Hello,
I have been testing CorelDraw 2020 on my 2019 MacBook Pro 16" and noticed the performance is just abysmal compared to Illustrator/Photoshop. The option of using GPU acceleration is either broken or for some reason uses the integrated gpu. If that's the case then this is just ridiculous - basically this makes the software unusable for any serious work!
While testing I found that if I turn off the auto switching of GPU in my macOS preferences and basically force my machine to always use the Radeon Pro then there is a significant performance boost and both Draw and Photo Paint start to work as expected. My conclusion is that the option inside Draw/PhotoPaint to use GPU is either broken or not using the correct GPU at hand.
Considering this finding I want to know if there is any plan this issue to be addressed within version 2020 or not? If there is no such plan then I might start looking elsewhere for Adobe alternative.
Thanks!
Does your MacBookmuse AMD technology?
Yes sure, Apple uses AMD in all their laptops and desktops for discrete graphics.
Like I already mentioned - if I turn off the automatic switching of GPU and force MacOS to only use the AMD then both Draw and Photo Paint are super fast. This can only mean the use GPU option inside The Corel apps is not working or falsely is using the integrated Intel GPU.
Windows 10 certainly moved into consumer BS as an operating system and updates are now more unpredictable but 99.9999% of all new properly written software and hardware just plugs in and works so it's not awful, just not perfect. If you can't keep a Windows 10 system running best if you try another profession or buy some good IT support.
Corel just coded to be usable on Mac and within 2 years will need to do it again. What do you think the chance of that working out is going to be?
I guess it depends on how many new Mac customers they got over the period. And hence my point that they are missing on real opportunities to gain from Adobe’s arrogance. I hope they stop ignoring our feedback and actually make their apps rock solid, fast and overall appealing. There is always the option of Affinity apps $50 each
You're a Mac guy so I'll ask, do you trust that Corel will recode for the new Mac processor correctly?
They recoded for 2019 and we'rec4 months into the 2020 release and that release hasn't addressed 15% of the problems they created in the 2019 release.
David Milisock said:You're a Mac guy so I'll ask, do you trust that Corel will recode for the new Mac processor correctly?
As far as I know, Corel built CorelDraw for Mac using the latest macOS APIs, so recompiling for the new Apple processors should be as easy as enabling an option and rebuilding the app as a new Universal Binary.
From this point of view, they are in a better position than Adobe.
I've been seriously researching Adobe alternatives because of a 2 contracts to do so and that research always crosses paths with platforms and the new Mac programming will be much more serious an issue than you think.
Apple will always have their user base but the most telling aspect of the installed Apple based is that over 30 years it's not moved very much. They sell phones and music their computers have not been going anywhere very quickly.
Only time will tell if the transition will hurt developers and users but they have done this once and it kind of worked out well. Also based on what I have seen there are apps from Adobe and Microsoft that already work on the RISC-ARM silicon.
Another point is they showcased existing /Intel x64/ software working on the new silicon using the new recompiler that will do the compiling during install. With that said I know these are demos and they are kind of powdered to look better that actuality but on thing Apple is known for is they get things done and not quit halfway like Microsoft.
I am not defending them or advocating but in order for them to survive they will have to get back their roots since phones are on the decline in terms of demand and they are already at the summit. The only real place for growth is if they finally start eating Windows market share which should not be too hard considering the crap Windows 10 has become.
Perhaps the switch to their CPUs could be the beginning of something of a bigger focus on non - iPhone hardware.
Forgot to mention - according to Apple developing for the new chips will be compatible with their iOS devices which means on paper should give incentive and boost for companies to quickly transition. Which brings the next point - with this transition they are unifying MacOS and iOS - something Microsoft tried and failed miserably.
Bill Gates has said he believes Microsofts biggest mistake was dumping their phone. I believe it I had a MS Windows 10 phone and it literally was walking around with your computer that made calls. I loved it!
I don't see Apple doing anything that benefits the desktop end user. They've got the Mac junkies and they'll buy it but they have what they will get in terms of laptop and desktop sales.
As far as app developers that's going like graphic design had, tons of so called professionals making little money writing apps to do things that are popular for a few days.
Hah, I had Windows phones since v.6 - HTC HD2, HTC 8X, Nokia Lumia 925, Nokia Lumia 850 and Microsoft Lumia 950. I agree they had a great platform but this is when they failed their user base miserably. First they never caught up to Apple or Google as a holistic user experience. Initially the plans were there - Skype, Groove, Office 365, Cortana, Edge, People Taskbar app, UWP, Bing Maps etc but slowly after Balmer's departure they killed all of them /except Office/. Now after the death of their phones its a fragmented, patched up and messy ecosystem that doesn't work that well. even their own devices - Surface are marred with bugs and half baked user experience. I know this 1st hand since I have Surface Book 2 and its crap. Every update brings new features that beak old ones, change design for no apparent reason, new bugs and more confusion of what is useful and what not inside Windows. Microsoft's usual approach is to start something they can't finish and in the end its us the users who suffer. Windows has become layer upon layer of legacy code, multiple UI elements, half working features.
All of the above made me move away from Windows because they have put enterprise above user and even tough I agree with your point on Apple they are far better looking after the user than MS.
MacOS and iOS being under singe coding is meant to simplify the development of apps for desktop and mobile and since a lot of Adobe's apps are already being rewritten for tablets and Autodesk is following this then its no brainer this is not targeted for the small devs with mini apps. Don't get me wrong I am not promoting what Apple are doing but I am just pointing that if there is one company that can bully everyone to play their tune that's Apple.
Microsoft have abandoned their end users long time ago and are just trying to stay relevant. They still dominate the pro market as well as the gaming but no in a way to make care or stay. So far everything I need or care I can do on my Apple machine - Graphic design, Motion graphics, photo retouching, 3D CGI, compositing and occasional gaming. Unlike Windows everything seems to be working smooth and its a breeze - something as of late I rarely experienced with my Windows machines.
I have no idea why Windows dropped their phone but in my opinion it was a bad idea. Ballmer's bad health didn't help MS.
Apple only bullies those who drink the Apple cool aid.
My research is coming up with an extreme move away from Apple and Adobe for Video, I don't video edit myself but their arguments concerning cost versus performance Mac VS PC makes sense.
The video editing Intel PC is 60% the cost of a Mac and video editing speed is equal or superior to equally configured Macs. Many seem to be moving to Ryzen processors 50 to 55% cost of a Mac but the system setup is significantly more difficult then the Intel, so much so that IMO the loose their ass on Ryzen systems.
If configuration of testing systems are done based on dollar per dollar basis both the Intel and Ryzen systems run completely away from the Apple machines.
Small video shops seem to be moving to Davinci while larger shops still do financially better with Adobe because of their dedicated task structure. In either case they complain significantly about software bugs in Davinci and Adobe.
My $1,800 system can't be built as a Mac at all, if I attempt to get close it's $5,000 which is ridiculous.
My research is showing that at larger Architectural companies, 150 to 250 seats I cannot sell their IT people on Mac, they won't even hear it, they'relooking for savingsnot a huge hardware cost increase. They are ok (so far) with splitting graphics applications and looking at a different approach to work station organization.
When you re looking to save $25,000 to $40,000 on graphic software fees a year I can get inventive. All I really need do is solve this in a convenient manner, breaking it into segments can save costs using dedicated non Adobe image editing software they can buy.
Many users don't need to draw or use page layout. Some only do work for presentation or web. Neither of these companies will look at CorelDRAW even though they've been doing their marketing with it for 20 years. 2019 put them both over the edge.
Still looking, so far I can tell you it's not going to be Mac or CorelDRAW and there will be a significant reduction in Adobe seats.