Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2016 · Consensus on Lightroom options?

  
 
butchM
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Consensus on Lightroom options?


Jeff Donald wrote:
I worked for Apple until late 2008. Apple was working on a professional photo application as early 2002, probably earlier. Apple rarely divulges any development plans or products. Thus, the public first learned of the existence Aperture when it was publicly released in late 2005.


Yes, but the initial conception and work on Shadowland began in 1999. Which is why I stated the two offerings were under development and consideration concurrently ... which is the case based upon historical fact.

Adobe quickly released a public beta of Lightroom in January to try to stop Apple from gaining any momentum in an area Adobe believed belonged to them. They had to buy key technology and developers (rawshooter) to try to match Apple's application.

Yes, but even Adobe could not produce an app even the caliber of the initial public beta in less than 40 days ... the time span between the the release of Aperture v1.0 and the Lightroom public beta. Apple has also had a very long history of 'buying key technology and developers' to match competitor offerings ... some very likely were utilized in the development of Aperture.

While Aperture was indeed the first v1 offering to break out of the starting gates ... it had it's own share of issues and limitations that held back adoption by many pros at that time. What the public beta offered was invaluable user/customer support to buy a product they personally offered input that influenced greatly on the finished product.

Adobe didn't release version 1.0 until January 2007, over a year after Apple released Aperture. It should be noted that Lightroom was the first application they'd ever released a beta version of and it was only available for Apple OS X.

True, but you are overlooking the fact that the Windows version was included in the public beta by July 2006. And the important fact that the public beta, while unprecedented, offers direct input and feature development based upon actual user feedback before any users had to actually monetarily invest in the product. Lightroom would likely have never reached the same level of usage and user support had Adobe not used the public beta offering. It has only been of late, when Adobe has not offered public betas for new versions, that they have encountered serious user blowback over the direction of development of Lightroom.

My gut feeling is Shadowland would never have been released if Apple hadn't released Aperture. It was during a time when the relationship between Apple and Adobe was fraying around the edges over Flash and other security and performance issues.

But those 'gut feeling' are an entirely moot point as Adobe and Lightroom not only won the battle they drove Apple completely off the field in the realm of developing professional still image software solutions. Feelings are not facts, purely subjective speculation.

Yes, Apple won the initial sprint from the starting line ... but Adobe certainly overwhelmed the competition by dominating the marathon portion of the race.

Sadly for we end users, Apple chose to abandon us which further allowed Adobe to tighten it's hold on the market.

As much as many of us would prefer to recall otherwise, all this reflecting on who came first and what came second based upon speculation is useless as Apple chose to pursue other avenues and cease further development of Aperture.



May 20, 2016 at 11:58 AM
rodmcwha
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Consensus on Lightroom options?


exdeejjjaaaa wrote:
you miss a point = this non released yet software does not have DAM component... so it is not LR replacements by any means... at least based on their FAQ = https://www.on1.com/apps/photo-raw/faq/ or https://www.on1.com/news/announcing-the-first-new-raw-processor-in-years-on1-photo-raw/ where they specifically boast about "no import, no catalog" approach... image/raw browser is not DAM.


I think you are missing the point-he asked for no import complications. I hate lightroom's dam and I suspect so does the OP.



May 20, 2016 at 12:43 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.