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

13468911

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 219
    yelapayelapa Posts: 6member
    I wish I were as sanguine as some who are somewhat confident that Photos will meaningfully incorporate Aperture functionality. Indeed, the statement from Apple, that "it is working with Adobe to help users transition to its Lightroom app for Mac," suggest quite the contrary.

    I have not looked yet but now I am very interested in alternatives to Lightroom. I just can't envision more of Adobe's blightware on my systems.
  • Reply 102 of 219
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member

    Maybe the Pixelmator guys/gals will make a companion product that manages photos. 

  • Reply 103 of 219
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,460member

    Apple wouldn't be working with Adobe to transition customers to Lightroom, unless something significant will be missing from Photos (and legacy Aperture under Yosemite) for a very long time.

  • Reply 104 of 219
    djames4242djames4242 Posts: 520member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post

     

    There is no migration tool. The easiest and simplest way is to STOP using Aperture at 17:00, and at 17:01 use Lightroom to process your photos. The time is irrelevant, as I was using it to make a point, but none the less, keep Aperture on your Mac for historical purposes but process from the future forward only in LR. 


     

    That's what I feared, and the reason why I've continued to stick to Aperture as long as I have (that and the hope that Aperture 4 was on its way).

  • Reply 105 of 219
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by eclipsepjm View Post



    This actually makes sense to me and I'm rather happy as iPhoto makes me angry!

    That is because you don't make money shooting, and processing photos. iPhoto is not a pro app and never was meant to be. 

  • Reply 106 of 219
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by yelapa View Post



    I wish I were as sanguine as some who are somewhat confident that Photos will meaningfully incorporate Aperture functionality. Indeed, the statement from Apple, that "it is working with Adobe to help users transition to its Lightroom app for Mac," suggest quite the contrary.



    I have not looked yet but now I am very interested in alternatives to Lightroom. I just can't envision more of Adobe's blightware on my systems.

    The people here that are so quick to make this assumption are under the gun to produce wedding photos for customers but are snapshot photographers who have very little idea about pro apps.

  • Reply 107 of 219
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

     

    Apple wouldn't be working with Adobe to transition customers to Lightroom, unless something significant will be missing from Photos (and legacy Aperture under Yosemite) for a very long time.


    That's right. Photos will basically be iPhoto with a new GUI and a cloud backend, and Aperture is discontinued.

  • Reply 108 of 219
    cputeqcputeq Posts: 1member
    Dear AppleInsider:

    You say --

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

    Could you please provide a quote from Apple, or a news release, indicating this?

    You seem to be referring to the TechCrunch article, in which ADOBE says it'll help people move to their products.

    Yet you seem to have flipped that around, claiming APPLE is helping people move...to a competitor? This makes absolutely no sense.

    So please, AppleInsider -- Who at Apple claimed this, or where can we read it, from Apple, for ourselves?
  • Reply 109 of 219
    baconstangbaconstang Posts: 544member
    I'm not really looking forward to switching over to Lightroom, from the folks that bring you "update once a week" Flash and Reader.
  • Reply 110 of 219
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    here's a CRAZY idea:

    with Apple opening up the iPhones Photo app to 3rd parties and the new continuity ideal that They're is pushing, what IF the iPhone Photos app and the Yosemite Photos app are %100 compatible?

    This would be killer because all apps you've installed and used on your iPhone could be synced to your Mac's photos app.

    So basically every app you purchase will act as a plug-in or "add on" to your Mac's photo app just like iPhone with all apps being %100 compatible with both platforms.

    With Apple opening up the stock Photos app for 3rd parties and removing the "i" in iPhoto this makes perfect sense. I can see the app store booming with this possibility and 3rd parties happier than even. Only Apple
    could pull this off at the moment with Windows taking a fair amount of PC market share but their phones sales failing terribly, google is in the exact opposite situation. Only Apple has sufficient phone AND computer users to pull this off.

    This is pleasing to the consumers because like myself, not everyone needs an expensive photo suite. Some people just need a simple filter while others may want to cherry-pick certain features for their business.

    The simplicity, customization and ability to edit your photos on the go is a much more appealing idea to me than purchasing Arpeture or Lightroom.
  • Reply 111 of 219
    That's terrible news!
    Without competition, we're going to see some price hikes on adobe's products...
  • Reply 112 of 219
    r2d2r2d2 Posts: 95member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by djames4242 View Post

     

    There are more cockroaches in the world than people but that doesn't make them superior ;-)


     

    Oh, the cockroach is far superior to people - just watch the news and see how much roach on roach crime there is!

  • Reply 113 of 219
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    I wasn't aware they were developing Aperture at all. I am using Aperture on an old computer, I wonder if I should be replacing it sooner than I'd like.

    Damn... I don't use either one (I prefer GIMP for cross-platform compatibility), but there's a lot of folks who do professionally. I know a few, and I bet they're all going to say the same thing:"WTF?"

    I don't think GIMP is even a remotely similar program, what they do don't overlap very much in functionality.
  • Reply 114 of 219
    We're loosing control of our hardware and software to the cloud.
    There is no privacy any more .
  • Reply 115 of 219
    We're loosing control of our hardware and software to big brother (the "cloud") by doing. Away with CD/DVD software up grades apple knows all the software that's on our computer,
    Then we learned that our gear could be turned on remotely to include audio and video, the more we store in the cloud, the less control we have...
    Now with all our photos stored on line they'll have a field day with facial recognition software. I heard that they love all the pictures you put into your address book. They now have a fave you supplied with all the personal Dara you listed. Big Brother loves the " cloud"
    It would be nice to have a manual kill switch to disable, your mic, camera, even computer, iPhone etc.
    The cloud is NOT secure! Every day we read third parties , let alone the NSA steal data.
  • Reply 116 of 219
    d4njvrzfd4njvrzf Posts: 797member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichL View Post

     

     

    That's right and even the subscription for Lightroom + Photoshop isn't crazy at around £9 a month. Compared to the cost of most lenses, it's peanuts.


    Yeah, but the problem of perpetually renting the software instead of owning it is that it could refuse to work if it can't phone home to Adobe, as happened a few months ago.

  • Reply 117 of 219
    rkevwillrkevwill Posts: 224member
    I'm hoping we can still keep the photos local (with backups of course), and not be forced to upload them to the cloud. For many reasons, I still don't like keeping personal photos in the cloud. Not that there are any overtly sensitive pics on there (too old for that these days), but I worry about hacking, security issues, etc, with pics of grandchildren, lifestyle, personal possessions, and especially gps enabled pics. Thats why I turned all that stuff off on flickr. (and thats becoming way too different than its original intent)
  • Reply 118 of 219
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,371member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     

    Wow, this is pretty shocking. iPhoto I can definitely understand, keeping both would create too much confusion, redundancy, and complications. But Aperture? Seems that serves a completely different use. It does not even come with OSX, its an optional paid download, so I dont understand the need to eliminate it. There's probably alot we don't know, lately Apple has shown renewed focus on its pro apps, and I dont see them just dropping this with no alternative. 


     

    Apple's become what they are today by focusing on stuff they can sell in quantity and make good $$ on.  Obviously not enough people were buying Aperture. 



    (They keep the Pro around for its halo effect and to provide a path for pros who outgrow their mass offerings... ...but that remains viable because it will run the shit out of Adobe's stuff as well.)

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post

     

    Although surprising that Apple is leaving the Pro market after releasing their new Mac Pro, more surprising is the fact they are leaving the "i" for just Photos. I wonder if this is going to be a broader move across all apps. 

     

    Buying Adobe would be really cool and I think fits well with Apple. Starts with A, ends with E, same amount of letters... :) 


     

    Of the possible BIG pair-ups out there that could work for Apple, I've long felt Adobe was the most likely candidate.  Not a guaranteed marriage made under the stars, but it could work out...

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by crushed View Post



    I am one of those who has been using Aperture from version 1.0. I hate Lightroom because it imposes a workflow and interface on you that just doesn't make sense to me.

     

    If Apple had decided to go the iTunes route (iTunes on Windows got me to buy my first Mac) and make things like Aperture standards in the digital world they might have gotten the buy-in and volume that they needed since this was a product that went head to head against Adobe. 

     

    But given that a sizable portion of the Photoshop pro base had no access to Aperture, while the whole base could use Lightroom, making it a "default workflow" (for better or worse), I'd say the outcome was inevitable.

  • Reply 119 of 219
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 923member
    vaporland wrote: »
    I remember when Lion Server ($19.99) "replaced" Snow Leopard Server ($499 & up).

    I was stunned at the level of bugginess in a released product.

    That was the biggest waste of $20 in my life.

    All the tech firms abandon platforms and infrastructure all the time, but Apple is notorious for burning its "partners".

    I'm almost ashamed to admit how many hours I've wasted trying to get that server software working. I bought the first Mini that came with the server software as a "hobby" to teach myself about servers. SLS had a little bit of a learning curve, but Lion Server was an embarrassment. I wasted so much time trying to figure out what I did wrong only to find out it wasn't me most of the time.

    Sever is finally getting to a point where it is again usable. That's what almost three years? Even Mavericks Server had some incredible bugs in it that weren't addressed until six months later!
  • Reply 120 of 219
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    All Apple pro apps are in danger of being discontinued, If it cannot be run in iCloud  it will be EOLed.

Sign In or Register to comment.