iPhoto ’11 sucks.

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by mcic1984, Oct 22, 2010.

  1. mcic1984 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2002
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    :mad:

    Yes, it’s a rant, but it really, really does suck. Hear me out.

    Yesterday, I upgraded to iPhoto ‘11. After half an hour installing the iLife ’11 suite, I launched iPhoto, which spent the best part of the next hour “upgrading” the library to the iPhoto ’11 format. And once it was done, it spent another 10 minutes in a peculiar, frozen state before returning control to me.

    But, lets start off with the positives – there are a number of good things about iPhoto ‘11. The new interface is pretty, Apple simplified iPhoto by replacing the mish-mash of interfaces in previous versions with a series of activity panes – Info, Edit, Create, Add To, Share; and gorgeous full-screen views that make full-screen actually useful. My favourite has to be the new Info pane – geotagging photos or adding faces can now easily be accessed via the info pane. Unfortunately, that’s about it...

    First of all, iPhoto ’11 is incredibly slow. Okay, the performance of Places and Faces is better than iPhoto ’09 – though clicking on a location or face still sends iPhoto into another spinning beach ball frenzy, with no escape; but the thought of waiting ages and ages just to watch a slideshow, make a card, or make a book simply means that it isn’t something I’d do very often.

    And yes, I am running iPhoto on a pokey 2006-era Core Duo MacBook Pro, with just 2 GB of RAM; and yes, I do have some 55,000 photos (37 GB) in the Photo Library. But that’s no excuse for the poor performance of iPhoto – if iTunes can successfully manage 15 days (40 GB) of music plus another 13 GB of films (and then some) without grinding to a complete halt, why can’t iPhoto?

    With iPhoto ’09, Apple modified iPhoto so that what you saw in iPhoto no longer matched the underlying folder structure. For example, if you renamed an event from say, “Summer Holidays” to “Summer Fun”, it would still be called “Summer Holidays” when you looked at the underlying folder structure in Finder. With iPhoto ’11, Apple has gone one step further – photos imported won’t even retain their original folder name, and instead, Apple would file these folders inside by the date and time that it was imported. So, if you imported your “Summer Holidays” folder on the 22nd of October 2010, your Summer Holidays photos will show up in ~/Pictures/iPhoto Library/Masters/2010/10/22/20101022-195210/ –– it hardly makes sense!

    Of course, some argue that end users would never see this – and allow iPhoto to do whatever it wants – but that’s missing the point: It’s all right and well when iPhoto works correctly, but when the database becomes corrupted, users will lose data. And I’m speaking from experience here – with the upgrade from iPhoto ’09 to iPhoto ’11, the import was completed successfully, but I nevertheless lost around 20 “smart albums” nestled in folders created in iPhoto ’09 with no error messages whatsoever. I had to recreate them from scratch.

    Again, a comparison with iTunes can be made. In iTunes, if a user selected “Keep iTunes Media folder organised”, iTunes would ensure that any song will be stored in ~/Music/iTunes Media/Music/Artist/Album/Song.m4a – and if you renamed the artist name, the underlying folder structure would be modified accordingly. Why can’t iPhoto do the same?

    It’s one thing to make things simple for end users – but another thing totally to make things “appear” simple to end users, but is a convoluted mess in the background. And that’s what iPhoto has become.

    I really want to like iPhoto – I’m still using iPhoto mainly because of the integration with iOS – I like how Faces and Places on iPhoto show up on my iPhone, and no competitors come close to this. And, iPhoto remains better than the competitors: Windows Live Photo Gallery under Windows 7 is probably a close second, but the latest (2011) version can’t read my networked library in VMWare Fusion; while Picasa looks more and more dated, despite the addition of features like Places and Faces. However, unless Apple sorts out iPhoto by making it MUCH faster, and ideally, a sensible underlying folder structure (a complete re-write for iPhoto ’12, anyone?), I find it hard to recommend iPhoto.

    (I’m really enjoying iMovie ’11 and GarageBand ’11, and would recommend them as an upgrade…)
     
  2. Sky Blue Guest

    Sky Blue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    #2
    Yes, iPhoto is incredibly slow, and I'm on a 2.66 i7 MBP! It take a good 30 seconds to launch and is very slow scrolling and moving between sections.

    Adding a new place and geotagging is incredibly fiddley and time consuming.

    I do like full screen though.

    It was about 6 weeks until we got a X.0.1 release last time, I hope it's not as long this time.
     
  3. i3igsmooth5769 macrumors 6502a

    i3igsmooth5769

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #3
    too bad...was kinda looking forward to it...guess they'll update it eventually right
     
  4. sigamy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2003
    Location:
    NJ USA
    #4
    While I won't excuse general slowness of iPhoto, I can't believe we are still having this point posted here. What exactly does iTunes have to do with those 15 days of music and films? Load ID3 data?

    iPhoto is loading thumbnails of all your images. A similar comparison would be to highlight all your songs in iTunes and have it play a 30 second clip from each song at the same time.
     
  5. alectheking macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    #5
    Iphoto 11 for me launches in 1 bounce on my iMac base model i3
     
  6. belltree macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    #6
    Give this post "The madness of iPhoto '11 (a personal rant)" a read, I was very thankful I held back on buying iLife '11. One glaring item is that iPhoto '11 does not allow you to send photos in emails without using their HTML templates. Ick. Give it a read.
     
  7. jwt macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    #7
    Yep, Apple is an iGadget company now. I stopped using version x.0 software since iPhoto '08 because in my experience it's been alpha-ware. I don't even trust their OS updates now-a-days since 10.5.7.
     
  8. 3282868 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #8
    Sadly I have to agree. Ever since the iPhone, Apple has slowly de-evolved into "Apple, Inc, the iOS company". Those in the know understand Jobs' philosophy with keeping the Apple "team" small and thus hiring universally adept employees from department to department instead of hiring more individuals, however it seems they need to hire more people to focus on the MAC side of development. OS 10.7 seems to be heading into iOS territory with the "Mac App Store", and now this awful 32-bit "update" that has crashed my new 6-core Mac Pro, my parents' iMac and countless others I personally know. It seems rushed, half baked and cheesy in appearance. I miss the days when Apple made computers and quality software.
     
  9. darknyt macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #9
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears they actually REMOVED fullscreen viewing options from iPhoto '11 . . .

    You can no longer view a photo in fullscreen - you have permanent bars at the top and bottom . . .

    I was playing with it in Best Buy to confirm.

    What kind of morons tout fullscreen and then take it away from the ONE THING it's most useful for.

    Idiots.
     
  10. me_94501 macrumors 65816

    me_94501

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    #10
    Oh look--you can't make calendars in iPHoto 11 as of right now:
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4258?viewlocale=en_US

    What the heck?

    I feel that iPhoto 11 actually takes a step back interface-wise. For the longest time I felt that Apple struck a good balance between visual effects and usability, but with iPhoto 11 it seems Apple went too effects-heavy. The book template chooser is a good example. It looks great, but it can be tedious to use.
     
  11. me_94501 macrumors 65816

    me_94501

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    #11
    I'll reserve judgement until we see more, of course, but if 10.7 shapes up the way it looks it will, it might be the first OS X upgrade I skip.
     
  12. QuarterSwede macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #12
    If iPhoto '11 is anything like iPhotos that came before the slowness can be remedied by not sharing photos over the network. Once I changed that setting it loaded in no time and was usable off the bat.
     
  13. someone28624 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Location:
    Buffalo
    #13
    I became an Apple convert back in mid-2007. I loved everything about my Macbook back then. OS X Tiger was beautifully done. iLife '07 worked well. I paid a premium for hardware, and I got top notch hardware that was all I could have wanted.

    I upgraded to Leopard, and then Snow Leopard. I upgraded to iLife '08, the iLife '09. I was thrilled with all of those upgrades.

    I loved my Mac and got several people to convert to Macs.

    Now, this past year, Apple really seems to be slipping, releasing upgrades that are alpha-like, not staying on top of the hardware game, and overall losing direction with the Mac line up.

    It's sad, because I don't really see another company that directly competes with Apple.
     
  14. rorschach macrumors 68020

    rorschach

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2003
    #14
    -Option to switch to edit mode when double clicking a photo is gone. Now requires that you double click the photo, then click Edit.
    -Option to edit photos in an external editor is gone.
    -Option to align photos to a grid is gone.

    Emailing has been crippled:
    -Option to email photos in another mail client of your choosing is gone.
    -Can't send more than 10 photos with the built-in email feature. (No, really.)
    -You HAVE to use one of the templates. No option to just have a plain message with the photos attached.
    -You cannot use any font you want to. Only certain fonts are shown in the menu that pops up. (And no, if you bring up the standard font panel, choosing another font has no effect.)
     
  15. QuarterSwede macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #15
    Honestly, most of those things can still be accomplished by dragging the photos to the app you want (email, external photo editor). For some reason they just made it harder.
     
  16. norwaypianoman macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    #16
    Wow. Are you joking ? Is this true ? This is the only thing I find useful in iPhoto. Now they took away FULL SCREEN VIEWING ?

    Can others confirm this ?

    I am waiting out for iphoto 11, when i see it. I will decide if I do the ultimate switch to Picasa.
     
  17. rorschach macrumors 68020

    rorschach

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2003
    #17
    Yes. You can get rid of the info/editing sidebar, but the top bar (with the navigation controls) and the bottom bar (with the thumbnail bar and a few other buttons) do not autohide.
     
  18. QuarterSwede macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #18
    That's moronic. Why take that out Apple?
     
  19. Frosties macrumors 6502a

    Frosties

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    Sweden
    #19
    Apple - please at least use auto hide

    Even more moronic in light of the auto hide scroll bars that Apple implementing from the iPad user interfaced also.
     
  20. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #20
    I'd be interested if this is the case for most. On my 2008 MP it launches almost instantly. Now, my library is 19 GB and I am launching from an SSD. I also have 16 GB of ram. /shrug

    Those specs should not be required to use iPhoto without any real headache. I do hope that while I am not experiencing what others are, that iPhoto doesn't run like Aperture did for me on my PB G4.
     
  21. QuarterSwede macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #21
    Ugh, that's a good point. *shakes head*
     
  22. jayducharme macrumors 68030

    jayducharme

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    The thick of it
    #22
    I'm confused as to what many people are complaining about. iPhoto '11 installed without a hitch on my Mac Mini. It took less than a minute to update my library. The program opens instantly and responds smoothly for me. And the interface is almost identical to the previous version, at least the way I use it. I have it set up like iTunes, with the list of photo albums on the left pane and the pictures from that album occupying most of the window on the right. I can click the picture and bring it to full-screen, just like I used to. :confused:
     
  23. QuarterSwede macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #23
    In iPhoto 09 when in full screen both the bottom editing bar and top thumbnail bar would autohide. From what I understand, apparently neither will autohide in iPhoto '11.
     
  24. dangerfish macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    #24
    I just installed iLife on my core i7 iMac. It upgraded my 38Gb iPhoto database in under 5 minutes. 4 years is gettin old for a computer and your 37Gb's is a lot of data. I dont think your hour long upgrade was necessarily unreasonable.
     
  25. netnothing macrumors 68040

    netnothing

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    NH
    #25

    Agree the built in mail feature sucks....but dragging directly from iPhoto onto the Mail icon in the dock works just as it did in iPhoto '09. It will even create a new message for you. You can then select Small, Med, Large, Actual size of the attached images.

    This also works by dragging directly to the Entourage 2008 icon, it attaches the images.

    -Kevin
     

Share This Page