[Macworld]

Post your comments for Adobe brings Lightroom 4 to the Mac App Store here

[leicaman]

For those who already have Lightroom, this isn't that important. Negotiating Adobe's store isn't that big a deal. And Lightroom 4 finally broke me away from Aperture. The camera RAW converter is that much better.

This post has been edited by leicaman: 10 May 2012 - 07:26 AM

[bager]

See restrictions as well:
http://blogs.adobe.c...-app-store.html

[Serenity]

 bager, on 10 May 2012 - 07:28 AM, said:

See restrictions as well:
http://blogs.adobe.c...-app-store.html

Thanks for the link, we've updated our post to reflect that.

[trichardlin]

 leicaman, on 10 May 2012 - 07:25 AM, said:

For those who already have Lightroom, this isn't that important. Negotiating Adobe's store isn't that big a deal. And Lightroom 4 finally broke me away from Aperture. The camera RAW converter is that much better.

Leicaman, can you elaborate on this more? Does Lightroom produce better images or is it easier to use? Thanks.

[whitedog]

The lack of an upgrade path seems to me to be a serious drawback in the Mac App Store for major programs like Adobe Lightroom, which get regular upgrades of significant value. I've owned and used Lightroom since version one and every upgrade has brought important new features and functionality to the program. Buying Lightroom from the MAS strikes me as penny wise and pound foolish. Getting it from Adobe is hardly that much more difficult, certainly not enough to justify paying full price for the next upgrade.

This is an issue Apple must address, and it would seem to be in their best interest to do so. Providing for upgrade pricing would make the App Store both more attractive and more viable for developers of every stripe, especially so for big developers like Adobe. I suspect releasing Lightroom through the MAS is a test case for Adobe, to determine if there is enough interest there to justify Apple's 30% cut.

There's also the issue of no trial software from the App Store. If I were a prospective first time user of a program as expensive as Lightroom, I'd certainly want to try it out first. Which currently means getting it from Adobe.

The Mac App Store, for all its chic, still has some major drawbacks and limitations for developers and users alike. These shortcomings raise the question of just how much does Apple prioritize customer service and convenience. One can overlook the store's failings with inexpensive apps, but for pricier products they become progressively more important. In the case of Lightroom, I consider those failings to be a deal breaker. As an enthusiastic Lightroom user, I cannot recommend buying it from Apple. YMMV.

[Stewsburntmonkey]

 whitedog, on 10 May 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

The Mac App Store, for all its chic, still has some major drawbacks and limitations for developers and users alike. These shortcomings raise the question of just how much does Apple prioritize customer service and convenience. One can overlook the store's failings with inexpensive apps, but for pricier products they become progressively more important. In the case of Lightroom, I consider those failings to be a deal breaker. As an enthusiastic Lightroom user, I cannot recommend buying it from Apple. YMMV.

I think to question Apple's commitment to customer service and convenience is a bit ridiculous given that they have made their name on both.

Apple has almost always released a product with the intent to hit the majority of use cases and then expands out as time and resources allow. Upgrades and trials are clearly not critical (given how well the existing limited model works), but I think they are features that will be added as time goes on. It seems clear paid upgrades are on the plan somewhere given the fact that the store distinguished between free and non-free updates. I would also imagine trials are going to be enabled at some point. My guess is that Apple is still working out how it wants to do this.

This post has been edited by Stewsburntmonkey: 10 May 2012 - 01:18 PM

[whitedog]

 whitedog, on 10 May 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

The lack of an upgrade path seems to me to be a serious drawback in the Mac App Store for major programs like Adobe Lightroom, which get regular upgrades of significant value. I've owned and used Lightroom since version one and every upgrade has brought important new features and functionality to the program. Buying Lightroom from the MAS strikes me as penny wise and pound foolish. Getting it from Adobe is hardly that much more difficult, certainly not enough to justify paying full price for the next upgrade.

This is an issue Apple must address, and it would seem to be in their best interest to do so. Providing for upgrade pricing would make the App Store both more attractive and more viable for developers of every stripe, especially so for big developers like Adobe. I suspect releasing Lightroom through the MAS is a test case for Adobe, to determine if there is enough interest there to justify Apple's 30% cut.

There's also the issue of no trial software from the App Store. If I were a prospective first time user of a program as expensive as Lightroom, I'd certainly want to try it out first. Which currently means getting it from Adobe.

The Mac App Store, for all its chic, still has some major drawbacks and limitations for developers and users alike. These shortcomings raise the question of just how much does Apple prioritize customer service and convenience. One can overlook the store's failings with inexpensive apps, but for pricier products they become progressively more important. In the case of Lightroom, I consider those failings to be a deal breaker. As an enthusiastic Lightroom user, I cannot recommend buying it from Apple. YMMV.

P.S.: The exception would be if you intend to use Lightroom on more than two computers, the current limit on the Adobe version. Using Lightroom on three or more computers, which you can do with any app you buy from the App Store, might compensate for having to pay full price for an upgrade. Time will tell how important this factor will be for Adobe sales in the MAS.

[anstormacworld]

I bet it's lacking some features, compared to its Windows counterpart.

[IanGosso8n5]

 anstormacworld, on 10 May 2012 - 05:46 PM, said:

I bet it's lacking some features, compared to its Windows counterpart.

How much?

[whitedog]

 anstormacworld, on 10 May 2012 - 05:46 PM, said:

I bet it's lacking some features, compared to its Windows counterpart.

Not. Cynicism without knowledge is just lazy thinking delivered with a bad attitude.

[hswt]

Of course there's also still that "no trial version" thing when purchasing in the App Store. Having just made the switch from Aperture to Lightroom (long story as to my reasons for the switch) I really appreciated being able to demo the program for 30 days by going through the Adobe site. The Demo really helped me decide not only that Lightroom would fill my needs better than Aperture was doing, but that the interface fit with my sense of how things should work (some adjustments there but nothing too major). While $149 may not be a lot of money it's more than I can afford to spend just to check something out.

[DocNo]

 whitedog, on 10 May 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

This is an issue Apple must address, and it would seem to be in their best interest to do so. Providing for upgrade pricing would make the App Store both more attractive and more viable for developers of every stripe, especially so for big developers like Adobe.

Actually, Apple did address it with their products - their pricing is now either what or less than what they used to charge for upgrades.

Adobe is an anomaly - they are one of the last of the major publishers to offer upgrading pricing. Most publishers have gone to a pay annual maintenance or re-buy when you want an upgrade model.

Not that I'm saying I totally agree. It's a little maddening for the iOS side of things since the App store offers to automatically upgrade all "Free" updates - why call it out if paid updates weren't always part of the plan? Five years later it does seem a little silly that paid upgrades still haven't been rolled out...

[DocNo]

 trichardlin, on 10 May 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

Leicaman, can you elaborate on this more? Does Lightroom produce better images or is it easier to use? Thanks.

For me it comes to feel. Both programs are excellent and essentially have feature parity. For me, Aperture just feels more right. It's purely subjective. I felt confined and dictated to with Lightroom. I've noticed that my friends who tend to prefer Lightroom have been photographers allot longer than myself, and most were active in the film days and processed their own photo's. The terminology and workflow in Lightroom seems to favor that. If that's what your comfortable with, then Lightroom will probably be a better fit for you.

I do think it's ridiculous that Apple removed the demo version. Since, for me, the choice of which application to use boils down to feel and a highly subjective choice, the lack of a demo version is a really buzz kill. I do think it's the one thing Microsoft nailed with the Xbox Live Arcade - developers were REQUIRED to have a demo mode in their apps, or they couldn't even get in. I was really hoping Apple would address this after the app store matured for a few years - apparently they think in-app purchases are sufficient?