Last Active
unconfirmed, member
  • Pro photo workflow tool Aperture won't work after macOS Mojave, Apple says

    It's still a basic flaw. Computers are tools meant (in this case) to serve creative individuals - writers, photographers, filmmakers, artists, etc...  You can still read a letter that Ernest Hemingway typed in 1930 or a photograph that Ansel Adams made in 1940, but you can't watch a film created in Final Cut in 2009 or a story written in Word in 1989.  There will be more lost works of art in the digital era - either because the file can't be opened or the work remains lost on some hard drive without the dead owner's password.
    Of course you can watch movies cut on FCP 2009. You just can't open the project file and edit them. Also, I think modern versions of Word can open all older versions' documents.
  • Editorial: Super Frenemies - why the world is better off with both Apple and Samsung

    Nice article DED. But In this epic between Apple and Samsung, I'm surprised you didn't mention Steve's 2002 announcement that Apple will invest $100 M in Samsung Semiconductor to secure display supply. That point marks significant contrast to their current relationship.
  • Apple's T2 chip makes a giant difference in video encoding for most users

    Curious about the massive discrepancy between the "2018 Mac Mini i3 CPU only" at 8m 51s and the "5,1 Mac Pro" at 51m 14s, both without T2/QS. Is it possible to break down the differences between T2 and QuickSync performances and which settings are required for each?
  • Steve Jobs predicted the Mac's move from Intel to ARM processors

    I hope Apple doesn't transition Macs to ARM chips. The benefit of having a POSIX *n*x running on the same hardware as the rest of the world is hard to overstate. The thinking with the transition is that since ARM chips are so powerful sipping such little energy on iOS devices, imagine the workhorses they'd be on desktops? Sure? Maybe? But this would only be a short-lived advantage until the same physical obstacles affecting Intel come up. The reason to transition is that progression on the Intel architecture has decelerated. But this is universal and will affect the ARM architecture as well. The laws of physics won't give Apple's ARM engineers any advantages over Intel engineers. ARM may have a head start, but it WILL hit the same limits at 4nm process with yield problems, etc.
  • How Apple's Aperture created a new class of app on October 19, 2005 and lost it to Adobe L...

    This article is either incomplete or inaccurate. Photos doesn't cover most of Aperture's abilities. As someone mentioned above, iPhoto was left entirely out of the article. And Aperture was never defeated by Lightroom. It it was just discontinued.

    Unfortunately, while Aperture still meets my needs as a photographer and runs flawlessly, our adjustments can't be migrated to Lightroom, leaving us either to flatten out tens of thousands of images or maintain Aperture for legacy work and use LR new work moving forward.

    I use Aperture for so much heavy corrections for which I used to rely on Photoshop. But one of its tools still remains unrivaled: Skin Smoother. Lightroom's Clarity slider doesn't even come close. I use Skin Smoother not just for obvious reasons, but also to clean up backdrops and solid surfaces. Aperture's tools weren't primitive once Apple finally added the curves tool. The only other ability I wish it included was the ability to reorder adjustments. Lightroom has since added profile matching, building custom color profiles and countless others, but its compartmentalized workflow is a pain.

    Basically, I'm stuck with Aperture. I honestly don't know what to do. I've been running it on my 2006 Mac Pro running El Capitan with a 1GB ATI Radeon 7550 card and it's like butter. However, since Apple stoped issuing RAW camera updates for El Capitan, newer OSs are required to import photos from newer cameras. So I had to install Aperture on a newer MacBook Pro with a modern OS for that. Aperture still runs flawlessly on macOS Mojave.

    I agree entirely with Richard Hallas, but one correction:

    "a MASSIVELY expensive and comparatively underpowered dead-end system, that it would never significantly upgrade"

    The trash can Mac Pro was NEVER updated, significantly or otherwise. Apple just discontinued the "good" config and dropped the "better" and "best" configs to the formerly "good" and "better" prices. Basically, the trash can Mac Pro, the discontinuation of xServe, OS X Server, Aperture, and lobotomizing Final Cut Studio were all part of Apple's move from the pro market. What Apple SHOULD have done:

    The current Final Cut X should be Final Cut Express and its underlying engine should've powered the evolving FCP and iMovie.

    Photos should've replaced iPhoto while Aperture continued evolving its pro features, if not entirely stripping its consumer features entirely.