I tweeted Scott after reading his post to tell him I hope he’s wrong and this was his reply:

@iDebbi I’m not hopeful. Apple is becoming a mobile company and not as interested in computers or pro software

This is worrisome to me considering he was my first A3 teacher/guru before finding this site and Joseph. I def don’t want to leave Aperture, but I don’t want it to stagnate either. Keeping my fingers crossed for an update soon!

I like Scott, but lets be realistic here. He switched to LightRoom in a similar fashion just before Aperture 3 was released. And he threatened to switch to Windows due to his dissatisfaction with OS X 10.7. Quote “If I didn’t have so much money (we’re talking hundreds of thousands of dollars) tied up in Mac software and hardware, I’d consider the switch to Windows because of this.”
He’s a tad bid dramatic to say the least.

http://photofocus.com/2011/10/27/my-mini-review-on-mac-osx-lion-version-…

Who is Scott Bourne and does it matter what he thinks? Sounds like a bit of a drama queen whoever he is.

I may know more than him and I may feel more confident about Ap4.

According to DPReview today:

“Adobe has launched final versions of Photoshop Lightroom v4.1 and Adobe Camera Raw v7.1 that include support for the Fujifilm X-Pro1. Both versions include the advanced defringing tools introduced in the Release Candidate versions they replace as well as promising to address ‘performance issues.’ Both versions include support for the Fujifilm X-Pro1 non-Bayer color filter array. They can be downloaded from the Adobe website now. Adobe Camera Raw 7.1 works with Photoshop CS6.”

Now, I love the X-Pro 1 and I would very much like to see RAW processing in Aperture. Soon.

Also, I recently acquired Capture One Pro and I have to say that I think it does a better job with my Nikon files than Aperture does. Aperture is more familiar so is faster for me and also has the Nik plugins, all of which I have. CO has the better end result though and I will be using that for my ‘special’ files from now on.

I have to second the “who is Scott Bourne and why would I care what he does” view. Seriously - why is what he does at all relevant to what anyone else does? Are people so incapable of reasoned decision making nowadays?

Of course … timing is everything … I saw this morning that Lr 4.1 was officially released overnight … but that still doesn’t change the fact that Lr is not at all perfect compared to other options … it definitely has it’s share of problems and shortcomings …

Just try to do more than retouch a dust spec, or simple blemish … don’t even think about fixing a stray hair in Lr … you’ll have to use Ps to save your sanity … though it’s a pretty effortless task in A3 …

I’m no expert on Bourne … but it seems to me if he was a “Big Mover and Shaker” in the Apple realm … wouldn’t he be included as a private beta tester? Very perplexing. He may be widely read and respected … but most often, throwing a tantrum and threatening to hold your breath until you get what you want rarely helps anyone …

Plus the fact, publicly traded companies are limited on what and when they can announce new products … since that five-letter dirty word “Apple” is involved … there are reasons why they may not want to divulge their plans … they have enough irons in the fire in our courts …

I’m just going to bide my time … and i may be a tad more relieved that we will see some movement on this matter sooner, rather than later …

“There is no outside beta on Aperture.”

Is that something new since v3 was released? … Chase Jarvis, Joe McNally and Bill Frakes … just to name three … were in the circle for A3 long before it was released …

Jarvis stated in his blog in Feb. 2010 … “I’m lucky enough to have been using it for several months now.” … if that’s not outside beta testing … (granted Apple may not have an official beta test group like other developers … but when those outside of the software engineers are using the app) … semantics aside, I don’t what you would call it other than outside beta testing …

Debbie thats great you got a reply! I tried a couple of times and he or his people didn’t respond. Butch! Im surprised that he or Derrick story aren’t Beta testers, that I know. Does any know of one….Guess thats the best kept secret in town.

Maybe Joseph or maybe Grant is and they are just being coy.

“IF” there are beta testers outside of Apple … they are very likely not allowed to share that information as they VERY likely are required to sign a Non Disclosure Agreement that specifies they are not allowed to publicly discuss there status as a tester before the software is released or any other privileged information … this is status quo for most developers, both large and small … the exception is of course when an app is released as a public beta … hence the pat answer … “those who have answers really don’t know … and those who really know, can’t say” …

Before Adobe released the public beta’s of both LR4 and PS CS6, there were many that were testing the pre-release version. All under a NDA (yeah…I can confirm the NDA part).

As Joseph noted to me, Scott is trying to make some noise and get Apple to at least say they’re working on the next version. Scott’s post has made the CNET Crave headlines, which is a good thing.

I’m running both LR4.1 and Aperture 3 side by side. LR4’s strength right low lies in the Develop module. It kicks Aperture 3’s butt all over the place. But…(and that’s one big butt), as William Beem noted, LR4’s (and v. 3, 2 and 1) organization and use of modules (vs. Aperture’s project based set-up) is a mess. I’m starting to realize why there are so many books written on how to use LR4 (along with Kelby Training’s seminar), vs. so few books and tutorials on Aperture 3. Guess which one is easier to use….

Also, one thing that really concerns me about LR4 is the book quality. I’ve seen a number of reports about Blurb’s inconsistant and sometimes poor book (binding/printing/etc.) quality.

Me…I’m gonna try and be patient and wait for some news from Apple.

Let’s not forget that the current version of iWork is even more past due for an update than Aperture. No one is saying that apple is abandoning productivity apps though. In fact John Gruber mentioned seeing a new version of Pages at the Mountain Lion event held for the press. The lack of an update for both Aperture and iWork is likely due to something involving the OS or the Mac AppStore . Maybe they were held back to be optimized for retina displays. 

I am like Charles by running both Aperture 3 and LR4.1. At the present time I am leaning more toward LR4.1 because of the Soft Proofing since I do all of my own printing. It would be nice if we would hear something from Apple about Aperture 4. At least they could state it is coming somewhere down the road. Just maybe some sort of announcement will be made during WWDC June 11-15.

Hi Robert,

Yes I am aware of the way Aperture does the soft proofing (onscreen proofing). However I just like the way LR4 now handles it. But I am just keeping my options open just in case. Both programs have pros and cons. It sure would make things easier if Apple would just make some sort of announcement about Aperture 4. Hopefully that will happen during WWDC June 11-15.

“Hopefully that will happen during WWDC June 11-15.” … that’s what a lot of folks are hoping …

Like I said earlier … companies like Apple are limited by law about what they can announce and when … hinting at something can cause an unintended stock buying or selling frenzy and create a false state of affairs which can get them in trouble with the SEC … especially if the software doesn’t show up on time, or is far less stellar than hoped … in this manner, quite often Adobe can be just as secretive, though they have been much more accepting of using a Public Beta of late to tip their hand … albeit for ulterior motives to test out features on as many possible configurations as they can …

“Like I said earlier … companies like Apple are limited by law about what they can announce and when … hinting at something can cause an unintended stock buying or selling frenzy and create a false state of affairs which can get them in trouble with the SEC”

This may be true, but I can’t see how that would stop companies issuing development roadmaps and so on, or making a general statement to the effect that yes, they will be continuing to develop such and such a product.

Many companies (albeit perhaps not traded in the USA) do issue general comments and roadmaps - for example, when the Fujifilm X-Pro 1 was released a full lens development roadmap was given at the same time.

I can’t see how a general comment from Apple along the lines of ‘We continue to work on Aperture” would send Apple’s stock in any direction at all.

The problem is that these are released as professional use tools, used by people who build businesses around them. If they were just consumer fun apps, it would not have so much effect because at the end of the day it wouldn’t really matter. It seems somehow ethically questionable to produce a product that clearly you know and intend many people will use for serious work and then just allow it to drift off into a state of undetermined future.

Totally agree re iWork btw - integrating that with iCloud to replace iDisk functionality would be up there on my list of wants for that.

Wow! Kai Krause. The man responsible for one of best UIs ever for an app … LP. :)

Grant: what Joseph said. !!!

Joseph,

seeing as we’re trading ‘blasts from the past’ … Remember this?

Same login/pass : apertureexpert

Grant

Any article that starts out with “I’ve had it with Apple. Ever since Steve passed, the company has seemed to be off course – not financially – but in regards to vision”, can pretty much be ignored. If I had a dime for every post I have read with a variation of that…

Be Patient for AP4. He gets paid to teach and demo lots of programs so he has a vested interest in moving to a larger market. If in June Apple announces they are shutting the doors on Aperture then fine move over to Lightroom. I seriously doubt that and think they will arise with a new program. Also the Processing mechanism does not make the photographer.

Scott is also an expert at drawing attention to himself.

He should switch right now. I don’t know why he’s waiting.

It leaves a bigger piece of the pie for AE!!

Both Thomas are right. He is well connected and may have something up is sleeve. What do I have up my sleeve…cynicism.

Well I have a feeling, that anyone making the move to Lr4 is in for a disappointing surprise … first off they are still on v4.1 RC 2 (yes, a Release Candidate … not an official v4.1 update), and there are still plenty of bugs and glitches … this after over 300,000 folks participated in the Lr4 Public Beta … the RC isn’t set to timeout until June 30 and there hasn’t been much in the way of addressing many of the issues …

While I do think Adobe has made some advancements in RAW image processing … and I love the noise reduction in the Develop module, tethering is a hit-and-miss venture especially using OS X 10.6.8 and Lion … the Slideshow module is an abomination compared to Aperture and the Blurb module … errr … I mean Book module is nearly as bad as it doesn’t offer any manner of customizing page sizes or creating custom templates … though it has been threatened it will … using an application outside of Lr …

So … the grass may always look greener on the other side of the fence … but once you mow it and pull the weeds … the bad, dead patches become more apparent …

If Apple hasn’t made any announcements for the next version of Aperture by the time they officially release OS X 10.8 … then I’ll move to the camp that is lamenting the death of a great app … though I am in hopes they are working hard to come up with something that will make users far more happy than they did with FCP X that may have left the gate too soon … I’m hoping they are looking at Lr4 and rolling up their sleeves to go one better than that …

They must be waiting for Mountain Lion surely? Changes to the OS they can leverage for A4 features?

Stuart said :

Yes I am aware of the way Aperture does the soft proofing (onscreen proofing). However I just like the way LR4 now handles it.

I also do all my own printing (z3100) and I’m curious what it is you prefer about Lr4’s approach?

(FWIW … I LOVE printing from Aperture via Books. It took me sometime to understand the layout positioning (Aperture allows for the gutter) but once I did, it is so cool to be able to create layout presets and just drag and drop in … or if you have 20 prints to do, just add pages … and press ‘go’. You can add Adjustments directly in the Book view, or make a version (Lr4 approach) and edit that. There is a bug when rotating images, but it doesn’t affect the output).

Grant

Hi Grant,

As of yet I have not done any book printing in either Aperture 3.2.4 or LR4.1. Now on the Soft Proofing if you check out this video by Julianne Kost: Soft Proofing in Lightroom 4 you may get a better understanding why I like soft proofing in LR4. By the way I print to an Epson 3880 and the Canon IPF5000 for my panoramas.

But as I keep saying I am keeping my options open and just waiting to see if and when there will be an Aperture 4 and what will be offered in the new version.

Hi Stuart,

I haven’t done any book printing from Aperture either.

However, the Books interface, by making custom book sizes, is absolutely terrific for handling printing to an LF printer (or any other for that matter).

I can see some appeal for the Lr4 approach to soft-proofing, but really all it is doing is to allow you to do manually, what ColorSync is doing for you automatically via profile conversion. It does give you more choice, by allowing you to decide whether to re-map via saturation or colour, but it might be better if they explained in the video what happens inside ColorSync, if you just click ‘print’ … in that all the out-of-gamut colours are already being re-mapped to fit the gamut of your target device, hopefully without banding and hence the appeal of 16bit printing.

Regarding the 2nd aspect of the Lr4 soft-proofing … it’s really a bit silly. Photographers are incredibly reluctant, when printing, to alter their habits and the apparent need to live in a darkroom. Anyone wanting to print from PS, Lr4, Aperture, or any other app, should surround their image with white (on-screen) to be able to judge it’s luminosity correctly. They should also be gauging onscreen white, in relation to their workplace’s ambient light. Placing a sheet of white paper on your desk and altering screen brightness of a white area (empty window) to match, is all you need to do. All Lr4 does, is force you to look at the image with a white surround and alter luminosity at the same time. In Aperture, I get this white surround in the Books view, but you can just set your Viewer Background colour to white or very pale grey if you want to have it generally available.

“Anyone wanting to print from PS, Lr4, Aperture, or any other app, should surround their image with white”

Lr4 does exactly that … though the user can choose to change the background color from the default white for soft proofing (can be adjusted from monitor white to black and shades of gray in between)

In my opinion, the Print module is one thing that Adobe did quite well for Lightroom … it is a dream to print one photo or hundreds with just a few clicks … custom print settings are easily saved and recalled later for similar jobs .. and the custom layouts/collages can also be saved as templates …

Not to mention, I have been very pleased with the output sharpening from Lr for both images I send to labs, or those I print myself. Albeit not as fine-tuned as you can do using other options for images that need that extra attention.

I have never experienced any loss in resolution or detail printing from Lr when it comes to “squeezing” the color data to fit the smaller gamut of my printers.

Like I said … the ease and accuracy of printing in Lr is one area where they did a great job … because I primarily print to only two different sources, soft proofing was never high on my list … so I don’t use it as much as I do in Ps when preparing files for CMYK offset printing or output devices I am not as familiar with …

Scott posted an update on PhotoFocus this morning - sharing his thoughts on the updates/refresh of the MBP line, and his decision to completely leave Aperture for Lightroom. He’s even indicated he might switch over to that “other” OS.

Disclaimer - this is my personal opinion only. I think his assessment of Apple’s direction (i.e. leaving “professional photography community”) is incorrect. I also think his assessment of FCPX (referring to it as a debacle) is also a bit overblown. His indicated decision to possibly switch to Windows - seriously?

Well … switching to Windows doesn’t say much for his aesthetic sensibilities, does it. If he’s ready to do that, then what the hell does he care about the more elegant workflow of Aperture compared to Lr? Anyway … who the hell is this guy?

gfsymon,

Just because someone has a different point of view to you doesn’t mean you have to go on the offensive. Scott stressed in his post that while the decision made sense to him, he wasn’t trying to influence others.

Perhaps you should focus less on the “aesthetic sensibilities” of your computer and operating system of choice and more on your photography. It is snobby attitudes like yours that give Mac users a bad name.

It’s okay Joseph. I’m a big boy.

I should know better than to ‘tease’ online without applying a big sticker saying ‘just teasing’. It gets lost in translation. My mistake. Apologies.

Really the point I’m making is that the opinion of someone mediatised (self mediatised … honestly I have no idea who this person is) is no more valid than the opinion of any other user. He may be correct and then again, he may be wrong. It’s just an opinion based on his emotion. What he clearly doesn’t understand, is that Apple almost never communicate about anything in advance. The iPhone was a rare exception. I’ve been using Macs since 1989 and have never ever known them say anything about future products or updates. It’s just an internal policy. They have eased on this slightly since the coming of the social media age … but not that much. So what that means is you have to just make the decisions that seem best to you and I guess that’s what this guy has done. Why he needs to make a big splash about it, I don’t really know, but I guess he makes money from doing so, or why would he bother?

As for aesthetics, they’re important to me. I wish they were important to more people, but that’s just the way it is. I would happily spend days angsting over tiny aspects of the Aperture UI or hardware if it was my job. It isn’t but I angst in the same way over my own work, so you’re suggestion that I’d better spend my time doing that is too late. I already do. Of course, I might be totally crap at it … but I try my best. You can see it here if you care to pass judgement. www.grantsymon.com

(Joseph … kept getting an error whilst trying to put the url in an html text wrap. It made the url an internal one.)

Grant

Hi Grant,

Sorry for sounding like a jerk on my last email, I must have been having a bad hair day.

Craig

I’ll throw my hat in the ring here….

On Wednesday, I spent a considerable amount of time on the phone with the Senior Director of Photo Services at Apple - a pro photographer himself. Here’s what I can divulge form that conversation (some things I’m not allowed to - I’m pretty sure this is all OK though)

1: Apple knows it lost sight of the pro market in recent years. It is redoubling efforts to put focus back on them.

2: The Aperture team is the largest it has ever been at this time

3: While 3.3 may seem like a relatively small update on the outside, under the hood are some incredible and dramatic improvements that lay the way for future developments. The tech behind the new WB and H&S tools is quite remarkable in itself. The speed improvements are also considerable leaps made partially to address the goal of winning users in the field who have relied on PhotoMechanic for its import speed. (which Aperture now firmly beats)

4: The team is committed to making it the best pro software available, better than LR, CO, PM and anything else out there.

5: Phil Schiller is a fanatical Aperture user.

Aperture is far from dead. The team is far from sitting still. They are actively working on making Aperture the standard all others will hope to reach.

The call ended with me being 100% sure I had made the right choice in Aperture.

Scott Bourne… really… who cares?

Ben,

much appreciated, your sticking your neck out on this.

My own take (as someone with a box on the shelf behind me with Photoshop 1.0 written on it) is that Apple could really take this market. Adobe have had it so easy for so long and they’ve done nothing really of any note. I’m talking PS here. They just plodded along for over 10 years. Sure, they have some good stuff in there … but they could/should have so much more. Apple don’t have a culture of laziness and if they could just take some of that gigantic sum of cash and invest it in making a truly great pro app., it would be incredible. I’m confident that they will bring FCP back up to and better than its previous level. I don’t know much about audio but Logic seems pretty good. Apple used to be the only game in town for creatives pros. They should get that back. I wish some of the engineers would take a look at Live Picture. If only Aperture vector retouching/brushing was like that, things would be sweet.

At this point I have high hopes that Apple is going to take the next step with Aperture … I too have been a long time Adobe user …. I have been using Ps since 1991 … v2 but I claim ignorance it existed before that ;-)

With the new “subscription” business model that Adobe is trying to sell (even though Lightroom is not a part of the plan currently, though indications that it will be soon) … I have lost confidence in them … there is no longer an incentive for them to work harder, rise further to make their products superior … In my opinion Lr has become a RAW processor with extra baggage, rather than a workflow solution … if they already know their earnings potential going in … there does’t seem to be much potential or incentive to reach further than mediocrity for features beyond the basic image processing tasks …

I have ALWAYS trusted in the Free Enterprise System … where the cream rises to the top … while subscriptions may be a fine vehicle to disseminate magazines and newspapers … I’m not so sure it is a wise effort for software development (that coming from a 34 year veteran of journalism) …. too much can get lost in the shuffle … and too many mediocre efforts are placed on goals when you validate efforts on a calendar, rather than content … I don’t want the average solution … I want folks working hard to surpass my goals and offer me more than I ever thought was possible … in many ways … Apple has done this for decades … though, it may have not appeared so when they introduced innovative options … (remember the Hell they paid for not including a floppy disk solution built into the original iMac?) …

I also get extremely frustrated with Apple and their secretive approach on letting their users know their intentions … I fully understand that they are in a competitive market … but I really wish they could at least be somewhat forthcoming as to their plans for the future …. I’m not asking that they divulge the latest in the advancements for retina displays … or share the breakthroughs they have made in battery technology … or even if the next generation iPhone will have a 4 inch screen …. just let me know there WILL be a next generation of Aperture!

I am hoping … probably more than should be prudent … that Apple will up the anti with Aperture … Sooner … rather than Later … I so much want to be a stalwart Aperture advocate …

Oh … and Scott who? … Never heard of him before this thread … Is he someone of importance?

Live Picture was amaaaaazig! I worked at Meta back then. What a crazy piece of software. Ahead of it’s time, I think.

Ha! I had no idea you’re such a veteran of the business. I have quite a history with LP and since you mention it and it turns out that Butch is almost as old as me, you’ll probably be the only 2 that read this, so it’s just for you guys …

Believe it or not, I’m still using LP. I suspect I may be one of just a handful still doing so. Probably less than 10. Virtually all the work on my site has gone through it. It’s absolutely absurd to imagine it, but there is still 15 years after its demise, no piece of software which does what it does. PS, falls down because it’s a pixel editor, although that said, Adobe have done a very good job of working around that with massive memory management solutions (what a PITA all that is, although ram manufacturers probably have a lot of Adobe stock. I was always amazed that online pundits would write reams about how people could speed up PS with gobs of ram, when PS couldn’t address more than 3gb until just a very short time ago). Of course, ironically, LP’s downfall was because it wasn’t a pixel editor (no rubber stamp) and also because of some amazingly greedy/blinkered management.

I have a ‘special’ vs of LP that was never released. It has a lot of code chopped out (mostly cmyk) and a couple of bugs fixed, most notably a bug when exporting alpha channels, which was a major headache for years. I also have a PS plugin that works on recent versions of PS and a batch processor for ivue on Intel. I think I’m the only person using this vs, which is somehow quite a privilege. I have a dedicated QuadG5 that does nothing but LP. The Quad is a bit of a waste, because LP doesn’t know anything about multiple processors of the modern age, so a Dual 2.7 would be just as good or better. (As an aside, it’s interesting to see just how fast those old Macs were. Intel didn’t move us forward much … it just removed the discussion, which was probably necessary for Apple.)

Some of the astonishing stuff about LP is technical (like all apps really I suppose). The Fits technology was truly one of the most extraordinary pieces of computer technology ever produced.

Pause while I Google ….

So I haven’t done that for a number of years (Googled LP). I have an old Electronic Imagining mag interview with LP’s creator Bruno Delean and I thought I might find it online, because the way the software was created must be truly unique (and inspiring for latter-day software creators/engineering) but I couldn’t find it, possibly a copyright issue. I don’t have the right to publish it, but I’ll put it up with a password. It’s a really interesting read for anyone interested in computer imaging and perhaps Aperture, because Aperture attempts (and fails) to do some of the stuff that LP does.

Bruno Delean Interview
loging/pass = apertureexpert

My feeling is that LP failed to be re-born (though it has come very very close not that long ago) because it is soooo complex, and the code was written in French. Software companies just wanted the patents and eventually, the evil troll that is Intellectual Ventures (ex MS) got a hold of them, with a bundle purchase and that’s probably how Apple got access to them too (Apple has a stake in IV) and subsequently how Aperture can do some of it’s vectorial stuff. This is pure guesswork on my part, so I may well be completely wrong.

I’ve probably blabbed on long enough, but FWIW … LP on my aged old G5 is 4mb (yes megabytes). It requires 20mb of ram to run. It loads in about 1 second. It can handle files of almost unlimited size (and could be truly unlimited if it were more modern). It runs all internal operations in 16bit and did so, years before Adobe managed to do the same. What used to be known as the ‘digital’ look of digital images, was really down to PS only having 8bit and each operation having a large impact through quantization. A couple of edits, like applying sharpening etc., would get an old PS 8bit file down to 5bits … which looks pretty horrible and gave digital imaging a bad name back in the late 90s early 2ks. LP’s colour management was superb straight out of the box … took Adobe till vs 6 to sort theirs out, although PS is now the rock solid reference in colour management. LP’s colour tools were mostly created by Joe Holmes, a great landscape photographer.

When it comes to actually working with LP and where Aperture is sooooo far behind, is for example, I can take a 10,000 megapixel brush on an image with 50 layers, incorporating say 20 different 300mb images composited together … and brush in and out … in real time. No lag at all. It is also the original ‘lift and stamp’ tool, because it’s vectorial. I can apply my edits to any image, or have ‘presets’ that I open up and apply to an image. But … but … it’s old and some stuff is a long way behind today’s technology. Sharpening is from another age, although interestingly, the Blur tool uses a sort of reverse USM which can give a really nice effect (and could also be useful for correcting overly sharpened images). I have learned to workaround it’s age and have a pretty slick workstation set up to use it. Lots of automation etc. and the Wacom’s radial menu was a godsend combined with an old macro software which gives me access to many of LP’s commands via the keyboard and thus, my Wacom’s radial menu. When working I virtually only use the pen … which is how LP was intended to be used. It is unusable with a mouse and always was.

Ho hum.

Grant

Now i have worked some days with 3.3, i really feel sorry for Scott B. The 3.3 is so much better in regards to speed, and some of the basic things is also better.

(but i still hate the mono icons !)

I have shared my opinion on Aperture 3.3 on these forums previously and I don’t want to be redundant. However, I will add to the dialog on Apple secrecy.

The fact that Apple does not help their customers by giving us a look into their product roadmap is annoying, scary and costly for those of that use their products. Therefore, I agree with Butches comments above.

What has not yet been discussed is Apple’s lack of support, post launch. Anybody that follows photography blogs or attends trade shows and conferences has heard Adobe Product Managers discussing Light Room’s new features, getting input from users and generally mingling with their customers. When was the last time you were able to speak with an Apple Product Manager? And now, Tim Cook is “Doubling Down” on secrecy - great!! Because of the secrecy and support issues, in my mind, Apertures technology has to be that much better than the competition for me to stick with it. And right now I am not sure.

One final comment, Scott Bourne is what we in marketing call a Key Opinion Leader, (as is Joseph), who in the past vocally supported Aperture. Apple should care what he thinks if they are still concerned about the Pro market, as eluted to above.