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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #70571 > unrolled thread

10.3.3 Beta

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  10.3.3 Beta M-M <nospam@ny.more> - 2015-03-06 12:02 -0500
    Re: 10.3.3 Beta JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-03-06 12:52 -0500
      Re: 10.3.3 Beta Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-06 11:09 -0700
        Re: 10.3.3 Beta Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-06 23:10 +0000
          Re: 10.3.3 Beta M-M <nospam@ny.more> - 2015-03-06 20:57 -0500
    Re: 10.3.3 Beta Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-03-07 09:55 +1300
      Re: 10.3.3 Beta tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-03-08 16:22 +0000
    Re: 10.3.3 Beta Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-03-07 10:00 -0500
      Re: 10.3.3 Beta M-M <nospam@ny.more> - 2015-03-07 10:26 -0500
        Re: 10.3.3 Beta nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-07 10:34 -0500
          Re: 10.3.3 Beta Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-03-07 15:50 +0000
            Re: 10.3.3 Beta nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-07 11:16 -0500
              Re: 10.3.3 Beta Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-07 09:50 -0700
                Re: 10.3.3 Beta nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-07 12:14 -0500
                Re: 10.3.3 Beta JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-03-07 15:07 -0500
                  Re: 10.3.3 Beta Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-07 14:01 -0700
                  Re: 10.3.3 Beta Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-08 19:53 +0000
              Re: 10.3.3 Beta Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-03-07 17:59 +0000
                Re: 10.3.3 Beta Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-03-07 17:33 -0500
                  Re: 10.3.3 Beta nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-07 17:35 -0500
      Re: 10.3.3 Beta Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-08 19:52 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#70571 — 10.3.3 Beta

Being the upgrade nut I am, I couldn't resist installing the 10.3.3
beta. I TimeMachine'd and SuperDuper'd first so I had nothing to lose.

I don't notice much different except iPhoto is now "Photos" with an
icon and interface exactly like the iOs interface on my iPhone. I don't
like it. 


I wish I could drag a thumbnail from the browser window to a mail
message but it seems I have to drag it to the desktop first. iPhoto
couldn't do this either and there is probably a better way.

-- 
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#70573

On 15-03-06 12:02, M-M wrote:

> I wish I could drag a thumbnail from the browser window to a mail
> message but it seems I have to drag it to the desktop first. iPhoto
> couldn't do this either and there is probably a better way.


iPhoto 09 and  Snow Leopard Mail work together in that respect. In
thumbnail mode in iPhoto, you can drag photos onto a mail message.

For Thunderbird, you havce to drag it to the "attachement" section , not
in the message itself.

I have to assume that this functionality, available for ages, was not
lost post Snow Leopard.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70574

In article <54f9e940$0$57782$c3e8da3$c8b7d2e6@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On 15-03-06 12:02, M-M wrote:
> 
> > I wish I could drag a thumbnail from the browser window to a mail
> > message but it seems I have to drag it to the desktop first. iPhoto
> > couldn't do this either and there is probably a better way.
> 
> 
> iPhoto 09 and  Snow Leopard Mail work together in that respect. In
> thumbnail mode in iPhoto, you can drag photos onto a mail message.
> 
> For Thunderbird, you havce to drag it to the "attachement" section , not
> in the message itself.
> 
> I have to assume that this functionality, available for ages, was not
> lost post Snow Leopard.

Unfortunately, it seems to have been lost.  However, all is not lost
because of the Share button in Photos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70589

Okay, so one time? In band camp? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> was all, like:
> In article <54f9e940$0$57782$c3e8da3$c8b7d2e6@news.astraweb.com>, JF
> Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>> On 15-03-06 12:02, M-M wrote:
>> 
>> > I wish I could drag a thumbnail from the browser window

Which browser? I drag images from Safari to Mail all the time. Including under 10.3.3.

>>>to a mail message but it seems I have to drag it to the desktop
>>>first. iPhoto couldn't do this either and there is probably a better
>>>way.
>> 
>> iPhoto 09 and  Snow Leopard Mail work together in that respect. In
>> thumbnail mode in iPhoto, you can drag photos onto a mail message.
>> 
>> For Thunderbird, you havce to drag it to the "attachement" section , not
>> in the message itself.
>> 
>> I have to assume that this functionality, available for ages, was not
>> lost post Snow Leopard.

> Unfortunately, it seems to have been lost.  However, all is not lost
> because of the Share button in Photos.

From the Photo window to mail? Be sure and report that.

-- 
http://2blog.kreme.com
I WILL NOT SCREAM FOR ICE CREAM Bart chalkboard Ep. AABF03

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70595

In article <slrnmfkd17.160n.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >> > I wish I could drag a thumbnail from the browser window
> 
> Which browser? I drag images from Safari to Mail all the time. Including
> under 10.3.3.

The Photos app browser window. Not a web browser.

-- 
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70576

In article <060320151202408239%nospam@ny.more>, M-M <nospam@ny.more>
wrote:

> Being the upgrade nut I am, I couldn't resist installing the 10.3.3
> beta. I TimeMachine'd and SuperDuper'd first so I had nothing to lose.
> 
> I don't notice much different except iPhoto is now "Photos" with an
> icon and interface exactly like the iOs interface on my iPhone. I don't
> like it. 
> 
> 
> I wish I could drag a thumbnail from the browser window to a mail
> message but it seems I have to drag it to the desktop first. iPhoto
> couldn't do this either and there is probably a better way.

10.3.3 ... that should be well out of beta testing by now, but at least
it's newer than my 10.2.8.  ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70670

On 2015-03-06, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> In article <060320151202408239%nospam@ny.more>, M-M <nospam@ny.more>
> wrote:
>
>> Being the upgrade nut I am, I couldn't resist installing the 10.3.3
>> beta. I TimeMachine'd and SuperDuper'd first so I had nothing to lose.
>> 
>> I don't notice much different except iPhoto is now "Photos" with an
>> icon and interface exactly like the iOs interface on my iPhone. I don't
>> like it. 
>> 
>> 
>> I wish I could drag a thumbnail from the browser window to a mail
>> message but it seems I have to drag it to the desktop first. iPhoto
>> couldn't do this either and there is probably a better way.
>
> 10.3.3 ... that should be well out of beta testing by now, but at least
> it's newer than my 10.2.8.  ;-)

D'oh!  :D

-- 
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70605

In article <060320151202408239%nospam@ny.more>, M-M <nospam@ny.more> 
wrote:

> 
> I don't notice much different except iPhoto is now "Photos" with an
> icon and interface exactly like the iOs interface on my iPhone. I don't
> like it. 
> 

Photos is replacing Aperture:


<quote>
Dear Aperture customer,
Last June, we introduced the new Photos apps for iOS 8 and OS X 
Yosemite, along with iCloud Photo Library, which lets you safely store 
all your photos in iCloud and access them from anywhere.

When Photos for OS X launches this spring, Aperture will no longer be 
available for purchase from the Mac App Store. You can continue to use 
Aperture on OS X Yosemite, but you will not be able to buy additional 
copies of the app. 

You can migrate your Aperture library to Photos for OS X, including your 
photos, adjustments, albums and keywords. After migrating, your Aperture 
library remains intact. However, Aperture and Photos do not share a 
unified library, so any changes made after the migration will not be
shared between the apps. 
</quote>
-- 
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing  room scene.
  -- notes for Blade Runner

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70609

In article <54fb127e$0$1659$c3e8da3$12bcf670@news.astraweb.com>, Warren
Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> Photos is replacing Aperture:

Isn't Aperture a whole lot more capable than Photos?

-- 
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70610

In article <070320151026480093%nospam@ny.more>, M-M <nospam@ny.more>
wrote:

> > Photos is replacing Aperture:
> 
> Isn't Aperture a whole lot more capable than Photos?

was more capable.

photos is replacing both iphoto and aperture, somewhere in the middle.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70611

In article <070320151034318054%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>In article <070320151026480093%nospam@ny.more>, M-M <nospam@ny.more>
>wrote:
>
>> > Photos is replacing Aperture:
>> 
>> Isn't Aperture a whole lot more capable than Photos?
>
>was more capable.
>
>photos is replacing both iphoto and aperture, somewhere in the middle.

I've not really used any of these programs. What is/was
Aperture/iPhoto/Photos equivalent to in Adobe terms? Lightroom?
Photoshop? None of the above?

-- 
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English
is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion,
English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious 
and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."            -- James Nicoll, rasfw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70613

In article <070320151550599133%timstreater@greenbee.net>, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> >> > Photos is replacing Aperture:
> >> 
> >> Isn't Aperture a whole lot more capable than Photos?
> >
> >was more capable.
> >
> >photos is replacing both iphoto and aperture, somewhere in the middle.
> 
> I've not really used any of these programs. What is/was
> Aperture/iPhoto/Photos equivalent to in Adobe terms? Lightroom?
> Photoshop? None of the above?

aperture and lightroom are peers.

iphoto is a consumer version of aperture that's good enough for casual
users. it doesn't do as much, but casual users don't care. 

photos does a bit more than iphoto but not as much as aperture. it's in
the middle somewhere. it's also brand new, whereas iphoto and aperture
have been around for a long time, so not everything is there quite yet.
aperture and iphoto have been around for years. give photos another
year or two for it to mature a bit.

photoshop is a highly capable image editor and a totally different app.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70614

In article <070320151116027470%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> photos does a bit more than iphoto but not as much as aperture. it's in
> the middle somewhere. it's also brand new, whereas iphoto and aperture
> have been around for a long time, so not everything is there quite yet.
> aperture and iphoto have been around for years. give photos another
> year or two for it to mature a bit.

How about seeing what the final version will be?  The version now in
the wild is beta.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70616

In article <070320150950108529%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
<michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > photos does a bit more than iphoto but not as much as aperture. it's in
> > the middle somewhere. it's also brand new, whereas iphoto and aperture
> > have been around for a long time, so not everything is there quite yet.
> > aperture and iphoto have been around for years. give photos another
> > year or two for it to mature a bit.
> 
> How about seeing what the final version will be?  The version now in
> the wild is beta.

it's pretty much feature complete.

plugins, for instance, will be in a later version.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70621

On 15-03-07 11:50, Michelle Steiner wrote:

> How about seeing what the final version will be?  The version now in
> the wild is beta.

How different can an app be between beta and final release ? (thinking
about feature set).

Apple marketinG/product design would have drawn a list of features that
"Photos" would have, and which would be implemented in first release.

Somehow, I doubt they would go to "beta" before major features are
functional. A major feature added after beta means that it didn't go
through beta and might be very buggy in final release.


On the other hand, major comments from beta users about missing features
may cause Apple to rethink the list of features that are a "must" for
first release.

But for those who have a 3rd hand (or 3 sided coins !), there is also
the issue of product positioning. If the complaints about missing
features come from Aperture users only, and Apple is getting out of the
market and positioning Photos as iPhoto replacement, then it would not
take those complaints too seriously.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70622

In article <54fb5a75$0$43005$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On the other hand, major comments from beta users about missing features
> may cause Apple to rethink the list of features that are a "must" for
> first release.

When we did Claris Emailer 2.0, we changed the feature set based on
beta-tester feedback; it is not unheard of.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70676

Okay, so one time? In band camp? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> was all, like:
> On 15-03-07 11:50, Michelle Steiner wrote:

>> How about seeing what the final version will be?  The version now in
>> the wild is beta.

> How different can an app be between beta and final release ? (thinking
> about feature set).

Photos has already changed significantly once in this beta cycle.

-- 
http://2blog.kreme.com
Mussolini made the trains run on thyme.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70617

In article <070320151116027470%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>In article <070320151550599133%timstreater@greenbee.net>, Tim Streater
><timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>
>> >> > Photos is replacing Aperture:
>> >> 
>> >> Isn't Aperture a whole lot more capable than Photos?
>> >
>> >was more capable.
>> >
>> >photos is replacing both iphoto and aperture, somewhere in the middle.
>> 
>> I've not really used any of these programs. What is/was
>> Aperture/iPhoto/Photos equivalent to in Adobe terms? Lightroom?
>> Photoshop? None of the above?
>
>aperture and lightroom are peers.
>
>iphoto is a consumer version of aperture that's good enough for casual
>users. it doesn't do as much, but casual users don't care. 
>
>photos does a bit more than iphoto but not as much as aperture. it's in
>the middle somewhere. it's also brand new, whereas iphoto and aperture
>have been around for a long time, so not everything is there quite yet.
>aperture and iphoto have been around for years. give photos another
>year or two for it to mature a bit.
>
>photoshop is a highly capable image editor and a totally different app.

Thx.

-- 
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English
is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion,
English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious 
and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."            -- James Nicoll, rasfw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70626

nospam:
> >aperture and lightroom are peers.

Tim Streater:
> Thx.

It could be argued that Aperture and LR *were* peers four years ago,
but Apple stopped development (though not sales) of Aperture nearly
four years ago, while Adobe pursued the development of Lightroom
aggressively. The upshot is that Aperture is no longer Lightroom's
peer. LR is the best photo cataloging and pre-processing software on
the planet.

> >...give photos another year or two for it to mature a bit.

I expect that Photos will be good enough for basic amateur use, but the
serious amateur and the professional will be using Lightroom. The two
will not be comparable in features, speed, versatility, and Photoshop
integration. Very few people who are more than casual photographers are
using Aperture these days.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#70627

In article <070320151733135142%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net>
wrote:

> nospam:
> > >aperture and lightroom are peers.
> 
> Tim Streater:
> > Thx.
> 
> It could be argued that Aperture and LR *were* peers four years ago,
> but Apple stopped development (though not sales) of Aperture nearly
> four years ago, while Adobe pursued the development of Lightroom
> aggressively. The upshot is that Aperture is no longer Lightroom's
> peer. LR is the best photo cataloging and pre-processing software on
> the planet.

they are peers.

the fact that one ceased development doesn't change the category.

> > >...give photos another year or two for it to mature a bit.
> 
> I expect that Photos will be good enough for basic amateur use, but the
> serious amateur and the professional will be using Lightroom. The two
> will not be comparable in features, speed, versatility, and Photoshop
> integration. Very few people who are more than casual photographers are
> using Aperture these days.

very few used it in its heyday, which is why it was cancelled.

lightroom blew it away in so many ways.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web