Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #28427

Re: Aperture ?

Show all headers | View raw

On 2015-03-26, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <cnir05Fk2liU6@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> It's a big deal to me in principle, because the software *disables*
>> itself if no ping is made. I find that *very* distasteful. In contrast,
>> you can generally expect software that you purchase rather than rent to
>> continue working indefinitely as long as your system remains compatible.
>> It's fully within your control.
>
> the reality is that everyone is online all the time

That's untrue. I have computers that aren't online all the time, and
some people have computers that are never or rarely online. Creative
Cloud is not attractive to those people. Other competing solutions are
much more attractive.

> and pinging once a month (or every 90 days for yearly customers) is
> not an issue.

It is an issue for some people, including me. Not sure why you are
having such a hard time accepting it.

>> > how many computers are off the grid for more than that? 
>> 
>> That's not the point. All it takes is *once* to significantly
>> inconvenience you. The cost savings of renting software is really a ball
>> and chain.
>
> it is the point.

You don't get to tell me what my own point is!

> the number of people for whom this is a problem is for all intents,
> zero.

I don't care how many other people care about it. *I* care about it,
which is why *I* am making the point. I dislike the principle of renting
software, and prefer competing solutions that offer much of the same
functionality for a fraction of the cost and without the requirement to
ping servers to continue functioning correctly. Your refusal to accept
my position and attempts to cast them as illegitimate isn't lost on me
either. You desperately need better manners.

> neither are replacements for illustrator or photoshop.

I didn't say that they were replacements. I said they offer much of the
same functionality, which they do.

> graphic artists will laugh at the suggestion of replacing either one
> with affinity apps.

You're full of it, and your blanket statement doesn't apply to all. I
know graphic artists who use both, and they say that Affinity Photo
has a lot of promise and may replace Photoshop for a lot of what they
do. They didn't claim it does *every* single thing Photoshop does, but
neither did *I*. And they weren't *laughing* either.

>> >> Both have allowed me to completely remove Adobe Creative Suite from
>> >> my system - good riddance:
>> >
>> > then you didn't actually need creative suite.
>> 
>> And how would you know that? : ) I really don't see how you are
>> qualified to make that statement. You don't know much at all about what
>> my particular needs are, or how I have used Adobe Photoshop and
>> Illustrator for the past few decades.
>
> if you think they can be easily replaced, then you haven't come close
> to using the full power of either one.

I never claimed they can be easily replaced. I said they have allowed
*me* to remove CS from *my* systems. Stop trying to put words in my
mouth to move the goal posts. I am well aware of a lot of Photoshop's
functionality since I worked in the pre press field for a decade or so.
So the fuck what if I don't use all of those features now? Some people,
even professionals in the field, don't use every single function of
Photoshop. I doubt many do use every single feature. All I have said is
that there are competing solutions that offer a lot of the functionality
for less cost and with more freedom. You seem to be completely unwilling
to accept that fact. And you're being a big jerk about it.

>> It certainly does a whole lot of what Photoshop does.
>
> it does some of it

It does a lot of it. You seem to want desperately to trivialize my
opinion on the matter. 

> but there are still gaping holes, such as camera raw

Photo already supports raw editing through the Develop persona. Since
it's still in beta, it's still under development, and Affinity has said
raw editing is in active development. I wouldn't call that a "gaping
hole".

> interoperability with lightroom, the wealth of plugins (not just
> filter plugins) and much, much more. 

Now you just sound like an Adobe salesman. "Oh, but competitors can't
use our plugins, and aren't integrated with our tools!". 

>> The majority of
>> the features I use in Photoshop are there: layers, adjustments, effects,
>> channels, masks, most or all of the same tools and tool adjustments,
>> color spaces, file formats, and so on. And Serif seems to be adding more
>> and more functionality to bring it closer to Photoshop as time goes on.
>> It seems to be a very close competitor to Photoshop to me. So which
>> missing pieces of functionality make it "not even close" in your
>> opinion?
>
> then you don't use photoshop to its full potential. not everyone does.
> nothing wrong with that. 

Then maybe you should stop trying to trivialize my opinion acting as if
it's irrelevant.

>> > photoshop elements is about $50 street price. you don't need the full
>> > photoshop.
>> 
>> I don't need Elements either when Affinity Designer does the same types
>> of things for $10 cheaper.
>
> that might work for you but it doesn't work for everyone.

Did I claim it works for everyone? No, I did not. I said for me and
anyone like me, competing solutions are attractive. You, on the other
hand, seem to want to trivialize my opinion on the matter.

> affinity designer does not support camera raw which is a show stopper
> right there for a *lot* of people, who get photoshop for *just* that
> feature.

You're wrong. Not only does the current beta support raw editing, but
Affinity is actively developing more raw editing functionality.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Back to comp.sys.mac.apps | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Aperture ? Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2015-03-25 16:22 +0000
  Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-25 12:30 -0400
    Re: Aperture ? bob <rcp27g@gmail.com> - 2015-03-25 21:02 +0100
      Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-25 16:07 -0400
      Re: Aperture ? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-03-25 20:22 +0000
        Re: Aperture ? tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-27 01:58 +0000
          Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-26 19:17 -0700
            Re: Aperture ? Me, myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> - 2015-03-27 08:27 +0100
              Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-27 01:25 -0700
            Re: Aperture ? tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-03-27 07:34 -0700
              Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-27 23:10 -0400
            Re: Aperture ? tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-28 05:14 +0000
              Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-28 14:25 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.org> - 2015-03-30 12:33 -0700
          Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-27 23:10 -0400
            Re: Aperture ? Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2015-03-29 20:46 +0000
              Re: Aperture ? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-03-29 18:53 -0400
              Re: Aperture ? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-04-01 10:31 +0000
      Re: Aperture ? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-25 22:31 +0000
        Re: Aperture ? rcp27g@gmail.com - 2015-03-26 03:11 -0700
          Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-26 11:02 -0400
            Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 15:29 +0000
              Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-26 11:57 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 16:02 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-26 12:23 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 16:39 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-26 13:32 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 18:12 +0000
          Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-26 08:28 -0700
            Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 15:57 +0000
              Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-26 12:00 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 16:38 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-26 10:04 -0700
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 17:33 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-26 13:51 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 18:17 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-27 23:10 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-28 14:02 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-26 11:02 -0700
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 18:44 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-27 23:10 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-28 14:11 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-26 13:32 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 19:37 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-27 23:10 -0400
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-28 14:24 +0000
              Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-26 09:24 -0700
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-26 16:50 +0000
            Re: Aperture ? Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-03-26 17:02 -0400
          Re: Aperture ? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-27 00:05 +0000
          Re: Aperture ? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-03-26 20:24 -0400
            Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-26 19:00 -0700
              Re: Aperture ? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-03-26 22:34 -0400
              Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-27 04:02 +0000
                Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-26 21:24 -0700
                Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-27 14:15 +0000
            Re: Aperture ? Me, myself and I <baiheli.pip.li@xs4all.nl> - 2015-03-27 08:24 +0100
              Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-27 23:10 -0400
            Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-27 23:10 -0400
    Re: Aperture ? Erilar <drache@chibardun.netinvalid> - 2015-03-25 21:41 +0000
      Re: Aperture ? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-25 17:53 -0400
      Re: Aperture ? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-25 22:14 +0000
      Re: Aperture ? Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-03-25 18:37 -0400
      Re: Aperture ? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-03-26 12:28 +1300
  Re: Aperture ? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-25 09:35 -0700
  Re: Aperture ? Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-25 10:47 -0700

csiph-web