Apple applies stealth Aperture Snow Leopard "tax"

Jonny Evans
|
September 15, 2009
|
Share

Apple has applied a quiet “Snow Leopard Tax” against professional photographers using earlier versions of popular pro software package, Aperture.

Digital imaging professionals who rushed to upgrade to the new OS have been distressed when they attempt to open their essential photogs tool, as Apple’s big cat is not prepared to support versions of Aperture earlier than 2.1.4.

An Apple tech support document published in the early hours of this morning confirms the news, warning: “When you attempt to open Aperture 1.5.6 on a computer running Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard, the following alert appears: "You can't use this version of the Application Aperture with this version of Mac OS X."”

Apple then helpfully informs users that the problem “is expected as Aperture 2.1.4 is required for Snow Leopard compatibility.”

Apple has made the Aperture 2.1.4 update available for download by users upgrading to Snow Leopard. The software was introduced near the ship date for Snow Leopard, August 27.

To be fair, Apple released Aperture 2.0 almost 18 months ago. An upgrade from a previous version to the current, supported version, costs c.$100.
 

Comments (20)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 4:14am

Is it 64 bit and is the loupe lag fixed ? If not I'm going with Lightroom without minding people to head to piratebay !

Fix lag first and then impose tax, no problem. Yes I'm a fanboy.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 5:07am

Yes agreed. I'm also a fanboy (since 1980 actually), but Aperture still does not support my Lumix G1. Actually I've found the Californian based "Raw Photo Processor" instead, quite adequate and acceptable. Why pay more? Think different, Apple! ;)

Jan Malý (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 5:20am

Anyway, I hope there will be new version (3.0) soon. That takes full advantages of OpenCL, 64bit etc. But I must say, that Aperture runs much faster on 10.6 than on 10.5.

iMat77 (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 5:52am

Waiting for 3.0 as well for the reasons mentioned above as well as:
- better geotagging features (embedded instead of plugin)
- face recognition (professionals and enthusiasts also will appreciate such a feature, particularly if it is better than the one in iPhoto)
- wider choice of books (with maps for instance)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 6:05am

6 months ago I decided Lightroom is core to Adobe's business, and Aperture is a play thing to Apple. Sadly, Apple is reconfirming my thinking.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 7:27am

Duh, you have to keep your applications current. Why would you not want to? That makes no sense. To me it sounds like you 'fanboys' are actually lame Adobe employees. Adobe gave up on Mac users, there is no way I would use any of their sw at this point. They just were putting the hurt on Apple, first not allowing display postscript in OS X and then just upset that Apple implemented PDF on OS X far better than Adobe ever could. Reader is a joke, and all their other SW is way overpriced.

I am not a professional photog anymore, used to be, but there is no way I would use Adobe when Apple's software is not only better, but much more humanely priced. And you guys are upset that you can't run ancient versions in brand new OS? That makes no sense at all. Apple will have a new version, this is not a 'plaything' for them.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 7:28am

OK, I can see when people complain about version 8 of some software not running on a new OS when version 9 just has tiny incremental updates--then that's a tax.

But Aperture 2.0 (and the FREE upgrade to 2.1) is so much overwhelmingly better than 1.5 and so cheap ($99 is nothing if you're a pro), that I can't imagine there being any legitimate complaints about this.

Slow news day?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 7:28am

You have to keep your applications current. Why would you not want to? That makes no sense. To me it sounds like you 'fanboys' are actually lame Adobe employees. Adobe gave up on Mac users, there is no way I would use any of their sw at this point. They just were putting the hurt on Apple, first not allowing display postscript in OS X and then just upset that Apple implemented PDF on OS X far better than Adobe ever could. Reader is a joke, and all their other SW is way overpriced.

I am not a professional photog anymore, used to be, but there is no way I would use Adobe when Apple's software is not only better, but much more humanely priced. And you guys are upset that you can't run ancient versions in brand new OS? That makes no sense at all. Apple will have a new version, this is not a 'plaything' for them.

Brian (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 7:31am

How should anyone expect an outdated version to run optimally on a brand new, streamlined OS?

You sure you fanboys aren't actually Adobe employees, resorting to an old MSFT tactic of posting as if you were disgruntled customers of competing products? Because I don't believe you are a professional and not wanting to bother to update your software. Have fun using Adobe and paying more for less.

Brian (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 7:55am

It gives me a 404 error.

Peruchito (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 8:11am

if your mac is the core of your business, you shouldn't have rushed to upgrade the OS. this is common practice since
'upgrades' first appeared on the planet.

if you had questions about compatibility, a simple call or email to apple support would have sufficed.

so reap what you sow.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 8:24am

Stealth? Bunk! There was plenty of notice that you had to have a later version of Aperture to work in Snow Leoaprd. You expect Apple to send every Aperture user a letter?

JJohn Blackburn (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 8:39am

C'mon, you're better than this. It's not a tax at all and there's no sinister motive. I was caught by this myself and must now upgrade, but be fair and above all accurate in your posts, please.

Late Adopter (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 9:03am

This is why people who count on certain applications should _not_ pounce on any new software upgrades, OS or not!

Geeze Louise people, if making your living is dependent on one or two particular applications, it's always, always, always a good idea to wait at least a month after a new version is released. The same goes for new hardware. This is why corporate IT departments have their users a version, or sometimes more, behind what's current (not to mention the rollout logistics).

Sit back, do you work, and read your favorite web sites and forums to hear from the rabid, must-have-now folks who installed the day the software was released. then see if they are cheering or wailing. Then wait another week or three and make your own upgrade decision!

If you simply must try out the new stuff, clone your startup drive to another hard drive, and try it out there. (You do have a backup drive, don't you???) If it does not work for you, simply switch back to your usual drive. Save yourself the tears and griping by being smart about your upgrades.

Bill Burkholder (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 9:04am

If you wish to use your older software, there are plenty of used computers and operating system versions for sale on eBay.

When companies upgrade, users must decide whether to play along, or stay where they are. I use a late-model MacBook Pro that I will upgrade to Snow Leopard by version 10.6.3. But I'll know precisely what will, and will not, work after the upgrade, and I'll be sure what I NEED is taken care of.

I'll not be upgrading Adobe Photoshop CS3 until a version that runs in 64-bit mode is available. What would be the point? There isn't much in CS4 that I need that isn't in Lightroom or Aperture.

I'll not be upgrading Microsoft Office until they restore Visual Basic for Applications, because I can't read any company spreadsheets that rely on VBA in Excel 2008. Office 2004 runs just fine in Rosetta.

That said, I still keep a couple of older machines around for (gasp!) PageMaker, Freehand, FAX transmissions, and reading older files from Zip and Jaz drives. I have neither the need, nor the time, nor the resources to invest in newer replacements for these things.

Use what you have, and use what you know. If you need more, upgrade, but do some homework and quit whining.

Late Adopter (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 9:05am

This is why people who count on certain applications should _not_ pounce on any new software upgrades, OS or not!

Geeze Louise people, if making your living is dependent on one or two particular applications, it's always, always, always a good idea to wait at least a month after a new version is released. The same goes for new hardware. This is why corporate IT departments have their users a version, or sometimes more, behind what's current (not to mention the rollout logistics).

Sit back, do you work, and read your favorite web sites and forums to hear from the rabid, must-have-now folks who installed the day the software was released. then see if they are cheering or wailing. Then wait another week or three and make your own upgrade decision!

If you simply must try out the new stuff, clone your startup drive to another hard drive, and try it out there. (You do have a backup drive, don't you???) If it does not work for you, simply switch back to your usual drive. Save yourself the tears and griping by being smart about your upgrades.

Bill (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 10:14am

What an incredible, whine-fest. I will remember now not to look here for any Mac information. This is a pathetic rant on your part.

Is this site run by Rob Enderle or Paul Thurrot? Because it reads like it.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 12:07pm

I agree with all the people who still use Aperture 1.5.6. Personally, I use Quark XPress 3.2 and I can't believe that Apple wants me to upgrade to the newest version on Snow Leopard. I mean, come on people, Quark XPress has support for APPLESCRIPT! Did you hear me? APPLESCRIPT! What else could I possibly need?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 12:44pm

Aperture sux anyway. Every try to do local adjustment (sorry, dogdey and burn)? Sux. Speed? sux (yes, even in 2.0). RAW support? sux

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 15, 2009 - 6:33pm

Aperture 2.1.1 works for me.