Which probably explains why this Ars Technica review of Apple's foray into professional-grade photo editing via their new Aperture application has been so consistently misrepresented by Apple partisans.
From the Aperture review:
Let's get this out of the way early: Aperture is not a competitor to Photoshop. Unless you bought Photoshop exclusively for the Camera RAW plug-in or the Bridge program, Aperture cannot replace Photoshop.
This is a complement to Photoshop, not a replacement.
From the partisan camp:
Why are people so obsessively comparing Aperture to Photoshop?
A textbook case of strawman misrepresentation of the argument if there ever was any. Look, I seriously question any professional photographer's skills who thinks that Aperture's inability to produce an accurate histogram, or maintain the integrity of RAW format files, is not a big deal. Looking at real professionals' comments and it's clear that Aperture is an albatross.
Make no mistake. The entire selling point of Aperture is non-destructive RAW file editing. Not Photoshop replacement. That primary and verified complaint by the Aperture critics is that the software fails on that single, central task.
Ultimately though Aperture's failure as an app (and failure is exactly what it is) has no bearing on Apple's success as a company. Apple will get it right aroudn v2.0 or so (remember that Windows, the most successful piece of software ever written, didn't get its stride till v3. 3.1, actually.)
The real problem is that Apple's hardcore base deify the company and so are utterly incapable of supplying honest critique that would actually be to Apple's benefit. If they could bring themselves to do so once in a while, there would be even fewer misfires like Aperture than the low rate of same that Apple presently enjoys. "yup, it's a flub, Apple will get it right next time, or we won'tbuy that version either" is a more honest defense than "na-na-na-na-na-na- I can't hear you!" against the doomsayers.
(via Brian, who has maintained reasonable neutrality on the issue overall, but still treats the partisans with a bit too much credulity.)