[djacopille]

"I also don't recommend TextEdit for professional authors."
While this advice seems obvious now I'd like to point out two things:
1. Several years ago before Aperture and the Bridge the options for workflow were more limited. Adobe's File Browser, the precursor to Bridge, was weak. iViewMedia Pro was probably the best, but it also had problems. You kind of had to look at iPhoto with a bit of hope.
2. Who's fault is it that iPhoto couldn't really accomplish it's primary objective - to organize and sort through large quantities of photos? Mine for asking it to do that? I think that's Apple's fault for delivering a flashy but shallow application that only performs as advertised on a very small scale and with obvious missing functionality. There's no reason why all the features I need as a professional photographer could not have been easily put into iPhoto. It didn't need to be an Aperture, but something closer to the Bridge would have been nice. And the Bridge comes for "free" with Adobe Creative Suite - not unlike iPhoto comes for free with new Macs.
I also think it's partially my fault for being so taken by Apple. I still am. And so I'll approach Aperture with the same hope I have with most Apple products - and expect to find a very slick application that impresses for the first 5 minutes until I find the missing nuts and bolts.

[minderbinder]

"There's no reason why all the features I need as a professional photographer could not have been easily put into iPhoto."
iPhoto is a consumer app. If it fails to do things a consumer app should do, sure, you have a valid complaint. But it's silly to expect a consumer app to have pro features.
"And the Bridge comes for "free" with Adobe Creative Suite - not unlike iPhoto comes for free with new Macs."
So to get the Bridge you have to spend hundreds on pro imaging software? Sure sounds unlike iPhoto to me. How much is Bridge if you buy it separately? You can get iPhoto for $49.

[TenoB]

I'm sure you understand the difference between consumer apps and pro apps.
There is a reason why iMovie doesn't have the functionality of Final Cut Pro.
Or iDVD doesn't have the funtioinality of DVD Studio Pro.
The pattern continues, iPhoto is a consumer app - Aperture is a pro app
One is a consumer app free with your Mac. The other is a pro app and its features are over kill for most people's needs.

[Grapho]

Aperture is NOT about content creation. It dose not have layers, channels, typography, gradients, swatches, brushes... The list goes on and on and on...

In reply to:

---

This is so wrong.
Aperture works with:
JPEG, TIFF, PICT, BMP, PNG, TGA, PSD

---

When did I say it didn't.

[pcharles]

In reply to:

---

It's in the Adobe arena, but it's not really in Photoshop's. Looks like Aperture is all about RAW. Photoshop is not about RAW. Photoshop uses external apps to let you convert/organize RAW. (The RAW plug-in and Bridge). If you don't have a RAW camera, Aperture is 100% useless, while Photoshop is still 100% useful. Plus it's $50

---

Actually, this is incorrect. Aperture works quite happily with most file formats, so Aperture is still 100% useful when working with none-RAW images.

[pcharles]

I think he was supposted to be responding to MoosenSquirrel, as I did. Unfortunately, I did not see he had posted before I did.