ACDSee Ultimate 10 just got released. It now replaces CC for me.

[N80]

I think the Windows only issue is a lost opportunity for ACDSee. Aperture's abandonment has provided an excellent market for CO and LR and the fact that many Aperture users do not like LR has driven people to CO. It seems that this has driven CO forward toward providing a full replacement for Aperture. Platform issues aside, I think there are a lot of Mac users still in limbo after Aperture. If ACDSee is as good as it sounds I think they could pick up a large number of these folks.

LR is the now the defacto software for most former Aperture users but a lot of us don't like LR to begin with and despise the subscription only approach to software. The only thing I ever miss in LR after going to CO is the print capabilities mentioned above and even that isn't a big deal.

So it seems like to would serve ACDSee to tap into that market.............especially since a license for CO is $300!!!

[StephaneB]

I think the Windows only issue is a lost opportunity for ACDSee. Aperture's abandonment has provided an excellent market for CO and LR and the fact that many Aperture users do not like LR has driven people to CO. It seems that this has driven CO forward toward providing a full replacement for Aperture. Platform issues aside, I think there are a lot of Mac users still in limbo after Aperture. If ACDSee is as good as it sounds I think they could pick up a large number of these folks.

LR is the now the defacto software for most former Aperture users but a lot of us don't like LR to begin with and despise the subscription only approach to software. The only thing I ever miss in LR after going to CO is the print capabilities mentioned above and even that isn't a big deal.

So it seems like to would serve ACDSee to tap into that market.............especially since a license for CO is $300!!!

The thing is, ACDSee is developed entirely with Microsoft technologies. To have a Mac version would mean a complete re-write that is simply not going to be profitable.

[GrahamBy]

How much portability is there between LR and ACDSee?
Ie do I have to export LR images as TIFFs, or can I somehow move across the DNG+edit-file?
The same question for the return trip of course, in case ACDSee were to go belly-up?

[StephaneB]

How much portability is there between LR and ACDSee?
Ie do I have to export LR images as TIFFs, or can I somehow move across the DNG+edit-file?
The same question for the return trip of course, in case ACDSee were to go belly-up?

The LR adjustments are definitely lost. You can salvage the end result by exporting to tiff.

I didn't do that.

I'll have a before and after. I noticed I very seldom revisit previously finished pictures. And when your CC subscription expires, only the Develop and Map modules in LR are disabled. You keep everything else. So I'll keep LR installed on the PC. If I want to print or export pictures that were edited in LR, I'll do it with LR.

I imported the LR database in ACDSee so that the searches I'll do will search in all my photography history.

[GrahamBy]

And when your CC subscription expires, on the Develop and Map modules n LR are disabled.

For the moment, I remain happy with LR5.7. My previous version was LR1.1, so it's possible I'll resist the call of CC for quite a while