£ = Option # on US keyboard ... might not be the same there in darkest Europe
Yes, I have that boxed 5 but the plug in seems to be cloud related only ... I might be missing something though. But I couldn't download it locally.
£O£ - it was right in front of me; thanks!
Wow, plugin requiring the rentware version; that sucks. Just like crappy 1Password version 5 not syncing its DB if one bought the web version from the developer instead of buying it through the MAS. Oh, software, what can one do?
Wow, plugin requiring the rentware version; that sucks. Just like crappy 1Password version 5 not syncing its DB if one bought the web version from the developer instead of buying it through the MAS. Oh, software, what can one do?
I just got off the phone with Apple support. I finally got through. It seems the iCloud free space is dependent on the boot volume of each Mac, regardless of the amount you purchase. The initial support person had to call in a supervisor and even she admitted iCloud Drive was so new he wasn't sure how it worked.
The senior support person said each Mac has a folder hidden on itself that is reflected to the iCloud. So when you look at the total space free on each Mac you only see the space free on that Macs boot drive which is why I was seeing different amounts on each Mac I have.
You copy things to this local iCloud Drive which are then in background uploaded to the external drive when required ... but not really. He seemed to think it was always on your local drive but other Macs see an alias of the files and can transfer them. So in reality there is nothing stored remotely if this is all true, it would simply be a conduit.
So I asked how to I get a 370 GIG Aperture vault from one of my external TB drives to the iCloud Drive on a new Mac Pro with a 250 GIG boot drive? Plus if it is never really stored off line what use is it as a secure back up? I also asked, in such a scenario, if all my Macs were to spontaneously combust and I buy a new one how would I get back everything I put on the iCloud Drive if nothing was ever really there?
He was very nice and said he didn't know and he is going to research and get back to me. I will let you know what I hear.
EDIT: After tests (but no call back as promised from Apple yet)
It is indeed on the remote server but the size limit of your spare space on the boot drive is true. When you drag off the iCS from another of your Macs you need to hold the option key to copy else it will remove when downloading. The initial copy to iCS seems fast as obviously it is only copying the file to this hidden folder on the boot volume and of course now you have two local copies. The uploading starts and runs when activity is low so as not to impact performance, very like TimeMachine.
So to recap: Yes it is stored off site.
You are limited by the spare space on your start up volume. For those of us with smaller boot SSDs on new Mac Pros and iMacs but with large volumes attached by Thunderbolt this is obviously a bit of a bugger.
If the default location of the watched folder could be relocated to an external volume then this would be a nice solution indeed. As it is it is useless to me for archiving larger data such as my Aperture Library which resides on a RAID 0 on a TB connection. It is larger than the new Mac Pros boot drive!
I am truly lost for words for the info Apple is giving you, or lack thereof. I am extremely thankful for your insightful post in this matter, as I was contemplating on storing my Aperture library on iCloud as well. IOW, one BIG thank you from me to you!
I am truly lost for words for the info Apple is giving you, or lack thereof. I am extremely thankful for your insightful post in this matter, as I was contemplating on storing my Aperture library on iCloud as well. IOW, one BIG thank you from me to you!
I am truly lost for words for the info Apple is giving you, or lack thereof. I am extremely thankful for your insightful post in this matter, as I was contemplating on storing my Aperture library on iCloud as well. IOW, one BIG thank you from me to you!
I still have hope the info I got is wrong ...
I would hope so. Especially when you think about this setup; a person buys a Mac with a 256GB or 512GB SSD and can't get a 1TB iCloud Drive because it won't fit on their boot drive? Something must be off here...
I would hope so. Especially when you think about this setup; a person buys a Mac with a 256GB or 512GB SSD and can't get a 1TB iCloud Drive because it won't fit on their boot drive? Something must be off here...
OK more tests ... On nMac Pro I create a new folder on the iCloud Drive. I upload a 30 GIG file to my iCloud Drive from my RAID. Takes a few moments only. My nMac Pro's internal SSD's available space drops by 30 GIGs. I go to several other Macs and check my iCloud Drive. The new folder is there but nothing in it. I check my nMac Pro after not touching it for about 30 seconds and my transfer monitor in Little Snitch shows massive data upload to one of Amazon's servers with occasional; blips to content-cloud.com. I aborted this after about half an hour. I deleted from iCloud Drive. I had to empty my trash on the nMac Pro to regain the space proving, if there was any doubt, the file was on the nMac Pro only. I used a 256 MB file this time and it went up same way, to an Amazon server in a few minutes. This now shows up on my other Macs in their own iCloud Drive. The other Macs were able to download after a long wait. BTW had to option-drag or it removed it from the cloud. It was fast, came down at over 200 Mb/s
That 500 GIGs is certainly not much use to me! BTW The upload to the cloud is like Time Machine it only operates after inactivity. If I moved the mouse I could see the upload stop.
Apple is going to get some grief on the blogs for this. Sort of a misleading presentation they gave on it. Unless you can relocate the invisible folder that is the local mirror to an external drive it is useless for the modern Macs with small SSDs. Then .. Why you need two local iterations of what you want to back anyway? Well I understand it is a watched folder so that’s why ... but it is not what I was hoping for. darn it!
The 500/1TB GIG optional storage might be targeted at photos and video in the new photo system that's coming rather than the file back up per se.
Here is the upload path. Does anyone know the location of the watched folder that is being used?
Quote: "Adobe has been looking for ways to gain marketshare at the expense of the image editing app's demise."
That's an odd statement. With Aperture's "demise," it'll be off the market and thus have no "marketshare" to "expense" against. Adobe is simply working to attract users who'll have to go to some other app in the next few years. It's doing that in a most helpful way%u2014making importing easy.
OK more tests ... On nMac Pro I create a new folder on the iCloud Drive. I upload a 30 GIG file to my iCloud Drive from my RAID. Takes a few moments only. My nMac Pro's internal SSD's available space drops by 30 GIGs.
That's shit design. It should put symlinks in an iCloud Drive folder in your user library and leave the original file where it is, no need for a copy, and it fills up your SSD, completely unnecessary.
<test snipped out> It was fast, came down at over 200 Mb/s
I envy your Internet speed. Thanks for this test. Complete shit design from Apple here.
BTW The upload to the cloud is like Time Machine it only operates after inactivity. If I moved the mouse I could see the upload stop.
If that's true that is indeed ridiculous.
The 500/1TB GIG optional storage might be targeted at photos and video in the new photo system that's coming rather than the file back up per se.
I wouldn't expect that, seeing their advertising the ability to store any filetype on your iCloud Drive
Here is the upload path. Does anyone know the location of the watched folder that is being used?[/quote]
Isn't this it? /Users ? ~ ? Library ? Application Support ? CloudDocs
On the peecee it's the same problem; people have Windows installed on C:\ and their data on \ Guess where Apple stores the iCD? Yup, on C:\
I use Aperture and Yosemite, works perfectly fine and I won't touch Lightroom until I've seen Apple's hybrid in 2015. I really don't like Adobe's subscription based service.
[@]jsheffie[/@] & [@]caribousteaks[/@] You both make excellent points!
I think I have grown accustomed to Apple shaking everything up by taking away features and slowly add them back (like FCP and many other apps). In the end though I do think they have created excellent programs, but the path towards that goal read 'stupidity' all over it, like the removal of selling boxed FCP7.
Fortunately Aperture will remain working though, and I would expect any shortcomings in Photos to be fulfilled by 3rd party plugins. But I will be disappointed if that doesn't turn out to be the case.
What Apple has been doing is re-writing everything using best programming standards and practices for ALL devices both x86 and ARM. This is a far different tactic than what Adobe is doing... although during Adobe MAX almost all of the conference was 75% devoted to mobile. These are all new programs written from the ground up, which is necessary AFAIC.
The Adobe CC suite NEVER was a real suite of programs that used a common interface between the programs, everything cross-program was tacked on as needed, sometimes in very stupid ways from one program to the next... for example Character/Paragraph Styles, or Transform dialogs. I've been ranting on this subject for years.
Apple on the other hand is trying to make their programs across functions, whether video, text writing, layout, or photo... all use the same GUI paradigms so that when you know how to use one, the dialogs, features and functions are in the same place... and function the same way. This takes time, and you absolutely must kill some functions to rewrite them from scratch.
I think the biggest problem is: should Apple just wait and throw everything at us in say 3 years when everything is functioning feature perfect in their labs.... or let people grow with the programs progressively like we all have done with versions 1 of the old programs.
Chicken-egg, cart-horse, Catch-22: damned if you put it out to soon, and raked over the coals for "dying a slow death and not innovating" if they wait too long.
As for the iCloud Drive, I think theirs some wishing that this should function like a data server would, rather than what it is: a 1:1 data synced "folder" or hard drive.
More interesting to me anyway, would be the ability to designate folder(s) as "seeable" similar to File Sharing, across all devices like a server would do... then from any device that you have authorization, to just right-click (long touch) any folder or document, and select "iCloud Sync" to make it available for synced editing.
Setting only one destination drive to sync all data across all devices seems rather constraining, when you consider that different devices have various free space available.
Or am I missing something?
Note: from a long ago post I made, why can't just the "library" part of a collection of photos be updated with keywords, culling, ratings and even edits since they're text-based edits anyway... be synced using device optimized proxis i.e. low-res JPGs for example. I don't NEED the RAWs on an iPad to do a heck of a lot of repetitious work that chains me to a desk.
Syncing a library/proxies is a heck of a lot faster and more efficient than syncing an entire RAW Edits folder (originals backed up elsewhere) .
Apple is a hardware company, it makes most of its money on the hardware. They know what their hardware is going to look like years from now and it will all be custom designed chips not even from intel. Apple cannot keep up with what the pros need with their hardware because that would mean selling hardware that is so powerful that upgrading every 3-4 years would not be as needed. Or you could put windows on the old Mac hardware once its not compatible with Apples latest and greatest software and keep using it with the latest technology. Once they switch over to their own proprietary tech, windows compatibility goes bye bye and planned obsolescence will be the thing. Maybe when they control all the hardware like that their pro apps might return. But internally they will know how many versions up you can go before your forced to buy a new machine to keep up. And even if it does it they can make plenty of money for many years by selling consumer devices that are hopefully cheaper than a Mac but that your more willing to replace every few years just to stay current.
I agree 100%. It's nice that apple is making their consumer software better and more powerful, but why at the expense of their pro apps?
I will wait to see what Photos looks like, but if Final Cut is any example it will be a couple years before they add back in all the features of Aperture they will lose in producing Photos...
Blah. Lightroom is better in a lot of aspects anyway. It's still nowhere near what it should be in color processing, but that's due to decisions on Adobe's part such as their committing to prophoto RGB, which makes me very sad.
So, if my iPhones are 64 GB, my iPad is 128GB, and my Macs are 1 TB, and if I buy 200 GB of iCloud storage, what happens when I upload a photo library that is 150 GB? Am I limited by the size of flash memory in my iPhone? Apple said that every photo will automatically sync across all devices using iCloud photos, and all of the photos will be stored in iCloud. Obviously, it's not possible to jam 150 GB worth of photos in the 64 GB of storage on the iPhone or 128 GB on the iPad? Can anyone clarify how this would work?
Comments
£O£ - it was right in front of me; thanks!
Wow, plugin requiring the rentware version; that sucks. Just like crappy 1Password version 5 not syncing its DB if one bought the web version from the developer instead of buying it through the MAS. Oh, software, what can one do?
I just got off the phone with Apple support. I finally got through. It seems the iCloud free space is dependent on the boot volume of each Mac, regardless of the amount you purchase. The initial support person had to call in a supervisor and even she admitted iCloud Drive was so new he wasn't sure how it worked.
The senior support person said each Mac has a folder hidden on itself that is reflected to the iCloud. So when you look at the total space free on each Mac you only see the space free on that Macs boot drive which is why I was seeing different amounts on each Mac I have.
You copy things to this local iCloud Drive which are then in background uploaded to the external drive when required ... but not really. He seemed to think it was always on your local drive but other Macs see an alias of the files and can transfer them. So in reality there is nothing stored remotely if this is all true, it would simply be a conduit.
So I asked how to I get a 370 GIG Aperture vault from one of my external TB drives to the iCloud Drive on a new Mac Pro with a 250 GIG boot drive? Plus if it is never really stored off line what use is it as a secure back up? I also asked, in such a scenario, if all my Macs were to spontaneously combust and I buy a new one how would I get back everything I put on the iCloud Drive if nothing was ever really there?
He was very nice and said he didn't know and he is going to research and get back to me. I will let you know what I hear.
EDIT: After tests (but no call back as promised from Apple yet)
It is indeed on the remote server but the size limit of your spare space on the boot drive is true. When you drag off the iCS from another of your Macs you need to hold the option key to copy else it will remove when downloading. The initial copy to iCS seems fast as obviously it is only copying the file to this hidden folder on the boot volume and of course now you have two local copies. The uploading starts and runs when activity is low so as not to impact performance, very like TimeMachine.
So to recap: Yes it is stored off site.
You are limited by the spare space on your start up volume. For those of us with smaller boot SSDs on new Mac Pros and iMacs but with large volumes attached by Thunderbolt this is obviously a bit of a bugger.
If the default location of the watched folder could be relocated to an external volume then this would be a nice solution indeed. As it is it is useless to me for archiving larger data such as my Aperture Library which resides on a RAID 0 on a TB connection. It is larger than the new Mac Pros boot drive!
I am truly lost for words for the info Apple is giving you, or lack thereof. I am extremely thankful for your insightful post in this matter, as I was contemplating on storing my Aperture library on iCloud as well. IOW, one BIG thank you from me to you!
I still have hope the info I got is wrong ...
I would hope so. Especially when you think about this setup; a person buys a Mac with a 256GB or 512GB SSD and can't get a 1TB iCloud Drive because it won't fit on their boot drive? Something must be off here...
OK more tests ... On nMac Pro I create a new folder on the iCloud Drive. I upload a 30 GIG file to my iCloud Drive from my RAID. Takes a few moments only. My nMac Pro's internal SSD's available space drops by 30 GIGs. I go to several other Macs and check my iCloud Drive. The new folder is there but nothing in it. I check my nMac Pro after not touching it for about 30 seconds and my transfer monitor in Little Snitch shows massive data upload to one of Amazon's servers with occasional; blips to content-cloud.com. I aborted this after about half an hour. I deleted from iCloud Drive. I had to empty my trash on the nMac Pro to regain the space proving, if there was any doubt, the file was on the nMac Pro only. I used a 256 MB file this time and it went up same way, to an Amazon server in a few minutes. This now shows up on my other Macs in their own iCloud Drive. The other Macs were able to download after a long wait. BTW had to option-drag or it removed it from the cloud. It was fast, came down at over 200 Mb/s
That 500 GIGs is certainly not much use to me! BTW The upload to the cloud is like Time Machine it only operates after inactivity. If I moved the mouse I could see the upload stop.
Apple is going to get some grief on the blogs for this. Sort of a misleading presentation they gave on it. Unless you can relocate the invisible folder that is the local mirror to an external drive it is useless for the modern Macs with small SSDs. Then .. Why you need two local iterations of what you want to back anyway? Well I understand it is a watched folder so that’s why ... but it is not what I was hoping for. darn it!
The 500/1TB GIG optional storage might be targeted at photos and video in the new photo system that's coming rather than the file back up per se.
Here is the upload path. Does anyone know the location of the watched folder that is being used?
That's an odd statement. With Aperture's "demise," it'll be off the market and thus have no "marketshare" to "expense" against. Adobe is simply working to attract users who'll have to go to some other app in the next few years. It's doing that in a most helpful way%u2014making importing easy.
I'd love to see that happen with every dying app.
That's shit design. It should put symlinks in an iCloud Drive folder in your user library and leave the original file where it is, no need for a copy, and it fills up your SSD, completely unnecessary.
I envy your Internet speed. Thanks for this test. Complete shit design from Apple here.
If that's true that is indeed ridiculous.
I wouldn't expect that, seeing their advertising the ability to store any filetype on your iCloud Drive
Here is the upload path. Does anyone know the location of the watched folder that is being used?[/quote]
Isn't this it? /Users ? ~ ? Library ? Application Support ? CloudDocs
On the peecee it's the same problem; people have Windows installed on C:\ and their data on
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/6555536?start=0&tstart=0
What Apple has been doing is re-writing everything using best programming standards and practices for ALL devices both x86 and ARM. This is a far different tactic than what Adobe is doing... although during Adobe MAX almost all of the conference was 75% devoted to mobile. These are all new programs written from the ground up, which is necessary AFAIC.
The Adobe CC suite NEVER was a real suite of programs that used a common interface between the programs, everything cross-program was tacked on as needed, sometimes in very stupid ways from one program to the next... for example Character/Paragraph Styles, or Transform dialogs. I've been ranting on this subject for years.
Apple on the other hand is trying to make their programs across functions, whether video, text writing, layout, or photo... all use the same GUI paradigms so that when you know how to use one, the dialogs, features and functions are in the same place... and function the same way. This takes time, and you absolutely must kill some functions to rewrite them from scratch.
I think the biggest problem is: should Apple just wait and throw everything at us in say 3 years when everything is functioning feature perfect in their labs.... or let people grow with the programs progressively like we all have done with versions 1 of the old programs.
Chicken-egg, cart-horse, Catch-22: damned if you put it out to soon, and raked over the coals for "dying a slow death and not innovating" if they wait too long.
More interesting to me anyway, would be the ability to designate folder(s) as "seeable" similar to File Sharing, across all devices like a server would do... then from any device that you have authorization, to just right-click (long touch) any folder or document, and select "iCloud Sync" to make it available for synced editing.
Setting only one destination drive to sync all data across all devices seems rather constraining, when you consider that different devices have various free space available.
Or am I missing something?
Note: from a long ago post I made, why can't just the "library" part of a collection of photos be updated with keywords, culling, ratings and even edits since they're text-based edits anyway... be synced using device optimized proxis i.e. low-res JPGs for example. I don't NEED the RAWs on an iPad to do a heck of a lot of repetitious work that chains me to a desk.
Syncing a library/proxies is a heck of a lot faster and more efficient than syncing an entire RAW Edits folder (originals backed up elsewhere) .
Obviously something to do with it but if you place an item in iCloud manually is doesn't show up anywhere there I can find.
Apple is a hardware company, it makes most of its money on the hardware. They know what their hardware is going to look like years from now and it will all be custom designed chips not even from intel. Apple cannot keep up with what the pros need with their hardware because that would mean selling hardware that is so powerful that upgrading every 3-4 years would not be as needed. Or you could put windows on the old Mac hardware once its not compatible with Apples latest and greatest software and keep using it with the latest technology. Once they switch over to their own proprietary tech, windows compatibility goes bye bye and planned obsolescence will be the thing. Maybe when they control all the hardware like that their pro apps might return. But internally they will know how many versions up you can go before your forced to buy a new machine to keep up. And even if it does it they can make plenty of money for many years by selling consumer devices that are hopefully cheaper than a Mac but that your more willing to replace every few years just to stay current.
Caribousteaks,
I agree 100%. It's nice that apple is making their consumer software better and more powerful, but why at the expense of their pro apps?
I will wait to see what Photos looks like, but if Final Cut is any example it will be a couple years before they add back in all the features of Aperture they will lose in producing Photos...
Blah. Lightroom is better in a lot of aspects anyway. It's still nowhere near what it should be in color processing, but that's due to decisions on Adobe's part such as their committing to prophoto RGB, which makes me very sad.