People expect Adobe to have the RAW updates first. This is their bread and butter. I'm sure Adobe has more of a relationship with the camera makers than Apple does. I don't expect Apple to have RAW updates soon after a camera is released, but I would expect it within a reasonable amount of time. It's not like camera releases catches them by surprise.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Aperture and iPhoto Updated with Performance Enhancements and Bug Fixes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
People expect Adobe to have the RAW updates first. This is their bread and butter. I'm sure Adobe has more of a relationship with the camera makers than Apple does. I don't expect Apple to have RAW updates soon after a camera is released, but I would expect it within a reasonable amount of time. It's not like camera releases catches them by surprise.
Same day as Adobe? Where have I suggested that? It's been 2 weeks since Adobe released. But I guess what you are saying in total is that Adobe w/ LR is always going to be faster, better, than Apple w/ Aperture & I should just come to grips with that fact.
Yes it is!!! Edit a d7100 raw file in Text Edit and simply change D7100 to D5200 in the file and save it... It then opens and edits fine in Aperture...
Did you read the whole nail in the coffin comment. I said this is one of the last nails in Apple's coffin for me and my business. We have one Mac left and when it reached EOL then we will have made the complete switch from Apple...
----------
You must really try hard to be this big of an *&^...
Some of us had to buy a new camera!!!
And yes I expect Apple to push rapid updates
Put up or shut up. Show me that Apple is much slower than Adobe. In regard to features of Aperture vs. LR (in particular in the image adjustment area), I agree Apple is clearly behind. But the timeliness of raw updates, not that much.
As much as I know, new raw support for LR comes with new point releases (one could say that LR point releases are mainly about new camera support).
In 2011 and 2012 combined, Adobe released eight updates, 3.4, 3.4.1, 3.5, 3.6, 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Dn_lightroom_release_history.png
And Apple released nine updates, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.13, 3.14, 4.0, 4.01, 4.02, 4.03. Whoops, Apple actually released its updates a bit more frequently than Adobe.
And if we look at 2013 only it is:
Adobe: one so far (4.4)
Apple: two so far (4.04, 4.05)
I am not saying that Apple is faster per camera but look is releases updates more frequently. If you want to show me that Apple is on average two months later than Adobe with their support for a specific camera, be my guest. I'am awaiting that comparison with baited breath.
Last edited:
Well there you go. Apple just released a new point release last week with no new RAW support. A RAW support update did follow a few days later only for Fuji cameras released in Feb, again, trailing Adobe by some time.
Wholly unsure why people are getting their panties in a wad over this. Why protect Apple when it really hasn't done much for its customers with this product in over two years. People take criticism personally. It's bizarre. Aperture is a program, not a person. Apple's support of it has been uneven at best whereas Adobe seems to constantly push on with improvements.
As I've written many times here -- I like and prefer Aperture's workflow over LR, so I stick with it but as a customer, be it of Aperture or BMW cars or Samsung TVs, I expect to see improvements made over time or I have to look harder at the competition. I refuse to be a loyal lemming "no matter what" like some in this thread appear to be based on their comments.
Look up the support dates for the following cameras and you might be in for a surprise:
Olympus E-PL5
Olympus E-PM2
Olympus XZ-2
Panasonic GH3
Canon G15
Canon S110
Canon SX50 HS
Nikon D600
Nikon D3200
I tell you what... You are you are the trying to stick up for Apple. You tell us how these support dates match up w/ Adobes. And then tell me why Apple is so slow w/ the D7100 since it uses the same sensor sans filter as the D3200.
Make the case for Apple's handling of Aperture in total, not just RAW updates.
Whenever Apple adds support after Adobe, everybody complains that are really slow. Whenever Adobe adds support after Apple, nobody complains.
Would call pointing out the above, as 'sticking it up for Apple'?
So, for Nikon, Apple is bit slower. For Canon Adobe is a bit slower.
All the more reason that we need a standard RAW format so that these issues don't arise. I'm not sure why Nikon, Canon and Sony don't go for .dng as a standard (but Leica and Pentax do), but something has got to give eventually. For a software company to have to constantly use resources to RAW updates just because a new camera is released is insane. One day, the camera RAW support file will be bigger than Aperture and Lightroom itself.
Somebody has to measure the spectral response of the CFA filters (incl. UV and IR cut filters) of every camera.
If we take a random raw support file, we see that five cameras take up 3.9 MB or 0.8 MB per camera. If we take a more recent update we end up with 1.3 MB per camera. Or an even more recent one we end up with 0.6 MB per camera. Though probably, some of that file size is a wrapper.
Aperture/iPhoto/OS X currently supports 280 camera models which might already be about 300 MB which is a third of Aperture's current size.
Thanks for those charts. I'll have my crow now, or hat, whichever you prefer to serve.
From the chart it really is inconsistent RAW support among Adobe and Apple, which BTW I bet when Adobe adds support after Apple there is plenty of moaning on the Adobe boards.
Well I'm just going to hope that Apple released a new update sooner rather than later for the 7100.