Google| Subject | Re: OSX Photos and referenced files |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 02/19/2015 16:36 (02/19/2015 10:36) |
| Message-ID | <190220151036557786%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | Sandman (14m) > nospam |
In article <sandman-d1f22ff47c9c88e3e507262fcaa4483c@individual.net>, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:
i'm not talking about those who switched recently because aperture is dead. i'm talking about lightroom users overall, long before aperture was nixed.SandmanSandmannospam
I've had very low expectations for Photos, but Apple did release Aperture, which is by far the best photo management app to have ever existed,
maybe you think it's wonderful, but the rest of the world disagrees.
Yeah? I mean, sure there are some people that have switched to Lightroom because they prefer Lightroom, but I've heard plenty of people that "had to" switch because Aperture was a dead end and there haven't been any updates, so they would rather switch sooner than later, and now Apple has EOL:ed Aperture so I suppose that was a wise choice on their part.
Of course, most Lightroom users can't even run Aperture since it's Mac-only.
lightroom has significantly more users on the mac than aperture did.
aperture was a failure, which is why apple canceled it. if it wasn't a failure, then apple would not have canceled it. common sense there.
wrong.nospamSandman
so few people bought aperture that apple didn't bother putting much resources behind it and ultimately canceled it. the writing was on the wall years ago.
I'm assuming you as usual has no actual data to support this?
adobe has given market share numbers many times (which was from an independent company, not adobe).
the last major upgrade to aperture was version 3 in 2010, and in that time lightroom had *two* major releases with another one coming in just weeks. apple tried to breathe life into aperture by slashing its price in 2011, but that was not enough to save it.
there were also *numerous* recurring rumours that the aperture team had been disbanded and given what ultimately happened, there was obviously some truth to that. aperture updates in the past few years were very minor, mostly bug fixes and compatibility issues, which means the aperture team was bare minimum and likely not full time either.
you will no doubt say "that's not proof", except it is. you're as usual, full of shit and living in another world, where the snow is blue.
nobody thought that photos would replace aperture, other than wishful thinking by delusional people.Sandmanso it's not like they can't do it.nospam
nobody said they can't. the point is that they don't want to.
Indeed, and some people actually thought OSX Photos would be an Aperture replacement as well.
most people thought it would slot between iphoto and aperture which is exactly what it's doing, however, it's still a work in progress that isn't even in beta yet, let alone released.
it's a bit like final cut, where apple rewrote it without all of the features of the previous version but later added nearly all of them back.
and yes it will have non-destructive plugins, but from what i'm hearing, version 1 will not have third party plugins (other than sharing).
02/18/2015-
