Well my copy of aperture is running under my quad G5 : I am not concerned by the Intel update
I was planning on buying a Quad after MacWorld, but as I don't do pro work anymore, I don't really need it (I just WANT it). So, now that the new BlankMac will be coming out this year instead of late next year, I've decided to wait, and stay with my dual 2GHz G5 and dual 1.8GHz (upgraded) Digital Audio for now.
The family will just have to wait a little longer for the rotation of their own machines to occur.
It's not a surprise. Aperture did not get oustanding reviews especially for the quality/price ratio (lightroom from Adobe is free).
Frankly who is willing to pay 50 more bucks for Aperture ?
Whoa, Dude! Lightroom is not free.
The Lightroom beta--which expires in June--is free. It may have bugs. Your files/edits may not work with the final version. You may start to depend on features which get changed or removed in the final version. It's got great raw conversion, but that's about it. No versions. No loupe. No lightbox.
By the time Adobe has finally finished coding it (end of 2006?) Aperture will already be on version 2 or 3! I don't think Adobe will ever catch up. Did Premiere?
Adobe has said that Lightroom will cost somewhere between $100-$600, but Adobe isn't saying specifically yet.
You're very optimistic - if Adobe hadn't come out with Lightroom I expect Apple wouldn't have updated Aperture for over a year. With Lightroom I predict Apple will announce version 2 at the end of this year - perhaps early next year. BUT version 3 will be some way off.
The Lightroom beta--which expires in June--is free. It may have bugs. Your files/edits may not work with the final version. You may start to depend on features which get changed or removed in the final version. It's got great raw conversion, but that's about it. No versions. No loupe. No lightbox.
By the time Adobe has finally finished coding it (end of 2006?) Aperture will already be on version 2 or 3! I don't think Adobe will ever catch up. Did Premiere?
Adobe has said that Lightroom will cost somewhere between $100-$600, but Adobe isn't saying specifically yet.
It does have a loupe.
And it's still in beta, the same place Aperture should be!
It's also interesting that we haven't seen those online review updates we were supposed to see after Apple came out with 10.4.4 with the updated conversions. I haven't seen too much of an improvement overall, so far, from them. Though I haven't had much time to do an in depth test.
And, stop including Premiere. Premiere, on the Mac, was NEVER a professional program. It was not intended as such. It wasn't a professional program on the PC either, until version 7, which only came out months after Adobe discontinued it on the Mac.
Adobe was working on 7 for the Mac as well, but decided to stop when they saw that Apple had Express. At least, this was what I was told from those I know in Adobe. I have no reason to doubt it.
But Aperture is a different case entirely.
If we come back a year from now, we will have a real idea as to where both Aperture and Lightroom stand. It's just too early now to tell.
And it's still in beta, the same place Aperture should be!
Maybe so...everyone's entitled to his/her opinion. Despite its bugs, however, the fact of the matter is that Aperture is feature complete and Lightroom is not (or doesn't feel like it at all).
I find it extremely hard to believe we'll see Lightroom before the end of the year. Not only does Adobe need to add features, it will also needs to test for bugs.
All of Apple's 1.0 apps are betas according to everyone. If someone bought a 1.0 app from Apple and was surprised that it felt like a beta, it's just too bad...they made the mistake and will hopefully learn from it.
I guarantee you Lightroom 1.0 will feel like a beta. Some people have gone as far as to say Lightroom is in alpha right now considering its feature-incompletness.
Maybe so...everyone's entitled to his/her opinion. Despite its bugs, however, the fact of the matter is that Aperture is feature complete and Lightroom is not (or doesn't feel like it at all).
I find it extremely hard to believe we'll see Lightroom before the end of the year. Not only does Adobe need to add features, it will also needs to test for bugs.
All of Apple's 1.0 apps are betas according to everyone. If someone bought a 1.0 app from Apple and was surprised that it felt like a beta, it's just too bad...they made the mistake and will hopefully learn from it.
I guarantee you Lightroom 1.0 will feel like a beta. Some people have gone as far as to say Lightroom is in alpha right now considering its feature-incompletness.
I can't argue with what you're saying. I feel the same way.
That's why I'm saying that it will be a year until we can make a valid comparison.
Adobe felt they had to show the beta. I'm sure we can all understand why. It's likely they were going to show it at the next dev conf instead.
While I'd like to see Apple sell more software, Adobe isn't stupid.
Maybe so...everyone's entitled to his/her opinion. Despite its bugs, however, the fact of the matter is that Aperture is feature complete and Lightroom is not (or doesn't feel like it at all).
I guarantee you Lightroom 1.0 will feel like a beta. Some people have gone as far as to say Lightroom is in alpha right now considering its feature-incompletness.
Yeah, Adobe is really stretching the truth with the 'beta' moniker. How can anyone not like Lightroom--it doesn't really do anything, so there's not much to complain about. \
Looks as though Aperture designers are ready to put in some serious work to fix the app.
Quote:
Apple approached PDN and asked us to provide the development team with sample images for comparison, so the Aperture programmers could improve raw performance. We asked Apple to include not just the in-house reviewers, but the PDN readership at large. Both Apple and PDN feel that the caliber of work from PDN readers and the level of technical sophistication would allow PDN readers to provide a fair sampling of images, and so Apple is inviting PDN readers to submit images to their development team for help tweaking the raw image conversion process.
I think Aperture needs these before it can succeed:
1) Storage of photos on multiple locations (includding saving to servers)
2) Speed/Preformance. Apple has got to chill on the sys. recs.
3) More advanced editing tools
4) Easy integration with Photoshop or a Photoshop killer integrated with it. (On this topic, a) aperture is NOT a photoshop killer, it is a photoshop's best friend, b) I don't think Photoshop will be falling any time soon.
Looks as though Aperture designers are ready to put in some serious work to fix the app.
PDN is good. I used to advertise with them. In fact, we were one of the first companies to allow them to place product at our customer area. We also did a lot of work for them (free!), early on.
Comments
Originally posted by bikertwin
You mean, ACR, right?
Sigh!
Originally posted by bikertwin
And I don't want a Photoshop clone, much as this poster said:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread....58240&tstart=0
I can agree with the remarks of several posters.
Look to the discussion on Ars about this.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/con...id=7-7890-8175
Originally posted by melgross
Some good news here, for a change! I hope they change their minds about the rest of their pro apps.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/con...id=7-7890-8175
Well it was a bit cheeky for a brand new app which was announced after the Intel announcement. Good to see Apple change their mind.
Originally posted by melgross
Some good news here, for a change! I hope they change their minds about the rest of their pro apps.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/con...id=7-7890-8175
It's not a surprise. Aperture did not get oustanding reviews especially for the quality/price ratio (lightroom from Adobe is free).
Frankly who is willing to pay 50 more bucks for Aperture ?
Originally posted by Powerdoc
It's not a surprise. Aperture did not get oustanding reviews especially for the quality/price ratio (lightroom from Adobe is free).
Frankly who is willing to pay 50 more bucks for Aperture ?
I know a couple on this forum (assuming they bought it at all, rather than just yelling at me about it
Originally posted by melgross
I know a couple on this forum (assuming they bought it at all, rather than just yelling at me about it
Well my copy of aperture is running under my quad G5 : I am not concerned by the Intel update
Originally posted by Powerdoc
Well my copy of aperture is running under my quad G5 : I am not concerned by the Intel update
I was planning on buying a Quad after MacWorld, but as I don't do pro work anymore, I don't really need it (I just WANT it). So, now that the new BlankMac will be coming out this year instead of late next year, I've decided to wait, and stay with my dual 2GHz G5 and dual 1.8GHz (upgraded) Digital Audio for now.
The family will just have to wait a little longer for the rotation of their own machines to occur.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
It's not a surprise. Aperture did not get oustanding reviews especially for the quality/price ratio (lightroom from Adobe is free).
Frankly who is willing to pay 50 more bucks for Aperture ?
Whoa, Dude! Lightroom is not free.
The Lightroom beta--which expires in June--is free. It may have bugs. Your files/edits may not work with the final version. You may start to depend on features which get changed or removed in the final version. It's got great raw conversion, but that's about it. No versions. No loupe. No lightbox.
By the time Adobe has finally finished coding it (end of 2006?) Aperture will already be on version 2 or 3! I don't think Adobe will ever catch up. Did Premiere?
Adobe has said that Lightroom will cost somewhere between $100-$600, but Adobe isn't saying specifically yet.
Originally posted by bikertwin
version 2 or 3
You're very optimistic - if Adobe hadn't come out with Lightroom I expect Apple wouldn't have updated Aperture for over a year. With Lightroom I predict Apple will announce version 2 at the end of this year - perhaps early next year. BUT version 3 will be some way off.
Originally posted by bikertwin
Whoa, Dude! Lightroom is not free.
The Lightroom beta--which expires in June--is free. It may have bugs. Your files/edits may not work with the final version. You may start to depend on features which get changed or removed in the final version. It's got great raw conversion, but that's about it. No versions. No loupe. No lightbox.
By the time Adobe has finally finished coding it (end of 2006?) Aperture will already be on version 2 or 3! I don't think Adobe will ever catch up. Did Premiere?
Adobe has said that Lightroom will cost somewhere between $100-$600, but Adobe isn't saying specifically yet.
It does have a loupe.
And it's still in beta, the same place Aperture should be!
It's also interesting that we haven't seen those online review updates we were supposed to see after Apple came out with 10.4.4 with the updated conversions. I haven't seen too much of an improvement overall, so far, from them. Though I haven't had much time to do an in depth test.
And, stop including Premiere. Premiere, on the Mac, was NEVER a professional program. It was not intended as such. It wasn't a professional program on the PC either, until version 7, which only came out months after Adobe discontinued it on the Mac.
Adobe was working on 7 for the Mac as well, but decided to stop when they saw that Apple had Express. At least, this was what I was told from those I know in Adobe. I have no reason to doubt it.
But Aperture is a different case entirely.
If we come back a year from now, we will have a real idea as to where both Aperture and Lightroom stand. It's just too early now to tell.
Originally posted by melgross
And it's still in beta, the same place Aperture should be!
Maybe so...everyone's entitled to his/her opinion. Despite its bugs, however, the fact of the matter is that Aperture is feature complete and Lightroom is not (or doesn't feel like it at all).
I find it extremely hard to believe we'll see Lightroom before the end of the year. Not only does Adobe need to add features, it will also needs to test for bugs.
All of Apple's 1.0 apps are betas according to everyone. If someone bought a 1.0 app from Apple and was surprised that it felt like a beta, it's just too bad...they made the mistake and will hopefully learn from it.
I guarantee you Lightroom 1.0 will feel like a beta. Some people have gone as far as to say Lightroom is in alpha right now considering its feature-incompletness.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Maybe so...everyone's entitled to his/her opinion. Despite its bugs, however, the fact of the matter is that Aperture is feature complete and Lightroom is not (or doesn't feel like it at all).
I find it extremely hard to believe we'll see Lightroom before the end of the year. Not only does Adobe need to add features, it will also needs to test for bugs.
All of Apple's 1.0 apps are betas according to everyone. If someone bought a 1.0 app from Apple and was surprised that it felt like a beta, it's just too bad...they made the mistake and will hopefully learn from it.
I guarantee you Lightroom 1.0 will feel like a beta. Some people have gone as far as to say Lightroom is in alpha right now considering its feature-incompletness.
I can't argue with what you're saying. I feel the same way.
That's why I'm saying that it will be a year until we can make a valid comparison.
Adobe felt they had to show the beta. I'm sure we can all understand why. It's likely they were going to show it at the next dev conf instead.
While I'd like to see Apple sell more software, Adobe isn't stupid.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Maybe so...everyone's entitled to his/her opinion. Despite its bugs, however, the fact of the matter is that Aperture is feature complete and Lightroom is not (or doesn't feel like it at all).
I guarantee you Lightroom 1.0 will feel like a beta. Some people have gone as far as to say Lightroom is in alpha right now considering its feature-incompletness.
Yeah, Adobe is really stretching the truth with the 'beta' moniker. How can anyone not like Lightroom--it doesn't really do anything, so there's not much to complain about.
Apple approached PDN and asked us to provide the development team with sample images for comparison, so the Aperture programmers could improve raw performance. We asked Apple to include not just the in-house reviewers, but the PDN readership at large. Both Apple and PDN feel that the caliber of work from PDN readers and the level of technical sophistication would allow PDN readers to provide a fair sampling of images, and so Apple is inviting PDN readers to submit images to their development team for help tweaking the raw image conversion process.
1) Storage of photos on multiple locations (includding saving to servers)
2) Speed/Preformance. Apple has got to chill on the sys. recs.
3) More advanced editing tools
4) Easy integration with Photoshop or a Photoshop killer integrated with it. (On this topic, a) aperture is NOT a photoshop killer, it is a photoshop's best friend, b) I don't think Photoshop will be falling any time soon.
Originally posted by TenoBell
Looks as though Aperture designers are ready to put in some serious work to fix the app.
PDN is good. I used to advertise with them. In fact, we were one of the first companies to allow them to place product at our customer area. We also did a lot of work for them (free!), early on.