[InvalidScreen]

iDVD -> VLC

iWeb ? Hmm, if only it could FTP to a non-Apple site, maybe it does in the new one. Too limited for me.

GarageBand -> No idea, cranked it up once and couldn't stop laughing. No honestly, it was fun.

iMovie -> Would be good if you could drag and drop standard movie files instead of having to import them. If I wanted to work in a 'Windoze' manner I'd have bought a PC :) Perhaps they've sorted this out too. I'll stick with Sony Vegas (PC only, sigh).

iPhoto -> Picasa, or any web based service as photos need to be free ;)



Fanning the flames...

[hmurchison]

InvalidScreen said:

iDVD -> VLC

iWeb ? Hmm, if only it could FTP to a non-Apple site, maybe it does in the new one. Too limited for me.


GarageBand -> No idea, cranked it up once and couldn't stop laughing. No honestly, it was fun.


iMovie -> Would be good if you could drag and drop standard movie files instead of having to import them. If I wanted to work in a 'Windoze' manner I'd have bought a PC :) Perhaps they've sorted this out too. I'll stick with Sony Vegas (PC only, sigh).


iPhoto -> Picasa, or any web based service as photos need to be free ;)






Fanning the flames...

I don't make the connection with iDVD and VLC.

GarageBand's a hoot when you realize you don't have to be a musician. How hard is it to drag loops to the window?

I haven't tried Dragon Drop with iMovie

Picasa..glad to have it on the Mac but boy is it ugly in comparison.

[bugjuice]

I personally don't like how iPhoto makes copies and copies of each photo, making the space it consumes, monstrous. I have heaps of 'average' sized shots (10mpx) and only after adding less than a couple of hundred at most in iPhoto 8, the db is well over 8gb, when outside of iPhoto, the shots on their own are 2gb. Has or will this ever be addressed? I understand why it's done (creating a new file for the thumbnail and another new file for the 'original' shot and a third file for something else (still don't know what. Backup???) while showing the 'dropped' pic in iPhoto), but can't it be simplified a bit more? Like using the icons for files in the finder, for the pic, instead of creating a whole new file. The option to turn off the 'original' and 'backup(??)' duplicates since they're backed up straight away to a separate drive, would be awesome, and then my 2gbs' worth of shots (i'd expect a bit of growth with the db) would barely bloat to 3. I love using iPhoto from the very 1st release, but it just gathers virtual dust cos it's so hungry and fat and I don't want my mac dedicated to just iPhoto, I just feed it massively trimmed photos so that I can use my MobileMe account for the pics (family/friends etc). I don't want to have to photoshop photos to go in iPhoto!!!!!

[mrbach]

iPhoto-Faces doesn't really work for me. It's interesting, but freeware class in its capability. Prefer Lightroom over Aperture, but for no particular reason. It just seems faster.
iWeb- nice job on the FTP.
iMovie- I'm weird, but for quick and simple movies, it's hard to beat iMovie 6. The new layout is too busy, what with all the clips showing. iMovie is faster as well. They seem to have missed the point of iLife with iMovie 8.
Garageband- Like most, I played with it for 5 minutes. Done.
iDVD- I haven't noticed a difference, but this is my fav application for producing a final DVD.
iLife seems to be suffering from the committee syndrome. Too many people, too many different ideas. They say a camel is a horse built by a committee.

[veggiedude]

I hope to see Faces incorporated into many more apps. For instance, if I am videoconferencing with Jerry using iChat and Tom happens to walk into the frame, the Mac should identify him if he is tagged in my iPhoto collection and notify me.

[zetal]

I'm more interested in iPhoto's editing tools. Faces, shmaces and other effects to attract attention, are useless for me. I'm sure the 'faces' thing will disappoint many people. too much hype.
I was considering switching to Aperture for one reason - the ability to edit images without the need for heavy Photoshop Elements, which I use. The most important editing for me is Levels, Highlights, Shadows, contrast, color enhancement,UNsharp, Remove Color, ...
Plus Resizing with Canvas.
Does the iPhoto '09 has these tools ?
If it doesn't, then I guess it's not even close to Aperture.
Does Aperture have for example Resizing, Canvas, Convert to sRGB...?

[Mr_EMan]

You can make DVDs with Video Lan Client media player? Interesting.

Nobody is forcing you to buy the update. If you don't want it, don't buy it. Free market, and all that.

Personally, I love the iLife suite. My wife uses all of them, except iMovie. The best part is she doesn't have to bug me to fix anything.

We have 35,000 photos in iPhoto, and I love using it. I love the easy integration into the OS and other programs. I'm looking forward to using Faces and Places in the '09 version. I would pay $79 just for iPhoto.

[tatilsever]

cphoffman42 said:

But the real question is, has Apple fixed the terrible file management system behind iPhoto? Does it still create multiple copies of every picture you import ("original", jpeg preview, modified, separate copies for each iPod or Apple TV you are syncing to, etc.)?

A bit of a stretch to call it "terrible". Let's see... If you don't modify photos, it does not create any in the modified folder. Without them you could never get back to the original versions. I sync with AppleTV, it does not create any copies for that, as it seems to sync full size. The thumbnails are very small, so they cannot take up that much space, but I gather it speeds up scrolling through all these pictures. Along with all the other data files, iPhoto overhead is less than 10% for me if I leave aside the modified folder. That's fairly good...

[folklore]

bugjuice said:

I personally don't like how iPhoto makes copies and copies of each photo, making the space it consumes, monstrous.

OTOH, the multiple thumbnails make iPhoto very fast to preview images, even when the library is huge (especially when you use the preset sizes). Keeping an "original" copy allows users to revert to an unaltered photo. Keeping additional copies for iPods and AppleTVs keeps the sync process from taking forever. Resizing the photos on the fly for each sync would get old in a hurry.

It's not like Apple's engineers just decided to make copies willy-nilly in order to waste space. They made a conscious decision to sacrifice hard drive space in order to gain performance.

I'm okay with that. I can always buy more hard drive space.

[InvalidScreen]

iDVD -> VLC.

You are all correct, different products, I was thinking of that craptastic DVD Player application. :)

[InvalidScreen]

folklore said:

OTOH, the multiple thumbnails make iPhoto very fast to preview images, even when the library is huge

Why does it need to do multiple thumbnail images? Picasa has a slider that allows you to dynamically change the thumbnail size, real-time, no slow down. How? Probably by scaling a larger thumbnail smaller, a simple solution that conserves disk space.

[Xenu]

Faces only picked up about half the readable faces in my library. Even clear head-on shots of people already tagged multiple times weren't even flagged as possible faces. And the location feature is really slow and drags (and I have a superfast Internet connection)-- not to mention the fact that the app only lists major cities and towns, and not smaller locations. I give Apple A for concept, C for execution.

[mr_josh]

Thanks to iPhoto and a poster from the movie, "Lost in Translation", I have Scarlett Johansson tagged in quite a few of my library images. :)

[hillstones]

It seems the existing Facebook plug-in does more than iPhoto '09. The plug-in allows you to do everything from iPhoto: Tagging, commenting, placing them in an existing album, or creating a new album, and then sending to Facebook only to confirm the upload. In iPhoto '09, it appears you can only upload the images to Facebook, then you have to go to Facebook to tag and comment, especially since Faces isn't exactly reliable.
iPhoto '09 appears to be one to skip.