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

1567810

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 219
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    ascii wrote: »
    ^ post

    That of course works as well, thanks.
  • Reply 182 of 219
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    philboogie wrote: »
    That of course works as well, thanks.

    Media yes, but not UI elements or entire Web apps that use Flash.
  • Reply 183 of 219
    As a pro photographer operating 5 studios for 30 years, with daily experience on Lightroom and Aperture, nothing, I repeat NOTHING, compares to Aperture. From the beginning it supported a clean Apple-like interface, efficient operation, and simple file management option. Lightroom has more tools - big deal. If I want every photo tool ever known to man I can open up Photoshop... I see no reason why Apple is dumping Aperture other than Tim Cook's lack of innovation. Tim - replacing 2 user specific products with a 1 size fits all hack, isn't innovation, it's resting on the laurels of those who came before you. I have the Creative Cloud subscription, but use Aperture for everything that I can.
  • Reply 184 of 219

    Agree 100%  Tap this, tap that, Lightroom is more Window's like in it's original design and workflow. Translation - it's somewhat annoying, certainly relative to Aperture.

  • Reply 185 of 219
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by photoshop59 View Post

     

    Agree 100%  Tap this, tap that, Lightroom is more Window's like in it's original design and workflow. Translation - it's somewhat annoying, certainly relative to Aperture.


    Did you just forget to switch over to your alternative user? :D 

  • Reply 186 of 219
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    relic wrote: »

    Media yes, but not UI elements or entire Web apps that use Flash.

    That a very good point, there is a clear distinction between the type of Flash elements. And telling the web server I'm an iPad client may serve up that videoclip as H.264 or something, it indeed won't do much/often on other elements.

    And I don't see any change in this for the foreseeable future, as it is now, what, over 5 years that the iPhone and iPad are such common place? Nope, Flash is here to stay.

    Oh well, I could always install the plugin, together with ClickToFlash as I used to have until last year.
  • Reply 187 of 219
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Originally Posted by Relic View Post

    Media yes, but not UI elements or entire Web apps that use Flash.

     

    What can Flash do in those regards that can’t be done with standards?

  • Reply 188 of 219
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    What can Flash do in those regards that can’t be done with standards?


    Huh? I was just referring to ascii's Flash solution only working with Media, that't it, no need to go any further.

  • Reply 189 of 219
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    What can Flash do in those regards that can’t be done with standards?


     

    If you want a really cool Flash example though you really need to check out audiotool.com/app 

     

     

    Ooooh this is a wonderful site to play with, so many great examples of HTML5 and Flash. 

  • Reply 190 of 219
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member

    What can Flash do in those regards that can’t be done with standards?

    [@]Mstone[/@] has knowledge on this topic, read some of his posts
    relic wrote: »


    Ooooh this is a wonderful site to play with, so many great examples of HTML5 and Flash. 

    I like the Drum Machine vid!
  • Reply 191 of 219
    There is also a possibility that no one seems to be considering: maybe Photos will be really awesome. Why is everyone assuming that it will suck, that Apple no longer cares about Pros or about photos, and that the only solution is to migrate to Lightroom? What makes everyone think that the new Photos won't be feature-rich when it debuts, and a perfect replacement for both iPhoto and Aperture?

    I'm going to remain optimistic about it all, and assume that the replacement will be better than its predecessors. :)
  • Reply 192 of 219
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    svacaru wrote: »
    Can you also give me the winning lotto numbers for Friday? Or maybe you have a direct line to TC. I's like you to forward some of my thoughts, please.

    On a serious note, some reviewers are trying to play this down. Their reasoning is that Apple would never destroy a good product that holds some sort of competitive edge without leveraging it. I disagree. Post Jobs Apple has lost the creativity edge so all they have to play with is the direction that was plotted before Jobs' departure. That line is to converge all platforms and make it universally easy for most of the users on this planet to do most of what they need. Everyone else is acceptable collateral damage, as long as they are not too many. Unfortunately, photo enthusiasts and pros are merely a blip on the screen, so TC will cut them because he doesn't have the imagination to figure something out. Simple as that. Photographers and photography are absolutely irrelevant to Apple's current strategy. It is the ability to share everything with everyone across all platforms and devices with a uniform UI. This is the mantra. Apple couldn't care less for photography. (remember Maps??!!)

    My main library since 2011 has over 100K images and uses over 1TB of storage (backup not included). I am waiting full of excitement to see that price tag for storing all my photos in the cloud. Oh, almost forgot: let's factor in those RAW files from the 36MP D810! My workflow is relying on having the RAW files accessible at a file system level. Good luck to me doing that with iCloud, TimCloud or any other cloud out there. Good luck to me doing that with Lightroom.

    I have no clue what I am going to do, but I know one thing: I am NOT waiting for the Photos  Miracle!

    Consider keeping backups online with Picasa and/or Flickr.
  • Reply 193 of 219
    benjamin frostbenjamin frost Posts: 7,203member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Relic View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by motoservo View Post



    I think Adobe should ditch Lightroom for the Mac not long after. And sock it to Apple the way Apple waylaid Flash.



    Then you'd see hordes of pro photographers ditch Apple completely.



    I'm a life-long die-hard Mac user but Apple's lack of concern for professionals since the iRevolution is disconcerting.




    Apple makes most of their money from the iConsumer crowd, that being said though Apple still caters to the professional or did you miss the release of one one of the most powerful workstations available. Yes Apple has been dropping their professional apps one by one but that doesn't mean there aren't hundreds of other third party apps to take their place. Suggesting that Adobe drop support for a company that is basically their bread and butter for the sole reason of revenge is an absurd suggestion. You can't expect Apple to cater to your every need, get over it and move on, Lightroom is a better program anyway. As far as Flash is concerned just buy a Surface PRO, the new one is an absolute gem.

     

    And in addition, I imagine that a good proportion of Aperture users will be happy with Photos.

  • Reply 194 of 219
    benjamin frostbenjamin frost Posts: 7,203member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Relic View Post



    How good is ClickToFlash, is it worth the purchase?




    It's free. All it does it prevent Flash from being loaded in the browser until you click the area where Flash would be or choose to whitelist the page/site.

     

    Redundant. Safari does that now.

  • Reply 195 of 219
    benjamin frostbenjamin frost Posts: 7,203member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by photoshop59 View Post



    As a pro photographer operating 5 studios for 30 years, with daily experience on Lightroom and Aperture, nothing, I repeat NOTHING, compares to Aperture. From the beginning it supported a clean Apple-like interface, efficient operation, and simple file management option. Lightroom has more tools - big deal. If I want every photo tool ever known to man I can open up Photoshop... I see no reason why Apple is dumping Aperture other than Tim Cook's lack of innovation. Tim - replacing 2 user specific products with a 1 size fits all hack, isn't innovation, it's resting on the laurels of those who came before you. I have the Creative Cloud subscription, but use Aperture for everything that I can.

     

    Shame you can't see beyond your nose.

  • Reply 196 of 219
    benjamin frostbenjamin frost Posts: 7,203member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by The Crow View Post



    There is also a possibility that no one seems to be considering: maybe Photos will be really awesome. Why is everyone assuming that it will suck, that Apple no longer cares about Pros or about photos, and that the only solution is to migrate to Lightroom? What makes everyone think that the new Photos won't be feature-rich when it debuts, and a perfect replacement for both iPhoto and Aperture?



    I'm going to remain optimistic about it all, and assume that the replacement will be better than its predecessors. image

     

    Exactly! And what anyone with their head screwed on properly should think.

  • Reply 197 of 219
    ingsocingsoc Posts: 212member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

    And in addition, I imagine that a good proportion of Aperture users will be happy with Photos.


     

    It really depends on what Photos can do. I'm not sure if you use Aperture, but it has a very specific set of functionality - it's definitely a professional application, and various "standard" photo apps (at the moment) don't come close to it.

     

    My view is that I'm not pre-judging the situation, except to say that Apple isn't stupid; I expect that Photos on Yosemite will likely incorporate a lot of the stuff that Aperture already does. It may initially be lighter on features, but I'm hopeful that Apple will address that in further iterations.

     

    This idea that Apple have lost their creative/innovative spark just doesn't hold water in my view, especially after the most recent WWDC, which felt very lively and full of ideas.

  • Reply 198 of 219
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post



    About Chrome, is installing it 'dangerous'? I remember the outcry from people who discovered Goolge was sending home quite some data after inserts installed Google Earth. I wonder if the same applies to Chrome, though I haven't looked it up.

    I don't know if they are "dangerous" but having Little Snitch in my system, I saw two or three (i don't remember exactly) Google binaries trying to call home. I have no idea what information they transmit. I let them alone for some time and they tried to contact the mother ship very often (like many times a day). Then I decided to block them altogether. In fact I don't use any Google standalone application anymore. Even I switched to duckduckgo for the web search. From time to time I may use Google Maps or the translation service. That's all. Google tracks every footstep you make; for your own good. :\

     

    On the other hand, Little Snitch is one of the top must-have applications for the Mac. :)

  • Reply 199 of 219
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    pb wrote: »
    I don't know if they are "dangerous" but having Little Snitch in my system, I saw two or three (i don't remember exactly) Google binaries trying to call home. I have no idea what information they transmit. I let them alone for some time and they tried to contact the mother ship very often (like many times a day). Then I decided to block them altogether. In fact I don't use any Google standalone application anymore. Even I switched to duckduckgo for the web search. From time to time I may use Google Maps or the translation service. That's all. Google tracks every footstep you make; for your own good. :\

    On the other hand, Little Snitch is one of the top must-have applications for the Mac. :)

    One could also consider using the Tor browser for Mac.
  • Reply 200 of 219
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    pb wrote: »
    philboogie wrote: »
    About Chrome, is installing it 'dangerous'? I remember the outcry from people who discovered Goolge was sending home quite some data after inserts installed Google Earth. I wonder if the same applies to Chrome, though I haven't looked it up.
    I don't know if they are "dangerous" but having Little Snitch in my system, I saw two or three (i don't remember exactly) Google binaries trying to call home. I have no idea what information they transmit. I let them alone for some time and they tried to contact the mother ship very often (like many times a day). Then I decided to block them altogether. In fact I don't use any Google standalone application anymore. Even I switched to duckduckgo for the web search. From time to time I may use Google Maps or the translation service. That's all. Google tracks every footstep you make; for your own good. :\

    On the other hand, Little Snitch is one of the top must-have applications for the Mac. :)

    Thanks for replying to that old post! So it is indeed doing something in the background, and apparently not needed as you now have it blocked and GE still work I understand(?)

    Don't know if this 5 year old article is still relevant:
    Why Google’s Software Update Tool Is Evil
    http://www.wired.com/2009/02/why-googles-sof/

    Maybe I'll just install it on a VM. I just want to try out overlaying several gpx files and Garmin BaseCamp software is truly crap, possibly written by ex-Microsoft employees.
Sign In or Register to comment.