Woodlink: As a company purportedly built on the crossroads of technology and the humanities, Apple sure knows how to drag its feet updating a "pro" product like Aperture.
If the photographic arts AREN'T the epitome of a discipline squarely in that crossroad, I dunno what is.
How Apple cannot build a product that can match or exceed Lightroom is beyond me. Too busy raking in royalties from Angry Birds I suppose.
You realize that Pros tend not to upgrade to every new version of software? Apple traditionally has made very little money in the Pro market because most shops would run on the same hardware and software for 5+ years. If you make $ off a workflow you tend to not want to change it and retrain your users every 6 months. Having said that, it's because of the Pro market that Apple survived the slump and is the company they are today. I give them props for keeping the Pro Apps around and for reinventing the Mac Pro.
MPA1: Bye bye Aperture. Now I get LR as part of CC (had to go to the Adobe Dark Side for a collaboration) and your lacklustre update policy means a change going forward.
I've used it since paying $800 for version 1 (remember when software cost that much?!) but now just a legacy to maintain edits from past projects.
It's part of my Creative Cloud subscription. Wasn't at the beginning, but was added before LR5 was released. I still prefer Aperture and CaptureOne though.
warpfoo: Re: Canon being the first to market an AF 35mm SLR:
The EOS 650 beat the 620 to market by a couple of months, but the Pentax ME F beat the 650 by ~5 years. No, it wasn't the best AF, but it was TTL.
And the first Canon AF SLR was not the EOS 650, but the T80