Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Says Aperture Won't Run in Future macOS Versions After Mojave

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,200
38,989



In a new support document, Apple has indicated that its legacy photo editing suite Aperture will not run in future versions of macOS after macOS Mojave. The support document provides users with steps to migrate Aperture libraries to Apple's newer Photos app for Mac or Adobe Lightroom Classic.

aperture-macbook-pro-800x424.jpg

Apple ceased development of Aperture in June 2014 and removed the software from the Mac App Store in April 2015 after the launch of the Photos app for Mac. However, the application continues to function on macOS Mojave for users who still have it installed, albeit with some performance limitations.

As part of the transition from 32-bit to 64-bit, certain media files created using older formats or codecs will also be incompatible with future versions of macOS after macOS Mojave. Apple has shared instructions on how to convert incompatible media in iMovie libraries and Final Cut Pro X and Motion projects.

Article Link: Apple Says Aperture Won't Run in Future macOS Versions After Mojave
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2019/04/30/aperture-wont-run-beyond-macos-mojave/
I've still not forgiven Apple for pulling the plug on one of the best apps they've created, especially since there's just no good alternatives… :mad:

(Hoping that Affinity eventually will create a descent DAM but that does not let Apple off the hook.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: MixiMera, foliovision, LiveM and 25 others
Looks like I switched entirely to an iPad Pro with a legacy Mac for managing old libraries just in time. I’ll likely never bother buying another Mac without Aperture.

While the transition brought some benefits i’d Still like to see affinity add a management and review tool to their apps with cloud sync and an iPhone companion app for reviewing/flagging/rating only.
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision and ksjunk
I thought apple was all about the pro? I really tried to like photos, but its really for the insta- facebook generation, not the iPhotos and Aperture crowds that brought people to Apple with proper tools and functionality. you can't even make your own damn books anymore without a 3rd party plugin and 3rd party subscription, ffs.

instead, you get an out of date Mac desktop, an overpriced all-in-one, etc. Im just getting sick and tired of apple's nonchalantness, it used to work well under Steve, but that's when the magic died and apple really doesn't have a clue.


Lol, just a rant. Lightroom is good, I still use photos to hold my large library of photos from the past few decades. things don't necessary have to change to get better, just improve /rant
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: foliovision, ultradk, evoluzione and 16 others
When I started seriously getting into digital photography(as opposed to film, which has been an ongoing hobby for ~15 years) there was talk that Aperture was on its way out. I'm glad that I spent the time and effort to learn Lightroom, although I did buy a second-hand copy of Aperture and have it on my Mac Pro.

Photos just doesn't cut it. I like Aperture, and I would use it if not for the fact that it's a dead end. At least, AFAIK, it still uses Apple Camera RAW so should be good on Mojave up to the last update to that which Apple releases.

Now I just dread the day when Lightroom 6 no longer runs and I get forced into paying for CC. I was able to LR6 back in 2015, although the lady I talked to at Adobe was definitely trying to sell me on CC at the time. At least Adobe was considerate enough to add Nikon D850 support to LR6-that will likely be my next DSLR in a few years.
 
Aperture hasn't aged well. If Aperture is all you know, you won't be able to understand this.

Apple was right to abandon it. The photo editing / digital asset management space is very crowded. It has over a dozen major competitors and probably several dozen if you start considering stand alone editor tools without asset management built in. Some of those alternatives are extremely good.

I loved Aperture and I hung onto it for too long myself. When I finally moved on, my only regret was that I didn't do it sooner. Aperture was easy to use and didn't make me think very much, but it was underpowered in its color editing tools and my extended reliance on it stunted my development as a photographer.

Capture One Pro is my photo editor these days and it can be configured to work similarly to the way Aperture worked. If the thought of giving up Aperture makes you want to make Mojave the last MacOS you'll ever use, do yourself a favor and give Capture One Pro a serious look. It takes a little exporing to figure out how to configure it, but my setup really does mimic Aperture.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: foliovision, USAntigoon, ipedro and 13 others
Letterb said:
Luminar is pretty decent. Source: I’m a mere user.
Click to expand...

While I like it and use it for major editing of my photos, it is still poorly optimized, laggy with slow responses. I recently started Lr because I needed to make batch edit of 500+ photos with auto tone settings (because, unfortunately, Luminar does not support that and AI auto filter is crappy) and I was amazed how smooth it is when compared to Luminar. But Luminar has better functions and is easier to use than Lr for me.

So I hope, one day Luminar will get better but right now it is still not a software which can battle Lr or any other RAW editor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back