The newly released iPad Pro benchmarks beat the latest (entry level) MacBook Pro. These tablets will become a standard in computing at this level. Being the device the youth is growing up with rather than laptops and desktops as the majority did before. I think it’s safe to say that if we’re taking about mobile apps and and we’re mostly talking about iPad here is that it’s the future. I’d like to react to Sherwood Botsford, and several other people in this comment section. and by all accounts that's turned out really well.
Which, btw, worried me when they announced the Windows version of Luminar. I would never want Skylum to do anything to risk or diminish their great products on Mac and Windows.
As for cross platform compatibility, my assumption (possibly flawed) was that the history stack would be relatively easy to transfer and replay across platforms. I don't know enough about the complexity of raw interpretation (or availability of libraries for same) to say. Perhaps a mobile photo editor that consumes external camera raw files (rather than apple raw) *is* too ambitious - but maybe its not. I suspect a mobile offering done well would grow their name recognition and user base, and deepen the relationship with their existing customers.
Its never easy, but I'd hate to see Skylum cede the mobile market. Having been in software my entire professional career (the last 10 as a product manager) I know how hard it is to balance the needs (wishes, wants and demands) of the various constituencies. Granted none of these are photo editors, but thats not the main point. I'm thinking of Evernote, Sonos, Fitbit, TPE in particular. and yet there are examples of independent small(ish) software companies that *do* have very functional products across multiple platforms. Do NOT cripple the product by trying to make it work on a much lower powered platform like and iPad. Even large companies with huge resources have trouble maintaining cross platform compatibility. You cannot do accurate colour work in a non-controlled environment. And it will be different depending on your ambient light. In addition to this, the colour space of an iPad is radically different from your office. You aren't talking of dealing with multilayers of imagery with 4000圆000 pixels each, raw conversion, all trying to run on a single processor that runs at 10% of the speed of your desktop. But they are not very demanding - an editiable view of a calendar. IOS versions of things like Google Calendar work - but even they work badly with huge inconsistencies in user interface, and layout. In general: Any software package that runs on multiple platforms is faced with the limitations of ALL those platforms and the strengths of neither. When Apple made Photos for iOS, then terminated both iPhoto and Aperture for desktop, we got a package that was very limiting in what and how you could do anything. When Apple came out with the pages version of iOS the desktop version went from a middle of the road word processor to a bit better than a toy. The mac version can do things that the iOS version can't - and makes events that iOS can't edit.
0 kommentar(er)
