A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Aperture's Future



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old August 14th 16, 07:18 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
David Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,146
Default Aperture's Future

On 14/08/2016 18:08, Savageduck wrote:
[]
I was very happy with an even earlier version of OSX, OS X 10.6, which
might have been considered as Apple's XP, and like XP it had reached its
end of life and was no longer supported. So when updates to software
such as PS and Lightroom were no longer developed for the defunct OS's
updating OS and software was a no-brainer for me. Now my 2010 iMac is
running quite happily on OS X 10.11.6, "El Capitan", and will be able to
run macOS 10.12 "Sierra".

[]

Whilst your 2010 Apple will run the next OSX, a 2011 iPad will not the
next iOS. Quite an early obsolescence for an expensive device. My 2009
and 2011 portables are both quite happily running Windows-10 latest release.

I might actually have bought a newer iPad last year, but the increase in
cost wasn't justified by the increase in function. I had hoped for a
better camera, but that was only on the top of the range iPhone. Since
then, the camera on the Moto G3 phone has proved to be very capable, and
actually better in quality than my iPad camera, and a lot more
convenient to use. So there will have to be a reason other than a
better camera to upgrade.

I'm finding less and less reason to take the iPad on a day trip, as I
can do almost everything - perhaps even everything - on the Moto G3
phone (including some programs which aren't available for the iPad).

Thanks for your other comments.

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
  #32  
Old August 14th 16, 08:16 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Aperture's Future

In article , David Taylor
wrote:

I was very happy with an even earlier version of OSX, OS X 10.6, which
might have been considered as Apple's XP, and like XP it had reached its
end of life and was no longer supported. So when updates to software
such as PS and Lightroom were no longer developed for the defunct OS's
updating OS and software was a no-brainer for me. Now my 2010 iMac is
running quite happily on OS X 10.11.6, "El Capitan", and will be able to
run macOS 10.12 "Sierra".

[]

Whilst your 2010 Apple will run the next OSX, a 2011 iPad will not the
next iOS.


so what? one's a desktop system and the other is a mobile system, with
different use cases.

Quite an early obsolescence for an expensive device.


ipads are anything *but* expensive, starting at $269.

My 2009
and 2011 portables are both quite happily running Windows-10 latest release.


so what? those aren't mobile devices. compare like with like. android
to ios or mac to windows. a 2009 mac runs the latest macos just fine,
as does a 2007 era mac.

a 2011 android device won't run anything close to the latest release of
anrdroid. it likely shipped with gingerbread (or honeycomb if it was a
tablet) and probably stops at ice cream sandwich.

that means no jellybean, kitkat, lollipop, marshmellow or nougat.

quite a few android devices from 2014, just 2 years ago, don't get
updates to the latest version, and prior to that, you can pretty much
forget it.

*3* year old android devices, sometimes 2 years old, orphaned.

not only that, but motorola has announced they won't be offering
monthly security updates for the moto g4, and that's a *current*
device!!

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/...that-it-will-n
ot-commit-to-monthly-security-patches/
Motorola has clarified the update situation of the Moto Z and Moto
G4, calling Android's monthly security updates "difficult" and
deciding not to*commit to them.

put simply, apple fully supports ios devices for about 5 years, versus
1-2 for android.

I might actually have bought a newer iPad last year, but the increase in
cost wasn't justified by the increase in function. I had hoped for a
better camera, but that was only on the top of the range iPhone.


nonsense.

the current ipad pro has the same 12 megapixel camera as the iphone 6s,
along with a *much* better display (wide gamut).

Since
then, the camera on the Moto G3 phone has proved to be very capable, and
actually better in quality than my iPad camera, and a lot more
convenient to use. So there will have to be a reason other than a
better camera to upgrade.


it might be convenient, but that's about it.

I'm finding less and less reason to take the iPad on a day trip, as I
can do almost everything - perhaps even everything - on the Moto G3
phone (including some programs which aren't available for the iPad).


then you're not using the ipad to its potential.

there's a *****load* of stuff an ipad or iphone can do that a moto g3
can't.
  #33  
Old August 14th 16, 08:48 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Aperture's Future

On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 13:43:13 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote in :

(I'm still using Outlook Express 6, from 2001,
to write this. It works great! Much better than Microsoft's later email
products. The time when one could assume new updates were improvements
passed a long time ago.)


I'm using this on W10:

http://www.opera.com/computer/mail

--
teleportation kills
  #34  
Old August 14th 16, 08:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Aperture's Future

On 2016-08-14 17:43:13 +0000, "Mayayana" said:

"Savageduck" wrote

| To start with this thread has nothing to do with Windows, it has to do
| with George Kerby's failure to update a now defunct and unsupported
| application, Aperture, when he was given fair warning and the
| opportunity to do so. Had he done so, and had he followed all the
| information and warnings concerning the end of life of Aperture, there
| would have been little need for this thread, and his final updated
| edition would be running without issue on his currently updated OS X.
|

But he didn't do that. So your solution is
to scold him for not being an obedient
AppleSeed? Or to tell him that he should
buy yet more software he doesn't need, this
time from Adobe?


I am not scolding him, he can spend his $$$ any way he wants. However,
once having spent that cash he should have paid attention to the state
of the World with regard to updates and software maintenance, for what
for him were important systems. It's not as if this whole thing was a
surprise to any who were paying attention.
Even dpreview had this to say as far back as June 2014:
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5684134078/apple-to-cease-development-of-aperture

....and

they even reported on the fiasco that is "Photos", which is certainly
no Aperture replacement.
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5074008951/opinion-can-an-aperture-user-be-happy-with-apples-new-photos-software

The

answer for any serious Aperture user wanting to move on, is Lightroom 6/CC/

I'm surprised that v. 3.6 is
not still available. I would think his two
possible options would be to revert back
to the older MacOS or to find a copy of
v. 3.6. But no one has suggested either
approach. Maybe those are also things that
one can't do on a Mac? David Ritz did seem to
suggest updating Aperture, but it's not clear
from his links whether that's possible. Does
Apple just cut people off that way?

Frankly I don't see a problem with George
Kerby's logic. He had software that worked.
Newer versions brought in cloud integration
that he might not have wanted. Which gets
back to my original point:


Nope. One has a personal responsibility to ensure that your software is
functioning that means being aware of updates which can include bug
fixes. The idea is to keep software running optimally. That is an area
where Adobe is doing a very good job with updates, upgrades, and bug
fixes with its Creative Cloud, and mobile offerings.

There's simply no
excuse for Apple not supporting their product
without people having to submit to every new
update of everything.


Apple gave the World fair warning that Aperture was not going to
supported or developed for use with OS X 10.10. Where Apple failed, or
deceived Apple users was by implying the Aperture/iPhoto replacement,
"Photos" was going to be the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Needless to say, for any serious photographer that was/is a false claim.

(I'm still using Outlook Express 6, from 2001,
to write this. It works great!


....er, no it doesn't! you should see what everybody else has to deal
with when it comes to your post, complet with bad attributions.

Much better than Microsoft's later email products. The time when
one could assume new updates were improvements
passed a long time ago.)



--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #35  
Old August 14th 16, 09:01 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Aperture's Future

In article [email protected],
Savageduck wrote:


Apple gave the World fair warning that Aperture was not going to
supported or developed for use with OS X 10.10.


apple said it was guaranteed to work with 10.10, but after that, no
promises.

despite that, it still works in 10.11 and 10.12.

Where Apple failed, or
deceived Apple users was by implying the Aperture/iPhoto replacement,
"Photos" was going to be the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Needless to say, for any serious photographer that was/is a false claim.


photos was never intended for serious photographers. it's a consumer
app that is bundled for free with every mac and quite a bit better than
the old and aging iphoto.
  #36  
Old August 14th 16, 09:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Aperture's Future

On 2016-08-14 18:18:10 +0000, David Taylor
said:

On 14/08/2016 18:08, Savageduck wrote:
[]
I was very happy with an even earlier version of OSX, OS X 10.6, which
might have been considered as Apple's XP, and like XP it had reached its
end of life and was no longer supported. So when updates to software
such as PS and Lightroom were no longer developed for the defunct OS's
updating OS and software was a no-brainer for me. Now my 2010 iMac is
running quite happily on OS X 10.11.6, "El Capitan", and will be able to
run macOS 10.12 "Sierra".

[]

Whilst your 2010 Apple will run the next OSX, a 2011 iPad will not the
next iOS. Quite an early obsolescence for an expensive device. My
2009 and 2011 portables are both quite happily running Windows-10
latest release.

I might actually have bought a newer iPad last year, but the increase
in cost wasn't justified by the increase in function. I had hoped for
a better camera, but that was only on the top of the range iPhone.
Since then, the camera on the Moto G3 phone has proved to be very
capable, and actually better in quality than my iPad camera, and a lot
more convenient to use. So there will have to be a reason other than a
better camera to upgrade.


I didn't buy my iPad for its camera, and when I eventually buy a new
iPad, it will not be for its camera. If I want to upgrade my camera I
will buy a new camera, not an iPad. As for the camera in my iPhone, I
have always considered that a camera of last resort when I have nothing
else available. Now that I have upgraded my old iPhone 5S to an iPhone
6S+ I am pleasantly surprised with the quality of image I can get with
it, but it remains a secondary photography tool for me. Though I have
friends who use it as their only camera.

I'm finding less and less reason to take the iPad on a day trip, as I
can do almost everything - perhaps even everything - on the Moto G3
phone (including some programs which aren't available for the iPad).


I suppose those programs would be custom stuff related to your
particular interest in satellites?

Thanks for your other comments.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #37  
Old August 14th 16, 09:35 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Aperture's Future

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:


That's an interesting issue. You're talking
about what might be called "forward compatibility",
which is not the same problem as backward
compatibility that George Kerby is dealing with.


To start with this thread has nothing to do with Windows, it has to do
with George Kerby's failure to update a now defunct and unsupported
application, Aperture, when he was given fair warning and the
opportunity to do so.


Where would the "fair warning" appear?


direct email to users and public statements, both of which were widely
reported by tech news sites and photo news sites, along with adobe
announcing a migration tool to lightroom, also widely reported, as well
as being extensively discussed on various forums, including usenet,
dpreview, etc.
  #38  
Old August 14th 16, 09:56 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Aperture's Future

On 2016-08-14 20:16:06 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Sun, 14 Aug 2016 10:17:09 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-08-14 15:39:46 +0000, "Mayayana" said:



That's an interesting issue. You're talking
about what might be called "forward compatibility",
which is not the same problem as backward
compatibility that George Kerby is dealing with.


To start with this thread has nothing to do with Windows, it has to do
with George Kerby's failure to update a now defunct and unsupported
application, Aperture, when he was given fair warning and the
opportunity to do so.


Where would the "fair warning" appear?


Not where would it appear, where it did appear, starting with this very
NG and the issues Jonas had with his move from Aperture to Lightroom
over a year ago.
Then multiple photography sites, computing sites, including Apple
itself, and Apple/Mac centric News Groups such as comp.sys.mac.system
and comp.sys.mac.apps, and George has participated in those NGs as have
others you might know such as Davoud and our very own nospam.

The woeful news was to be found in dpreview, and many more.
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5684134078/apple-to-cease-development-of-aperture
http://www.graphics.com/article/macphun-positions-creative-kit-2016-aperture-replacement-apple-photo-users
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/08/04/adobe-publishes-how-to-guide-for-migrating-from-apples-aperture-to-lightroom
http://www.macworld.com/article/2953720/software-photography/capture-one-pro-8-3-review-aperture-replacement-light-on-library-features-strong-on-editing-tools.html
http://www.graphics.com/article/macphun-positions-creative-kit-2016-aperture-replacement-apple-photo-users

Had

he done so, and had he followed all the
information and warnings concerning the end of life of Aperture, there
would have been little need for this thread, and his final updated
edition would be running without issue on his currently updated OS X.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #39  
Old August 14th 16, 11:27 PM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,rec.photo.digital
Fred McKenzie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 214
Default Aperture's Future

In article ,
Lewis wrote:

There have been several updates to Aperture and it runs perfectly well
under 10.11 (and 10.12). Maybe you didn't get them because you refused
to update your system? The most recent update, I believe, was in late
2013.

Yep. Just launched Aperture under 10.12b5. Works fine.


Lewis-

My problem was that Aperture appeared to launch, but its menus never
developed. I could not even check to see which version I had.

I thought my Aperture was up-to-date, but it stopped working correctly
with 10.11. Based on your comments, I did some digging at Apple. One
of the items told me that I could hold down both Option and Command keys
when starting Aperture, and get a menu for rebuilding three items.

When I "rebuilt" the first item, Aperture started working correctly. It
turns out I have version 3.6, so the problem may have occurred when
converting iPhoto to the Photos App. I went back and rebuilt the other
two items just to be sure. All seems to be working again.

For those who do not have version 3.6, I hope it is possible to download
an update that can be installed without having to boot under an older
system. I found the "rebuild" option before finding the update.

Fred
  #40  
Old August 14th 16, 11:30 PM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,rec.photo.digital
Davoud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 639
Default Aperture's Future

George Kerby:
After updating my MacPro OS to the latest, I found that my professional
photo software, Aperture 3.4.5 that I purchased on disc for over $225 was
now USELESS and FUBAR.


Apple tends to write code to disable an app just because...


Since we have three testimonials confirming that Aperture 3.6 runs
under the latest El Capitan (from David Ritz, RJH, and me), your
assertion doesn't hold up.

Unfortunate that, after all these years, Mr. Kerby is just now learning
about keeping software up to date.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is this the future? J. Clarke Digital Photography 9 November 14th 08 05:03 PM
In-camera aperture vs. In-lens apertu What's the difference? LooksLikeRain Digital SLR Cameras 22 May 10th 07 05:52 AM
Aperture future in question as Apple axes bulk of team l e o Digital Photography 41 May 10th 06 06:03 AM
The GUI of the future. cjcampbell Digital Photography 2 March 27th 06 10:35 PM
The future of APS Offshoreman APS Photographic Equipment 20 December 18th 03 03:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.