I've been using (and loving) Lightroom from the first day of the
initial beta (and have already explored much of the retail version)
and I can't sing its praises enough. My favorite aspects of the
software, though, are mostly related to my RAW workflow. The software
will import JPEGs, but I can't say that I've done it.

Do you shoot tons of pictures each "session?" Are you frustrated by
the organizational and metadata tools of Bridge? Do you do alot of
printing at home and find the print dialogue in Photoshop to be less
than you could want, especially in terms of adding credit or other
text and information to your prints? Do you wish that you could export
flash-based or html-based web galleries quickly and easily?

If you answered yes to one of these questions, then at least check out
the 30-day free trial. If you answered yes to more than one, then
you'll definitely benefit from Lightroom's offerings. If you're just
shooting as a hobby, and your output is limited, and you don't do alot
of the above then it is likely overkill.

In terms of its image manipulation, I think its tools are second to
none, and you don't need to shoot RAW to use them. Almost everything
it does can be done in Photoshop, but the interface is much more
intuitive and streamlined with Lightroom. Again, check the demo and
see if you like it. You've nothing to lose and, in my view, everything
to gain.

And if you do buy it, grab some extra memory cards and shoot RAW. If
you'll be using Lightroom anyway, you might as well use all of it to
its fullest.

One man's opinion,

Will

It has some tweaky options, but I wouldn't buy it for just JPEGs.
PICASA does a pretty good job with that

Doc

I guess you have to ask what you think Lightroom would do for you. It is a
good file organizer, light duty editor, and management tool. Seems to me that
JPEGs need management just as much as RAW files.

I have seen nothing in Lightroom that compels me to move away from Aperture,
or even iView. I do like a few of the more innovative editing tools, though.