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

111–120 of 135 posts

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

#111

Post by Karunamon »

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.

I was wondering if they ever brought it back to parity with the original.. guess not.

It is odd, though, in that releasing a gimped product to be improved later seems counter to Apple's whole design ethos. (The "back of a dresser" parable of Steve's comes to mind).

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

#112

Post by uptown »

coldtea wrote: post #106
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'…

> 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.

You can still buy stand-alone Lightroom, though they also offer it as part of the $10/month Photography subscription where you get both Photoshop and Lightroom.

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

#113

Post by netcraft »

mesh wrote: post #97
netcraft wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I agree with you - they released Lightroom 5 around the same time as the CC transition, and as far as I can tell they haven't updated it since beyond support for new cameras and bug fixes, which I would have expected for lightroom 5 anyway. The last major update I can find is over a year ago now. They have released Lightroom Mobile but thats all I am aware of. I hope you are right though and that they do…

Whats new in Lightroom 5.0 to 5.5: http://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/help/whats-new.html This includes a ton of new features, as well as the release of Lightroom mobile, web and sync services.

The major features in that list were introduced as part of lightroom 5 - the only other features to lightroom itself came in lightroom 5.2 and these are small enhancements and bug fixes. All other changes are lightroom mobile, which while i'm sure they are useful, I don't consider to be improvements to lightroom itself.

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

#114

Post by jrockway »

abruzzi wrote: post #87
jrockway wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

McDonalds is probably making more money for its shareholders than The French Laundry, however.

And when I'm looking for a nice dinner, I'm definitely considering the value the restaurant provide to its shareholders in my decision.

I'm just talking about the incentives as to which type of restaurant to open, or more generally, which set of tastes to cater to. Do labors of love scale? No. Does it make sense to start a business that doesn't scale? I have no idea.

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

#115

Post by tcskeptic »

arrrg wrote: post #105
nnnnni wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Interestingly, in the top right hand side of the Adjustments panel, there appears to be an "Add" button.

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

#116

Post by rbritton »

lutorm wrote: post #74

Do pros really want to store their photos "in the cloud"? I'm just an amateur and have ~500GB of photos. Uploading that much is almost impossible over a normal asymmetric home internet connection, and I imagine professional photographers must have multi-terabytes of data easily.

Not at all. We have about 4 TB of photos. I signed up for Backblaze last August to get an online backup of just the past few years and it's still ~400 GB from finishing.

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

#117

Post by alphapapa »

Karunamon wrote: post #58
hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #38

Unifying the integration with iCloud is okay, but that's really unfortunate. Apple kills a "pro" app while the "basic" apps lose features every new release. If you compare iMovie and iPhoto '09 to the latest ones it's a downgrade from every angle. Even GarageBand lost features, you could use plugins before. I'm afraid they will "transition" users to Photos in the sense they will let you import your Aperture library,…

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.

> When you're doing a ground-up rewrite, it makes sense to get the basics working first.

And you do that in alpha phases. You don't replace working software with inferior, incomplete software.

At least, that's what is supposed to happen. I have no idea why people think it's reasonable to downgrade users to a new version that has fewer features and expect the users to use the new, inferior version while waiting for the equivalent features to be restored. I would say that it's greed, the desire to sell new software at lower development costs for more profit, but since the FOSS community has been one of the worst offenders in this regard (KDE 4, GNOME 3), I guess it's not that simple. Maybe some other factors are laziness, irresponsibility, and lack of pride in craftsmanship.

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

#118

Post by alphapapa »

psychometry wrote: post #44
ghshephard wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do use Aperture every day, and I'm happy Apple isn't open sourcing it. I want all energy/attention/testing/use to go against their next platform, and not be fractured.

And what if their next platform is insufficient for your needs? Then perhaps you'll wish you still had Aperture as an option, but it'll be an obsolete application with no chance of revival.

Why are people downvoting your comments? Is there a pro-Apple, anti-FOSS element here?

The more time I spend on web sites with voting, the more I think upvoting should be the only option.

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

#120

Post by pling »

lutorm wrote: post #74

Do pros really want to store their photos "in the cloud"? I'm just an amateur and have ~500GB of photos. Uploading that much is almost impossible over a normal asymmetric home internet connection, and I imagine professional photographers must have multi-terabytes of data easily.

Not a chance. Takes too long to upload and download and the 'cloud' data usage and rights assignment stuff is pretty unclear. My father (a pro) has about 3TiB on a NAS and AIT backup.
Post reply on HN