Sure, you can try to disregard this by writing it off as a “serious” consumer rather than a superficial teenybopper, but my wallet is much fatter and should be of interest to any retailer who’s interested in actually making money.One of the biggest problems right now is what to do with all our photos.
…and what that means is that the next time I drop $5K for computer hardware to support my photography, it is more likely going to be for a Windows PC tower with Lightroom, rather than another Mac Pro.
True, customer interests change, but it is really more that they evolve, and the days of Apple consumers really being actual content *creators* is a capability which is being abandoned by Apple. Case in point: how large is your iPhoto/Photo directory size?įourth, suggesting that the “serious” stuff should go to Lightroom for processing and printing also means that you’re giving up a part of Apple’s ecosystem, such as printing of cards & books…plus we had the effective death of iWeb a few years ago which was wonderfully integrated, but is now a lost capability. For example, the history of iPhoto included issues such as how early versions (IIRC, around v5?) would drag & crawl once users started to have 20,000 images…but these were also the days where a huge hard drive was 2GB – – times change and our demands have grown … not shrinked.
Third, “Works fine for me” is lame also when it provides no context for how much (or little) you’re using the software tool. Second, needing to manually toggle something that should be a “screen saver” level background task is lame.
I simply have far too much invested in iPhoto to consider Photo to be a low risk transition … and if I’m going to go through the effort, I’m also obligated considering just moving the whole thing over to Adobe Lightroom and onto a Windows PC, since Apple also did away with the tower Mac Pro (mine currently has ~13TB of storage internal), as the image-centric small business / prosumer customer base is being abandoned by Apple.įirst, I shouldn’t have to go pay my ISP for a higher tier of service because of a supposedly “improved” piece of software which is sucking up much more bandwidth at inopportune times. Insofar as performance (& iCloud “chatty”), the simple answer for me is that I’ve not yet risked transitioning off of iPhoto yet – – which also means I’ve not updated to OS X 10.10 because of this. IMO, someone needs to write what I’ve seen for MS-Office … an “Old Menus to Ribbon Interface” translation guide (the one I saw was GUI based … very good) – – and what such a guide also needs to do is to be honest and disclose “No Equivalent Feature” so that people really understand what’s now missing. Overall, the article appears to be almost apologetic in trying to suggest that the rollout of Photos wasn’t a disaster (shades of Final Cut X all over again) and that all of these parity-to-legacy-iPhotos stuff had been there all along. Next, hopefully, Apple will take iTunes out back and shoot it, too. MacDailyNews Take: Overall, Photos is a marked improvement over iPhoto and lays a solid foundation for much more to come! (Now, if only someone would come tag each one of our 15+ years of digital photos!) Clicking the down-facing arrow icon, however, exposes individual controls.”Ĭarlson reports, “That’s just the beginning… Photos for OS X turns out to be a much more capable photo editor than it first appears, which is a good place to start moving forward.” “Dragging a slider makes the image brighter or darker (Light), or more or less saturated (Color) you can also click the Auto button that appears when the mouse pointer moves over the tool. “For example, when you edit a photo and click the Adjust button, you’re presented with sliders for improving light and color,” Carlson reports. “But is that it? Even though it’s a 1.0 product (replacing iPhoto and Aperture), a lot of editing power is actually hidden beneath that user-friendly surface.”
“Photos for OS X is designed to appeal to a broad audience, with simple editing tools that let anyone improve their photographs,” Jeff Carlson reports for Macworld.