or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple's 'Photos' for OS X to come with pro-level image search, editing, plugins, more
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's 'Photos' for OS X to come with pro-level image search, editing, plugins, more

post #1 of 69
Thread Starter 
Less than a week after Apple announced plans to ditch both its pro-level Aperture and consumer-minded iPhoto photography tools for OS X, a report on Tuesday offers additional details on the upcoming replacement app, Photos for OS X.


Source: Apple


Last Friday, Apple revealed it has ceased development of Aperture and iPhoto in favor of "Photos for OS X," which is set to debut in 2015 as an accompaniment to the next-generation OS X 10.10 Yosemite operating system.

At the time, little was known about Photos aside from a brief onstage mention at WWDC and a screenshot that shows a user interface and toolset befitting of a "prosumer" title.

On Tuesday, Apple revealed a bit more background on the upcoming app, telling Ars Technica that Aperture-level features will be built into the title at launch, including image search, editing, effects and third-party extensibility, or plugins.

As seen in the above screenshot provided by Apple, Photos for OS X will be an in-between product, blurring the line between consumer and professional-grade image editing and management software. For example, while image adjustments like saturation, temperature and contrast exist in iPhoto, the upcoming Photos app appears to have a higher level of control ala Aperture.

The most enticing promise, however, is third-party extensibility, which could potentially bring advanced customization options that users can apply to tailor Photos to their specific needs. If developers take to Apple's software, the app may one day offer an image editing framework robust and powerful enough to rival true pro-level tools. That being said, it looks as though out-of-the-box functionality will be somewhere between iPhoto and Aperture, as Apple alluded to in its previous statement.

As for current Aperture users, Apple said it will roll out a final update to bring compatibility with OS X Yosemite, but there are no plans to continue software development beyond that point. To ease the transition, the company is working on a solution to streamline image transfers from Aperture to Photos for OS X, which will likely to built into the forthcoming title.

Interestingly, Apple also mentioned it is concurrently working on a transitionary workflow from Aperture to Adobe's Lightroom, suggesting Photos may not fit the needs of photography professionals.
post #2 of 69
I'm still confused about the "photo libraries in the cloud" idea. Will I still have my own physical storage of them, or are they asking me to go all cloud
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #3 of 69
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post
I'm still confused about the "photo libraries in the cloud" idea. Will I still have my own physical storage of them, or are they asking me to go all cloud

 

Here’s what I want from iCloud:

 

Document on my Mac Pro. Document on my MacBook Pro. Document on my iPad.

It’s the same document. Three files, three locations. Not stored in the cloud.

When I make a change on one, the change is made on the other two.

 

New document created on my Mac Pro.

That new document is created automatically on my MacBook Pro and my iPad.

Identical folder trees on each, within my local account. Meaning that if I create a new folder in Documents, name it something, and drag existing files there from elsewhere, I want that all to happen on my other devices at the same time.


No storage. Screw keeping MY content in someone else’s hands. iCloud as a conduit for syncing local content across all my devices. But I am still in possession of the files.

 

Unfortunately, iCloud seems to be trending toward Steve’s reality (at NeXT)/dream (for everyone) of “dumb terminal/server stores account/login anywhere and see your things”.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #4 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

At the time, little was known about Photos aside from a brief onstage mention at WWDC and a screenshot that shows a user interface and toolset befitting of a "prosumer" title.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

. . . have a higher level of control ala Aperture.

befitting of. ala. too bad there's no-one around to proofread your writing. but, as mikey campbell says, "I can't."
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
"Personally, I would like nothing more than to thoroughly proof each and every word of my articles before posting. But I can't."

appleinsider's mike campbell, august 15, 2013
Reply
post #5 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


The most enticing promise, however, is third-party extensibility, which could potentially bring advanced customization options to tailor [application] to the specific needs of users. If developers take to Apple's software, the app may one day offer a [productive task] framework robust and powerful enough to rival true pro-level tools.
 

 

An extensible ecosystem tied to a managed, curated core has always been key. 

"Inspirational phrase here." - Person you never heard of here.

Reply

"Inspirational phrase here." - Person you never heard of here.

Reply
post #6 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

I'm still confused about the "photo libraries in the cloud" idea. Will I still have my own physical storage of them, or are they asking me to go all cloud

Very likely it will be like My Photo Stream/Shared Photo Streams now.

You can have none/some/all pix in the cloud and use/edit them in one place/everywhere.

It's pretty unrealistic to think that Apple will make it mandatory that all photos will be in iCloud only.

post #7 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Here’s what I want from iCloud:

Document on my Mac Pro. Document on my MacBook Pro. Document on my iPad.
It’s the same document. Three files, three locations. Not stored in the cloud.
When I make a change on one, the change is made on the other two.

I mostly agree with you. I wouldn't mind having the option NOT to store the files on one device (say if my iPad doesn't have storage capacity for my entire photo library). In that situation, having access to the photos in the cloud would be useful. But I agree, my ideal would be having the cloud synching (and backing up) my photos/doccuments and not being the main repository.
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #8 of 69
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post
I mostly agree with you. I wouldn't mind having the option NOT to store the files on one device (say if my iPad doesn't have storage capacity for my entire photo library). In that situation, having access to the photos in the cloud would be useful. But I agree, my ideal would be having the cloud synching (and backing up) my photos/doccuments and not being the main repository.

 

Oh, and that would be quite simple, too.

 

Have a panel in iCloud Preferences similar to the one that lets you tick boxes for features of the account, except the tickboxes would be a grid for the products you own. Choose what syncs where.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #9 of 69
Hope I'll still be able to order physical photos/books/calendars/etc.
post #10 of 69
I foresee the new photo app as being a much better way to take pictures and have them synchronize in a more seamless way.

If pro-cameras also can be synced to your cloud, even better...
post #11 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoundaboutNow View Post

An extensible ecosystem tied to a managed, curated core has always been key. 

I never head the word 'curated' used as often as it is now. Jimmy certainly started something ...1biggrin.gif
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #12 of 69
I just hope to alleviate frequent iPhoto hangs, crashes, and sometimes near unusable slow performance. This is on last year's Mac Pro, dedicated internal 2 TB SATA drive, 16GM RAM, Mavericks, and all sw up to date.
post #13 of 69

I just hope that it won't look like that picture above.  The user has obviously set the preferences to the "light" look of 10.10, but the application shows a "dark" look.  I'm sick of developers that just do everything in black and think they have created a "pro" app as a result.  

 

I think it could be a very *good* thing if it isn't a pro app as well.  Catering to the arcane, strange and mostly marginal requirements of so-called pros just twists the app around to a point where regular folks can't use it.  Extensibility through the use of optional plugins by all means but not all of us want every spanner in the toolbox in front of our faces at all times.  

post #14 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


Interestingly, Apple also mentioned it is concurrently working on a transitionary workflow from Aperture to Adobe's Lightroom, suggesting Photos may not fit the needs of photography professionals.

That last sentence really troubles me ... So Apple is telling us to migrate if we are pros ... or is this one person's opinion? If it is official then Apple is saying Photos won't cut it for those of us now using Aperture in a pro environment and that's horrible to learn. I would like to see this spelled out officially though. If true, so be it I guess, we will have no choice. Also if true, this is nothing like the FCPro 7 to X situation where in fact X turned out to be very professional after a few updates, OK a lot.
Edited by digitalclips - 7/2/14 at 5:17am
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #15 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Unfortunately, iCloud seems to be trending toward Steve’s reality (at NeXT)/dream (for everyone) of “dumb terminal/server stores account/login anywhere and see your things”.

 

The thing is, that's not really some wild new concept. That's how it was originally, you had dumb terminals that all shared time on a main computer. Then the pendulum swung toward individual computers that did everything locally. Now we're headed back in the other direction. And everyone is heading that way, not just Apple with iCloud. In Windows 8.x you log in with your account on any PC and you have access to your apps, your SkyDrive files (I refuse to call it OneDrive), etc. From a privacy standpoint it's a problem, but from a convenience standpoint it's great. You don't have to worry about your hard drive failing and taking everything with it, nor worry about getting your computer stolen, etc.

post #16 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post
 

Very likely it will be like My Photo Stream/Shared Photo Streams now.

You can have none/some/all pix in the cloud and use/edit them in one place/everywhere.

It's pretty unrealistic to think that Apple will make it mandatory that all photos will be in iCloud only.

 

Exactly.  It will replace two products that Apple already makes, neither of which currently require you to have your photos in the cloud, so would that be different on a new, third app?  

 

I've seen this fear expressed on multiple articles about the new app, but it appears to be based on nothing at all.  

post #17 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunWuKong View Post

I just hope to alleviate frequent iPhoto hangs, crashes, and sometimes near unusable slow performance. This is on last year's Mac Pro, dedicated internal 2 TB SATA drive, 16GM RAM, Mavericks, and all sw up to date.

I would have suggested moving to Aperture ... but I guess I won't now ... 1hmm.gif

But it sounds like damaged data to me or a hard drive directory issue maybe. I can open an Aperture library in iPhoto on a new Mac Pro that is several hundred GIGs and it is quite fast. That said I do use a RAID 0 on Thunderbolt. I'd try running Disk Warrior on your drive.
Edited by digitalclips - 7/1/14 at 7:53pm
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #18 of 69

Apple Cedes Pro Photography Market - another example of Cookie Monster's failed leadership.  Cut prices, and incremental upgrades do NOT an Apple Make.  Pathetic.

post #19 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

I'm still confused about the "photo libraries in the cloud" idea. Will I still have my own physical storage of them, or are they asking me to go all cloud

Think Photos for iWork on iCloud. I doubt there would be a web interface, but the idea would be the same - doc in the cloud, edits pushed to all devices currently also logged into the same account.
post #20 of 69
I think we are going to start hearing a lot more about third party extensibility.

There are lots of advantages to offering a single app with additional pro functionality being offered (at a price) in a compartmentalised, but structured, way.
post #21 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoshop59 View Post
 

Apple Cedes Pro Photography Market - another example of Cookie Monster's failed leadership.  Cut prices, and incremental upgrades do NOT an Apple Make.  Pathetic.


Apple is focus. Apple is also most likely introducing a new wearable device this year. They're moving to reassert their dominance in the music market. They're undertaking a massive expansion of their cloud strategy. They're pushing out yearly, significant updates to iOS and OS X. They're refreshing just about the entire product lineup as well.

 

In order for Apple to do all that, things have to give. My guess is that they looked at the Aperture user base and decided that was a place to prune. Now they can combine the iPhoto and Aperture dev teams, and take some of those people for other more important projects.

 

The "cookie monster" is a genius, and one of the best CEO's in the entire world. Apple's 2014 so far has revealed just how much they have things well under control, and how well they keep to a larger, master plan, instead of focusing on the short term like some other Silicon Valley companies.

post #22 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post
 

[...] From a privacy standpoint it's a problem, but from a convenience standpoint it's great. You don't have to worry about your hard drive failing and taking everything with it, nor worry about getting your computer stolen, etc.

 

My Broadband 50 internet package has a maximum upload speed of 3Mb/sec. Coming home with even just 100 photos means hours of uploading. That's inconvenient. It's also a nuisance if one's files are large. The handful of hi-res Photoshop files and video clips for a simple three-minute presentation add up to 5-10GB for each project. Cloud storage for that workflow is expensive and WAAAAY too slow.

 

Obviously no one is forcing anyone to use the cloud instead of conventional local storage so I'm not objecting or complaining. I'm just saying that it's not a good approach for people who work/play with big files. We would be better served by a system that lets us use our LAN to perform the kind of handy sync offered by iCloud, but Apple doesn't seem interested in providing that. A tool that would track updates to my iTunes library on one machine and replicate it across the other three would save me hours of boredom.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #23 of 69

I'd love for Apple to take a similar tack with all Apple software... Downloadable plug-in options (available through each app, or through the App Store).

 

I'd especially love to see plug-ins for iWork, plug-ins and extensibility that would really make everyone happy.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #24 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Here’s what I want from iCloud:

Document on my Mac Pro. Document on my MacBook Pro. Document on my iPad.
It’s the same document. Three files, three locations. Not stored in the cloud.
When I make a change on one, the change is made on the other two.

New document created on my Mac Pro.
That new document is created automatically on my MacBook Pro and my iPad.
Identical folder trees on each, within my local account. Meaning that if I create a new folder in Documents, name it something, and drag existing files there from elsewhere, I want that all to happen on my other devices at the same time.


No storage. Screw keeping MY content in someone else’s hands. iCloud as a conduit for syncing local content across all my devices. But I am still in possession of the files.

Unfortunately, iCloud seems to be trending toward Steve’s reality (at NeXT)/dream (for everyone) of “dumb terminal/server stores account/login anywhere and see your things”.
This is the idea I am into as well but there others who want chrome OS idea of the idea you computer is simply a display that is showing a file remotely located, or to some that find out, wait the cloud is not literarily a cloud?

Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

That last sentence really troubles me ... So Apple is telling us to migrate if we are pros ... or is this one persons opinion? If it is official then Apple is saying Photos won't cut it for those of us now using Aperture in a pro environment and that's horrible to learn. I would like to see this spelled out officially though. If true, so be it I guess, we will have no choice. Also if true, this is nothing like the FCPro 7 to X situation where in fact X turned out to be very professional after a few updates, OK a lot.
Think apples saying won't a pro experience now go to Adobe or if you won't it later wait till next year, figure it will simply be a toggle button labeled advanced settings that goes from simple to professional interface.
post #25 of 69

Yet another article parroting TechCrunch's erroneous reporting that Apple is working with Adobe to transition people to Lightroom.  TechCrunch already corrected this LAST FRIDAY!

post #26 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Here’s what I want from iCloud:

 

Document on my Mac Pro. Document on my MacBook Pro. Document on my iPad.

It’s the same document. Three files, three locations. Not stored in the cloud.

When I make a change on one, the change is made on the other two.

 

New document created on my Mac Pro.

That new document is created automatically on my MacBook Pro and my iPad.

Identical folder trees on each, within my local account. Meaning that if I create a new folder in Documents, name it something, and drag existing files there from elsewhere, I want that all to happen on my other devices at the same time.


No storage. Screw keeping MY content in someone else’s hands. iCloud as a conduit for syncing local content across all my devices. But I am still in possession of the files.

 

Unfortunately, iCloud seems to be trending toward Steve’s reality (at NeXT)/dream (for everyone) of “dumb terminal/server stores account/login anywhere and see your things”.

 

This sounds great, though I wouldn't mind an appropriately encrypted backup in the cloud. I currently use S3 for that, but I would switch to iCloud if it did what you describe (though Apple's unlikely ever to make it work with my non-Apple devices -- phone and work computer). 

 

The only advantage of direct cloud storage, I think, is for documents that are edited by a group of contributors. Google Apps' implementation of simultaneous editing of documents is really nice. 

post #27 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I'd love for Apple to take a similar tack with all Apple software... Downloadable plug-in options (available through each app, or through the App Store).

I'd especially love to see plug-ins for iWork, plug-ins and extensibility that would really make everyone happy.

Plug-ins for iWorks would be god-damned Genius!!! It keeps the programs simple for those who don't need all the bells and whistles and allows users to bedeck the apps with all the ribbons and bows anyone could want!
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #28 of 69
Although the file syncing between devices via iCloud is great I would like the option of having part of my content/ photos stored in the cloud only and have a greyed out reference for it locally (that takes up tiny space)
For those who fear privacy issues with this I think that if apple wanted to get a hold of your content it could do so during the syncing process as well.
post #29 of 69

cookie monster is doing a good job of keeping existing ideas moving forward.  

 

apple lost the photo market to adobe because adobe is FOCUSED plus, my guess is that revenues from photo are topped out.  all of the wanna be photographers that came in with digital are now broke, and moving on into real jobs.  prosumer is where the money is, unless you're a pro who needs the fine points that adobe offers - which few do.

 

as to innovation, i don't think that 'wearables' are all that interesting but will take a wait and see.  

post #30 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Here’s what I want from iCloud:

 

Document on my Mac Pro. Document on my MacBook Pro. Document on my iPad.

It’s the same document. Three files, three locations. Not stored in the cloud.

When I make a change on one, the change is made on the other two.

 

New document created on my Mac Pro.

That new document is created automatically on my MacBook Pro and my iPad.

Identical folder trees on each, within my local account. Meaning that if I create a new folder in Documents, name it something, and drag existing files there from elsewhere, I want that all to happen on my other devices at the same time.

 

Can't one basically do that already with a folder synced to Dropbox?

post #31 of 69
Photos app looks awesome - can't wait to get it, and it's free on my Mac! This looks like what Lightroom should have been. Lightroom has nice features, but it's so clunky, especially compared to this..
post #32 of 69
If Apple adds iCloud APIs for one to have their own in-house NAS be a point of presence in iCloud I imagine it would open the door for Apple to expand their hardware ecosystem.
post #33 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post


Plug-ins for iWorks would be god-damned Genius!!! It keeps the programs simple for those who don't need all the bells and whistles and allows users to bedeck the apps with all the ribbons and bows anyone could want!

Wouldn't that be a bit like CyberDog? A general container that had extended functionality through plug-ins. The obvious problem with this idea is that you would have to have all the plug-ins installed to see the contents of the document. Which is fine as long as you are the only one to use the document, and you only use it on one machine. What happens if you send that document to somebody that don't have the proper plug-ins installed? You could of course embed a read-only version of the plug-in in the document (this is what CyberDog did), but what if you want to edit the document on another machine? Or the document would detect the necessary plug-ins and automatically download them from the net, but then who pays for the plug-in? This idea is harder to implement than it appears.


Edited by tryd - 7/2/14 at 6:41am
post #34 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

That last sentence really troubles me ... So Apple is telling us to migrate if we are pros ... or is this one persons opinion? If it is official then Apple is saying Photos won't cut it for those of us now using Aperture in a pro environment and that's horrible to learn. I would like to see this spelled out officially though. If true, so be it I guess, we will have no choice. Also if true, this is nothing like the FCPro 7 to X situation where in fact X turned out to be very professional after a few updates, OK a lot.

So switch back later.

"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 #35 of 69

I wonder if it will be written in Swift or ObjC?

post #36 of 69
Here's what I want from iCloud:

Document on my Mac Pro. Document on my MacBook Pro. Document on my iPad.
It's the same document. Three files, three locations. Not stored in the cloud.
When I make a change on one, the change is made on the other two.

New document created on my Mac Pro.
That new document is created automatically on my MacBook Pro and my iPad.
Identical folder trees on each, within my local account. Meaning that if I create a new folder in Documents, name it something, and drag existing files there from elsewhere, I want that all to happen on my other devices at the same time.

No storage. Screw keeping MY content in someone else's hands. iCloud as a conduit for syncing local content across all my devices. But I am still in possession of the files.

Unfortunately, iCloud seems to be trending toward Steve's reality (at NeXT)/dream (for everyone) of "dumb terminal/server stores account/login anywhere and see your things".

I'm with tallest skil and bageljoey all the way on this.
post #37 of 69

The new Photos for Yos' is inline with Apple being one of the worlds largest camera makers!

 

Consider the popularity of iPhone photography the move to transit iPhoto into a semi-pro territory is a smart and logical step following the newly presented higher integration between platforms and inter-app communication.

 

Developers would love another market being opened up for add-ons, pleasing users and strengthening the Apple ecosystem.

 

Think we will se a feature on the subject at demon Fireball within a week or two.

post #38 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by photoshop59 View Post
 

Creeps who want to 'ban' free speech, when it is rational and reasonable are reminiscent of history's worst dictators.  Check out the 1st amendment you liberal censor, and try to understand what America is all aout.

 

The 1st amendment doesn't force others to give you a platform for your speech. This is Apple Insider's house and if they don't like what you're saying then they have the right to kick you out. Not happy about it? Start your own forum. That independent entrepreneurial spirit is what America is all aout.

post #39 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post

My Broadband 50 internet package has a maximum upload speed of 3Mb/sec. Coming home with even just 100 photos means hours of uploading. That's inconvenient. It's also a nuisance if one's files are large. The handful of hi-res Photoshop files and video clips for a simple three-minute presentation add up to 5-10GB for each project. Cloud storage for that workflow is expensive and WAAAAY too slow.

Obviously no one is forcing anyone to use the cloud instead of conventional local storage so I'm not objecting or complaining. I'm just saying that it's not a good approach for people who work/play with big files. We would be better served by a system that lets us use our LAN to perform the kind of handy sync offered by iCloud, but Apple doesn't seem interested in providing that. A tool that would track updates to my iTunes library on one machine and replicate it across the other three would save me hours of boredom.

I've been wanting something like this for a long time. I would buy an apple server for my home if it had the capability of running iTunes 24/7 and I could sync/ backup ALL of my devices to my server in my home at LAN speeds. From the server, it could trickle up all, or a portion of my data to iCloud for offsite storage - but the current mechanism of going directly to and from icloud for everything is slow, inefficient and uses more of my bandwidth than is necessary!
It would also be nice to be able to store all of my purchased video content locally within my home rather than transferring it from the cloud everytime I want to watch it on Apple TV or a 16GB IPad.
post #40 of 69
"On Tuesday, Apple revealed a bit more background on the upcoming app, telling Ars Technica that Aperture-level features will be built into the title at launch, including image search, editing, effects and third-party extensibility, or plugins. "

It says on the article, the 27th. I read it on the 28th ... perhaps when it was updated.

The problem with this sort of shoddy reporting, is that it fails to achieve the single aim of reporting, notably, to inform. Instead, it confuses.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple's 'Photos' for OS X to come with pro-level image search, editing, plugins, more