Adobe 'committed to helping' Aperture customers migrate to Lightroom after Apple announcement

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 92
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post



    Apple and Adobe have traditionally collaborated. Apple licensed PostScript for their early LaserWriters, and Apple licenses DisplayPDF for OS X.

     

    Adobe also didn't support OS X at first, Jobs never quite forgave them for that.

  • Reply 42 of 92
    igamogamigamogam Posts: 42member
    Guess a lot of us could sense this was coming but I'm grateful Apple made the announcment now, it allows time to formulate coping strategies rather than finding out next year when Yosemite appears.

    I test each new version of lightroom but stick with Aperture for many reasons despite having Lightroom for free with CC/CC2014. My normal workflow was mainly possible with iPhoto and Photoshop, it's the management abilities and slickness of Aperture that will be missed and Adobe's cloud offerings are not very inviting compared to the ease of use of Apple's photostreams IMHO.

    If Apple nailed the Photoshop intergration of Photos.app over Aperture's indifferent performance (in that aspect) and maintained robust file handling I'd be glad to skip Lightroom's cumbersome interface. I suppose Lightroom is OK if all you know is PCs but it's not very slick and unless they seriously improve the image "development" workflows flexibility LR will remain something of a last resort.

    Despite looking forward to the upcoming iCloud photo storage, another concern is just how iCloud/Photos.app will cope with large libraries that would swamp any iDevice many times over. I hope Apple make some concessions to their ex-Aperture users by making this facet work in a useful and flexible manner that does not drive us in to the tentacles of Adobe.

    Will development of LR slow to make it even more clunky now that it will effectively have no viable alernative? Wouldn't be surprised, despite Adobr's claims...
  • Reply 43 of 92
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,745member
    techguy911 wrote: »
    Apple basically won the mobile flash argument so they probably don't consider Adobe to be an enemy anymore.  As long as Adobe is making pro software for OSX, Apple keeps selling computers.  

    Seems Apple is actually embracing Lightroom. Probably good news for Lightroom development.
  • Reply 44 of 92
    markromarkro Posts: 3member
    slurpy wrote: »
    Apple clearly spent alot of time in building this product, updating it, advertising it, and integrating it. It's an excellent product, and financially, it's a net positive for them. It has a ton of loyal users, including Pros (and myself). Yet, in spite of this, they're willing to axe it, and even help people transition to a competitors product.

    Apple...is still willing to make seemingly self-harming moves like this, when it truly believes its in the greater good. And that greater good is FOCUS. Apple, for better or worse, has decided that the baggage of maintaining the software, and making sure it plays well with their rebuilt photos app, is not the best use of their resources- especially when its for a limited user base. They made the calculation that marketing the product, and putting the energy and resources into meaningfully differentiating it from their upcoming photos app, is not in their best interest or that of most consumers. And thus, they answered the "does it deserve to exist" question. And that answer was "no". 

    Actually, losing Aperture is the result of poorly written base code and years of mismanagement. It could never be upgraded with more advanced feature sets without a complete rewrite. Perhaps the will was not there because of an overarching plan to merge the iPhoto and Aperture platforms, but more than likely, it was the best option considering the long smoldering problems.

    None the less, if you take the time to learn Lightroom you will find it to be a beautifully designed program, for photographers, by photographers. It puts aperture to shame. The "library" module is brilliantly flexible. The adobe camera raw program built into the "develop" module is far more elegant, and functional than aperture ever was, with compare windows and soft proofing built in. The learning curve is a bit steep, but highly worth the time and effort.
  • Reply 45 of 92
    danoxdanox Posts: 387member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

     

    Sadly, I subscribed to Adobe's suite a few days ago.  It was all because of the uncertainty of Aperture.  Apple really left it on the vine to rot and the general feeling from the user community is that Apple stopped updating it.



    It's really too bad.  I don't like Adobe, and I'm certainly not a fan of its subscription model.  For the most part, they are the 800-pound gorilla in the room for the time being.



    I preferred Apple's more polished, native app than Adobe's java nonsense.



    I'm going to keep a very close eye on what Apple does.  I'm getting very deep back into professional photography and I couldn't wait to see what Apple was going to do.  I hope they integrate all of Aperture's more "professional" components into iPhoto, including RAW support.



    I suspect for Adobe, it's a limited moment of joy.


     

    Good luck with one of the worse software companies in existence, right up there with Autodesk.

  • Reply 46 of 92
    danoxdanox Posts: 387member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by igamogam View Post



    Guess a lot of us could sense this was coming but I'm grateful Apple made the announcment now, it allows time to formulate coping strategies rather than finding out next year when Yosemite appears.



    I test each new version of lightroom but stick with Aperture for many reasons despite having Lightroom for free with CC/CC2014. My normal workflow was mainly possible with iPhoto and Photoshop, it's the management abilities and slickness of Aperture that will be missed and Adobe's cloud offerings are not very inviting compared to the ease of use of Apple's photostreams IMHO.



    If Apple nailed the Photoshop intergration of Photos.app over Aperture's indifferent performance (in that aspect) and maintained robust file handling I'd be glad to skip Lightroom's cumbersome interface. I suppose Lightroom is OK if all you know is PCs but it's not very slick and unless they seriously improve the image "development" workflows flexibility LR will remain something of a last resort.



    Despite looking forward to the upcoming iCloud photo storage, another concern is just how iCloud/Photos.app will cope with large libraries that would swamp any iDevice many times over. I hope Apple make some concessions to their ex-Aperture users by making this facet work in a useful and flexible manner that does not drive us in to the tentacles of Adobe.



    Will development of LR slow to make it even more clunky now that it will effectively have no viable alernative? Wouldn't be surprised, despite Adobr's claims...

     

    Lot of if's and maybe's there.

  • Reply 47 of 92
    danoxdanox Posts: 387member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

     

     

    Adobe also didn't support OS X at first, Jobs never quite forgave them for that.


     

    It took Adobe ten years to natively support the new software tools available for OS X, also notice the lackluster programs on iOS, and not just from Adobe but Autodesk too. Neither company will be Swift or petal to the Metal in any Mac or mobile software development.

  • Reply 48 of 92
    danoxdanox Posts: 387member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    The only thing that would cheer me up right now is news Apple are buying Adobe. Making all the software have a true OS X GUI and closing down production for Windows. That last part is just for laughs.

     

    That would be a massive waste of money, Apple however should gotten Freehand before the black hole of Adobe killed them.

  • Reply 49 of 92
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,443member
    freediverx wrote: »
    I've been reading numerous comments from some who expect the new Photos app will incorporate a lot of Aperture's power, rather than being a wimpy iPhoto refresh. I sure hope they're right. Note that Apple didn't say anything about customers having other options and they mentioned migrating to Photos. I think it would be pretty crass of Apple to suggest customers can migrate from Aperture to Photos if the latter will just have iPhoto-level features.

    I hate to sound like a rerun of the Final Cut Pro 7 v X debate ... which wasn't as clear cut as it seemed at first, just terribly implemented by Apple. That said ... I don't see Photos being even close to what Aperture was or could have been for pros. I suspect Apple is ceding the pro photography ground to Adobe and others here. I can't see cloud storage satisfying a pro photographer let alone those simplistic preset corrections. Don't get me wrong, it's all great for the home user but it's not going to work for pros with multiple and massive client portfolios, massive storage requirements and the need of plug-ins, batch processing, HDR manipulation and and complex RAW controls. The fact it is a year off nearly, yet being talked about now by Apple, is like a red flag or perhaps 'ample warning' to anyone who has a business depending on Aperture and Apple know that. Any pro will have to parallel work flow in Aperture and something else for a while and ease in the learning curve and conversion process, it's not something you could just do over night if it turns out Photos is purely a home user product.

    Meanwhile Aperture seems to work just fine in beta Yosemite so nothing will hopefully fail over night for anyone upon 10.10's release.
  • Reply 50 of 92
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,443member
    danox wrote: »
    That would be a massive waste of money, Apple however should gotten Freehand before the black hole of Adobe killed them.

    Well I wasn't being serious but I hear you on Freehand ... not to mention Aldus itself.
  • Reply 51 of 92
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,443member
    Adobe also didn't support OS X at first, Jobs never quite forgave them for that.

    Me and many others didn't either. There was a time it was all Apple, Aldus and Adobe and there was happiness in graphics town ... then something went evil ... Gates backed by IBM stole Mac OS and then the prince of darkness screwed over IBM, unleashing Compaq, Dell and Gateway et al ... 20 something years of beige crap and malware followed. This should be made into a movie filmed in New Zealand ... :D
  • Reply 52 of 92
    markozmarkoz Posts: 1member

    So, so furious about this.  I have used Aperture since day 1.  Now I will have to learn Lightroom, Bridge(?) and lose my edits or engage in a long and painful export process, or have a 14 year photo library split between the new Photos app (when it gets here) and whatever the Adobe organizational app is.

     

    I have been using mac for 14 years and my whole home is Mac centric.  Multiple Macs, iPhones, iPad, Apple TV etc.

     

    REALLY, REALLY ANGRY!

  • Reply 53 of 92
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,748member
    Ouch ... but .. for Photography pros that's not a big deal, no one is suggestion iPhoto users get it ;) Then again I do want that Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L EF IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens soon and that comes first ... :D

    Funny. I'm eyeing myself buying the exact same lens this year. That lens is about as perfect as one can get. :)
  • Reply 54 of 92
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,748member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Danox View Post

     

     

    Good luck with one of the worse software companies in existence, right up there with Autodesk.




    So you're good at complaining about everything, yet offering zero on alternatives.  What options are there?  Stick with a forgotten product like Aperture and go on blind faith that Apple will get iPhoto (or whatever) more current?  If not Adobe, then whom?  



    I already pointed out that I'm not a fan of Adobe, but they are the only real game in town.  They have the product, it's used by a gazillion people, and most importantly, it's supported.  



    What other option is there?  

  • Reply 55 of 92
    bergermeisterbergermeister Posts: 6,784member

    I hope some 3rd party jumps to the call here to fill Aperture's shoes and allow people to not move to Adobe.  Perhaps Pixelmator Pro X?  Heh heh...

     

    I want to play with web design right now, but can't find anything simple and robust other than Muse, which is really frustrating.  Maybe I haven't looked hard enough.  I can't code at all:

     

    10 print "I can't code"

    20 goto 10

     

    That is my level.  Tumult Hype is doing good things for me, but I want to push it a little further.

     

    This is off topic, so I will end it there...   But, it is leading somewhere:  

     

    I want to play with website design.... Muse might do (except I cannot use it to create a stand alone file without a web address???)

    I want to manage my photos and edit and such....  Lightroom is looking really attractive, with PS

    I do artwork regularly....  actually own and use Illustrator CS6...  

     

    In short, you can eventually talk yourself in to signing up for Adobe.

     

    Please, other developers: create great stuff.  But then, we don't know much about Photos, yet...

  • Reply 56 of 92
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,494member
    bradleysm wrote: »
    It's working fine in 10.10 for me too. I suspect Apple will keep it working, fixing any crash bugs, until Photos comes out early next year. They won't give loyal users a reason to jump ship to Adobe. Same thing with iPhoto.

    No reason to make (valid) assumptions: Apple already stated they will create a migration tool for users to switch over to LR, together with Adobe. Plus they are going to make it 100% compatible with 10.10. And they also stated that their other Pro apps will continue to be updated and are not being discontinued.
  • Reply 57 of 92
    19831983 Posts: 1,201member
    If I have to migrate my libraries to Lightroom I'm not too bothered, as long as Adobe provides a straight forward way to do this. It's been the better product for a while now anyway. What worries me is that they'll only provide that via their subscription model and not via the standalone version of Lightroom you can still currently purchase without the need for a subscription. If that ends up being the case I'm not doing it! I don't want to subscribe to Adobe, and will have to look around for an alternative, or simply not upgrade to Yosemite. I'm perfectly fine with Mavericks for the time being.
  • Reply 58 of 92
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,494member
    1983 wrote: »
    If I have to migrate my libraries to Lightroom I'm not too bothered, as long as Adobe provides a straight forward way to do this. It's been the better product for a while now anyway. What worries me is that they'll only provide that via their subscription model and not via the standalone version of Lightroom you can still currently purchase without the need for a subscription. If that ends up being the case I'm not doing it! I don't want to subscribe to Adobe, and will have to look around for an alternative, or simply not upgrade to Yosemite. I'm perfectly fine with Mavericks for the time being.

    Apple has already stated they will update Aperture to be fully compatible with 10.10
  • Reply 59 of 92
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,408member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    I hate to sound like a rerun of the Final Cut Pro 7 v X debate ... which wasn't as clear cut as it seemed at first, just terribly implemented by Apple. That said ... I don't see Photos being even close to what Aperture was or could have been for pros. I suspect Apple is ceding the pro photography ground to Adobe and others here. I can't see cloud storage satisfying a pro photographer let alone those simplistic preset corrections. Don't get me wrong, it's all great for the home user but it's not going to work for pros with multiple and massive client portfolios, massive storage requirements and the need of plug-ins, batch processing, HDR manipulation and and complex RAW controls. The fact it is a year off nearly, yet being talked about now by Apple, is like a red flag or perhaps 'ample warning' to anyone who has a business depending on Aperture and Apple know that. Any pro will have to parallel work flow in Aperture and something else for a while and ease in the learning curve and conversion process, it's not something you could just do over night if it turns out Photos is purely a home user product.



    Meanwhile Aperture seems to work just fine in beta Yosemite so nothing will hopefully fail over night for anyone upon 10.10's release.



    I would love for the Aperture story to unfold in the same was as Final Cut Pro X. That transition just pissed off a lot of people who were accustomed to the old software's arcane UI and user flows. The new product is vastly superior in terms of usability and performance, and as far as I'm aware they've caught up on functionality missing in its initial release.

     

    But I think you're right that Photos is not likely to be a true Aperture replacement, since there will no longer be separate apps for casual/pro users and we all know which group Apple will focus on with a single app. With new extensions capabilities in iOS 8 and Yosemite, however, I suspect Apple is going to give the developer community the option to extend Photos' capabilities,  with limitless potential. So I'm less worried about editing tools and more about the overall cohesiveness of the product and its flexibility to let users manage their image libraries in their own way. 

     

     

    Re: Photos in the Cloud, I think some people are misunderstanding its purpose. I don't think they will prevent you from doing anything you already do today in terms of local storage and archiving. It's simply going to add the ability to automatically store and sync all photos taken with an iOS device via the cloud. 

  • Reply 60 of 92
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,408member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

     

     

    Adobe also didn't support OS X at first, Jobs never quite forgave them for that.


     

    There is no shortage of reasons to dislike Adobe and Adobe products. Disloyalty to the Mac community is the least of them. 

Sign In or Register to comment.