Well - it’s an assumption that Apple won’t raise the price of Aperture but given what’s happened recently that’s probably reasonable, however my point is simply this …

A low sub $100 price for a piece of Software that receives no substantial development effort or feature expansion for 2-3 years is no bargain at all in todays world.

I would rather pay the upgrade price even it’s $99.00 every 12 months and have a program that is constantly being developed rather than just receiving “enhancements” and “bug fixes”.

You can argue about whether what has been added to Aperture since the price came down is more than an “enhancement” but when you compare it to the rather substantial features Lightroom has added in the image editing modules I think any comparison fails.

Apple’s lack of development in it’s pro apps is a huge mistake - they may now be a consumer product driven company but they need the high end as well, it’s traditionally been part of the Apple mystique that they have used to sell themselves, “use the same tools that the pros use” and it should be part of the Apple “ecosystem”.
No I’m not predicting the “death” of Apple - they’ll be good for decades, I just think they’ve forgotten a big part of their “DNA” here.

Finally recognizing that this all seems a little contradictory to my original complaint about pricing - well maybe, but maybe I’m feeling like unless it’s some groundbreaking release that leapfrogs over it’s competitors by a couple of generations it will me more of the too little to late.

If it’s a good feature set then I’ll be in at $79, $99 or even $199 but please Apple get a good product manager for Aperture and set a progressive development path with adequate resource.

I agree completely with your frustration and understand that you would like to pay 3 times as much, in order to get 3 times as much development. I expect Apple wish that every user felt like you and even though they are undoubtedly the kings of creating ‘new product lust’, they would have trouble justifying that rhythm. Better to have the audience begging for more, rather than growing tired of being continually pumped for money.

Personally, I am itching for an upgrade too and like you it is as much for confirmation that Apple have not abandoned the pro market, which was for such a long time the only market they had. I could also do with a few more features in Aperture, but what I have in mind is probably not on the cards. However, even some less rudimentary layers and copying masks would be welcome.

Think of this though; my primary imaging software has not been upgraded since 1997. Nothing Adobe has produced in those last 16 years has made me stop using it, although I have consistently bought PS over that time for 2 or 3 features. I would love Apple to truly embrace non-destructive editing from a photographers point of view, instead of a ‘managing photography’ point of view, but they are so far away in terms of speed, from my old app, I can see it’s going to be a long wait for hardware to fill the gap, because they’re not doing it with smart software, that’s for sure.

I for one will not “be happy” to pay for a new full version - I probably will but color me glum.

I’d like to see them do a limited time “free” or “low cost” promotion for those of us who have been onboard for a while - in my case since 1.0 - there should be some reward for the stubbornly persistent !

” there should be some reward for the stubbornly persistent !”

Really? I appreciate a bargain as much as the next guy … but … Aperture users have been receiving free updates and improvements that many other developers charge for.

Anyone who has purchased Aperture 3 since it was released in Feb. 2010 has not incurred one cent of additional expense … those who jumped on board when the price was dropped to $80 in the Mac App Store received an even more special bargain … users of Lr have spent more than twice that much just to stay current with RAW support for new cameras over the same period … something Apple has provided free of charge … Not to mention Apple just passed out Mavericks, new versions of iPhoto, iMovie, Garage Band, Pages, Numbers and Keynote … I, for one, can’t wait to spend some cold cash on a new and beefed up version of Aperture … as long as it delivers. In fact, I have been begging with Apple for the opportunity to spend a bit more with them for something new with Aperture.

My only fear is that it may bypass those of us who are still using Macs that aren’t Maverick ready. I too have been on board with Aperture from it’s inception and find it is as good or better than LR for most tasks.

Yes, I’d love to see an improved version of Aperture.

But we should be careful what we wish for. In recent years Apple has had an obsession with “style over substance”. This has culminated in the new iWork applications that look very pretty but have had lots of functionality removed.

So there is a very real risk that Aperure 4 will have, for example, a really elegant, minimalist toolbar that you cannot customise. Or even fashionable pastel-coloured icons but no crop tool!

There is some hope. Aperture is a ‘pro’ app so Apple can reserve its “style over substance” efforts for iPhoto and concentrate on adding useful functionality to Aperture. I really do hope so.

We’re serious users, Apple. We want “Substance” not “Style”. Please don’t disappoint us.

” there should be some reward for the stubbornly persistent !”

Really? I appreciate a bargain as much as the next guy … but … Aperture users have been receiving free updates and improvements that many other developers charge for.
————————————————–

I take your point but as I noted I’ve been onboard since 1.0 not 3.0 and even if I had opted in at 3.0 2010 > 2013 with no “paradigm shifting” user enhancements for “no charge” is not a bargain at all - I would have been happier paying for updates for a program that at least kept parity in features with Lightroom rather than ceded ground to them.

Compare the feature set of Aperture 1.0 as launched to where we are now to Lightroom.

Clearly Lightroom had to play catch up for many releases and as many have noted, Adobe may not have ever released Lightroom if it weren’t for Aperture. Now however Lightroom has features, particularly in the RAW editing department, that are the equal or better than Aperture - which is exactly where Apples development effort should have been concentrated all along.

If I buy in too a product from Apple, I expect to be buying something that is top in it’s class and will receive the development resources needed to stay that way - in return I expect to fund that development through reasonable upgrade cost’s - not buy over and start again - however Apple clearly doesn’t have a pricing model for Pro App’s anymore and no mechanism to charge for updates outside of their current all or nothing paradigm.

Their “Bad” - I think, not mine for wanting an option to upgrade.

Andrew,

I think you’ve missed what has happened with pricing. Think of it this way; Apple only have an upgrade price. They have done away with the costly business of buying what Adobe call a ‘Full Price’ seat.

Lr : full price - 150usd, upgrade - 80usd.
Aperture : full price - 80usd, upgrade - 80usd.

So there is no initially high price of using Aperture and once you’re using it, you can ‘upgrade’ at the same price as ‘full price’ users, which happens to be exactly the same price that Adobe charge for their upgrades.

There is one BIG difference though. Adobe charge the upgrade price for little in the way of improvements. Apple did not charge for the 3.4 upgrade, which involved big changes in the code. They could easily have stuck a simplistic feature on or made a marketing splash about how much had changed, but they didn’t and for that, I for one respect them. Adobe these days don’t have any of my respect, because they have been pumping their user base dry in the same manner for way too many years. (For context; I have a box copy of PS 1.0 on the shelf behind me).

As someone who uses Aperture as a high-speed tagging and presentation system for sporting events, I’m hoping that there are some functional changes to keyword and metadata management and export capabilities, especially in full screen mode. The various web exports and manipulation tool improvements will certainly be nice for other workflows, but they’re not huge points for me.

With Aperture 3 coming out *4 years ago* and no signs of Apple letting the software die I mean it HAS to be coming soonish, and bringing it out with the Mac Pro just makes sense, so I’m hopeful. Now the question becomes can Apple recover from the pounding it has taken from LR during this massive gap?

That is what I have been expecting since Phil made his comment in the Oct 22 keynote.

I doesn’t make sense to give the new Mac Pro to select photographer with Aperture 3.5 (or 3.6) to test out. Aperture 3.5 runs fine on the current iMacs and Mac Pros. How much better could it run on the new Mac Pro.
It has to be a big bad new version of Aperture (4 or X).

My big wish is for some type of Aperture companion app on the new iPads that lets you spread the workflow between the iPad and Mac.

That’s probably a stretch but it would leapfrog the competition. All the other expected features are already available in other apps (Lightroom). Apple doesn’t like to just match the competition.

We will see.

I would put it down as very encouraging. Yes, the writer made a mistake with the current vs, but did also say this :

“Apple told us that the new version of the Aperture software and an update to Final Cut Pro will come with the launch the Mac Pro, now confirmed for December.”

They are one of the major Mac publications.

‘will be awesome’.

Well … if they do what they seem to have taken a liking to doing … a total re-write, then it might not be awesome for the first year or so. Apple are not afraid to regress before moving forward on a stronger footing. The initial regression can be painful.

Careful for What You Wish For. Even AP3.5 has bugs.