I have no idea about hamsters on the lawn but I figured I had to give a random answer for the poll haters
I really like Aperture and there were a lot of things I like about it over LR. When I got my Fuji XE1 I made the switch because it did not have RAW support and after a few months of messing with DNG conversions I reluctantly made the switch.
I still use Aperture. It still works fine for me but I know I will have to switch sometime in the near future.
Interesting. So for those moving to Windows does the lack of a pro app like Aperture help drive the move? I use OSX primarily for development and it is simply the superior choice because of the UNIX heritage, but for prosumer apps there are other considerations.
The Mac platform, even without Aperture, has a fine range of pro level apps aimed at the prosumer and professional market. Both the leading apps in the same sector as Aperture, Lightroom and Capture 1 are available, as are Photoshop and lower cost image editors such as Pixelmatr and Affinity Photo. People seem to believe that a Windows machine will be both cheaper and faster and somehow less restrictive. I personally don't think that assertion holds up... but then again I am biased K
Lightroom Mac vs PC Speed Test | $4k iMac vs $4k Custom PC Performance Test This really illustrates why I don't want to use Lightroom. It is not so much that it is optimized for Windows but the import/preview times are ridiculous. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
For me there is no comparable solution on the market. I do like the aperture rendering more. The rating system works well for me. The speed is great: Apple should do something to make the transition seamless...
And if anyone has any thoughts that Adobe is not optimizing for Windows, the import times are absurd. The Windows machine has a Samsung 1TB 850 Evo 2.5" SATA III SSD. The Mac machine has a PCIe SSD. The PCIe SSD is at least twice as fast as an SATA SSD. So in all reality the Mac should be faster than the PC in getting them off disk (I am making the assumption they are loading them to disk first of course, but this should apply to all disk intensive operations).
Also most Windows PCs don't have thunderbolt which is the best way to get PCIe performance out of external PCIe blade arrays. For me the bottom line is Lightroom is slow and worse it is slower on Mac - for no good reason. @kevinparis, your assertion is absolutely correct and wrong in this case unfortunately.
So I was doing a bit more research and it appears that Lightroom is not I/O bound, so disk performance it pretty much irrelevant. There was a data point from one review that stated that LR takes about "1.3 hours to import 1,000 files". This alone makes LR a total non-starter for me. 1000 files is a low event day for me. 3K to 5K is more likely.
I had to give up aperture, which I really liked, when I bought a new 27" iMac last year. So I've been using Apple Photo since I found LR and others to be too work-intensive/too much trouble as far as I was concerned. I have to say that Photo does pretty well and though I miss Aperture, Photo works for what I need. I don't do a lot of "serious correcting" in pics, if it's a bad pic I delete it; it will still be a bad pic after processing... I have to say that I dragged out the old computer with Aperture on it and loaded my Safari pics on both the new and old. Frankly, there was no difference that I could see in the output doing the same sort of processing on both. IOW, although I liked Aperture vey much, for what I do, Photo did the same thing just as well. Obviously, if you are doing heavy duty processing like "photoshopping" images, then Photo (or Aperture) does not have anywhere close to that sort of capability.
Exactly where I am. I liked iPhoto, but also had Aperature. Updating software meant I lost both, and converting to Photos was an unhappy reality for me. I purchased Lightroom and tried to learn and like the program, however I was less than enthusiastic about it, and the process of importing a large amount of images while retaining the names/separations/catalogs I'd created over the years was less than perfect (did it a few times). I've now accepted and use Photos, and like you it's mostly about a storage system, and little editing.
If you already had iPhoto on your computer, upgrading to El Capitan and getting Photos didn't mean you had to stop using iPhoto. I am still using iPhoto myself. Years ago had every intention to buy Aperture and kept putting it off. Then word started that Aperture was no longer being supported and was going to be replaced. I then thought about Lightroom and again kept putting it off. So I would have used Aperture if it kept going but not I am sticking with iPhoto. Whenever I get around to updating this computer and get Photos I will move to that. I do have Photos on another secondary computer but only played with it a tiny bit. This, my main computer, remains at Maverick OS level for the time being. It ain't broke, so I am in no hurry to change.
My husband and I have been using Aperture for years. He switched to Photos back when it came out. I have yet to switch. He has had a learning curve but has discovered Photos does much of what Aperture does - it just does it differently. I will probably switch soon - when I have time to clean things up before the migration. But I will probably miss Aperture. I like how easy it is to move and rename folders and projects, and generally re-organize if you want. I also like using keywords - I assign general keywords when I import the photos. I also like being able to rate the photos and then show only the 5-star photos. On a side note, I can't imagine ever switching from my Mac!
Giving an answer to this, involves a trip down memory lane ... My first 'serious' machine was an Atari ST, which I bought in 1986 and then in 1992 I went on an IT course where I was trained on the original Apple Mac's. In the meantime, someone had brought out the Spectre and Magic Sac which meant you could run Mac software on an Atari .... Being impoverished, I went down that route for a while, until I bought a PC running Win 3.1. The main advantage of the Macs has been the DTP and graphics apps which were far better than on a PC ... (TrueType fonts offering scalability, warping and rotation, plus some very innovative graphics apps too. ) but the main reason I went for the PC was because of JASC's Paintshop Pro which was just as good, a shareware product and I found it functionally a darn sight more user-friendly than Photoshop. I still use a PC, though I do really like the Apple's products, but not [in the early days] their devious pricing structure where they'd sell their machines here by just changing the $ sign to a £ - anyone here remember that little scam of theirs? I've remained a MS man because I'm not 'tied' to one manufacturer, and stayed with PSP, because I think Adobe's alternatives are over-priced and hyped and also nowadays, some are subscription only, plus I also use Capture 1 Pro. As for current Apple users, from what I've heard, Serif's Affinity Photo is a darn good package, offering more than Aperture, plus they are also going to be releasing a PC version soon; I currently use PagePlus X9 DTP and used their software for decades, which I've found to be bullet-proof, so I'm betting Affinity will be just as well developed.
