After a week of use, I absolutely love the Photos. My early 2009 iMac just cannot handle 40,000 photos with iPhoto. However after about 1 hour of imports from the existing iPhoto library, Photos just take those 40,000 photos in without any hesitation and scroll like a knife cut through a melting butter. It is bad business for Apple though. I could live the 2009 iMac for another two year if Apple is going to improve performance like Photos does.
I am glad to hear it handles large libraries better. My large iPhoto library (almost 90,000 photos and growing daily with an 11-month old) is the primary reason I am hesitant to upgrade to the OS X beta just now. Does anyone know if you can still use an outside editor (e.g., Photoshop) from within Photos as you can in iPhoto? Also, are in plugins supported (e.g., from MacPhun)?
Your second comment about not upgrading your Mac for another year or so also applies to me (late 2009 iMac i7). I may wait a little longer to decide between an iMac with Retina 5K or splurge even more on a MacPro with my own display (probably overkill, especially if Photos works more efficiently with the libraries).
Beware, once you move to Photos from iPhotos you can't go back. I'm sticking with iPhoto as long as I can.
This is a FALSE statement. The Photos app creates its own library, separate from the iPhoto Library. You can continue to use both programs. But if you add and edit photos in one application, they do not appear in the other.
Can anyone let me know if you can create your own smart albums? And if you can organize a folder of albums/events (putting all of 2015 events in one folder, all of 2014 events in one folder)
Yes, not quite Aperture but way more sophisticated that iPhoto.
Reminds me of the neutering that was done to iMovie. Apple claimed it was simple and so much easier to use. The thing is that they did not tell you they were cutting features so that it does not have parity (or other features compelling enough to throw out the old).
It does not do what iPhoto does (editing, viewing). It changes the paradigm from events and albums as your main navigation to a timeline (yes you can still have events and albums). It also ties you to iCloud which is OK if you don't mind carrying a subset of your pix on your iPhone and have constant access to either WiFi or cellular so that you can retrieve the others. EXIF data is an afterthought and not easily accessible and the location is no longer stored the same.
Beware, once you move to Photos from iPhotos you can't go back. I'm sticking with iPhoto as long as I can.
It doesn't tie you to iCloud if you want to use a stand alone local Library you can.
It can do very sophisticated edits compared to iPhoto. Perhaps you haven't seen how yet?
Whoever voted for you hasn't used Photos obviously nor have you it seems.
The last line you wrote is total tripe. Photos in no way stops you using iPhoto if you want to for a while. It creates its own Library. Plus you can choose where. It is highly customizable.
I love the new Pages and Numbers and use them everyday. This is catered towards those that have iOS devices, and for that it works brilliantly.
I guess you love butchered programs with features stripped out of it, because that is what happened to Pages and Numbers. iOS devices are touchscreen interfaces. The Mac is not a touchscreen interface and trying to make any program work and look like an iPhone/iPad version on the Mac is a huge mistake. It does not work well on the Mac because it is not a touchscreen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
What the **** are you talking about? The editing tools are 1000x more comprehensive than whats in iPhoto.
Every technology site single hands-on I've read has said it's a massive improvement over iPhoto, but we can always count on the Apple-hating trolls on this site (oh sorry, "life-long Apple fans", as they call themselves) and other Apple sites to tell us how truly horrible it is.
The editing tools are all hidden by default...so how many people are going to find the actual tools to edit their photos on the Mac? The basics are shown, then you have to click the tiny word 'Add' which does not look like a button, and only then you can add the rest of the real editing tools...and be sure to select save as default or it reverts back to dummy mode (for the iOS folks). This upgrade is just as awful as iTunes 12, which is huge step backwards in managing your music, finding your music, navigating the store. The reviews that I have found rated iPhoto with 4 mice and the new Photos with 3 mice. And that to you is a massive improvement?
I disagree. In many instances I want the apps to be "aware" of what "surrounds them".
Think of putting an Excel table in a Word document. Or things like "merge" for mail addresses.
Heck, in Pages you cannot even copy a single page and repeat it.
I used Excel extensively for years, to a point in which it almost replaced Word and was pretty much everything I used for writing and cost estimates.
I tried to use Numbers.
Want to link to a tab in a different Numbers file? Not possible.
Want to decide precisely when a page break is inserted? Not that easy.
Want to group cells (easier to see than "hide" or "unhide" thanks to the little icon and far easier to use for sheets where sometimes you want details to be shown and otherwise you don't)? Impossible.
The list goes on and on (creation of lists in cells).
You see. Making things easy is one of the greatest things Apple ever did. But now they seem to be "dumbing them down" too much. People complaining about Photos aren't iPhoto users, they are Aperture users. And Aperture users are the ones that paid 200 USD back in the days.
And probably the ones that would pay for iCloud storage. But they are now flocking to Creative Cloud instead because it offers them what they are seeking for.
So, yes, making things easier is a huge plus. But there's a subtle line between this and dumbing them down.
Having a set of "semi-pro" apps in your portfolio, even if sales are slim, gives you a foothold in the pro market on one side and allows you to test features on the other. Much like car manufacturers that put the latest and greatest in their premium models and then let it tickle down to all other products.
Off topic but in Numbers it is amazing how many things it does in a totally different way. Having used Excel since it's inception and even VisiCalc (which IMHO it was ripped off from) I too tended to try to do things the same way only to hit a brick wall. Of late I have discovered more and more things can be done but in a totally different way. My only complaint is Apple should do a few videos for those of us trying to transition explaining the things we thought we knew how to do but can't figure out. That said anyone using a spread sheet as a word processor probably isn't going to ever transition! It reminds me of the idiots intellectually challenged using Excel as a data base.:no:
I guess you love butchered programs with features stripped out of it, because that is what happened to Pages and Numbers. iOS devices are touchscreen interfaces. The Mac is not a touchscreen interface and trying to make any program work and look like an iPhone/iPad version on the Mac is a huge mistake. It does not work well on the Mac because it is not a touchscreen.
The editing tools are all hidden by default...so how many people are going to find the actual tools to edit their photos on the Mac? The basics are shown, then you have to click the tiny word 'Add' which does not look like a button, and only then you can add the rest of the real editing tools...and be sure to select save as default or it reverts back to dummy mode (for the iOS folks). This upgrade is just as awful as iTunes 12, which is huge step backwards in managing your music, finding your music, navigating the store. The reviews that I have found rated iPhoto with 4 mice and the new Photos with 3 mice. And that to you is a massive improvement?
I do agree the tools are a little too well hidden for those with an IQ <100. Apple need to make ADD more obvious. I truly believe most of those freaking out didn't try clicking the down arrows or Add in the Edit mode.
And with that, I won’t be using Photos until it is.
Aperture doesn’t get deleted from your machine when you update, does it?
No they work together very well. I have found Photos perfect for family and vacation stuff and continue to use Aperture for my business work. The EOL of the latter grieves me profoundly. There are many features in Aperture i depend on for my work flow, especially stacking and the extended Smart options plus brushes. That said i see no reason why they can't be added to Photos if we scream loud enough (as we did with FCPX).
Every single preview states that it is superior in the major aspects. That's a fact. It is MUCH faster, smoother, and more responsive than iPhoto. That's a fact.
In your earlier post, you said you hadn't even used it because you said you would probably like it since you liked the butchered versions of Pages and Numbers. Every single preview does not say it is superior in major aspects. It is a beta, it is NOT faster than iPhoto, it is not smoother, it is not more responsive. Maybe you have a few hundred photos, but for someone with tens of thousands of high resolution photos, it is slower than iPhoto. When I open iPhoto, the pictures are instantly clear. In Photos, they all appear blurry, and then after a few seconds, they all render clear. The white background behind the photos is irritating to the eyes. But Apple has moved to an 'everything white' interface. There are practically no preference settings in Photos, all gone. Apple will not let you adjust the background color to your preference. The generic album icons in the left column are now tiny thumbnails that are so small, they only appear as a mess of colors that are distracting to the eyes. A user interface is supposed to be pleasing to the eye to make it easy to work with, and less eye strain. Not so with the new Photos app.
Oh, and try to report a bug with Photos, you get an error trying to export a Photos diagnostic, so you cannot submit a bug report without it. An error occurs that says cannot communicate with external application. Try to quit and start over. Same message appears every time.
So why don't actually use the program and give an honest opinion, instead of your "Apple does everything perfect" attitude.
In your earlier post, you said you hadn't even used it because you said you would probably like it since you liked the butchered versions of Pages and Numbers. Every single preview does not say it is superior in major aspects. It is a beta, it is NOT faster than iPhoto, it is not smoother, it is not more responsive. Maybe you have a few hundred photos, but for someone with tens of thousands of high resolution photos, it is slower than iPhoto. When I open iPhoto, the pictures are instantly clear. In Photos, they all appear blurry, and then after a few seconds, they all render clear. The white background behind the photos is irritating to the eyes. But Apple has moved to an 'everything white' interface. There are practically no preference settings in Photos, all gone. Apple will not let you adjust the background color to your preference. The generic album icons in the left column are now tiny thumbnails that are so small, they only appear as a mess of colors that are distracting to the eyes. A user interface is supposed to be pleasing to the eye to make it easy to work with, and less eye strain. Not so with the new Photos app.
Oh, and try to report a bug with Photos, you get an error trying to export a Photos diagnostic, so you cannot submit a bug report without it. An error occurs that says cannot communicate with external application. Try to quit and start over. Same message appears every time.
So why don't actually use the program and give an honest opinion, instead of your "Apple does everything perfect" attitude.
I have for weeks and he is correct. If you set Photos up with the local Library holding the high resolution data you won't get the delay, if you set it up to store the high res on the cloud obviously there will be a delay if you have a crappy slow internet connection. Reading the manual is always a good idea.
What isn't working for you in Pages and Numbers? I had to laugh the other day when i saw thousands of blog posts claiming Apple had removed the layout function. It's under the File menu people.
p.s. "Apple does everything perfect perfectly" attitude. They almost do ...
I am not using the cloud in Photos because I do not want my photos in the cloud. I prefer them local. Photos takes longer to open compared to iPhoto using the same library.
Do you get this error message when you try to export the Photos Diagnostic report from the Photos/File menu? Happens every time, and yes, the Photos Diagnostic plug-in is installed in System Preferences.
Oh, here is another step backwards. The option to edit or get info on a photo is completely hidden unless you double-click or hit spacebar to zoom a photo. Only then, Edit and Info appear in the upper right corner, along with the other toolbar items that remain static in both views. In iPhoto, the Edit and Info options were always visible no matter what view you were in. There is no reason to hide them on the toolbar and only make them visible in one view.
As I previously said, the white background is distracting. When you edit a photo, the background turns black because a darker background is preferred. However, when viewing photos, Apple has it backwards and forces a solid white background.
If I could solve the helper application bug, I could submit reports to Apple.
I do agree the tools are a little too well hidden for those with an IQ <100. Apple need to make ADD more obvious. I truly believe most of those freaking out didn't try clicking the down arrows or Add in the Edit mode.
It is ridiculous that the drop down arrows are invisible until you move the mouse over the area to make them appear. They also do not look like a typical drop-down menu. Why would Apple hide the extra adjustment settings, and yet claim the program is easier to use? In iPhoto, you click on Adjust, and all the settings appear with nothing hidden.
Do they continue to operate off the same library? If Photos requires an update to the library, can Aperture still read and write it?
Photos uses its own library, called Photos Library. The iPhoto Library and Aperture Library remain untouched. I can have both iPhoto and Photos open at the same time since they are using separate library files.
When I first opened Photos, it appeared to access my iPhoto Library file, but many albums were missing the photo count did not match. Then I opened Photos a second time holding Option, and chose the iPhoto Library file. This spent a long time updating the Photos Library file, but afterwards, the photos and albums were correct. I have an iPhoto Library file and Photos Library file...of course now that has doubled the amount of disk space since each library is over 100GB of photos, but iPhoto and Aperture are not harmed in anyway, and the libraries are kept separate.
If you add pictures to one program, they will not appear in the other.
Photos uses its own library, called Photos Library. The iPhoto Library and Aperture Library remain untouched. I can have both iPhoto and Photos open at the same time since they are using separate library files. If you add pictures to one program, they will not appear in the other.
Great.
Thanks for the info! I’ll stick with Aperture, then, for the time being.
Comments
I guess it's called iCloud now
After a week of use, I absolutely love the Photos. My early 2009 iMac just cannot handle 40,000 photos with iPhoto. However after about 1 hour of imports from the existing iPhoto library, Photos just take those 40,000 photos in without any hesitation and scroll like a knife cut through a melting butter. It is bad business for Apple though. I could live the 2009 iMac for another two year if Apple is going to improve performance like Photos does.
I am glad to hear it handles large libraries better. My large iPhoto library (almost 90,000 photos and growing daily with an 11-month old) is the primary reason I am hesitant to upgrade to the OS X beta just now. Does anyone know if you can still use an outside editor (e.g., Photoshop) from within Photos as you can in iPhoto? Also, are in plugins supported (e.g., from MacPhun)?
Your second comment about not upgrading your Mac for another year or so also applies to me (late 2009 iMac i7). I may wait a little longer to decide between an iMac with Retina 5K or splurge even more on a MacPro with my own display (probably overkill, especially if Photos works more efficiently with the libraries).
Might be an interesting opportunity for the Pixelmator team to consider integrating photo library management/workflow into their app.
Jussayin'.....
Beware, once you move to Photos from iPhotos you can't go back. I'm sticking with iPhoto as long as I can.
This is a FALSE statement. The Photos app creates its own library, separate from the iPhoto Library. You can continue to use both programs. But if you add and edit photos in one application, they do not appear in the other.
Yes, not quite Aperture but way more sophisticated that iPhoto.
It doesn't tie you to iCloud if you want to use a stand alone local Library you can.
It can do very sophisticated edits compared to iPhoto. Perhaps you haven't seen how yet?
Whoever voted for you hasn't used Photos obviously nor have you it seems.
The last line you wrote is total tripe. Photos in no way stops you using iPhoto if you want to for a while. It creates its own Library. Plus you can choose where. It is highly customizable.
I love the new Pages and Numbers and use them everyday. This is catered towards those that have iOS devices, and for that it works brilliantly.
I guess you love butchered programs with features stripped out of it, because that is what happened to Pages and Numbers. iOS devices are touchscreen interfaces. The Mac is not a touchscreen interface and trying to make any program work and look like an iPhone/iPad version on the Mac is a huge mistake. It does not work well on the Mac because it is not a touchscreen.
What the **** are you talking about? The editing tools are 1000x more comprehensive than whats in iPhoto.
Every technology site single hands-on I've read has said it's a massive improvement over iPhoto, but we can always count on the Apple-hating trolls on this site (oh sorry, "life-long Apple fans", as they call themselves) and other Apple sites to tell us how truly horrible it is.
The editing tools are all hidden by default...so how many people are going to find the actual tools to edit their photos on the Mac? The basics are shown, then you have to click the tiny word 'Add' which does not look like a button, and only then you can add the rest of the real editing tools...and be sure to select save as default or it reverts back to dummy mode (for the iOS folks). This upgrade is just as awful as iTunes 12, which is huge step backwards in managing your music, finding your music, navigating the store. The reviews that I have found rated iPhoto with 4 mice and the new Photos with 3 mice. And that to you is a massive improvement?
And with that, I won’t be using Photos until it is.
Aperture doesn’t get deleted from your machine when you update, does it?
Off topic but in Numbers it is amazing how many things it does in a totally different way. Having used Excel since it's inception and even VisiCalc (which IMHO it was ripped off from) I too tended to try to do things the same way only to hit a brick wall. Of late I have discovered more and more things can be done but in a totally different way. My only complaint is Apple should do a few videos for those of us trying to transition explaining the things we thought we knew how to do but can't figure out. That said anyone using a spread sheet as a word processor probably isn't going to ever transition! It reminds me of the
idiotsintellectually challenged using Excel as a data base.:no:I do agree the tools are a little too well hidden for those with an IQ <100. Apple need to make ADD more obvious. I truly believe most of those freaking out didn't try clicking the down arrows or Add in the Edit mode.
No they work together very well. I have found Photos perfect for family and vacation stuff and continue to use Aperture for my business work. The EOL of the latter grieves me profoundly. There are many features in Aperture i depend on for my work flow, especially stacking and the extended Smart options plus brushes. That said i see no reason why they can't be added to Photos if we scream loud enough (as we did with FCPX).
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Every single preview states that it is superior in the major aspects. That's a fact. It is MUCH faster, smoother, and more responsive than iPhoto. That's a fact.
In your earlier post, you said you hadn't even used it because you said you would probably like it since you liked the butchered versions of Pages and Numbers. Every single preview does not say it is superior in major aspects. It is a beta, it is NOT faster than iPhoto, it is not smoother, it is not more responsive. Maybe you have a few hundred photos, but for someone with tens of thousands of high resolution photos, it is slower than iPhoto. When I open iPhoto, the pictures are instantly clear. In Photos, they all appear blurry, and then after a few seconds, they all render clear. The white background behind the photos is irritating to the eyes. But Apple has moved to an 'everything white' interface. There are practically no preference settings in Photos, all gone. Apple will not let you adjust the background color to your preference. The generic album icons in the left column are now tiny thumbnails that are so small, they only appear as a mess of colors that are distracting to the eyes. A user interface is supposed to be pleasing to the eye to make it easy to work with, and less eye strain. Not so with the new Photos app.
Oh, and try to report a bug with Photos, you get an error trying to export a Photos diagnostic, so you cannot submit a bug report without it. An error occurs that says cannot communicate with external application. Try to quit and start over. Same message appears every time.
So why don't actually use the program and give an honest opinion, instead of your "Apple does everything perfect" attitude.
I have for weeks and he is correct. If you set Photos up with the local Library holding the high resolution data you won't get the delay, if you set it up to store the high res on the cloud obviously there will be a delay if you have a crappy slow internet connection. Reading the manual is always a good idea.
What isn't working for you in Pages and Numbers? I had to laugh the other day when i saw thousands of blog posts claiming Apple had removed the layout function. It's under the File menu people.
p.s. "Apple does everything
perfectperfectly" attitude. They almost do ...I am not using the cloud in Photos because I do not want my photos in the cloud. I prefer them local. Photos takes longer to open compared to iPhoto using the same library.
Do you get this error message when you try to export the Photos Diagnostic report from the Photos/File menu? Happens every time, and yes, the Photos Diagnostic plug-in is installed in System Preferences.
Oh, here is another step backwards. The option to edit or get info on a photo is completely hidden unless you double-click or hit spacebar to zoom a photo. Only then, Edit and Info appear in the upper right corner, along with the other toolbar items that remain static in both views. In iPhoto, the Edit and Info options were always visible no matter what view you were in. There is no reason to hide them on the toolbar and only make them visible in one view.
As I previously said, the white background is distracting. When you edit a photo, the background turns black because a darker background is preferred. However, when viewing photos, Apple has it backwards and forces a solid white background.
If I could solve the helper application bug, I could submit reports to Apple.
Do they continue to operate off the same library? If Photos requires an update to the library, can Aperture still read and write it?
I do agree the tools are a little too well hidden for those with an IQ <100. Apple need to make ADD more obvious. I truly believe most of those freaking out didn't try clicking the down arrows or Add in the Edit mode.
It is ridiculous that the drop down arrows are invisible until you move the mouse over the area to make them appear. They also do not look like a typical drop-down menu. Why would Apple hide the extra adjustment settings, and yet claim the program is easier to use? In iPhoto, you click on Adjust, and all the settings appear with nothing hidden.
Do they continue to operate off the same library? If Photos requires an update to the library, can Aperture still read and write it?
Photos uses its own library, called Photos Library. The iPhoto Library and Aperture Library remain untouched. I can have both iPhoto and Photos open at the same time since they are using separate library files.
When I first opened Photos, it appeared to access my iPhoto Library file, but many albums were missing the photo count did not match. Then I opened Photos a second time holding Option, and chose the iPhoto Library file. This spent a long time updating the Photos Library file, but afterwards, the photos and albums were correct. I have an iPhoto Library file and Photos Library file...of course now that has doubled the amount of disk space since each library is over 100GB of photos, but iPhoto and Aperture are not harmed in anyway, and the libraries are kept separate.
If you add pictures to one program, they will not appear in the other.
Great.
Thanks for the info! I’ll stick with Aperture, then, for the time being.