Lightroom vs. other options (Aperture? what else?)

Question

I'd hate to make just a really vague topic, but I'm curious what others are using for their stills workflow.  I use Lightroom, and so do most others I know, but I want to make sure I'm not in an echo chamber and not even aware of what I'm missing.
My workflow is entirely Lightroom-based: from import, sorting, basic editing, more advanced editing with Photoshop if necessary (but LR integrates this very seemlessly), and then jpg export (I currently don't do prints or web galleries, just delivery to clients via Dropbox).  
Thoughts? What are the advantages of other options out there?

Answer 1

Aperture is only available for the Mac -- since it's Apple software.
Some time back... in Apple's way of doing things, they recognized that Photoshop -- though quite powerful -- wasn't very practical for everyday use nor did it have any management capabilities.  They recognized that a typical photographer probably shoots a large number of images which are all related -- they belong to the same event or project, etc.  They also recognized that if you shoot enough, you fill up your hard drive and need a way to deal with offline storage so that you can archive the shots you aren't working with NOW and yet not lose track of the fact that you have them.  They also recognized that 98% of the time, you're "adjusting" images and not doing wholesale edits (you're not creating composite images, etc.)  Lastly... they realized that the Photoshop editing process is not protective of the original image and is also QUITE bulky (files really have a filespace "bloat" problem becasue of the nature of the "layer" system.)
So they created Aperture -- which deal with all of this.
Adobe... feeling threatened by this new product (and rightly so) responded by creating Lightroom -- more or less a shameless rip-off of Aperture.
The two are roughly equal in terms of what they can do.
I have long felt that Adobe is exceptionally proud of they software and thing it should be priced as if they were selling gold bars.  When Aperture debuted... it was $200.  When Lightroom debuted it was $300.  
Lightroom is available on both Windows and Mac.  Aperture is only available on Mac.  
Recently I've noticed Apple seems to be drastically lowering the cost of software -- if not giving it away for free.  And further... they seem to consider everything to be a "family pack" in that once you buy something from the App Store you are allowed to install it on every computer YOU legitimately own.  Adobe is still in the "one computer" world.
Aperture is now $79.  Lightroom is $149.  
I tried Lightroom in it's pre 1.0 beta days but even after release and watching several revisions, it was too much like Aperture (I suppose that's a good thing) so I saw little value in swtiching.  It doesn't work with Photoshop any better than Aperture does.  
I use a lot of tools on my Mac and I find that Aperture (not-surprisingly) has better integration with everything else on the Mac.
As such... I pretty much treat this like a Coke / Pepsi thing and don't feel that one of them is truly "better" than the other and it's more a matter of personal taste.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da