I'm afraid to say that the only good DAM out there is Adobe Lightroom, and Adobe knows it (thus the subscription only model).
Primarily, what I am missing are features that allow me to quickly organize photos, weed out the chaff, make stacks, versions and the like, copy and paste adjustments, etc. Many of the purported alternatives are missing e. g. versions, and apart from Lightroom, I don't think any of them have something like photo stacks. (I'd love to be proven wrong.) The file-centric DAM apps in particular don't seem to want to go there. Even re-ordering photos is not necessarily a given.
You've (unknowingly) touched another sore spot that contributed to my lethargy: my beloved Fuji X100S died, the electronics gave up the ghost.
Oh man, sorry to hear that.You've (unknowingly) touched another sore spot that contributed to my lethargy: my beloved Fuji X100S died, the electronics gave up the ghost.
Bridge supports stacking (called "grouping" there), which is precisely why I use it.
But you can use acr in bridge. I know a number of people who use that combo in lieu of LR.
The fact that Bridge is just a DAM is a plus for me . All I want is something that will get images off a card and put them where I want , let me review them either individually , or as a slideshow ; allow me to set up an album folder for edits of trips or events ; and act as a portal to access whatever editing software I choose ( usually either DXO Photolab , or Affinity Photo ) .
I loved that camera. So did my wife. We’ve been eying a new camera, but for now I can use my trusty Nikon D7000 that’s still going strong.
“and eventually I will have to give Adobe Lightroom another chance.”
Only if you have at least one actively licensed other Adobe product.
oh, i didn't realize that. I thought ACR was also free, but I guess it must need the PS/PSE engine also.
I guess it's rather an artificial limitation to get people to pay for their product. I mean, if – as you correctly said – you could use Bridge + CR as some kind of Lightroom Light for free, there would be fewer reasons to give Adobe your money.
Don’t worry, I don’t perceive it as such. Lightroom is the obvious choice. Thing is that I hated Lightroom’s interface since the public beta. I haven’t tried every version, but I have tried it on-and-off and strongly disliked it every time. It still may be the best option at this point, though.
It isn’t cost or the business model that is holding me back, it is just my dislike of Adobe’s UIs. That’s why I want to try them last: I’ll literally have exhausted all other options by then.
See it as a way to give Adobe a serious look, though, not as a way to avoid Adobe at all costs. 
I’m curious what you don’t like about the interface? I’ve always found it rather thoughtful and intuitive.Don’t worry, I don’t perceive it as such. Lightroom is the obvious choice. Thing is that I hated Lightroom’s interface since the public beta. I haven’t tried every version, but I have tried it on-and-off and strongly disliked it every time. It still may be the best option at this point, though.
It isn’t cost or the business model that is holding me back, it is just my dislike of Adobe’s UIs. That’s why I want to try them last: I’ll literally have exhausted all other options by then.
I haven't tried the interface of their latest version yet, but what infuriated me the most was the modal nature of their interface. It constantly got in my way. I felt as if Lightroom wanted to impose a workflow on me as opposed to Aperture, which felt as if it would adapt to me. Either I sort files or I edit pictures. In Aperture, I could mix and match as I liked. Perhaps the workflow Lightroom wants me to use is “better”, but my brain just isn't wired that way. That was not just a preference in how things are done, something philosophical, but I found Aperture's approach tremendously useful when creating photo books (remember those?): here I would often tweak e. g. white balance or the colors on photos on the same page to make them match colors. With Aperture that was trivial, select the image in the book and e. g. hit H to bring up the editing HUD, make your edits and press H again. Ditto for light tables and the like — you would immediately be able to see the result live and make the necessary tweaks. With Lightroom I had to switch between modes. It's also why I really dislike Photos on the Mac and don't use Photos on my iOS devices for much more than viewing.
.
Yup, and to be fair, Lightroom won, Aperture is dead. So it might still be the best alternative out there. (Just to be sure: I am not trying to re-litigate the LR vs. Aperture flame wars of yore, I'm just trying to explain why so far I haven't gotten along with Lightroom.)
I'm trying DxO right now. It seems to focus on lens corrections for understandable reasons and seems a bit faster than C1 — at least with my test folder. But it seems like one of the more serious contenders.
