Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > Mac Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 24, 2012, 01:30 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
iOS-Inspired iPhoto for Mac Update Coming This Summer?






The next version of iPhoto will be redesigned to be more like the iOS version of iPhoto, according to Belgian website Apple Weetjes [Google Translate].

The report includes a couple of details about potential new features. The new Mac version of iPhoto is said to gain the excellent iPhoto Journals feature and a redesigned photo retouching system, both inspired by the iOS version of iPhoto. The site also claims that the new iPhoto will require OS X Lion or Mountain Lion -- Snow Leopard won't be supported.

Apple Weetjes doesn't have much of a track record on rumors, but the features they mention do seem likely to make their way to the Mac version of iPhoto at some point.

via AppleInsider

Article Link: iOS-Inspired iPhoto for Mac Update Coming This Summer?

Last edited by Doctor Q; Apr 24, 2012 at 06:57 PM.
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 01:37 PM   #2
Schmitty11
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
This I would be interested in this. I like the ios iPhoto but dont have an iPad and see it useless on the iPhone
Schmitty11 is offline   -7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 01:38 PM   #3
Jamie0003
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Norfolk, UK
Send a message via AIM to Jamie0003 Send a message via MSN to Jamie0003 Send a message via Yahoo to Jamie0003 Send a message via Skype™ to Jamie0003
I hope that Apple integrates iPhoto into the Photos app on iOS, it makes no sense to have two apps considering they have the exact same function bar a few photo editing features on iPhoto.
__________________
iPhone 4S 16GB
Macbook Pro 13" 2.3GHZ Intel Core i5, 2011 model
TV 3
Jamie0003 is offline   15 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 01:39 PM   #4
davidwarren
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
That would be great. iOS iPhoto is much better than OS X iPhoto, IMO.
davidwarren is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 01:53 PM   #5
bushido
macrumors 601
 
bushido's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: España y Germany
yay ... more limitations

the iPad version is horrible, you cant even delete and reorganize your pictures as far as i know
__________________
¡No hables a menos que puedas mejorar el silencio!
bushido is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 01:59 PM   #6
guzhogi
macrumors 68020
 
guzhogi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Wherever my feet take me…
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmitty11 View Post
This I would be interested in this.
<Grammar Nazi> Redundant poster is redundant </Grammar Nazi> (Sorry, couldn't resist! )

Anyways, sounds interesting. I might give it a try.
guzhogi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:08 PM   #7
2bikes
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie0003 View Post
I hope that Apple integrates iPhoto into the Photos app on iOS, it makes no sense to have two apps considering they have the exact same function bar a few photo editing features on iPhoto.
With iCloud, this could be sweet.
2bikes is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:09 PM   #8
ArtOfWarfare
macrumors 603
 
ArtOfWarfare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Send a message via Skype™ to ArtOfWarfare
A lot of the features revealed in iOS iPhoto looked interesting, but given I lack an iPad I wasn't willing to buy it and try them out. On my iMac, it could be pretty nice.
__________________
Battery Status - On the Mac App Store
The only app that'll estimate when your wireless devices will need their batteries changed.
Including the ones paired with other Macs on your network.
ArtOfWarfare is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:11 PM   #9
PBP
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2011
'Appleweetjes' is just guessing. Never heard from this site (im belgian), they probably just need viewers
PBP is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:26 PM   #10
nickn
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Yay! Let's dumb everything down even more! WTF has happened to apple... They used to have excellent products.



Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bikes View Post
With iCloud, this could be sweet.
iCloud as a whole is somewhat useless, but especially with photos and videos. I posted this before, but I will repost it.

Do you understand how large photos are? My low end DSLR makes files that are about 15MB a piece. Some of the high end models such as the Nikon D800 make photos up to 75MB. Lets use my camera for example. I typically take about 250-400 shots per shoot. Assuming each file is around 15MB, that would mean I have between 3.7 and 6 GB of data. Like most in the US, I also have low upload bandwidth. To be exact, I get about 1.5megaBITs up, or 192 kilobytes per second. At that rate, it would take over five and a half hours just to upload 250 shots to iCloud. If I had a nice D800, it would take 27 hours to upload those shots on my connection. Also note that on one vacation, in which I toured Europe, I took over 2000 photos. Do you see how ridiculous it would be to actually use iCloud? It is not a viable option.
nickn is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:27 PM   #11
afin
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Midwest USA
For an average user this would be a nice change. The rest of us photography snobs can keep using what we use.
afin is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:30 PM   #12
Kid A
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2008
Does this mean we'll no longer be able to organize photos on our Mac using iPhoto!? And that the UI will become completely unintuitive and my mom will no longer be able to use it and I will be at a loss as to explain it to her!?

Oh goodie! YAY!

OK, admitedly I may be being harsh, but i just yesterday purchased iPhoto for iPad and was terribly frustrated and disappointed with it within 90 seconds. Normally I do my homework before dropping change on an app, but I tend to just trust Apple... And I (apparently?) falsely assumed iPhoto for iOS would allow me to *organize* photos ala the Mac version, thus replacing the Photos app??? Either I'm a moron... or whooooops.... $5 in the trash. So disappointed. *Sigh*.
Kid A is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:31 PM   #13
needfx
macrumors 68000
 
needfx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: macrumors apparently
Quote:
Originally Posted by guzhogi View Post
<Grammar Nazi> Redundant poster is redundant </Grammar Nazi> (Sorry, couldn't resist! )

Anyways, sounds interesting. I might give it a try.
Weird Al Yankovic would have made it a hit!
needfx is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:32 PM   #14
nickn
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by afin View Post
For an average user this would be a nice change. The rest of us photography snobs can keep using what we use.
Sure, for now, but eventually we will want an upgrade. Then what? I guess I will defect over to ps.
nickn is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:35 PM   #15
Rumple
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Wow that icon is hideous.
Rumple is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:37 PM   #16
PlaceofDis
macrumors Core
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
i can see it happening. However, i sure hope that it includes a complete overhaul of iPhoto for OS X because it needs work and i think it might be best for them to start from scratch with it.
__________________
dim my eyes on the waves of confessions...
PlaceofDis is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:40 PM   #17
guzhogi
macrumors 68020
 
guzhogi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Wherever my feet take me…
Quote:
Originally Posted by afin View Post
For an average user this would be a nice change. The rest of us photography snobs can keep using what we use.
Apple's line of logic, probably: Why pay $14.99 for iPhoto when you could pay $79.99 for Aperture?
guzhogi is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:41 PM   #18
Moonjumper
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lincoln, UK
The iOS features in Lion doesn't bode well for this being a step forward.
Moonjumper is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:43 PM   #19
John IV
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: mcminnville, or
[/QUOTE]Do you understand how large photos are? My low end DSLR makes files that are about 15MB a piece. Some of the high end models such as the Nikon D800 make photos up to 75MB. Lets use my camera for example. I typically take about 250-400 shots per shoot. Assuming each file is around 15MB, that would mean I have between 3.7 and 6 GB of data. Like most in the US, I also have low upload bandwidth. To be exact, I get about 1.5megaBITs up, or 192 kilobytes per second. At that rate, it would take over five and a half hours just to upload 250 shots to iCloud. If I had a nice D800, it would take 27 hours to upload those shots on my connection. Also note that on one vacation, in which I toured Europe, I took over 2000 photos. Do you see how ridiculous it would be to actually use iCloud? It is not a viable option.[/QUOTE]

If you can afford to own a DSLR and trips to Europe, then just spring for the faster internet connection. Or you can use ipad's 4g connection and that is much faster than 1.5Mbps.
John IV is offline   -6 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:51 PM   #20
Dr. McKay
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Belgium, Europe
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBP View Post
'Appleweetjes' is just guessing. Never heard from this site (im belgian), they probably just need viewers
I'm Belgian, too. Never heard of appleweetjes, either. Sounds fishy...
Dr. McKay is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:59 PM   #21
nickn
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
If you can afford to own a DSLR and trips to Europe, then just spring for the faster internet connection. Or you can use ipad's 4g connection and that is much faster than 1.5Mbps.[/QUOTE]


First and foremost I can't get a faster connection. Remember, we are talking about upload bandwidth here, not downloads. Also, I would go way over any caps imposed on a 4G iPad. Remember, one shoot will net me 3.7-6 GB of data...
nickn is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 02:59 PM   #22
2bikes
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickn View Post
Yay! Let's dumb everything down even more! WTF has happened to apple... They used to have excellent products.





iCloud as a whole is somewhat useless, but especially with photos and videos. I posted this before, but I will repost it.

Do you understand how large photos are? My low end DSLR makes files that are about 15MB a piece. Some of the high end models such as the Nikon D800 make photos up to 75MB. Lets use my camera for example. I typically take about 250-400 shots per shoot. Assuming each file is around 15MB, that would mean I have between 3.7 and 6 GB of data. Like most in the US, I also have low upload bandwidth. To be exact, I get about 1.5megaBITs up, or 192 kilobytes per second. At that rate, it would take over five and a half hours just to upload 250 shots to iCloud. If I had a nice D800, it would take 27 hours to upload those shots on my connection. Also note that on one vacation, in which I toured Europe, I took over 2000 photos. Do you see how ridiculous it would be to actually use iCloud? It is not a viable option.
I some what agree with you. Compared to music, cloud for pictures, assuming each file around 15MB isn't too different from music. But I think, most would agree that your example of 250-400 shots per shoot is way above an average user. It wont work for you. Nothing will work for you.
2bikes is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 03:02 PM   #23
iBug2
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
I hope they bring the "find similar pictures" to Mac iPhoto and Aperture soon. That's a very crucial feature in modern photo management apps and it's basically missing from Mac offerings of Apple right now. Hard to believe they brought such a powerful feature to iOS iPhoto first.
__________________
MP Hex D700 32GB-1TB, rMBP 2.7 15" 16GB, ATD, iPhone 4S, iPad Air
iBug2 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 03:12 PM   #24
bboucher790
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickn View Post
Do you understand how large photos are? My low end DSLR makes files that are about 15MB a piece. Some of the high end models such as the Nikon D800 make photos up to 75MB. Lets use my camera for example. I typically take about 250-400 shots per shoot. Assuming each file is around 15MB, that would mean I have between 3.7 and 6 GB of data. Like most in the US, I also have low upload bandwidth. To be exact, I get about 1.5megaBITs up, or 192 kilobytes per second. At that rate, it would take over five and a half hours just to upload 250 shots to iCloud. If I had a nice D800, it would take 27 hours to upload those shots on my connection. Also note that on one vacation, in which I toured Europe, I took over 2000 photos. Do you see how ridiculous it would be to actually use iCloud? It is not a viable option.
Photostream is a consumer product. It is designed to push iDevice photos to other devices, getting rid of the need to transfer your photos to your computer. Doing so, it backs up your photos to your PC, without the need to do any work.

For $100, you can get 55GB of yearly storage. That will satisfy 99.9% of the population. The fact that you may be in the 0.1 percent, is tough luck :P.

Lucky Apple and Canon didn't forget about you :
http://www.apple.com/thunderbolt/
http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/canon-t...as-11-03-2011/
__________________
"My girlfriend always laughs during sex - no matter what she's reading." - Steve Jobs

Last edited by bboucher790; Apr 24, 2012 at 03:25 PM.
bboucher790 is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2012, 03:18 PM   #25
nickn
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bikes View Post
I some what agree with you. Compared to music, cloud for pictures, assuming each file around 15MB isn't too different from music. But I think, most would agree that your example of 250-400 shots per shoot is way above an average user. It wont work for you. Nothing will work for you.
What would work for me is to keep everything how it currently is. Apple is the problem, as they are removing any advanced features from everything they are "updating". Now everything is tailered to the extreme idiot clients, and powerusers are thrown under the bus. Seriously, take a look at everything.

10.6 - 10.7, massive loss of features.
Server edition even more so
iMovie HD 06 to 08, large loss of features
Final cut 7 to X, extreme criticism.
Airport utility, loss of many controls.
Removal of super drives from even desktop machines.
Etc and on and on
nickn is offline   2 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > Mac Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lords of Discord (a game inspired by Disciples) is coming to iOS! HeroCraftGames iPad Apps 2 Oct 24, 2013 02:55 AM
iOSX? iOS 7 inspired Mac icons Ryantcairns iOS 7 113 Aug 28, 2013 10:17 PM
BlackBerry Messenger Coming to iOS This Summer MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 176 May 19, 2013 09:25 AM
OS X: Bioshock Infinite coming to Mac this Summer! Dirtyharry50 Mac and PC Games 3 Mar 21, 2013 10:13 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:32 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC