Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 135 posts

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#101

Post by modfodder »

abruzzi wrote: post #93
Karunamon wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at what happened with FCP, though. They released a new version, missing lots of features, and then future releases restored functionality. When you're doing a ground-up rewrite, it makes sense to get the basics working first.

However they radically changed the way the workflow works in ways that some (many?) users cant adapt to. I don't do much any more since I shuttered my production side business, but I can't use the current FCP. It's still (and will always be) missing some do-or-die features for me. The Apple Pro App that I really use though is Logic, and, please Apple--do not "improve" it.

What do-or-die features are missing for you?

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#102

Post by stan_rogers »

caycep wrote: post #53
ghshephard wrote: post #33

As a multiple-times-a-day Aperture user for the last several years - I'm really glad to hear this. Apple has made it abundantly clear, that they were longer going to invest any effort into Aperture, and so we're going to get the best of all worlds. The application is absolutely rock solid for me - most of the database crashes, and corruptions have stopped occurring for over a year - so in the interim, I have a produc…

The one worry, and this is more of an ancillary one, is that now without the Aperture competition, Adobe will let lightroom development slack off. Lightroom is (was) one of the adobe apps that don't totally suck, and I always credited this w/ them getting taken off guard by Aperture (competitions is a great thing, etc etc). That being said, I suppose the writing is on the wall and whatever changes in direction were i…

With Apple supplying the RAW codecs with the OS, Hasselblad's Phocus [1] is a viable (and gratis) alternative on the Mac. For Windows types, it's only good for Hassy's own cameras, but if OS X understands hte RAW format, Phocus can work with it.

[1] http://www.hasselbladusa.com/products/phocus-.aspx

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#103

Post by jonknee »

lukasb wrote: post #94
jonknee wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will stop working if you ever get a new camera. RAW formats are all different and Lightroom needs constant updates to support new camera models. It's a huge mess, the camera companies don't make the specs public and the formats change subtly with camera releases. Adobe obviously gets access to the formats, but open source tools are left to guess and it shows. I just had this burn me when I got a new camera (Panaso…

good lord, why don't the camera companies publish specs?

It's rage inducing, but I think they are of the opinion that it's part of their secret sauce. I get the idea that they're all similar enough so that open source apps can get most of the way there, but Adobe has the full specs and is able to get them perfectly.

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#104

Post by GrantS »

al2o3cr wrote: post #56
pdabbadabba wrote: post #24

It seems to have been confirmed (as Techcrunch reasonably speculated) that development will cease on iPhoto as well. http://www.loopinsight.com/2014/06/27/apple-stops-developmen...

The Photos app looks like they are rebranding iPhoto, not "ceasing" anything.

This seems logical, especially in light of the Aperture news, but I'm not so sure -- all references to the new Photos app, including the demo at WWDC, refer to it as a viewer for your iCloud-stored photos. It's possible that instead of cloud storage being an option added to iPhoto, it is being re-designed as the primary use case, with your Mac as just another iPad-like device that may occasionally cache some local copies of photos as needed. I understand that from a practical point of view in 2014, but I think I'm philosophically against it.

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#105

Post by arrrg »

nnnnni wrote: post #47
ghshephard wrote: post #33

As a multiple-times-a-day Aperture user for the last several years - I'm really glad to hear this. Apple has made it abundantly clear, that they were longer going to invest any effort into Aperture, and so we're going to get the best of all worlds. The application is absolutely rock solid for me - most of the database crashes, and corruptions have stopped occurring for over a year - so in the interim, I have a produc…

Yeah, I'm really hoping that "Photos" will have all of the features of Aperture. It sounds like that's what they're doing. If it does, that will be great.

Doesn’t look like it.

The screenshot in the linked article is quite high res (no idea where they got that one, though). You can see what’s in there: http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/photosfo...

So, that’s quite extensive (definitely compared to iPhoto), but it doesn’t seem like they are going for Aperture levels of possible adjustments. But maybe they are, that interface could be hiding things.

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#106

Post by coldtea »

mortenjorck wrote: post #68
caycep wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one worry, and this is more of an ancillary one, is that now without the Aperture competition, Adobe will let lightroom development slack off. Lightroom is (was) one of the adobe apps that don't totally suck, and I always credited this w/ them getting taken off guard by Aperture (competitions is a great thing, etc etc). That being said, I suppose the writing is on the wall and whatever changes in direction were i…

I'm not even so worried about Adobe letting Lightroom languish as I am about them using their newfound monopoly position to at last move Lightroom into the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model that ate the Creative Suite last year. As an enthusiast photographer and avid Lightroom user, there's no way I'm paying a recurring subscription for the same app when I'm not using it to make an income. That said, there'…

>I'm not even so worried about Adobe letting Lightroom languish as I am about them using their newfound monopoly position to at last move Lightroom into the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model that ate the Creative Suite last year.

I think they've already done that, a few months ago.

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#107

Post by rikf »

iSnow wrote: post #71
mortenjorck wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not even so worried about Adobe letting Lightroom languish as I am about them using their newfound monopoly position to at last move Lightroom into the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model that ate the Creative Suite last year. As an enthusiast photographer and avid Lightroom user, there's no way I'm paying a recurring subscription for the same app when I'm not using it to make an income. That said, there'…

Apple never does simple/advanced mode UIs

Aqua (GUI) and Terminal (CLI)

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#108

Post by ghaff »

danso wrote: post #7

Someone help an Adobe-acolyte out: about how far behind/apart was Aperture from either Photoshop or Lightroom in feature set? My impression (from reading Wikipedia and past announcements) was that it was closer to Lightroom in intended use? I've recently seen a few articles about startups/business ideas in the mobile/consumer photo space pointing at the problem of users not having enough storage space for photos. I g…

>My perception and personal experience has been that users don't have enough ability to sort/filter the photos they already take. Digital/phone photography has allowed users to be voracious photographers...without a corresponding increase in being able to handle the information overload...

I think that's fair. Presumably facial and other pattern recognition, together with the increasing prevalence of geo-encoding, will improve this to a certain degree. But I know that I'm not nearly as good as I wish I were at entering metadata into Lightroom today--and I'm probably better than most.

The one saving grace is that I do publish a subset of photos to Flickr through the jfriedl Flickr plug-in which has, as sort of a side effect, the characteristic of creating a sort of album of my better photos.

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#109

Post by dublinben »

secabeen wrote: post #85
dublinben wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The copy of Lightroom you have right now isn't going to suddenly stop working, even if the next version becomes part of CC. If somehow it does fail to do the job for you in the future, you can switch to DarkTable, RawTherapee, CaptureOne, or any number of other programs.

True, but it won't handle or process RAW files from your new camera. Yes, you can use the free Adobe tool to convert RAW to DNG, but that adds another step, and reduces some of the current simplicity of Lightroom.

You can't expect software written before your camera was even released to support it. It will never stop working for existing cameras. What more can you expect?

Re: Apple to Cease Development of Aperture and Transition Users to Photos for OS X

#110

Post by stephencanon »

georgemcbay wrote: post #43
potatolicious wrote: post #21

I really wish the Pixelmator guys will do a product in this category. They've already got the core engine, and they have a perfect 100% intersection with the Aperture userbase (Mac-only). I for one would like to see a OSX-only photo editing suite. If it's anything like Pixelmator (no UI/UX compromises for the sake of cross-platform, insanely fast hardware-accelerated-everything) it'd be a real treat.

The amount of work required for software of this type that can reasonably compete with Lightroom is really massive. Beyond the obvious editing features you've got colorspace handling issues that most image editors don't bother with (Pixelmator actually handles this fairly well already), the need for a very robust plugin system, non-destructive editing, cataloging features (including image stacks), and a huge amount o…

Most of the technical features you list (colorspaces, raw conversion, ca) are provided by the OS. That leaves plugins, non-destructive editing and organization, which are still a pile of work, but definitely manageable for a determined small shop.
Post reply on HN