Apple Notifying Aperture Users of Impending Removal From Mac App Store

[bobone]

I know there are a lot of die hard aperture fans out there, but honestly guys, it's time to switch to Lightroom or Capture One. You'll be very happy that you did.

From my brief forays with both, it'll most likely be Capture One. Lightroom just doesn't... work the way I do. It's got some nice features and all, but my other major issue with it is Adobe is moving away from software licenses to subscriptions and cloud based services. I don't want to go there.

----------

I see others have responded to this, but I thought that I saw that we would have the option to locally store the original files. Am I not understanding this right?

I have no desire to store my originals on iCloud.

I will not store my originals on the cloud, not even for backup. Originals stay on my personal backup system, that I control and verify. No outages or lost data for me, thank you, nor pictures going on a site for whatever reason. When I drop something on the cloud, it's essentially publishing it, however limited its reach is intended to be.

Also, I may be in the minority, but I don't want to have two libraries with my photo files in them. That just takes up too much storage. I wonder how others are addressing that.

Multiple copies in backups Seriously, with 4TB costing a mere $120, having 3 externals, each with a copy is relatively cheap. (I have 2TB drives currently, as that's all the space I need, with 3 externals that rotate offsite about once a month) Do you recall when purchasing, developing and printing a single roll of 36 pics was $15 or so? 20 rolls equals 100K photos now, in triplicate, which is a couple fewer pics than I took in high school alone.

 

[JetLaw]

Apple should just give it away for free before they give it the axe.

That's the last thing they would want to do. Their goal is to migrate everyone to the current solution, not to increase the number of people using a legacy app.

 

[kirky29]

I think I could manage not using Aperture, I only rate my photos 5 stars so I could replace that with the favorite option and I only edit my photos on my iPhone, I just found Aperture looked and felt nicer than iPhoto and certainly Lightroom.

I've tried importing my 400GB library but Photos instantly maxes out on CPU and becomes completely unresponsive. Took about 10 hours to import too...

 

[n8cousins]

Amen. It's about time Apple sent that outdated program to a farm upstate.

 

[heeloliver]

It just shows that Apple seems to be doing this to sell iCloud subscriptions, and not to improve the user experience.

I would have to agree and disagree. I love how well iCloud Photo Library works, and I love that it got rid of the mess that was before it (Photo Stream)

 

[DudeDad]

I got tired of waiting for an update to Aperture....I purchased LightRoom. It's everything I expected Aperture to become. I suggest you download the trial...it will be much better than Photos. There are some great plug-ins available as well. I process photos from my Canon 6D and am very happy with the workflow and results.

 

[mw360]

I don't know why this would be "probable." "Possible," yes, but doesn't seem very likely based on Apple's history. For example, Final Cut Pro X was introduced in 2011, yet Final Cut Pro 7 still runs on Yosemite, more or less. Apple may not be considering compatibility with FCP 7 when it updates OS X, but they don't seem to have gone out of their way to break it.

The "life of Yosemite" doesn't end when the next version of OS X is released. Apple still supports (including issuing security patches for) Lion, Mountain Lion, and Mavericks, and Apple is not at all quick to remove code from OS X that's necessary for the operation of legacy apps. Ceasing development/support is not the same as intentionally making it unusable.

I admit I'm being cynical but in Mavericks Aperture 3 doesn't run without an update to 3.5. In Yosemite Aperture 3.5 doesn't run without an update to 3.6. In 10.11... whoops, no more updates.

 

[bobone]

I admit I'm being cynical but in Mavericks Aperture 3 doesn't run without an update to 3.5. In Yosemite Aperture 3.5 doesn't run without an update to 3.6. In 10.11... whoops, no more updates.

There's always that spare SSD to continue running your old Aperture system on, that then gets moved into a VM.... But that seems like a lot of trouble if there's a current solution that's supported that works.

 

[HenryDJP]

Hard to forgive them for this. Musicians and movie makers get awesome apps and we get half-baked experimentation. I get that eventually everything will be in the cloud, and photos was the next thing after they figured out documents. What I don't get is why they kayboshed the whole thing for professionals *before* the cloud options were anywhere near as good as what we already have.

First of all, I don't know what you mean by "kayboshed" because I never heard of that word but as far as "Professionals", some people here need to stop pretending that there's nothing else out there but Apple's software. ANY REAL PROFESSIONAL will get the Mac software that THEY NEED to get work done. Apple's software is not the only game in town.

 

[space1nvaders]

more Crapware

Not happy - how does Apple get off migrating stuff before you even have any experience with the application? I'll bet their support people are slammed with people trying to figure out how to switch their Aperture back to the way it was after looking at this over simplified application.

Apple, you are doing a great job at disappointing your base. Keep up the good work.

BTW will you ever fix the bugs in your current applications or do we just have to live with them too?

 

[ApfelKuchen]

"You can migrate your Aperture library to Photos for OS X, including your photos, adjustments, albums, and keywords."

It was my understanding that most adjustments would be lost. Curves for example don't exist in photos, so how could they be retained?

No, the adjustment data is not lost (or ignored) - any adjustments you made will still exist and will be applied to those images (just as adjustments you make in iPhoto will be reflected in Aperture, and vice versa, even though the tools are different in each). Edit data in iPhoto, Aperture, and Photos are all stored in the same format.

Adjustments are not stored as if they were settings on knobs that would be useless if there were no equivalent knobs - it's numeric data that can be applied to an image (specific additions/subtractions to the numeric values of the pixels).

There's not (yet) a Curves tool in Photos, but the Levels adjustment (which is similar in intent to Curves) is an interesting cross between iPhoto's and Aperture's versions - more sophisticated than iPhoto, less so than Aperture.

I'm an optimist, without a doubt. The fact remains that, regardless of what adjustments exist at the moment, there is absolutely nothing to prevent tools from being added or enhanced, other than Apple's will to do so. The technology is all there under the hood. The difference between an optimist and a pessimist on these matters has to do with what we believe Apple will or won't do in the future.

 

[Four oF NINE]

I don't think it would make sense to purchase Aperture at this point, since it won't continue to be supported going forward. One can only hope for a pro version of Photos at some point.

Or at least an enhanced version of what they have now.

 

[guzhogi]

I will not store my originals on the cloud, not even for backup. Originals stay on my personal backup system, that I control and verify. No outages or lost data for me, thank you, nor pictures going on a site for whatever reason. When I drop something on the cloud, it's essentially publishing it, however limited its reach is intended to be.

I'm a little mixed on whether to backup to the cloud. I'm concerned about privacy, plus I don't particularly want to pay hundreds of dollars a year for that.

One way to backup that someone told me was instead of getting a big SD (or whatever card you use) card and use it for everything, get a bunch of smaller SD. Use one card per event. Once done, label the card, keep that it in a case, and just keep it a safe deposit box, desk drawer, or something. That way, if you lose your originals, bam! You have them.

 

[newagemac]

The difference is that people working professionally, or in a professional manner, often have specific file system locations for certain kinds of images and other data. Aperture supported that.

Apple now wants users to go with amateur-hour, quicky, iPad friendly dump all photos everywhere. While that really is better for the iPhone selfie crowd it does not necessarily work for serious photographers. Hence real pro apps like Photoshop and Lightroom.

Anyone who still believes that Apple supports creative pros probably believes all the things they read on the various Mac fan sites including MacRumors.

Have you even used Photos? You can leave your files in whatever location you want. The option is in the settings. Any "professional" wouldn't just go with whatever defaults are there that make it easy for people to be productive. You have the ability to force yourself to have to manage your files and their locations just like in Aperture and Lightroom. All it takes is a simple click on a checkbox in settings.

 

[thomamon]

I do like that the originals are stored on your hard drive instantly with Photos when you take them with your iPhone. I actaully really like photos to manage my iPhone photos.

However, I think I will have to test out Lightroom again for my DSLR photos. I am so disapointed in Apples choice not to continue with Aperture.

 

[Sasparilla]

Then I don't need to order that 4TB HDD?

You don't....you need to order the 6TB HDD.

If you're moving TB amounts of photos or bigger, using the cloud to synch them all to - IMHO, seems problematic problematic at best...and while not firmly using it on their customers (at this point) Comcast measures your usage in terms of 250GB a month (if memory serves) for example.

 

[Glassed Silver]

Apple should just give it away for free before they give it the axe.

Must. Not. Destroy. The Premium Image!

Glassed Silver:mac

 

[space1nvaders]

No, the adjustment data is not lost (or ignored) - any adjustments you made will still exist and will be applied to those images (just as adjustments you make in iPhoto will be reflected in Aperture, and vice versa, even though the tools are different in each). Edit data in iPhoto, Aperture, and Photos are all stored in the same format.

This is not really true after migrating. Any changes made in Aperture are not updated in Photos IF you store your photos outside of the Aperture Library.aplibrary (which is how I do it). Plus, they rename the Aperture Libarary with (migrated) in the name and give you a blank Aperture Library after migrating. You can switch back by picking the migrated library and it will rename it back to normal. This makes no sense to me.

There is no way to store photos outside of the Photos Library.photoslibrary

 

[AppleInLVX]

Then I don't need to order that 4TB HDD?

Well, I *did* say 'eventually'....

 

[mabhatter]

Probably won't work in 10.11 which is... argh... just a few months away.

I'm holding out for 10.10.10 or the X.X.X release... We've had "X" all these years, don't fail us now!!

 

[cocky jeremy]

Maybe Apple is making a big deal because you're gonna pull a Final Cut Pro X and reveal Aperture X which has been fully rewritten is the best photo management/editing software this side of the galaxy jk I'm crying.

Do yourself a favor and get LR. It's better anyway.

 

[mabhatter]

I do like that the originals are stored on your hard drive instantly with Photos when you take them with your iPhone. I actaully really like photos to manage my iPhone photos.

However, I think I will have to test out Lightroom again for my DSLR photos. I am so disapointed in Apples choice not to continue with Aperture.

I would guess they are rewriting the Apps from scratch for IOS which is why they're dropping features like the bass (fish). Then they port that code back to Mac because OSX is a Superset of IOS features.

 

[AppleInLVX]

First of all, I don't know what you mean by "kayboshed" because I never heard of that word but as far as "Professionals", some people here need to stop pretending that there's nothing else out there but Apple's software. ANY REAL PROFESSIONAL will get the Mac software that THEY NEED to get work done. Apple's software is not the only game in town.

I never said there wasn't anything else. Obviously, there are other options. However, this was the only Apple-native one that had all the features that we've grown used to which we are going to lose because Apple didn't wait for parity with its new cloud-based solution.

 

[Glideslope]

Photos Sucks.

Thanks for the screw job Apple. Guess you just could not make that 39% margin, eh?

Pathetic electronic Toy Maker.

 

[oneMadRssn]

I wish OS X Server came with an "iCloud Photos" service. It has a webmail and calendar very similar to iCloud already. I love the idea of having all my photos live in the cloud, but I want to own, control, and take responsibility for that cloud.