if you just could get the "RAW" with any "decent" editor.... but you get a edited version.
Think you need to have a better understanding of what RAW is.
a RAW file is just that... the raw information from the sensor - so if you could look at that, then what you would see would be a matrix of pixels of varying brightness - all of them monochrome.
The camera always captures RAW. However if you are shooting JPEG what happens is that the processor in the camera takes that matrix of pixels, and because it knows which ones were capturing red, green or blue light, it can do some complex maths called demosiacing that allows it to reconstruct a full colour image and then will apply lens corrections to the image before applying any setting you have on the camera such as saturation before generating the JPEG.
If you are shooting raw... then its still does all that - it needs a JPEG to show you on the screen your finished shot. But what it does is bundle the un demosiacced sensor data, along with some indication of the types of lens correction that has to be done and a thumbnail JPEG, and writes that to a file.
That RAW file , once it is transferred to you computer therefore still needs to be 'interpreted' in order for it to become an image that you can look at. This is where applications like Aperture, Lightroom and Olympus Viewer etc come into play.
Olympus Viewer has an advantage as it knows precisely how to get the best that Olympus thinks it can get out of the sensor data, as they know all the characteristics of the sensor.
Olympus don't share that deep level of understanding with Adobe, Apple etc... so those guys have to have to work out their own interpretation of the data - which is why raw camera support doesnt come out at the same time as the camera, and why different apps can have different looks for the same RAW file.
So you can never see a RAW file - just an interpretation of the monochrome information captured by the sensor
K
