Will the Quattro Embarrass Sigma into dropping their camera line?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
maxotics
Regular MemberPosts: 282Gear list
Like?
Re: No
In reply to Laurence Matson, 3 months ago

It may seem offensive, but so many people jump on this whino bandwagon about SPP that the casual observer would think it impossible to ever get it to work. My guiding principle has always been to figure out how to make it work be stand not to yowl about its shortcomings.

And what would you suggest Sigma do? Give them everything they need to decode? Done! Offer to work with them and commit resources? Done! Give them more information than they have received from anyone else? Done! Purchase Adobe? Pending!

Whether you believe me or not, those are the facts. I know, and that is all I can say. Ask Eric what he wants to do. It's a joke. And they did do the other exotic from Fuji. They are stonewalling. If you have a better word, let me know.

If Sigma was so committed to getting 3rd party support why is Roland still struggling with his tools?

Just in case there is a casual observer here, I AM ON THE SAME PAGE as Laurence.  You can get where you need to go with SPP.  It is ENTIRELY possible that the sluggishness is caused by the computational demands of Foven technology, and, if so, the end results are worth it.  I use SPP.  It has no show-stoppers.

"Stonewalling" is not accurate, I believe, because it would imply a politically motivated decision.  If you're right, and I'm questioning it, not doubting it, than Adobe simply doesn't want to spend the money or move their development priorities around.  If that's so, than an open-source solution, like Roland's, might be our best bet.

Thoughts?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow