... If a photographer cannot post his experience without coming under attack then what's the point?...
Let me first state that I appreciate that you found the OP helpful. I respect and strongly support your right to have such an opinion and to express it publicly.
By the same token, I hope you respect my right to have a different opinion (i.e., that the OP was not helpful) and to express it publicly.
What you call "attack," others, myself included, consider a discussion. After all, this is a Discussion Forum, no? A discussion involves opposing, sometimes fiercely so, views. Or you think only acclamation is appropriate?
The OP started the thread fully aware of how contentious it might be. He even put it in the title ("dives for cover"
). He then started it with "Risking it here but I have to post this, if only for someone to prove me wrong."
And yet when the OP got what he expected, he immediately cried foul!?
And how exactly did the OP expect "someone to prove [him] wrong"? A claim without proof is easily refuted without proof. All one has to say is "No, actually Lightroom is superior to DXO 'by a surprising margin'." Is that the discussion you would approve of?
We were definitely not against "a photographer posting his experience." We, however, wanted to see
that experience, not just read about it. After all, this is a photography forum, with a picture being worth a thousand words, no?
Had the OP said: "You know guys, I can't prove it..." or "I do not have the time to show it to you, but I feel DXO is superior," I would have shrugged it off as another opinion of another guy I do not know an moved on. However, the OP actually said:"... in side-by-side comparisons of my best efforts with LR (after using it regularly, professionally, on thousands of images from its initial release) and DxO (after about two weeks of playing), DxO is better by a surprising margin."
Well, with that he piqued my curiosity. Pardon me then for actually wanting to see