Wurzle: I would try Phase one capture one for a very good alternative to adobes criminal way of making money.
Wurzle: "Phase one let you upgrade without charging the earth"
Lightroom upgrades are around $79 last time I checked. That is less than some people pay for mere plug-ins.
GiovanniB: Capture One is the natural successor to Aperture IMO. However, because I use a certain LR PlugIn, I've switched to LR about a year ago. However, the UI of LR is horrible all the way. Thus I'm considering moving to C1 even if this needs more manual work and maybe adding MediaPro.
I was a user of Media Pro for years and years. Finally got fed up with its limitations that never got fixed as the program got passed from iView to Microsoft to Phase One (who still haven't improved it), so I moved on to Lightroom where I am much, much happier.
KingOfAtlantis: Photos is a viewer not an editor lol. I don't care about filters :P
There are both basic and more detailed editing tools in it that you can use while ignoring all of the filters. But, that would require reading the article.
Edymagno: Did they fix Mail constantly crashing? if not, They can SIUTA!
I keep Mail up constantly, and I haven't seen it crash much on Yosemite or Mavericks. Better check your system...
straylightrun: What the? What a sellout.
Uh...I'm not clear on which moral principle are they supposed to be supporting by not selling a company that makes money purely based on today's software being too complex to learn out of the box?
RichRMA: Anyone know what the lifespan is for an SSD drive used for continued back-up of files?
@Impulses - Yes, the theoretical max of USB 3 is around 625 megabytes per second but most real world reports seem to be pointing to typical throughput of under 200 megabytes per second for USB 3. That is less than half what my SATA SSD is capable of. I did find a couple reports of 400+ megabytes, but it's clear those are in the minority and you need to pick the right controller to have that happen.
dpfan32: It still like iPhoto wants to import your photos in a different library to double the photos space on your hard drive! Ridiculous in the times of very small sized SSDs in recent MacBooks :-(It behaves like an external app instead of leaving the photos where I put them in folders and know where they are.
And 2.nd: it's all about selling expensive cloud storage for beaming your photos on all devices possible ... No thanx!! I'm using Picasa which takes my folders and displays them as created by myself.
@gesture - If you use Lightroom the right way you can tell it to leave your photos in the folders where they are, and just keep track of them. There is no requirement to dump everything into a common library. There is a database, but photos are not stored inside it.
Peter K Burian: This is supposed to compete with Lightroom????
I use a Windows PC but many of my friends loved APERTURE .... Does Apple believe there's no demand for **advanced** photo editing software??? .......... More likely, they realized that they cannot compete with Adobe. ... Lightroom 5.6 for Mac is available now http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5822
No idea when Lighroom 6 will be available but it should be fabulous http://photorumors.com/2015/02/27/adobe-lightroom-6-hdr-merge-video-leaked-online/
No, Photos was never supposed to compete with Lightroom. Where did you read Apple ever claim that Photos was supposed to compete with Lightroom?
Apple showed their hand months ago when they made a video promoting the Retina 5K iMac used by a photographer. What application do you think Apple used back then? Aperture or iPhoto? No, they were killing them. Photos? Nope. Apple's own Retina 5K iMac video demos the Mac using Lightroom clearly on the screen.http://www.apple.com/imac-with-retina/design/
That was a sign they were telling everyone they no longer had anything to compete with Lightroom.
munro harrap: Can such a drive be used to store movies from a camera through HDMI or USB3 ?
For HD and especially 4K video recording, nobody is using "hard drives" anymore. They are too slow. SSDs are required and USB 3 is too slow...which is one reason this is expensive.
Are you sure, or is my math is off? I thought USB 3 topped out around 110 megabytes per second from published tests. My internal SSD, connected via SATA, clocks in at 400-500 megabytes per second.
And I did check to make sure both numbers were megabytes, not megabits.
2-lane PCIe-based SSDs appear to go up to the 700 MB/sec range, and the new 4-lane PCIe solid state storage in the latest Mac laptops are in the 1300 MB/sec range.
It's not just because it's an SSD, it's because it's an SSD with a Thunderbolt interface. Both are already expensive, you put them together and you have $$$$.
If you are OK with 1TB in a spinning drive with USB 3, you only pay about $70.
If you are OK with a 1TB SSD in a USB 3 enclosure, you will; pay about $600. But USB 3 is too slow to transfer at more than 15-20% of the full throughput of an SSD.
But if you want and SSD *and* Thunderbolt, then you pay for this thing. Now you have an interface that can transfer at the full speed of the SSD.
I think part of the problem is that it's hard to find a 2.5" external enclosure that has Thunderbolt. If you could then you could get a 1TB SSD for $400 and put it in the Thunderbolt enclosure.
The lifespan for an SSD used for backups is far longer than if it was used for a boot drive, where files are constantly being cached and flushed all day long.
And even in that latter scenario, today's SSDs are projected to last longer than most users will need the drive to last before they upgrade anyway.
newe: iOS only?? Come on...this will doom the product..not that it has much of a future anyway. Android is used everywhere by more people. Price is ridiculous anyway...priced like an Apple.
The data in no way indicates how intelligent the users are. All it says is that Android users spend less. It does not say why, so there is no judgment possible, unless someone has an agenda to overlay on the data.
America spends much more on its military than other countries. That does not in any way mean America is the biggest fool on the planet.
The reason a lot of apps are iOS only is because raw market share is not useful to most app developers. Photo app developers in particular are going to note the market share of iOS within photography itself, which is probably much higher than in the general population.
Even if you were going with the market in general, and even if you discount fragmentation and how god awfully long it takes for a significant percentage of Android devices to get to the same up to date version of the OS, an app developer with any business sense at all is going to go iOS first on the money numbers alone.
"Google Android users in total are spending around half as much on apps on more than twice the user base, and hence app ARPU on Android is roughly a quarter of iOS. This is not surprising - it is entirely in line with innumerable reports from developers and publishers." - Ben Evans
I'm not sure which would be cheaper: Buying this camera and then crashing it into a parking lot thanks to my awesome piloting skills, or heating my home for the winter by burning dollar bills in the fireplace...
ChowMonkey: Have fun transferring 32 GB per wifi :)
Might not be too bad if it can transfer after every exposure. You're not going to shoot 32GB in 5 minutes.
dialstatic: This is my general impression of weather forecasts: only marginally better than guessing.
In any case, beautiful images - a sight I would dearly love to behold with my own eyes (and through my own camera) one day.
Weather forecasters are an easy target for bashing by the uninformed, especially when the forecast deviates significantly from what actually happens.
But if you were to compare the accuracy of today's forecasting to that of 20 to 100 years ago, you'd see a fantastic level of improvement. The amount of weather data available and beng processed is staggering. That's why the Dark Sky app on my phone can tell me that rain is 15 minutes away, and be right about it.
Sure, they predicted a huge snowstorm for NYC that didn't materialize as predicted. But all the critics miss the bigger point: At the same time, Boston got the storm it was supposed to get, and if it were 50-100 years ago, Boston might not have known it was coming and would not have had time to prepare.
"Marginally better than guessing" ? Not likely.
Vegetable Police: Let's make everything wireless! It might even be safe for humans. We're not sure yet, but it could be. There's a small chance that you will not develop any health conditions being exposed to wireless signals all day long, and we like those odds.
While we have more wireless devices than ever, it is not all at the same high power, and for low-power devices you have to take into account the Inverse Square Law, which every photographer must understand if you are to make the best use of a flash.
When you take power and distance into account, you're probably not really exposing yourself to that much more radiation than 10-30 years ago.
You probably still run much higher risks with your life by driving your car out into the street.
chlamchowder: Looks like they're on Windows 7, with quad core CPUs (or 2-core CPUs with hyper-threading). And it looks like their CAD software is only loading two threads.
Also, standing desks...
Wow... I'll just leave the previous post up as Exhibit A. :)
Papi61, I never said "most." I did say "widely" and that can be defended to a point.
Listen, let's just say you're right and you win, OK? Because reading through this thread, which person is right is not what stands out the most. What stands out the most is how hard you want to work to make sure Macs are put in their place. It isn't clear why you feel so threatened by platform that is supposed to be insignificant. If you want to argue with the NASA guy I quoted, that's fine. I'm fine with the claims that you made.