on the list and due to the life cycle position for those on the list, I'm unlikely to buy one of them.

Currently I use use either an Adobe product or Bibble for RAW pre-processing as both programs offer easier capability than QU does.  If QU could read and build on their results that would make me a very happy camper (HINT, HINT) as it would eliminate a conversion step.  The fact that tone targeted sharpening can work on jpegs or tiff files is an alternative that I'll have to evaluate for my workflow.

Personally, I think Mike's offer to maintain the QImage versions through camera and OS changes is fantastic.  I do worry about OS changes however as new OS versions under Mircosoft do not necessarily have backward compatibility - try running DOS or 16 bit apps or even some older 32 bit programs under Win 7.  Needed or not, we'll all be going to 64 bit if for no other reason than hard drives will require it in the future due to addressing space.

Throwing my own 2 cents in.  I don't have any problem with Mike introducing a new product model with a renewal subscription.  The way I view the issue with Ultimate however is that if I compare the features list with QImage Studio - it's identical except that some features are faster and Flashpipe has been added to it (if I wanted Flashpipe features I would already own it).  The retention of EXIF info from RAW to jpeg/tiff is new but not a major improvement.  There just does not seem to be a major differentation of features between Studio and Ultimate to view it as a new  and separate product; additionally, it is not like that if I bought the Ultimate edition that I would still use the Studio edition.  The 2 products may be substantively different in fact but not in the information provided on Mike's QImage homepage.  

I'm sure that Mike will make significant changes such that the 2 products, Ultimate and Studio editions, will be substantively different this time next year.  But the question is "Why should I buy a new product NOW that does essentially the same thing as products I already have?"  For future new features which I don't know and not sure if I want since Mike hasn't disclosed what new features he plans on adding?  Users of Lite and Pro will not change otherwise they would have gotten the Studio edition.  For the Studio owners, if they wanted Flashpipe, it's only $20 more and they probably already have it or it doesn't mean much to them.  

Mike, I understand why you don't want to provide an "upgrade" path since there is now an annual fee and there would be bitching and complaining about free upgrades for life and a "loyalty" discount also has connotations but, at least for the first year or two, there should be a scaled path to change products in order to induce current customers to change now rather than a couple of years from now when their needs change.
 
As a point of information, I bought the Pro version in 2006 which had RAW support and upgraded later to Studio for $40 more so there has not been as large a change history as from 1998 to 2006 of features added that I can say that I got upgraded for free.  So my base product was higher and most of the discussion of what I got if I bought QImage in the beginning leaves me cold.