Very slow performance!

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.

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.

I can see your points and would agree with most.

On the flip side I have experienced a lot of post and photo editing houses heavily invested in Mac machines because of less spending for IT support, less frequent upgrades and less trouble with faulty components. All of these are 150+ seats and all are 100% Mac + Adobe. Again I am not advocating for Apple here but for me personally as a pro user who does freelancing I am happy moving away from Windows. And yes if you compare DIY machines vs any brand machine the cost is at least x2. Most huge organizations don't mind paying the x2 for Dell, Lenovo, HP or Apple because of the support, warranty and upgrade paths provided.

I personally believe Windows as ecosystem is getting stagnant due to the lack of proper apps, hubs and services. Microsoft nowadays heavily relies on Amazon, Google, Spotify, Adobe etc to patch-up the half baked and missing parts inside Windows. FYI that was not the case with none of their previous OSs for the past 10 years. One would argue this is good because it presents choice and flexibility but I don't think that's the case simply because most of these pieces don't talk to each other and when you add mobile into the equation it gets very messy. Because of all that I would argue that Apple has decided to get back to its roots and try to take some marketshare from Microsoft by putting more attention and focus to Desktops and Laptops. Its quite visible with the lates versions of MacBook Pro, iMac Pro and Mac Pro.

You are 100% right on the annual fees for software which are becoming ridiculous and a lot of companies are starting to wake up to this. The current company I work for is forking nearly $75K per year only on Autodesk software and another $50K for Adobe. With that said free software is becoming a thing and Affinity with their $50 per product with all shortcomings is still a very very attractive option.

As mentioned in one of my previous post its not always down to the better product or cheaper one. Adobe is playing its cards really well to try and squeeze every user it can due to it near monopoly status. It hurts me to see Corel missing on great opportunity with its return to Mac and instead of some inventive and aggressive approach to try and capitalize on the recent shift among prosumers and studios they are acting as if it's still the year 2000.

It (subscription) would not have been a bad move by Corel if their product was higher quality. 

I have 2 architectural clients (200+) and 8 smaller ones that I support for graphics, signage and donor walls. Autodesk,  it's  plugins, Sketchup and Rhino are a big bite in their budget.

Adobe is the next bite but for all of them it seems to be more offensive to them.  Corel could be getting a good portion of that budget if their product worked better in key areas and was not put together so poorly.

None and by that I mean NONE of these companies use any Macs. I've been in business in my area for 45 years over 30 years as self employed. In my area in print, as servers and web developers there is little to zero growth in Mac use in the last 2 decades.

If I go back 3 decades the first of those 3 decades saw a huge reduction in Mac installations. From all Mac servers to zero in a decade. From all Mac work stations to a mix of Mac to PC in many shops more PC then Mac.

From 240 graphic providers to 20 then down to 10. Screen printers from over 50 down to 4. All these losses were Mac based processes.

No print shop or sign shop in my area has a Mac server, most have 1 new Mac and a few older Mac work stations. Many sign shops have 3 years old or older Macs with a few newer PCs.

Agencies have declined from 11 major national agencies to 1, all Mac processes lost. The current 1 uses all Mac work stations with a Mac server and 1 Windows server.

Small web developers in my area have grown in number but as far as I've seen all have Windows servers and all but 2 are Windows work flows.

It's  just my opinion but it was foolish of Corel to move to the Apple platform before they cleaned up their Windows house.  The effort they put into Mac could have been used to really clean up the Windows version providing a base to compile a Mac version in later releases. 

Now they've put their worst image put there for all to see on both platforms. The new owners may want to sell Draw but could they even find someone willing to buy?

You are correct and stats don't lie - more than 85% of the global market is controlled by Windows. My only point is that if I have to evaluate both platforms on what I am getting in return and how much its tailored for the end user /me/ then Apple wins. Microsoft is killing one by one every consumer service/app and is pushing Windows to be more business/enterprise oriented. All said above matters if you are putting a holistic approach rather than narrowing to certain specifics of course.

As for Corel I agree they should have made sure when re entering Mac to put their best effort and make great impression to the new gen. of designers etc. This is so important these days since Corel has been absent for so many years from Mac and Adobe's dominance has put them is a small corner that is hardly visible by most people. As mentioned before more than 90% of all searches on "Adobe alternative" produces Affinity. This only means people don't know, use or like Corel which only confirms what the perception and feedback is on their 2019 and 2020 versions.

I am very very hopeful they are prepping some sort of fix or SP for release.

The problem for Corel is that 85% installation advantage has spread to the graphics world and they sacrificed their PC base, for (even if they got 30% of all installed Mac designer systems), a near  zero return. They have destroyed any possibility of selling high end corporate installations due to instability, incomplete features,  poorly implemented changes and the inability to create an administrative lock for customization, to mention a few.

The other issue is the general lack of financial resources in the graphics world.  For my 45 years designers have always been the worst clients, calling them cheap is an insult to the term. You have 30 day terms they want 60 days but pay in 90 or 120 and ask for discounts.

This situation in the last decade has gotten even worse, today it's web work, LOW, LOW quality, free and cheap applications. However it has been a revenue source for me.

I don't take work from designers and haven't for years,  my profits went up and cash flow is a 30 day cycle.

With that said my architectural clients use B to B web marketing firms for online publications, ( for lack of a better term), 4 or 5 of these will be requested as very high end print, 4 color + 1 and 2 spot varnish every year.

I'll usually get PC based InDesign but once in a while Mac based InDesign. I demand all working files because nearly EVERYTHING is wrong. Same thing for my clients professional photography, AWFUL is an understatement.  It's so bad that I demand the RAW captures, I prep the images for use on the clients internal devices, web use, insertion for global trade magazines and print of all types. My clients pay the B to B peanuts for their work and a premium to me because of the quality of the end product.

This is typical for the industry, whether it's a 85 employee design firm or a 1 person shop 99.999% of the work is unusable. They may have Macs, PCs, state of the art applications and they may as well us friggin MS Publisher. Crap is crap be it made in InDesign or Infinity. 

I disagree with your view of Microsoft, Windows 10 is so filled with consumer crap you spend 2 hours making it a viable tool. Then it behaves itself and you can get work done.

Corel needs to focus on a viable PC version, solve the AMD, Xeon issues then (fixing all the stuff they screwed up from X6 thru 2020) this will give them good base code to compile the 2 Mac versions they're going to need.  The PC market can support the R&D God knows the Apple market can't unless their going to sell phones or music.