or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple will no longer develop Aperture or iPhoto, OS X Yosemite Photos app to serve as replacement
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple will no longer develop Aperture or iPhoto, OS X Yosemite Photos app to serve as replacement - Page 2

post #41 of 218
Blah
post #42 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I am not a photographer but I do some and I don't think any of them use Aperture. Aren't there better solutions out there? I'd think if they are abandoning it that the number of customers aren't high enough to warrant the expense cost of development.

 

True, most of the photographers I know use Lightroom. That in itself doesn't make it better. More people use PowerPoint than Keynote, and that certainly doesn't make PowerPoint better (on the contrary - without exception those who have used both say PowerPoint is a festering pile of crap).

 

I suspect most people use Lightroom because they are already familiar with Photoshop, just as most people use PowerPoint because they are familiar with Microsoft and simply are unaware of alternatives.

post #43 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by initiator View Post
 


1. Apple should just come out and say is that they are abandoning the professional photo software market entirely. 

 

2. I find this decision strange. With the introduction of the new Mac Pro, Apple seemed to have affirmed its commitment to the pro market. Abandoning one of their pro apps just doesn't make much sense. 

 

1. We have no exact details about what will replace Aperture. So it wouldn't make much sense for them to declare that. 

 

2. Apple introduced the Mac Pro in order to allow Pros to run resource-intensive software in an OS X environment. What they do with *their own* Pro apps has no connection to this. 

post #44 of 218
Photos will sit between Aperture and iPhoto.
Apple will have a single photo app.

Pros will move to Adobe.
The remaining 99% of people will be happy with Photos.
post #45 of 218

First, none of this should be a surprise to anyone.  The bigger surprise is that Apple waiting until weeks after WWDC to give details on this, especially since Craig Federigui spoke briefly about it during the Photos demo.  Even though he didn't address it then, it was evident that Aperture's days as a separate app were numbered.

 

Why?  First, the renaming of "iPhoto" which is the old OS X name to "Photos" which is the iOS name is no accident.  Aperture was a great idea at the time, but Lightroom has pretty much commanded most of the market share for years now and Apple hasn't done a meaningful update in four years (an eternity).  Also, it's clear that iPhoto needed a ground up rewrite as well.  It began when cloud storage didn't exist and photos were a lot smaller in file size.  When the latest cloud photo features for family were announced, iPhoto wasn't a part of it and the reason was that it's replacement wasn't ready.

 

I'm expecting that the new Photos app will have some Aperture features, but maybe not all of them, at least not at launch.  Over time we'll probably see most of them again, but Photos will be solidly a consumer app and not marketed to the Pros.  I'm sure some Pros will still use it anyway.

post #46 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by djames4242 View Post
 

 

True, most of the photographers I know use Lightroom. That in itself doesn't make it better. More people use PowerPoint than Keynote, and that certainly doesn't make PowerPoint better (on the contrary - without exception those who have used both say PowerPoint is a festering pile of crap).

 

I suspect most people use Lightroom because they are already familiar with Photoshop, just as most people use PowerPoint because they are familiar with Microsoft and simply are unaware of alternatives.

 

 

Aperture hasn't been "better" than Lightroom for ages. 

post #47 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by initiator View Post
 

I find this decision strange. With the introduction of the new Mac Pro, Apple seemed to have affirmed its commitment to the pro market. Abandoning one of their pro apps just doesn't make much sense. I could see if they decided to discontinue the Mac Pro and all pro apps entirely to focus only on consumers. But, that's not what they did.

 

It's too early to know for sure, but the new Photos app, coming next year, may be simple enough for consumers and powerful enough for professionals. Why maintain two separate applications if a single well-designed application can serve both markets? It's a question worth waiting for. 

post #48 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGNR8 View Post

Glad I moved to Lightroom, not that I trust Adobe....

You and me both, one of the reasons why I moved away from Logic, I fear with so much attention going to GarageBand it's only a matter of time till they stop development on that as well.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #49 of 218
Some will be upset, rightfully.

Me personally, I'm very pleased to see it.. because it shows that Apple is not equating making more money with pleasing more people. The only reason behind shuttering this is that they're honing their resources, because of a clear vision. I didn't use aperture, but my kind condolences to those who did. 1smile.gif
post #50 of 218
I've been using Aperture since 2006. And I am often amused at my fellow longtime users' willingness to make excuses for Apple regarding Aperture. Let's face it. The application, though usable, has been languishing for some time. I am not surprised at all that it will be discontinued. I've spent the past few months trying to figure out how to handle the legacy library of 80,000 images I have in Aperture.

I respect Apple's right to discontinue the application if it is no longer successful enough to warrant development. I had to leave Aperture because once it was updated to 3.5, it began crashing regularly on my 2013 27" iMac with 32 GB RAM. It turns out the crashes on that machine and the MacBook Pro Retina were related to the NVIDIA card in those new machines. I've since moved to a Mac Pro for my image editing. With its high end AMD video cards, that issue was solved. But, I had already began moving to another digital asset manager.

The lesson for me is that Apple let so much time pass without communicating their intent about this application, I will never put all of my eggs in that basket again. For sure, I love Mac OS X and many Apple products. They just handled this issue with Aperture poorly in my opinion.
post #51 of 218
Exactly four days ago I had to make a choice between Aperture and Lightroom. It took me about five minutes to make the decision after I reviewed all the negative feedback about Aperture and Apple's lack of keeping it current. I saw the writing on the wall.

I would have preferred Apple's solution, and I'm certainly not a fan of Adobe's subscription model. Nonetheless, I decided to go Adobe's route for the time being.

I wonder if that means Final Cut Pro will eventually meet the same fate.
post #52 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

Long-term, Apple needs software partners. They will probably benefit more from having 3rd party pro apps on OS X than they would if they sold pro apps themselves. For example, as much as Adobe's bloatware sucks, it's become the de facto standard. Adobe is the Microsoft of creatives.

Apple needs their own pro suite, because Adobe is a lowest common denominator company not pushing the envelope in any way, focused on a non-standard GUI and cross-platform software.

iOS reminds me daily more of MS-DOS with task switcher multitasking: each App has its own UI, the OS X UI consistency is also a thing of the past. We might as well be using Java apps at this point.
Apple needs to reinvigorate the platform by having a key product in each core software category that raises the bar and sets minimal standards for the platform, creating heat on sloths like Adobe.

alternatively, instead of wasting money on a brand that makes shitty headphones, buy Adobe, retool their Software, make it Mac-only, and re-establish the Mac as the premier content creation platform.
post #53 of 218
I don't know for a fact, but I've got the feeling Aperture adoption was pretty modest. Whenever I tried it (I did a few times) it felt like a big dinosaur, where as Lightroom felt more like a straight app that just get the work done. I remember picking Lightroom over Aperture for the superior chroma noise reduction. For any serious Aperture user though, this is obviously a serious blow. It'd be like if they quit developing FCPX for me.
post #54 of 218
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post
4. I hear good things about Lightroom.

 

sudo rm -rf/ ADOBE.

 

Originally Posted by Spinoza View Post
What will be the difference between Photos for OS X and iPhoto on the Mac?

 

There is no more iPhoto on the Mac. That’s the difference.

 

Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

2. Apple introduced the Mac Pro in order to allow Pros to run resource-intensive software in an OS X environment. What they do with *their own* Pro apps has no connection to this. 

 

BS. Does it seem at all like Apple to say, “Yes, we’re known for building both hardware and software that works together seamlessly and in a way that absolutely no other company can do because we control both and can build one to compliment the other, SO NOW GO USE SOFTWARE FROM THIS THIRD PARTY WHO IS EXPLICITLY KNOWN FOR BUILDING THE WORST, LEAST OPTIMIZED SOFTWARE ON OUR PLATFORM”?!

 

Originally Posted by sflocal View Post
I wonder if that means Final Cut Pro will eventually meet the same fate.

 

Total nonsense. Apple has to be planning something here.

post #55 of 218
I am not, NOT happy about this at all. I use Aperture, and I use Capture NX2. Both are being discontinued simultaneously. Is there another DAM application with face recognition? How many of the Aperture features will show up in Photos? Will it get the full treatment on DAM but leave the nitty gritty of specialized raw conversion to others, a solution I could live with? Or do we can a bunch of dumbed down, canned half features, a solution that leaves the market without a single effective all in one DAM solution?

What now? Photo Mechanic? Photo Ninja on the back end?
post #56 of 218
Oh no. The 3 people still running Aperture will be heartbroken. The rest have "already moved to Lightroom" to be closer to Adobe, or are just stopping by to post the expected "Apple doesn't care about pros" meme.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #57 of 218
Based upon recent history with Apple apps, the first version of Photos probably won't even have all of the features of iPhoto, let alone Aperture. Apple has a long history of abandoning apps or replacing them with seriously feature lacking versions. Just one example: I was a long time MacWrite Pro user, an app that was superior to Word and WordPerfect in it's day. Apple abandoned it, pushed users to Apple Works (that was the point that I moved to Word, say what you will about MS, they don't generally abandon users), abandoned Works, introduced Pages, improved it for a few versions, then re-wrote it with less features, now attempting to improve it again... I'm hoping that they don't mess up the Photos app too badly, as I do rely on it for personal use. Bottom line, never rely on Apple apps for business...
post #58 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post
 

 

 

Quite likely THIS  ^^^

But if this is the case, Apple needs NOW to identify the general features that are earmarked for Photos or at least indicate the areas in which nothing will be lost from Aperture's feature set.  No-one will trust them otherwise.  They don't deserve it.  I'm not going to sit around for a year with Aperture only to find that Photos drops two-thirds of the sorting and IPTC features.  

post #59 of 218
So, if I've gone through my 'faces' part of the iPhoto program & labeled each photo with the person's (family member's) correct name, & the photos are currently stored on my computer, the new system will migrate all of my identified photos to the cloud? Seems like in would have already done the facial recognition work. Will my photos be rejected because I failed to include or stripped off geotags as well?
post #60 of 218
Oh that's a shame. I don't use the app very often but much preferred it to the Adobe rubbish.
post #61 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by grblade View Post

I don't think we'll lose functionality from Aperture. It'll just be in a new package.

There is no way at all that Apple will put Aperture's functionality into the Photos app. Aperture does shedloads of stuff that iPhoto doesn't do and Photos is going to be much more of a replacement for iPhoto. There will be some Aperture features but never all of them and they will never restore them. They wouldn't be working with Adobe to allow Lightroom to import Aperture/iPhoto libraries otherwise.
post #62 of 218
Wow Xmas came early for Adobe!
post #63 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post
 

Aperture hasn't been "better" than Lightroom for ages. 

 

This probably sounds somewhat silly (admittedly, it is), but I wasn't arguing which was better - rather I was arguing that just because more people use one over another is not an indication of better. More people use Windows than OS X but I doubt many here (other than the trolls) would argue that makes Windows better. More McDonald's hamburgers are eaten than any others, and we all know theirs are rubbish. There are more cockroaches in the world than people but that doesn't make them superior ;-)

post #64 of 218
The update cycle of Aperture is appalling. Buggy. Crashes. Quint monstrous library database that needed building/repairing every now and then.

It fills an essential need for manipulating huge libraries of photos but is equally out of step, "weird", finicky and let's not forget *&@!ing slow!!!!!

Although I fear Yosemite Photos will be little more than iPad Photos , something that is fast, less buggy, maintained with more genuine love and works more seamless with iCloud would be appreciated.

Hope it can heavy-lift massive libraries and organises and shares libraries more professional.
post #65 of 218

Apple stopped development of Aperture a long time ago.

 

Makes me question using Logic...

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #66 of 218

I hate that they're abandoning Aperture before launching its replacement.  I guess I'm going to switch to Lightroom 5, but I started testing it this week in anticipation of this, and it just feels so clumsy and clunky by comparison.

post #67 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post
 

Apple stopped development of Aperture a long time ago.

 

Makes me question using Logic...

 

 

Why? There's barely any of it in this thread. 

post #68 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

 

BS. Does it seem at all like Apple to say, “Yes, we’re known for building both hardware and software that works together seamlessly and in a way that absolutely no other company can do because we control both and can build one to compliment the other, SO NOW GO USE SOFTWARE FROM THIS THIRD PARTY WHO IS EXPLICITLY KNOWN FOR BUILDING THE WORST, LEAST OPTIMIZED SOFTWARE ON OUR PLATFORM”?!

 

 

 

We're getting a replacement. You do know that, right?  And as yet we don't know its exact feature set. 

post #69 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

Features you love will be removed.

Then they will be added back in.

Advice to Aperture users:

1. Take a deep breath.

2. Send feedback to apple.com/feedback once Photos is out, telling them which missing Aperture features (if any) are important to you.

3. Keep using Aperture until Photos can meet your needs. Aperture still exists.

4. I hear good things about Lightroom. Which is surreal to me, since everything I have personally experienced from Adobe in recent years has been negative! But it's nice to have options.

 

Lightroom is an excellent program. It's great for organizing and doing some basic photo adjustments. For me personally, nothing beats the combination of Lightroom and CS5. I do have Aperture, but I didn't like it. It just doesn't have the tools like CS5. 

post #70 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Well, the Aperture news is surprising and disappointing. Hopefully this means Apple will be buying Adobe.

That would be the greatest thing ever. I was about to switch to Aperture, but when I saw that announcement at WWDC I thought this might happen, so I held off. I guess I'll just ride it out for now and see what happens next year. Not that big a deal to me since I'm not a pro photographer, so Photos will probably be fine for me. Eventually I'll be migrating away from Adobe to pixelmator and other comparable design apps for vectors and layout. Going to try to stay away from subscriptions as long as possible, but it's getting harder and harder.
post #71 of 218

I don't use aperture, so I can't comment intelligently on that.

 

I do use iPhoto and have mixed feelings. I think I paid for it too. It isn't great, and is a huge memory hog, slow, and not particularly intuitive. If this means a better Yosemite app, well...OK. But i needs to be backwards compatible too. I have legacy machines (as do many people) and they shouldn't be abandoned.

 

What would truly suck would be a Yosemite app that has no option to function without cloud storage. Many people simple want local options only, refuse to upload anything. And of course, I doubt a cloud option will be unlimited and free, meaning I will stick to local storage for many things...as will many people.

 

A killer feature for a Yosemite photo app would be to have an option for your own "cloud" storage location: your photos live on a HD you own connected to the mac, and it shares it out to all your other macs and devices through your interwebs connection seamlessly.

post #72 of 218
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

Apple needs their own pro suite, because Adobe is a lowest common denominator company not pushing the envelope in any way, focused on a non-standard GUI and cross-platform software.

iOS reminds me daily more of MS-DOS with task switcher multitasking: each App has its own UI, the OS X UI consistency is also a thing of the past. We might as well be using Java apps at this point.
Apple needs to reinvigorate the platform by having a key product in each core software category that raises the bar and sets minimal standards for the platform, creating heat on sloths like Adobe.

alternatively, instead of wasting money on a brand that makes shitty headphones, buy Adobe, retool their Software, make it Mac-only, and re-establish the Mac as the premier content creation platform.

 

All good points.  Adobe has always had cross-platform development at the core of their software designs.  Shaves a little off the development budget because they can hire fewer people who are experts in one platform.  But yes, it leads to lowest-common denominator UI design that acts as a boat anchor.  And not just a boat anchor for Adobe and its products.  It slowed down OS X adoption among pros over a 10 year period before Adobe ported Photoshop to OS X.

 

I think the Beats acquisition is more about music industry connections and the potential for bridging the massive Silicon Valley vs. Hollywood divide.  Apple can and will eventually revolutionize much of the entertainment industry.  But they need to do it very deliberately.  Getting Iovine and Dre on board is just one small step.  And I'm sure Ive could drastically improve Beats' hardware overnight.  If he wanted to.

 

So how much is Adobe worth now?  Let's see.  Its market cap is about $35 billion.  Add a premium to lock in the deal with its board, and that would raise the acquisition price to $45 to $50 billion.  But is it really worth $50 billion to Apple?  To buy Adobe just to kill off its Windows offerings, re-write everything in Swift for OS X, and own several segments of the "pro apps" market?  Hoping that Adobe's Windows-using customers will switch to Mac?  Not sure it's worth it.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #73 of 218
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

We're getting a replacement. You do know that, right?  And as yet we don't know its exact feature set. 

 

I’ll hold you to that. I hope beyond hope myself that Photos is a replacement to Aperture, but shipping freely with every Mac, I seriously doubt it. I doubt if it will even have RAW support.

 

And this:

 
Apple also said it is working with Adobe to help users transition to its Lightroom app for Mac. 

 

Really leads me to believe that you’re wrong.

post #74 of 218
NOO! TIM COOK IS RUINING APPLE!


Okay, now that I think I got ahead of everyone on that.

Surprising that iPhoto is going away.

Too many Apple products to list...Long on AAPL, so take what I say with a bucket of salt.

You are only relevant...if your customers love you.

Reply

Too many Apple products to list...Long on AAPL, so take what I say with a bucket of salt.

You are only relevant...if your customers love you.

Reply
post #75 of 218

This doesn't surprise me and I think they even mentioned something during the keynote, or someone did.  The fact that the new Photos app is going to have some great image editing capabilities that were highlighted on the phone, and yet be easy to use, leads me to believe that's the way things are heading.  iPhoto's biggest issue was performance, and Craig stated that the new Photos app will be high performance.

 

They also said in the keynote that this was replacing iPhoto. Again, I have no idea why this is news.

 

So again, no surprise here.

post #76 of 218
IF and that is a big "IF" the photos app built into Yosemite offer comparable or the same editing capabilities of Aperture, then it will be just as good or better than lightroom. Basically you will have all the search, organization, indexing and file management capabilities of the finder and iCloud replication across all your devices (first 5GB free.) No crazy proprietary file libraries and databases and I can open photos in any external editor and save them in-place fully versioned. If they manage to make it plugin-extendable it could turn out to be a photoshop killer.
post #77 of 218
Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post
Surprising that iPhoto is going away.


Couldn’t be happier. Can’t have Photos and iPhoto in the same ecosystem. This bodes well for iOS, too. It’s nonsense to have both.

 

The loss of Aperture, though, is inexcusable unless Photos picks up the slack.

 

Originally Posted by Eric Swinson View Post
If they manage to make it plugin-extendable it could turn out to be a photoshop killer.
 

Well, no, a Lightroom killer. Nothing that any of Apple’s three applications do even touches Photoshop in image creation.

post #78 of 218
It became clear this was going to happen as it followed the same pattern as other software Apple EOL'd:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160439/beware-of-the-pages-update#post_2428497

"The next casualties will be Aperture and Quicktime (Pro)"

The lead developer of Aperture actually left Apple years ago and I believe he started the project. AFAIK, there were no major releases after his departure. This happened with Shake; the team went to work on Nuke and Shake just languished with compatibility updates and then just EOL.

In order for a software project to keep being developed, it needs the talent to stay - Apple knows this. Software developers are often treated like replaceable technical staff but they come up with innovative ways to do tasks.

I expect FCP will continue as long as Randy Ubillos is at Apple but after that, who knows.

Apple isn't really dedicated to making apps. They make software where they feel they have to. Their focus is hardware and the OS.

When it comes to companies like Adobe, their focus is apps because that's what keeps the company going. While subscriptions aren't appealing to everyone, they allow a software-focused company to keep delivering updates by maintaining a large team of developers - look at Avid for what happens with the standalone payment model. Smaller software packages tend to have very limited functionality so it doesn't make sense to subscribe to those. Larger software needs to be updated all the time because the industry keeps changing and entire industries depend on the software so subsidising the software makes sense. The alternative (discontinuing software and having to migrate to and learn a different package) is far worse.

This is just one more indicator that professionals should not rely on Apple's apps. The hardware and OS on the other hand are perfectly fine and the software Apple makes is good enough for people who don't have to earn a living from the use of it. Logic and FCP are exceptions for the time being.
post #79 of 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2oh1 View Post
 

I hate that they're abandoning Aperture before launching its replacement.  I guess I'm going to switch to Lightroom 5, but I started testing it this week in anticipation of this, and it just feels so clumsy and clunky by comparison.

 

That's what doesn't make sense about this story.  Apple is usually tight lipped about everything.  Why would they announce this now after so many months of nothingness on the Aperture front?  All it does is encourage people to jump ship to Adobe.  Something isn't right with this story and leads me to believe more will be announced in the near future.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post
 

Apple stopped development of Aperture a long time ago.

 

Makes me question using Logic...

 

Questions answered!

Just say no to MacMall.  They don't honor their promotions and won't respond to customer inquiries.  There are better retailers out there.
Reply
Just say no to MacMall.  They don't honor their promotions and won't respond to customer inquiries.  There are better retailers out there.
Reply
post #80 of 218
This isn't entirely surprising though it is mildly disappointing. That said though, like many have noted, this doesn't mean that Apple is done developing pro-level software. Perhaps it will just eventually all roll into the new Photos app. But realistically, I don't know of many pro-photographers who use Aperture. Everyone complains about Lightroom and Photoshop, but it's still the standard for most, like it or not.

Also, has anyone considered that perhaps Apple worked out a deal with Adobe to drop Aperture in exchange for more influence on Adobe's Mac apps, or perhaps in an effort to get more resources devoted to Mac development? Maybe Apple's working to improve the relationship with Adobe and thus the software quality, which on some level would make sense given again that Adobe has a very strong hold on the pro market. Aperture isn't on nearly the same level as Final Cut Pro or even Logic Pro when it comes to actual working professional usage. It might just make sense to play ball with them to improve the experience as opposed to competing with them with what many consider to be a lesser product.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
  • Apple will no longer develop Aperture or iPhoto, OS X Yosemite Photos app to serve as replacement
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple will no longer develop Aperture or iPhoto, OS X Yosemite Photos app to serve as replacement