the UI is the same but much of the architecture is new. Their release cycle seems to be new features release -> updated core -> updated features. The Snow leopard revisions seem to be the most stable and less hassle.
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.
Apple Notifying Customers Using Older Pro Apps About Incompatibilities With macOS High Sierra
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm happy to update to the latest version of Logic but I'm still using Soundtrack Pro. I assume it will probably stop working with HS?
I'll have to look at what alternatives are available, that may be enough to keep me from going to HS for a while. Which unfortunately means at some point I'll have to choose between STP and being able to get the latest Logic update.
I'll have to look at what alternatives are available, that may be enough to keep me from going to HS for a while. Which unfortunately means at some point I'll have to choose between STP and being able to get the latest Logic update.
You must not do any OS updates because Aperture has been disabled since after Yosemite if I'm not mistaken. It won't work at all.
The problem that I have with Apple is not that they don't support older versions.
It's that they just disable them so you can no longer use them anymore, often for no reason.
It's like Ford taking away your car keys for a car you bought after so many miles.
I have used Aperture since version 2 and all of the versions since without any major issues with OS upgrades. I recently wiped my system and reloaded with macOS Sierra, and Aperture 3.6 installed directly from the App Store without issue. The only problems I have seen are some of the animations when invoking plugins are a bit jerky. I have also been running Aperture with HS beta with few issues.
Frankly, I have more than 25,000 images in my library, and I found that Lightroom was incredibly slow and totally failed to accomplish anything that I could not do with Aperture and several plugins (NIK, etc.). Currently, I continue to use Aperture for image management, basic adjustments, export and printing. (My library resides on an external RAID array with Aperture managing the files as "referenced".) I've been using Luminar's plug in for more "up to date" adjustments, and am finding that this workflow works very well. I also use NIK and ON1 plugins occasionally as well.
Should Apple choose to disable Aperture in a future macOS release, I would just not upgrade. At least until someone comes up with a end-to-end, integrated system as good as Aperture.
Ken
Not surprised if Aperture comepletely cut out, but honestly it is one of the most awful decisions Apple has ever made and totally dishonors perhaps it's most loyal followers. Killing Aperture is ridiculous! It is one of Apples best programs ever and I argue the best in the photo organizing industry beating Lightroom and Capture One in organizational ability easily and equaling them in redering. It is simply amazing to me Apple is happy to spend billions on a ridiculous ultra inefficient and uber luxurious space ship campus and yet kill simple upgrade development on a program it's fan base is built upon: pro graphic arts users. The cost to keep Aputure alive compared to Tim Cooks jet setting is miniscule. Aperture to date has not been equaled and its demise has caused many die hard Apple users to question their loyalty. At the very least sell the program off and let someone else run with it but for Apple to just abandon it and call Photos a replacement is plain stupid and embarrassing. Happy to release a mega iMac ( although years late) this Christmas yet what to put on it? For still photographers we now must go elsewhere and in that case why bother at all?
Now Apple forces us to upgrade and abandon or be locked in a cave on an old system. I call it extremely poor decision making and laziness by Apple top brass . Boo Hiss Timmy and clan!
Now Apple forces us to upgrade and abandon or be locked in a cave on an old system. I call it extremely poor decision making and laziness by Apple top brass . Boo Hiss Timmy and clan!
Not trolling at all, promise – but what's so great about Aperture? I used it and actually found Photos to be more user-friendly and had most, if not all, of the options that Aperture offered. I'm kind of not understanding what exactly it is people are waxing nostalgia about Aperture.
Disclaimer: my photos are mostly iPhone photos of family/scenic places I go to, and friends. However, I do keep a firm grasp on organization and editing. Photos work just fine for me, for my purposes.
Disclaimer: my photos are mostly iPhone photos of family/scenic places I go to, and friends. However, I do keep a firm grasp on organization and editing. Photos work just fine for me, for my purposes.
I make no assumption except that people whine a lot.
I work in Technical Consultancy for an IT company.
No company does latest upgrade without fear and I do not presume that latest software is the best - on the contrary - latest SW is full of issues in general.
Safe gameplay is to use 1 or 2 version behind the latest.
On the other hand you make the assumption that the oldest software is SAFE.
There is a reason for outdated SW - most of it is the reason of deprecated and obsolete technologies.
Food for the whiners....
Well older hardware may be subject to depreciation and difficulty to service as parts become rare, but on software I am struggling to see what you said as globally applied (if this is what you are inferring). An older gen software suite, especially those in the pre-internet era, is quite self-contained and isn't suddenly unsafe just because time goes by.
As a consultant I am sure you understand pretty much every case out there is an edge case and no norm is a real norm, so I am not sure why you seem so convinced that the whiners are here to whine, instead of actually making a point based on reality.
You are right, though for sure , there will be a lot more bugs than the current last version . I'd never upgrade to a major patch, until it has been patched, developers are racing to meet a deadline.....
You are mistaken, actually. It runs fine on El Capitan (which I'm still on).
Additionally, Derrick Story reports that Aperture appears to run on 10.13 High Sierra.
I was an Aperture user as well until recently. User friendly or not, Apple Photos is a joke (even in High Sierra, Apple must be really high lol) so now I finally completely switched to Lightroom.
Apple just doesn't seem to care anymore about pro software nowadays. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple stopped supporting Final Cut and Logic Pro as well at some point in the future.
Apple just doesn't seem to care anymore about pro software nowadays. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple stopped supporting Final Cut and Logic Pro as well at some point in the future.
Apple treats its Pro customers like DIRT and that's why many have already switched to Winblows out of disgust.
When I bought my 1st Mac Pro, I had Final Cut Pro, Compression, Motion, and Logic Pro installed with Mavericks.
All incompatible with Yosemite update. They all still work if I boot Mavericks. But Apple forced Pro customers to pay a "Yosemite price" and re-pay for all the apps. This kind of stuff leads to people leaving the platform.
To run legacy pro apps on OS X Yosemite, OS X El Capitan or macOS Sierra, all you need to do is to apply Pro Application Update 2010-02 and Logic Pro 9.1.8 Update:
https://support.apple.com/kb/dl949?locale=en_US
https://support.apple.com/kb/dl1601?locale=en_US
[doublepost=1503638841][/doublepost]
This is not right.
Once you update to Aperture 3.6, Aperture continues to be compatible even in macOS High Sierra.
It is ALWAYS a good time to mourn Aperture's slow death.
Still rocking it myself. I'd switch but the alternatives don't get it right and even if LR was an option, I cannot trust Adobe anymore.
Glassed Silver:ios
It would be and I would embrace it fully, but I don't think we'll ever see it. Perhaps Photos will gain some organizational features like AP, but I doubt it
I actually keep meaning to make an appt at the local Apple store so they can show me all the features of Photos because maybe there's something missing. I have a bad feeling I understand that it truly is trimmed down.I've been looking at CaptureOne. Not cheap, but seems to be a great alternative.
It's too bad b/c I really like AP. Still using it. On Yosemite and it's still fine. I'm also behind on organizing my photos into AP (they're all backed up mind you).
I absolutely loving being able to create smart lists based on the keywords I've added. Very powerful feature!
Cheers,
Brian
Funny how this has turned into an Aperture thread, and whether it still works in High Sierra. Personally I used Aperture and loved it; I waited patiently for Apple to pull some major update, or a totally revised version like Final Cut X, but it never came. Even after they announced it's demise, I used it for a long time, trying to switch to Lightroom exclusively, I think version 5 was out, but after a month I'd had enough, I didn't enjoy using it the way I did Aperture. I always had Aperture do auto-adjustments on import as a starting point and to get an overview, but Lightroom for some reason was really bad at auto-adjustments for my type of photos, where Aperture was excellent. Metadata management was, and is, a real strength in Aperture, I found it cumbersome in Lightroom.
Then I heard of Capture One, which I trialled while still using Aperture. It feels natural as an Aperture user and produces great results. But it has come from a different direction than Aperture and Lightroom, it was originally designed around Sessions and tethered studio shoots, being made as the accompanying software for high-end medium format cameras. So catalogs are a relatively new feature, and metadata management isn't a strength.
Since then, I've transitioned, maintaining the old library in Aperture, which when I have time I gradually go through all the old albums and write metadata to the originals, a few albums at a time, close Aperture, and fire up HoudahGeo to write geotagging info from Aperture into the raw files (the only app I know of to read Aperture's database and write geotagging to the files). Unfortunately Aperture doesn't write geotagging to the files along with all the other metadata, except when you export them, so I have to go this time-consuming route. HoudahGeo uses Exiftool, so it is completely reliable, I have used it occasionally in the terminal as well to set camera info for manual lenses. Once this process is complete, which will be some time as I need spare time, I will also export all selects as JPEG so I have a final with all metadata as well as a reference if I need to reprocess in Capture One at a later time.
Now I import with Photo Mechanic, which also uses Exiftool to write to the originals, which has comprehensive metadata management with variables that can be used to automatically sort your files on disk, like [image year]/{image month}-{image day} {project name}/Image{number} [year-mm-dd].cr2 along with solid file renaming. It is very quick and efficient. Only then do I open Capture One to import the folder of images in place. This way I'm playing to their strengths, and don't have to waste time on Capture One's anaemic metadata tagging, and the original Raws are not tied to any one program, since they have the metadata safely stored in them, which can be read by any Raw editor, including Photoshop. Lesson learned form Aperture's demise. I still have Photoshop and use it regularly, but I'm not in the least tempted to use Lightroom again.
Edit: For those of you who likes the Apple Raw engine but are unhappy with editing in Photos, look into Raw Power in the App Store, it is by some of the former Aperture team who left to form their own company. It works as a Photos extension as well as a standalone app, and seeks to leverage the Apple raw engine with similar tools as what Aperture had, with refinements, utilising all the power under the hood which is still there but hidden in Photos. Currently no DAM, just the Raw editing.
Then I heard of Capture One, which I trialled while still using Aperture. It feels natural as an Aperture user and produces great results. But it has come from a different direction than Aperture and Lightroom, it was originally designed around Sessions and tethered studio shoots, being made as the accompanying software for high-end medium format cameras. So catalogs are a relatively new feature, and metadata management isn't a strength.
Since then, I've transitioned, maintaining the old library in Aperture, which when I have time I gradually go through all the old albums and write metadata to the originals, a few albums at a time, close Aperture, and fire up HoudahGeo to write geotagging info from Aperture into the raw files (the only app I know of to read Aperture's database and write geotagging to the files). Unfortunately Aperture doesn't write geotagging to the files along with all the other metadata, except when you export them, so I have to go this time-consuming route. HoudahGeo uses Exiftool, so it is completely reliable, I have used it occasionally in the terminal as well to set camera info for manual lenses. Once this process is complete, which will be some time as I need spare time, I will also export all selects as JPEG so I have a final with all metadata as well as a reference if I need to reprocess in Capture One at a later time.
Now I import with Photo Mechanic, which also uses Exiftool to write to the originals, which has comprehensive metadata management with variables that can be used to automatically sort your files on disk, like [image year]/{image month}-{image day} {project name}/Image{number} [year-mm-dd].cr2 along with solid file renaming. It is very quick and efficient. Only then do I open Capture One to import the folder of images in place. This way I'm playing to their strengths, and don't have to waste time on Capture One's anaemic metadata tagging, and the original Raws are not tied to any one program, since they have the metadata safely stored in them, which can be read by any Raw editor, including Photoshop. Lesson learned form Aperture's demise. I still have Photoshop and use it regularly, but I'm not in the least tempted to use Lightroom again.
Edit: For those of you who likes the Apple Raw engine but are unhappy with editing in Photos, look into Raw Power in the App Store, it is by some of the former Aperture team who left to form their own company. It works as a Photos extension as well as a standalone app, and seeks to leverage the Apple raw engine with similar tools as what Aperture had, with refinements, utilising all the power under the hood which is still there but hidden in Photos. Currently no DAM, just the Raw editing.
Last edited:
A longtime (since v1) Aperture user, I tried Photos. Really really wanted to have it fit, but it just could not. The nondestructive editing options of Aperture, brushes, keywording, and of course plugin support, all kept me from staying with Photos. I went to Lightroom about this time last year, and while it is nowhere near as nice as Aperture (and downright clunky far too often), it is a much better fit than Photos was. I finally converted the last of my Aperture libraries a few weeks back and retired the Aperture install for good.
Hoping Macphun's rumored catalog management app comes along soon and gives me something to consider moving away from Lightroom.
Can someone explain what is the point of not supporting 32 bit apps ? Is apple going to remove all 32 bit libraries? Why not keep 32 bit compatibility ?
In point of fact, we do. In fact, we we're trying my to upgrade a tool and found the driving computer was running a special version of DOS 3.2. DOS! And this is a high tech tool in a FAB make by computer chips!
Qualifying a new tool costs a lot, and that is even if they give it to you for free (and trust me, they aren't free).
In professional use, you stick with what works. That is why business uses do not upgrade Willy nilly: what if that patch breaks custom in house software.
That said, this is a decent move by Apple. Upgrade software or don't go to High Sierra.
Totally agree!
I forgot to specify that my customers never upgrade to the latest and greatest. It's very rare when that happens and if it does - it's always on test machines/environments.
There is no coin spent on upgrades unless there's a reason behind.
However, companies do not risk either running legacy SW/HW and wake up one day production is off because of that.
You described perfectly how the process goes with the example.
All I was saying is that many non professionals complain about support for legacy to be extended far beyond reason.
If you are a business, sooner or later you will invest in upgrades wether you like it or not and businesses accept that cost.
Plus, if there would always be legacy devices and SW - companies will not grow... everybody has targets...
Cheers.
The only thing that Aperture was good for back in the day was just importing wirelessly via photo stream, which they had in Photos right away. That's still the easiest for getting my iPhone pics to my iMac. Honestly the rest of that program wasn't up to par and bled user base heavily to LR. Yes I did use both and still use LR and it's features were never even close to it. I tend to think it had SO many features combined with Apertures lack of them at the time, that it separated the herd very quickly with only a reluctant few hanging on. Apple could have made a great competitor but let's face it, they have bigger dollars to make elsewhere.
The next best thing as someone has mentioned is C1 and they are world's behind in feature set in my opinion. Their raw processing is very comparable though. Their strongest asset is tethered shooting which LR has made decent ground but not quite as good. If these two made a love child it would be the best imho, as I use these two daily.
The trip down memory lane for Aperture has been fun though!
The next best thing as someone has mentioned is C1 and they are world's behind in feature set in my opinion. Their raw processing is very comparable though. Their strongest asset is tethered shooting which LR has made decent ground but not quite as good. If these two made a love child it would be the best imho, as I use these two daily.
The trip down memory lane for Aperture has been fun though!
My Copy of final cut studio required registration and a serial so they have my name, email addy, and who I work for.
If it works why replace it and if I replace it what are the second and third echelon effects? I work in print and sort video I don't need a supercomputer to do those things and my printers and ink and the like are expensive.
Who knows why they're pulling the 32bit libs OSX is so fat now that it can't be for space and its not like they're called if not used.
Unless there is a security vulnerability, older apps should just work on new releases of the OS.
Why not?
There are several reasons:
- private APIs are removed; Apple apps sometimes and continue to use APIs that ordinary developers aren't supposed to use
- Apple doesn't want to test older apps to assure they still work properly with new OS releases
- older apps sometimes have workarounds to deal with older OS defects. Apps would require further investigation to get them working properly with the new OS.
In other words, conservation of developer and testing resources.
It's really a shame that the OS couldn't retain older functionality these apps require. Unless the changes are due to fixing security vulnerabilities.
Why not?
There are several reasons:
- private APIs are removed; Apple apps sometimes and continue to use APIs that ordinary developers aren't supposed to use
- Apple doesn't want to test older apps to assure they still work properly with new OS releases
- older apps sometimes have workarounds to deal with older OS defects. Apps would require further investigation to get them working properly with the new OS.
In other words, conservation of developer and testing resources.
It's really a shame that the OS couldn't retain older functionality these apps require. Unless the changes are due to fixing security vulnerabilities.
