Apple Searching for Retail Employees to Test Upcoming Photos App for OS X

[Atomic Wasp]

I really hope the new Photos app will not make duplicates of photos - iPhoto takes up so much disk space.

 

[casperes1996]

At first I was like:

At first I was annoyed with this move, as I like iPhoto and Aperture, but then I thought that maybe it was the right business move, to consolidate with the Photos paradigm on iOS... But wait... iOS also has an iPhoto app...

 

[irishv]

And in the end, I don't see a reason why it should not be possible to have a complex album hierarchy in Photos while maintaining compatibility with the iOS photos app.

I agree it should certainly be possible. At the same time, Apple has made a point to say that you will be able to search photos by date, location, and name. Nothing else. I'm certain that it will come at some point, but not holding my breath for version 1.0. The editing capabilities and iCloud integration look fantastic to me, just hope that the organization will be there too. Of course Aperture still works great, so I'll be holding on until we actually see more from Apple.

 

[Glassed Silver]

When last I looked, Aperture was sold for EUR 63,- on the AppStore - which is roughly EUR 236,- LESS than the boxed version of Aperture 1.0. 63 bucks hardly qualifies as "software of that price" hence there is not much to research and nobody is a fool for buying such a software for that price.

Is it unethical to still be selling Aperture since it's been officially EOLed? Not if they put a big label on it in the AppStore that clearly says: "END OF LIFE". At least then people know that they are buying a dead product. After all, software is NOT like a car and sooner or later it will cease to function properly when you keep on updating your operating system. (Backwards compatibility has NEVER been Apple's strong suit.)

Does Apple warn customers that Aperture has been EOLed? No. So this is a problem and people will feel screwed once they learn that they bought a dead horse. Unless, of course, there will be a clearly defined and properly communicated upgrade path from Aperture to its successor -- where the successor needs to be at least as powerful and feature rich as Aperture, otherwise this would be just a downgrade and then it would again be unethical to promote that product as a successor.

For a long time I thought of Aperture as --THE-- killer application for OS X; it's features and work flow perfectly suited my way of doing things. Seeing it gone just hurts and I doubt that Apple even have the slightest clue of what they are doing here.

Couldn't have said it better.
Those are exactly the things that go through my head thinking about this situation and Apple's incapability to do some proper communication towards customers who put good money down for their hardware and software, rightfully expecting a good experience and some calculability.

Glassed Silver:mac

 

[bluespark]

Why not search for a few photography professionals to test the app and provide feedback as well. No offense to the enthusiasts that may work at Apple retail stores.

No one has ever claimed this app will be targeted toward professional photographers. And while this article said that Photos will "replace" Aperture, that is incorrect. This is a new app that will permit migration from Aperture, but is not intended to replace it.

----------

Well iPhoto is a database and library manager. You're not supposed to look for your photos using the finder. You're supposed to look for them using iPhoto or Aperture. The new Photos app is supposed to have some built in smart searches to make searching through your photos a whole lot easier.

Exactly. If iPhoto is managing your photos, you *never* need to look for them in the Finder -- not for any purpose.

----------

It's highly unethical for Apple to continue selling Aperture in the App Store.

Why? It's a working product (a great one, in my view) that comes with a guarantee that it will be upgraded to work with the next OS upgrade. That's more than most apps offer.

 

[danielsutton]

Although professional photographers may know more about the subject area, that doesn't necessarily make them better beta testers. Successful beta testing is as dependent on the user's ability to methodically put an application through its paces, documenting bugs and the steps that produce them, as anything else. In many cases, it's advantageous to recruit less sophisticated users who may be more likely to push the envelope and find bugs, even if inadvertently.

So, if Apple were going to do a limited public beta, as they are with Yosemite, I think they should look for a broad spectrum, ranging from digital photo novices to people with extensive experience.

I agree that Apple should cover a broad spectrum in its beta hiring practices. However, a bug involving a complex visual effect may get by a novice who does not understand complex effects. But I do agree, a broad spectrum should be covered, but should definitely include professional photographers.

 

[charlituna]

Please get it right, Apple.

Define "right"

Because they could get it right but you will hate it because it doesn't fit your definition.

 

[Morod]

Define "right"

Because they could get it right but you will hate it because it doesn't fit your definition.

"It just works".
Not "It works, just…".