Yes you did. And I don't disagree with you. I just put in my 2 cents for you to consider.
By just repeating arguments again you start to sound like an LP with scratches.
Sometimes you need to play the LP again, when questions are asked and the answers were in the song. ;-)
... and not a world leading imaging SW company. Correct.
Actually, they are very much a word leading imaging software company. There is extremely powerful code running in their cameras to process the raw data from the sensor and create the final images that are corrected at many frames per second for scene conditions and lens correction.
I told you what you can do after RAW and lens cooking, if you don't feel fine with DPP.
And, I told you what that I feel that DPP is in need of an upgrade. If you're going to put that record on again, I'm going to have to play it again. ;-)
Of course it would be fine if Canon put in - say - 10, 20% of their stills R&D in DPP and still give it away for free.
Canon sold 15 million cameras in 2019. Or around 100 million cameras since DPP was released. I think 10 cents a camera might just get us a new version of the software. Don't you?
And here they get ROI and EBIT because they can sell cams and lenses.
Agreed. But, as we all know, there is massive downward pressure on camera manufacturers as more and more people realise that they can capture the moment just fine with their smart phones and a consumer that expects to get get software for under a dollar.
If they would think they could get EBIT with DPP then you would see a new version each year, I suppose.
The return on investment is consumers who find the experience easy and turn to your products. Like it or not, the experience isn't just holding the camera and taking the snap. The experience ends with the final image. In 2020 that image is on a display. As a manufacturer, you would surely want that experience to be as pleasurable as possible. It should be easy to get the image off your camera and onto something that you can correct for lens issues and do a bit of basic image adjustment. Obtaining a .JPEG/.HEIC file for sharing and storage should be as easy as possible. Your software should be up to date and in line with the modern operating systems that consumers are used to.
But do you want to pay extra for a (slightly) better interface and a (little bit) faster DPP?
Would you pay a buck? That's $100 million for Canon since DPP was released.
Contine with your complaints. Maybe it will work. I don't think so.
Accept that others don't share your opinion - or at least put some other aspects into account, too.
As long as DPP stays free and not cloud based, I'll take every improvement with cheers.
I'm happy that people have other ideas. That's the great thing about the world. Difference is how we learn and correct for error. But, to be fair, I am at a loss as to why anyone (not pointing at you) would be defending 6 year old software that accompanies cameras being sold into the thousands of dollars. Even more if you add the lens sales. My opinion is that Canon needs to either up their software game, or give up on it completely and make their lens/raw data available for all and sundry. This middle ground isn't good for them, and it certainly isn't good for us.
Edit : Like a lot of things in the modern world, media sites and influencers hold a disproportionate amount of sway. I've even seen Apple change things because the media have got a bee in their bonnet about something. You would be surprised how much can change if one of the big sites like DPReview added a line to their conclusion. "The included software with the Eos R5 is starting to show its age. Basic lens and image correction is becoming a chore and potential buyers need to factor in the cost of additional software to get the most out of this camera. There will also be a wait period while software companies do their best to bring their products up to date as Canon do not share camera information".