Siberiinn: The answer to the title of this article is "no, not yet". The key word is "yet". Once Apple opens up Extensions (plug-ins) then other developers (e.g. onOne, MacPhun, etc.) will grow Photos into more than Aperture was. I think Apple realized they can't compete with LR, but also realized their cameras took a LOT of photos and iPhotos was out-dated. I'm a LR user (non-pro/ enthusiast) and Photos won't replace LR for me. Will it replace iPhoto? Absolutely! This is just Photos 1.0.
To the pompous snobs that have been posting that Photos isn't enough for them and so Apple is doomed because Steve Jobs would have never done this, get real! Steve Jobs is not coming back. You are basically saying the other tens of thousands of employees at Apple are meaningless because Steve Jobs must have written every line of code and hand-built every piece of hardware. Steve Jobs helped make Apple a successful company, but the success is still continuing. Compare the share price and market cap.
The handwriting was on the wall for years before Apple officially killed Aperture. I was unhappy about the impending demise of Aperture only because I have many thousands of dslr raw photos that I worked in Aperture. When I switched to Lightroom in 2013, it had many advanced tools that Aperture lacked (mostly because Aperture hadn't had a major upgrade in several years). I have made peace with LR, memorizing key commands for quick navigation and access to the tools I use most often. Best of all, it really does a great job or me. So while I may have to go back and rework in LR photos that I had already worked in Aperture, overall I am happy that Adobe kept up its support for pro and prosumer photographers, unlike Apple, who threw us under the bus.
This is pretty outrageous. Thanks Lensjoy for posting the link to the comments page. Everyone should file a comment. I get really annoyed when I go to some attraction and because I carry a dslr, the prohibitions against taking photos are enforced against me, but anyone with a cell phone can shoot away, even with flash, and get away with it. Extending these asinine rules to wilderness is despicable.
RossN: It's a good effort, yet very poorly executed. Adobe puts together a better (not great) offer to lure back users, but then limit the fanfare to a restricted set of users and don't commit to fixed pricing. It appears Adobe is going to play games with potential customers, ratcheting price back little by little, until they find the exact sweet spot where they can extract the most $.
It's pretty bad when they don't invite owners of prior CS suites (i.e. customers who spent more money with Adobe than those with PS, alone) to participate. This comes across as being more interested in earning a buck up front, than building a customer base.
Talk about souring a relationship with the customer. I'm sure there are a lot of potential customers they just excluded, such as me.
"This offer is available to customers who own a previous commercial version of Photoshop or Photoshop Extended, version CS3 or later (CS3.x, CS4, CS5.x, or CS6). Suites and volume licenses do not qualify."
Trust is gone.
No, what I would expect is that I could continue to use my CS6 suite applications and that I could get Photoshop CC and LR5. That might be a good deal, even though I have already bought the standalone version of LR5. But eliminating suite owners from the offer for Photoshop and LR just adds to distrust that I now have for Adobe.
Hawaii-geek: I Like it! Worth the Upgrade.Have been a LR user from the very first beta. and use LR every day.
The conversion of LRv3.6 to LRv4 is just ok ... you will want to tweak your settings in LRv4, and will get better results via more control imho. There might be a bit more detail. But, that might be from the improved Clarity slider.
With every version, I make fewer trips to PS.
But, Adobe ... Can we please have a LITTLE more SPEED in the v4.01 for Win7 64-bit update ? Please
Maybe a way for LR to use more Memory (preferance slider) or load all the program in memory.
Hello, 36mp Nikon D800 DNGs ... :)
No way to create "Custom Book Templates"?
I am a longtime Aperture user who never really took to LR3. I used it for noise reduction and applying adjustments with the gradient tool. But LR 4.1 is a big improvement, IMO. The develop tools are much better than in the previous version. However, the interface is still extremely user-surly, requiring endless module changes and memorization of key commands. The database functions are nowhere near as easy or elegant as Aperture's. So I use both programs. At least now I find LR to be a much better competitor to Aperture. May they continue to compete for a long, long time!