FlickrExport for Aperture 1.0

Fraser Speirs was happy to announce this morning the official 1.0 release of his FlickrExport for Aperture plugin, which provides a direct conduit for your works of art to the heavenly nirvana of Flickr. I don't own Aperture, but the plugin seems to have the same UI and functionality as his #1 smash hit: FlickrExport for iPhoto (though it should be noted that on his product page, Frasier makes it clear that the existence of a feature in one of the plugins does not necessitate its existence in the other). Pricing for the Aperture plugin is $26.25 USD (or £14), and a cross-grades from the iPhoto plugin can be had for 50% off by using your FlickrExport for iPhoto serial number as a coupon code. Clever, Mr. Speirs.
Demos of both plugins are of course offered, and Apple (finally!) released a 30-day test drive of Aperture last month, so you really have no excuse for not checking these bad boys out. I was a user of the iPhoto plugin since the early days, and I gladly dropped the cash for a license.
Share
Categories
Fraser Speirs was happy to announce this morning the official 1.0 release of his FlickrExport for Aperture plugin, which provides a direct...
Add a Comment
"so you really have no excuse for not checking these bad boys out."
Unless you have a newer Pentax, which for whatever silly reason Apple has not yet chosen to support in CoreImage.
The plugin costs as much as a year of flickr??? Unreal - it has one interface, is built on the iPhoto and flickr APIs, and costs more than some ground-up applications and 25% of iLife itself? Greed much?
December 09 2006 at 9:30 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Replyhehe Granted, my gripes go a bit back, so I could be guilty of selectively projecting your name to all the articles with a whiny attitude. ;)
Looking over recent stuff my criticism doesn't apply all that much. I think it was mainly the time that apple released the iPod hi-fi and some of you guys expected a bit too much and got all vocal about Apple being stupid for releasing a good, but not groundbrekaing product, that got me a bit hostile. Anyway, I'll shut it, and I obviously still check things out, so you must be doing something right. :p
HS, I wonder if you might have me confused with a couple other bloggers. I often post positively about .Mac; I've been a member 2/3 years running, and I just renewed about a month ago. Dave Caolo, who is sadly no longer blogging with us, was the one who had the series of 'what's wrong with .Mac/alternatives' posts, and Dan Lurie, another TUAW blogger, wrote the 'web 2.0 crisis' post.
I also was one of the first to review the impressive new .Mac webmail, and I gave it largely positive marks for some impressive leaps ahead of its more popular competition such as Yahoo!'s webmail beta and even Gmail.
hehe I know this, and I appreciate opinions as such, my only gripe is the disproportion in relation to positive/negative posts that you submit. Of course, I am the first to admit that it does not matter what I think, it's mainly a point of view to let you know that the Apple crisis 2.0 that you tried to start, and the crusade against .mac, is kinda "heavy" for a lot of us.
I appreciate the reasons for doing what you do, and I actually think the crusade against .mac CAN bring about change in the product, given that you post it here, relentlessly. So I'm split on this, I appreciate efforts to make things better, while I don't like a lot of what I percieve to be agressive exaggerations on how bad Apple/.mac etc is. I know that's probably not your intent either, and as I said, my opinion doesn't matter.
I guess we commentators get a bit opinionated too. :)
I'm always happy to post about something going on, but keep in mind: this is a blog, not CNN. If we like or don't like something, management (Weblogs, Inc. and our overlords: AOL) *encourage* us to be vocal about it.
Take a look at this post, in fact: I mention Fraser released a new plugin, and I actually *do* get across my agenda: I love the plugin, and I pimp it as such. There are a lot of people out there who were upset when Fraser started charging for it, but I completely disagreed with them, backing up Fraser's decision, and posted as such a while back.
Sites like MacNN and MacCentral, on the other hand, stay a bit more strict to the 'news and nothing but the news' stretch - and I'm not saying that's either a good or a bad thing. Just trying to make the comparison to help you decide whether we're up your alley or not: we're a blog, and bloggers get opinionated. That's part of the reason we love writing for TUAW as opposed to anywhere else.
Hope this helps!
Thanks David, that's the kind of articles we like. :) Information without the agenda! ;)
December 09 2006 at 1:17 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyHot Apps on TUAW
Deals of the Day
more deals- Altec Lansing Octiv Duo iDock for $48 + free shipping
- Used Apple iMac 17" Core 2 Duo 1.83GHz for $430 + $28 s&h
- Lounge Deluxe Stand for iPhone / iPod touch for $28 + $8 s&h
- Brookstone Surround-Sound Earbuds for $14 + $7 s&h
- Refurbished Skullcandy Tokidoki Smokin' Buds Mic'd Headset for $5 + $2 s&h
- Stitchway Backup Battery for iPod / iPhone for $5 + free shipping
Software Updates
more updates- EFI Firmware Update brings Lion Internet Recovery to 2010-model Macs
- OS X Lion 10.7.3 released with Safari 5.1.3, Wi-Fi bug fix
- Aperture updated to 3.2.2, addresses Photo Stream issue
- Apple updates Keynote to address Lion issues
- Google Search app gets new look on iPad
- Apple releases Apple TV Software Update 4.4.3



8 Comments