OSNews

Indeed, outside the US, only media users and artists use Mac. Well, theres a very small group of unix hackers I know that use Mac but they use Linux just as often, at work.

Also, buying Logic didn't completely work out how they thought it would (IMHO), because I see more people switching from Logic to Cubase than from PC to Mac for Logic.

Closed hardware has cost Mac OS a larger share on the PC market. Porting these media apps to Linux would open them the doors of a wider market without seriously threatening their current hardware market. x86 media users won't buy Apple boxes but would probably buy Apple software if they could run it on their favorite hardware.

That would give a lot of traction to Linux and therefore to Apple as a software developper, as being the first on a market very often means dominating it shamelessly.

Don't wait for Adobe ...

"Indeed, outside the US, only media users and artists use Mac."

That's not true at all. Its just a common idea about the macs, nothing else. In Europe and in Japan for example, a lot users are simply students, familly, or whatever. Without consering scientists and engineers.

That's very nice that Apple could open themselves to very good market and business. Hollywood is not the only one, Apple is also growing in sciences and clustering markets in an impressive way.

I don't think that Apple wants to focus only on the high-end worlstation market (it seems that they did not say that). i guess they don't simply want to compete in the very low priced desktop market (the emac is not completely in this market), but instead try to keep the same range of prices, and still propose some conputers in the Imac range of price.

So I don't think that Apple wants to play only in the high-end computing like Sun and SGI did, but i guess that they still want to propose an alternative to the pc computers for a large brand of users.

This story is actually quite funny to me, since I am one of those Unix developers getting an iBook. However, a friend of mine works with SGI harware a lot (for Visualisation). He doesn't notice anything mentioned by this article. What he notices is that SGI is switching to Linux to keep their share, and they do that quite well. More and more clusters from SGI are running Linux and performing better than Irix. Cluster XFS has been ported aswell as CCNUMA. Pherhaps this is not quite the Hollywood bussiness, but Apple hasn't come along yet.

*öh*
No.
I live in Europe and none of the Mac users I know are artists (me included). None of them even need the multimedia apps very often (except for iTunes). I (and some of the others) just don't think the cheaper hardware price of PCs is worth the constant hassle with Windows (insecurity, constant patching, MS monopoly tax, etc.) or having to dual boot (not needed with Mac OSX for most Linux apps). IMHO - taking time and nerves into account - Macs are way cheaper.

> Also, buying Logic didn't completely work out how they
> thought it would (IMHO), because I see more people switching
> from Logic to Cubase than from PC to Mac for Logic.
That depends on the marketing aims of Apple. They shurly expected loosing a certain percent of users. Maybe the actual number of lost users is less than they expected which means a marketing success from their point of view.
Any numbers to support your claims?

"Indeed, outside the US, only media users and artists use Mac. Well, theres a very small group of unix hackers I know that use Mac but they use Linux just as often, at work."

I'm not artist and I use Mac. Am I mad? :-D
No, I'm a person that he hates stupid things: Windows and PC are stupid things, like the words that you wrote.

"Also, buying Logic didn't completely work out how they thought it would (IMHO), because I see more people switching from Logic to Cubase than from PC to Mac for Logic."

Have you a link that it say this?

Could you guys get back on the topic of "media market and Apple" instead of picking up to death on comments people write in a hurry?
Of course and there are mac users that are no artists. Do you really need to debate this fact? But the reality is, on small countries like Portugal, Greece etc the *image* and *impression* Apple gives is that is *mostly* for the media users. But OF COURSE and there are "normal" users there too.
Now that we cleared this up, please let's go back on topic.

That is not true. I use Macs and I am not an graphic artist. About the half of my friends that own an computer are Mac users and nobody of them is a graphic artist, too.

I think the "only media users and artists use Mac" statement depends on the old prejudice that Macs are only good for graphics. (like Eugenia's brother ;-).

well, cubase sx is better than logic IMHO, so it's a good thing they are switching

I'm not an artist, and I'm not a Mac user either, SO IT MUST BE TRUE!!!! ;-)

While they're good with scientific workstations, it certainly seems to me that with a standard Dell and a Linux distro you get a bit more bang for your buck, even if it is at the cost of the overall experience. I think Apple should try and leverage the "it-just-works" simplicity and beauty of their computers (they are by far and away the most stylish IT company out there). There's tons of moms out there that would like an easy computing experience.

I'm not sure about how well they'll do in the media industries, but they seem to be running their partners (ISVs and Hardware re-sellers) out of business. I'm not sure how good this will be for them in the long-run - it could make software houses wary of developing for the Mac.

I'm happy to see that Apple start moving to the Hollywood market. I think now that SGI has made some weird decisions, such as leaving Irix and go with the mainstream Linux choice, one competitive edge is sort of lost. I guess in a few years Apple will have a significant share while SGI diminish into nothing. Unfortunate since SGI used to be somewhat of a dreamcompany and now they don't have much left.

Go Apple go

I live in India, until recently, I had never seen a Mac, and I'm a graphic design student.

I bought a Mac because I'm now planning to work along with some friends in the US who use Macs, and needed me to get a Mac and Quark Xpress for compatibility.

But here I don't see Macs anywhere, not even in graphics field. Just today I've come back after giving a job for printing, and he was very unhappy that I was unable to give him a CorelDRAW or pagemaker file for his PC.

From the article

"Apple starts making a big name in Hollywood and many creative studios are now opting for Apple's products to do the main editing."

Where is the source of that? on what is that based?

I used to do proffesional 3D CGI and CAD and still are subscribed to lots of magazines and formums and the only names that come up very often are Windows, SGI, SUN and Linux not Mac. Sales of Maya for MacOSX are really really low compared to Windows and Linux.
Shake runs on Windows. There are many proffesional DVD and Linear VideoEditing programs for Windows and SGI and even Linux.
Could you please send me the link to this assumption.

Di.fm does all I need for my music needs

Kewl! Nice selection of music there. Thanks, Eugenia, for a good music link...

Back to the subject? Media market & Apple? Macs?
Yep, Apple probably continues to grow in media market. Yep, Macs are very good machines... I hope I could perhaps afford to buy one for myself one day too...? =)

(Hey, it is's spring time here in Finland, after a long cold winter. Being a Finn, I cannot be expected to write too rational text at this time of the year. Even the multitudes of arctic penguins and polar beers that usually populate Helsinki city centre are behaving quite irrationally at this time of the year, you know.

Now - let us see if I get my very first modded down message with this one..??)

>excuse me, but would anyone trust a rendering farm running
>windows?

Its not about renderframs but about the frontend work like:
Maya, Softimage, Avid etc.. But to answer your question alomst nobody is running their renderfarm on Windows but this is a more price choice (you pay often licenses per cpu or even cpu/cycle and most system a quad+), than a stability question. Linux renderfarms/clusters are cheap and powerfull.

Windows is very suited as a CGI/CAD desktop but Linux is better, faster and cheaper!;) The question is, if Apple is making inroads on the Hollywood desktop too, it could do that but i do not read or see that anywhere.

Wouldn't Apple's Xgrid be useful for this sort of task?

http://www.apple.com/acg/xgrid/

I agree, where are the actual stats on Apple sales in Hollywood particularly Silicon Valley? From what I've seen and heard from other Artists Linux is the dominant force in production studios and is spreading fast world wide crushing Windows. This may change if Apple gets serious offering real workstations for studios and desktops for the home/corporate user. Though from this quote it seems unlikely (see below).

"With Steve Jobs saying yesterday that Apple has specifically decided to not compete in the low-end desktop market (not even in the corporate desktop market according to Jobs) but instead to focus on the iPod business and in the high-end workstation market, this image of Mac being "for artists" can only become stronger on both lower-income countries whose not all citizens can afford Macs, but also in USA -- the stronghold of Apple."

Well I guess Apple doesn't understand what caused SGI to lose it's hold on the industry because of being so locked in with expensive hardware and limited software. Sure Apple has some great software but shutting out the desktop market will make them suffer even more. Who do they think is buying all those iPods? It's not mostly the artist but mainly the tech geek on his/her way to work or the home user.

I still can't compare a desktop G5 to an SGI except when comparing cost or the feeling of being locked in. After all SGI systems are servers and workstations offering professional graphics. They are not intended for desktop use. Apple only at this time offers gaming cards suited for most 2D work but not suited for 3D. No matter how much Apple markets their systems and OSX to be kick ass it still doesn't fool experienced users. Do you know why Maya and Shake require pro graphics cards on Linux but for OSX Apple only lists gaming cards? The same goes for Maya on Windows that requires pro graphics but for Apple only a select few gaming cards. Answer is simple and that is that they don't offer any support for highend graphics hardware. Oh and Bas, Shake is no longer distributed on Windows. Last version was 2.5 and I believe Apple now only supports OSX and Linux.

It sounds like Apple is unable or unwilling to compete with Windows for things like gaming on a desktop so their excuse is to say "We will now only offer systems suited for the workstation market". Okay so where are they? Looking at the Apple site right now and all I see is some shiny laptops (still no G5 64-bit like the AMD mobile) and some very nicely priced desktops but no workstations.

I'm holding off on purchasing a G5 till I see if there are complaints with things like Maya 6 as there was with previous version of Maya. We shouldn't lay blaim on the software but the hardware Apple provides. Locking users in and trying to run highend graphics software on low end hardware does not impress me. Alias continually lists poor test results when trying to use a gaming card instead of a pro graphics card intended for DCC.

I think it's safe to assume Apple doesn't impress many other 3D artists either. Hopefully Jobs and the rest of Apple are listening. Start offering what the market needs and wants, instead of what you think we should have.

Shake is no longer sold for windows. If you're using shake, you have a Mac, a PC with Linux, IRIX, or you are way behind the times.

I don't know what some people are smoking when they say they don't think macs are being used more for video. Apple won an Emmy for final cut pro not to long ago. There have been articles about producers of prime time TV that edit their shows on Powerbooks. Macs have taken over Pixar, the most successful CGI movie company(pretty much the only company that makes CG movies). Its definitely out there, you just have your head in the Windows sandbox.

And all this is before apples announcements of Final Cut Pro HD, Shake 3.5, Motion, etc.

Apple has a rather large share of this market. Its just that its such a small market comparatively, so no one has a buddy that is a mac user and does "graphics."

The last thing Apple needs to do in this high end market is make Pro graphics cards compatible with the G5. When they do that, the doors will be wide open for pro's to choose Apple.

"Sales of Maya for MacOSX are really really low compared to Windows and Linux."

As low as 25%

http://www.alias.com/eng/press/press_releases/20030716_maya_softwar...

"Macs have taken over Pixar, the most successful CGI movie company(pretty much the only company that makes CG movies). "

You do know who runs Pixar, don't you? What is surprising is that it took so long for that to happen.

the world is a lot bigger than europe, the usa, and japan. sales in japan are faltering the fastest for apple. apple reports on sales to all regions of the world and there arent many going in south america, asia, and africa.

but anyway, nice opionion but where is some data to back up this "success" in hollywood? pixar, a company with strong ties to apple via the CEO is just now moving to Macs and for clearly marketing reasons pulled off by said CEO.

What other big firms are moving significant numbers to Mac?

Everything I see shows for both video production (windows), scientific computing (linux), web design (windows), print design (windows), sound design (windows), education (windows and linux), rendering (linux and a little windows), etc as moving away from proprietary hardware/software (read sgi and apple and other highend unix workstations from hp & ibm {they are now pushing linux on workstations to bring costs down}, etc ).

buying a few software companies (killing off support for other platforms too) and announcing new titles doesn't make this editorial any more true.

show me/us some hard data.

>Shake is no longer sold for windows. If you're using shake,
>you have a Mac, a PC with Linux, IRIX, or you are way behind
>the times.

I do USE shake not did i said i did.

>Macs have taken over Pixar, the most successful CGI movie
>company(pretty much the only company that makes CG movies)
Pixar is using Linux very much, Disney switched completly
to Linux.

>Its definitely out there,
I never stated its not outthere but that is something completly different that the article poster said, and i remind you:
"Apple starts making a big name in Hollywood and many creative studios are now opting for Apple's products to do the main editing"
Wich creative studios? where is that printed?

>you just have your head in the Windows sandbox.
I do not use Windows but that is not relevant.

>Apple has a rather large share of this market
Where did you read that?

Meanwhile Linux and Windows are making inroads..
this is a nice article (2001) about that.
http://cgw.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Article...

>The last thing Apple needs to do in this high end market is
>make Pro graphics cards compatible with the G5. When they
>do that, the doors will be wide open for pro's to choose
>Apple.
Open yes but i suspect they will not choose Apple for several reasons but the main reason will be that Apple requires new/expensive and mostly low-preformance hardware.
Windows and LInux run on cutting edge sooner than Apple and Linux is FREE!!

I see people switching from Windows to Mac to get better quality laptops, a friend of mine recently jumped from an HP laptop to a Powerbook 15" and I'm thinking of replacing my prehistoric Dell Latitude with an iBook.

Windows laptops are in a speed race and battery life is suffering, Apple's more sedate - and classy - powerbook and iBook range look very tempting for that reason.

Add to that the positive morasss of evil applications waiting on the web for a windows user and you have a pair of compelling reasons.

>As low as 25%

only Education marketplace, we are talking about proff.studions not schools. Educational packages
are often very low priced.

http://www.alias.com/eng/press/press_releases/20030716_maya_softwar...

"Currently 25 percent of all commercial units of Maya are sold for the Mac OS X platform in North America and 20 percent globally, showing that Maya is now a leading 3D animation software package on the Mac platform."

so they are 20% of mayas sales worldwide not even 25%.

maya is a top seller on mac with lightwave as there are much fewer choices on mac than on windows...id be willing to be there are even more choices for linux in the 3d space now.

maya came to mac with X and has done very well, but it is a modest percentage of sales for alias.

The PM G5, and the X-Serve G5 systems are cutting edge hardware. where else in the X86 world do you get 16GBps bandwidth? Maybe i should call it the x86 sandbox.

btw you probably think i'm a zealot, but i have both mac and windows sitting on my desk right now, so I have a better view than most of whats being offered.

The newst Maya Unlimited v. 6 is not even available for MacOSX. That sas enough

this tells you something. It tells you that apple is being very careful about which markets it chooses for expansion. It also demonstrates that once apple chooses a market it goes for it.

Apple has focused on taking this media market and i think you'll see the same type of focused behavior in other market in the not so distant future.

Apple's tiny market share is a problem, one that jobs clearly is aware of. It is also an advantage. IF apple can increase their share to 10% of sales then they will do quite nicely.

Apple wasn't the one who 'single handedly' took down SGI's dominance...It was Nvidia with their GeForce 256. By the time that came out, Intel's processors were much stronger than the MIPS ones that were shipped in SGI boxes instantly making PCs a viable 3D platform. Then MS bought Softimage, ported it to Windows just to show it could be done...thus scaring Alias (then Alias|wavefront) into porting Maya to win32 as well...both those apps were IRIX only apps previously. Since then it was windows PCs that cut into SGIs business. Apple didn't really have a 3D contender until a couple years later when OS X was released. I'd be willing to bet that about the time the geforce 256 was released most editing started moving to win32 as well...especially as it became a apprent that intel was going to continue to kick MIPS' butt in speed.

a frequently over looked industry that is actually now bigger than hollywood is the game industry.

i wonder what percentage of design, 3d, rendering, sound, etc is done on mac, a platform that has a miniscule end market for games?

IGDA lists many partners at http://www.igda.org/partners/ and if you go down the list you see a lot hardware and software firms but no apple and many dont support apple.

its a rare occasion you see a mac mentioned in http://www.gdmag.com/homepage.htm

>It tells you that apple is being very careful about which
>markets it chooses for expansion.
Like the Graphics market?

>It also demonstrates that once apple chooses a market it
>goes for it.
Right because just choose and then stop going for it??!!??


>IF apple can increase their share to 10% of sales then they
>will do quite nicely.

What a BS statement. If Linux can increase its share to 90% of sales then they will do quite nicely. Right so much for logic.

@Anonymous (IP: ---.nash01.tn.comcast.net)
Right on the head!

I am not against Apple i use MacOSX everyday but all these statements are build on quicksand. Where is the article that states that Apple is making inroads into Hollywood? where?

http://ati.com/products/workstation.html

no mac support, just windows and linux

Digital Content Creation Certifications
ATI works closely with the industry's key Digital Content Creation (DCC) software companies to ensure our professional customers of outstanding performance, product reliability and stability.

The following content creation applications have been certified for the FireGL products listed.


Company Application
Adobe
Adobe Premiere 6.5
Apple
Shake
Alias
Maya 5.0
Alias
Maya 4.5
Alias
Maya 4.02
Discreet
3ds max 5.1
Discreet
3ds max 4.2.6
Discreet
3ds max 4.2
GNS-MBH
Animator3 V.0.6.2c
MAXON
BODYPAINT 3D
MAXON
CINEMA 4D
Newtek
LightWave 3D
Right Hemisphere
Deep Exploration
Side Effects
Houdini 5.x
Side Effects
Houdini 4.0
Softimage
SOFTIMAGE®|XSI 3.01
Softimage
SOFTIMAGE®|XSI 2.0.x
Softimage
SOFTIMAGE®|XSI 3.5
Softimage
SOFTIMAGE®|3D 4.0

ati even supports Shake for the firegl cards, but not on a Mac.

so I must agree with Eugenia. The last MacOSX version has problem with Greeks. So INDEED YOU HAVE TO BE A PAINTER!! or live like it was 1990.
Sometimes I think of Gates like the great saviour that with Microsoft computers somehow got some standards and everybody is happy<?> now...

I must also say that Apple's HW cost like a fortune here in Greece. In the main street of Pc HW and SW in Greece (stournara street) there is only ONE SHOP about Apple.

With that said, I have to agree w/ your brother Eugenia

http://nvidia.com/page/macintosh.html

nvidia has up to the fx5200 available on the mac. this is a card that ships in $600 low end retail desktops for PC.

the whole quadro line for professional workstations is windows and linux only

here is the top end list of software vendors that support the quadro line...again a few make apps for the mac but you cant use a workstation grade video card

http://nvidia.com/page/partner_certified_drivers.html

nvidia likewise already has 64bit drivers out for both amd and intel 64 bit solutions....linux only as of now.

@Anonymous (IP: ---.chvlva.adelphia.net)

ATI & Nvidia are not the only videocard chip maker there are others in the high end like 3dlabs.com. They also do not support Mac.

"Like the Graphics market?"

like the high-end media/hollywood market that used to belong to SGI and which apple played no role within. In fact that is even the title of the piece.

"Right because just choose and then stop going for it??!!??"

you must not have noticed the 64 bit G5s including servers and apple's acquistion of a number of media oriented sotware programs. That is dedication. Apple is going for this market with some authority. Its not some lame half arse attempt (which is what they are doing in enterprise).

"What a BS statement. If Linux can increase its share to 90% of sales then they will do quite nicely. Right so much for logic."

Ok now i am thinking you have some issues. It is realistic for apple to take 10% of the market over a three to five year period. they are established. they have strong and easy to use products and their main problem is really pricing. as i've said again and again and again. Pricing on mainstream product can come down if apple finds other margins opportunities which is what they are clearly trying to do.

It is not realistic to expect linux to take 90% of the market because linux is not that easy to use (can you say dependencies) and 90% means destroying MS which is a challenge to say the least.

I applaud apple on its attempts to expand into additional revenue segments. I hope they will be successful.

If Apple can dominate and flourish in the high end market while disengaging from the low end consumer and business desktop space, this will free the company to compete more effectively long term. It will be able to leverag its software strengths without concern over hardware sales losses. Essentially, it would permit Apple to release OS X as an Intel based OS, and even cut deals with new OEM partners such as HP (currently planning to sell rebranded iPods, for example).

Apple's revenue now depends upon hardware sales across the spectrum, and its hardware represents a premium product. The company, while cost-competitive, does not, cannot, and I would argue should not, compete on price. Securing the core revenue stream with items such as the iPod, other consumer devices to be named later, and dominating the high end workstation market with advanced processors from IBM, would permit an assault on MS where it cannot compete.

MS is a software company. It can't give away the product long term. Apple is a hardware company, it can pretty much give away software as part of a long term strategy, so long as its hardware sales revenue is secured. In this scenario, there are already millions of Mac clones. We call them PCs. Add Darwine to the mix you have blunted any Microsoft counter-attack of refusing to port Office, or by cancellng it for the Mac hardware platform.

This is, of course, simply my opinion and some food for thought. I'd be interested in hearing what the rest of you think.

matrox only supports windows and linux...

http://www.matrox.com/

for three years i am greek cube owner, and for a couple of years i use an ipod.

ya, i am greek. living in greece.

AND I AM NOT A PAINTER!!!!!! ROFL
(but cio of proton investment bank)

Windows laptops are in a speed race and battery life is suffering,

Im sorry but thats total BS. I have a labtop with an Intel Centrino processor (1.7GHZ) and I can verify that I get about 4 1/2 to 5hrs of battery life.

LOL
PATRIDA!!!!
I've been to that street (tried to convert my windows using friends to linux hehehe). Seriously though, even the apple store on Stournari street sold x86 machines too! It was surreal!

The thing that really bugs me about apple, in terms of software, is that they have this wonderful OS that is supposed to be international, Greek support stinks like roadkill on the mohavi desert in an 110F day! We get a greek unicode keyboard but it does not work in carbon applications (like MS word), and you also dont have polytonic greek! Granted most of us greeks don't write nor type in polytonic but publishers still use it.

rainbow in greece charges A LOT for the macs they sell and they refuse to service macs bought outside of greece! Not to mention that you have to pay PREMIUM on top of the premium price you pay to buy it from them to get the "greek" version. aye caramba!


In terms of the flaimbait that dukeinlondon posted
Closed hardware has cost Mac OS a larger share on the PC market. Porting these media apps to Linux would open them the doors of a wider market without seriously threatening their current hardware market. x86 media users won't buy Apple boxes but would probably buy Apple software if they could run it on their favorite hardware.

I do not agree. People do not have favorite hardware. run-of-the-mill users only know of intel, and maybe AMD because that is what their dell, gateway, compaq PC runs on. They do not know of SPARC, PowerPC, or other processors because they simply do not care about the hardware. So you ask what does a user care for? The magic word is compatibility! The user wants to be compatible with what his buddies, family, office collegues (and so on) have and they also want compatibility with previously bought software! People are hardware agnostic, and as a matter of fact I've rarely come across debates of PPC vs x86 vs SPARC vs Alpha (and so on), what we mostly come across is MacOS vs Linux vs Windows vs other OS.

Apple is losing one thing from not having an x86 lineup. They are losing all those wonderful headaches you get from hardware incompatibility ;-)

mini-me

You'd think that with all the focus/cheerleading on Apple's strategy that you were all shareholders or something. Anyway, my perception is that the studios have been moving their IRIX stuff to Linux. If movie production was becoming a big-time Mac OS X affair, you'd expect Steve Jobs to be particularly loud enough about it to get the word out beyond OSNews.

i couldnt disagree more

apple has historically given away a nice stack of software to make their expensive hardware that more palatable. in the end it isnt free as it comes on overpriced hardware comparatively speakining. that software stack is not needed on a high end workstation that probably performs a single function or runs a single application.

apple has historically made their money from selling hardware...Macs

if apple disengages from a volume sales position, they will have less and less revenue to fuel r & d. just like what has happened to sgi. they would have to keep prices high to garner any margin to fuel that future r & d, reducing their competitiveness even further.

dominating the high end workstation market would be great for apple but there is zero evidence that they are anything but a bit player in this market as well. they sold just 174,000 g5 powermacs worldwide last quarter.

ms doesn't give its products away. because of market demand they have been able to run some of the highest margins in industrial production history. what few ever mention is that if anyone comes along that seriously threatens that demand, they can easily drop the price substantially and remain handsomely profitable. apple cannot do this as costs for the r & d and manufacture of macs is very high.

apple is not choosing to abandon volume sales to consumers and education etc, the market is abandoning apple. few businesses willingly choose to leave markets that make them money.

apple is aggressively going after software companies in the video and other design element spaces as they probably realize long term their only future is as a software company or selling some form of hardware that is not a personal computer like a mac.

all evidence over the last so many years points away from apples model as what will succeed in the hardware space. expensive and proprietary hardware/software is dying in all but niche markets. apple is a $6 billion company but will not remain one for long selling nothing but packaged video editing workstations. can they survive doing it? maybe, but as a radically different company from what they have been. certainly they will make a lot less money for their shareholders.

It is realistic for apple to take 10% of the market over a three to five year period. they are established.

Right so for the past 20 years or so Apple hasent been trying? Is that why their marketshare has gone from 30%, 2 decades ago to about 1% now?

Total and utter garbage. Linux has a much better chance of increasing its marketshare over the short term than Apple does.

"If Apple can dominate and flourish in the high end market while disengaging from the low end consumer and business desktop space"

They cannot disengage from the consumer (volume) market. They need volumes. As evidence of the need for volumes just look at sun and sgi. You need the high end and the volumes. Even IBM needs volumes for their power chips. They get around it by fabing chips for everyone and anyone. You also need developers.

to retreat to the high-end alone would kill apple. can't do that. they don't need a $300 pc but a pro machine in the $800-$1000 space is essential.

I don't think Macs will be important in the high-end workstation segment anytime soon, due to the lack of hardware AND software support. No Quadro, FireGL or Wildcat support, no real high-end software like XSI, Smoke, Piranha, Nucoda, Amazon... - nothing!

And mentioning Pixar is bullsh*t, it's Jobs' company. What about Disney, Dreamworks, ILM, Centropolis, Tippet, Weta, C.O.R.E., Digital Domain, Rhythm & Hues, Sony Pictures Imageworks, Amalgamated Effects, Hammerhead, Computer Cafe, Flash Film Works or Double Negative? All those companies use Linux, and keep expanding their Linux setups - no Macs there, except for some Photoshop workstations.

I would think that Linux' market share will grow even more, with software becoming available for AMD64.
One of the main advantages of SGI always was memory bandwith, and AMD64 is the only true alternative (up to 12.8GB right now). That's fairly important for 4k and 8k editing (completely impossible with Macs right now).

Well, I use a Linux workstation (dual Opteron, 4GB RAM, Nvidia QuadroFX 3000G), running XSI, and I'm very happy with this setup...

OSNews is becoming so diluted with Linux zealots that it is getting tiring to read. There are very few professionals in the field of editing that can deny that FCP HD is a kick butt piece of software and has no compare on the Linux platform. None. You would have to be a zealot or extremely broke to choose any Linux video editing suite over FCP, at this time. Come on, for $999 you get:

FCP HD
Cinema Tools
SoundTrack
LiveType
Compressor

All of these applications are highly optimized for the G5 and they just work out of the box. I also like the fact that there are numerous places to be trained on these products as well as publications to support them. There are tons of uncompressed cards and other third party tools that support FCP. (Photoshop)

I use Linux as well but anyone on this site that claims that Linux is as good as the Mac for video editing is kidding themselves. Apple is taking what was once a very expensive market and bringing it down to a level where the average editor (indie, small houses) can get really great tools at an affordable price. It comes back to the same thing that has been said time and time again, use the best tool for the job at the moment, that is Macs.

http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=2469...

the machines cost less or about the same

dollar for dollar they are substantially more powerful in 3d and video editing (nothing beats doing your work in 1/4 the time when you are paying a pro $40-80,000 a yr)

they have more expandability

they run more os choices

they have more software choices for the stated market (3d and video)

they are 64 bit now with linux

they will be 64 bit with windows by the end of 2004.

replacement parts are less expensive

there are more choices for replacement parts (read graphics cards that when added 2 years down the road extend the life of the machine)

repairs cost less

more developers work on windows and linux

the list could go on for some time

and no, serious pros editing film or building 3d models 8 hours per day don't need iPhoto and iTunes on there machines to be more productive when they are being paid to produce. elegant icons and genie bottle docks likewise don't matter much when you are staring at 3ds max or Avid Xpress Studio all day.

Oh please, come on - we're talking about the _high-end_. I'll admit that FCP is nice and all, but you have obviously never seen Piranha Edit or Smoke. These packages have better workflow, are faster, way more powerful (and expensive) - true high-end. FCP is great for commercials, clips and stuff, but that's about it.
But even for this stuff, there are way better alternatives like Quantel.

http://www.ifx.com/piranha/
http://www.discreet.com/smoke/
http://www.quantel.com/

And there's still even more high-end stuff like Fire or Inferno that's still IRIX only...

"What about Disney, Dreamworks, ILM, Centropolis, Tippet, Weta, C.O.R.E., Digital Domain, Rhythm & Hues, Sony Pictures Imageworks, Amalgamated Effects, Hammerhead, Computer Cafe, Flash Film Works or Double Negative? All those companies use Linux, and keep expanding their Linux setups - no Macs there, except for some Photoshop workstations."

Anyone know what all of those guys use? Just curious what the breakdown is between Windows, Mac, Linux, and IRIX (and other Unix OSes). FYI, I'm referring to workstations, not renderfarms.

Reading the news flash I clearly understood that Maya is sold globally in 20% of the market. This market is basically the education sector (ie: Film/Art schools) and not to studios which their (Apple) market is very small.

It gets really annoying when a few Apple users claim superiority with out knowing all the facts. Just as the title misleads readers into believing SGI had a dominant foot hold in Hollywood. Years ago maybe but their market is dismally small now compared to Linux and Windows. Also, the only film/animation studio I've heard using Apple hardware is PIXAR which still has Linux in use and Linux is not just for renderfarms as some would like others to believe.

As for the new release of Maya 6, once again only Complete is offered on OSX but Unlimited is offered on Linux, Windows and IRIX. Alias listens to their customers and decides developement of tools and porting based on the majority. The majority is studios, not freelancers or students. So besides the percentages from the Alias news flash, this also clearly indicates sales for Maya are not in favor of OSX and more towards other platforms. Just as Softimage would surely port to OSX if there was a market for it but there just isn't enough demand. Again this is basically due to to things such as no professional graphics, TCO, etc.

So the media should be asking why is Apple making the decision to not compete with the desktop market and instead focus on the highend market when they haven't proven themselves? One film studio out of hundreds is not reason enough to do this.

An informative link regarding what is actually being used in the film/animation industry (see below).

http://millimeter.com/ar/video_linux_hollywood/

OK, some examples:

Disney:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1210083,00.asp

Dreamworks:
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-825967.html

Digital Domain:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6339

R&H, Weta, ILM:
http://millimeter.com/ar/video_linux_hollywood/

And there's also The Mill (XSI/ Linux) and Framestore CFC.
You could check the Softimage XSI mailing list, or the LinuxMovies mailing list, there are quite a few artists and admins of those companies...

I know what market we are speaking about, how much you paying for your Piranha or Smoke systems? and tell me what are you doing with these systems that is so unique? I am curious?

Uhm nice benchmark-- but the Mac used a dual G4 1.25... Compare those intel machines to a dual G5 2.0, then were talking

______________________________________
--Dutch translator for SkyOS, v5.0--

Hard to explain - I would suggest you to request a demo (both systems are beyond $ 20.000 for a turnkey, but well worth it). OTOH, better don't do it, you may want to dump FCP and sell your house to afford 'em... ;-)

But it's true, these systems are not for small workgroups or hobbyists.

Uhm nice benchmark-- but the Mac used a dual G4 1.25... Compare those intel machines to a dual G5 2.0, then were talking

Um OK but he even said that the machines all cost the same. The point he was trying to make is that x86 has more bang for the buck.

How many high end workstation companies are doing well these days? SGI? Sun? This is a tough market and not a very big one. I am not saying Apple can't do well in the space but I doubt it can mean significant growth for the company.

Think stuff at Apple was bad under Amelio? Apple was like a $7B a year business. When Amelio took over, he had the CFO make a doomsday plan: What would happen if Apple was a $5B company.

Today, Apple is generating what, $3B or $4B in revenue?

Putting out a press release saying "Yeah! We sold more $399 iPods than $3000 computers!" isn't going to turn that company into a $7B company. I found that to be a very depressing press release indeed.

Apple's G5 technology is not even one year old. This summer the IBM 975 based on their Power 5 server chip will debut. Even so, TV production is joining Hollywood in using Apple's multimedia hardware and software. The BBC just announced a package for sale for news workflow that includes Final Cut Pro HD. There's now a complete production package that includes a HD camera with Apple's hardware and software for $35k. The NAB show last weekend had standing room only at Apple's big booth with many a "wow" being heard.

As the G5 hardware matures and is succeeded by the G6 next year with multiple cores on the chip, you will see Apple's server clusters making supercomputers that move their current record as 3rd fastest in the world. Virginia Tech. University is selling the design and software for theirs which will increase Apple's sales and credibility in that segment too.

HD multimedia and internet delivery along with other distribution forms is the big target here. Apple needed success in the creation market in order to block Microsoft's efforts at controlling the market and content through file format control.

That's why Linux makes inroads, I think - it can't go bankrupt, so the investment is safe.
Oh, and there are other former UNIX workstation markets switching to Linux mostly unnoticed, like CAD, CAM, CAE, MCAD, scientific computing, chipdesign...

See Matlab, Mathematica, Pro/E, Dassault Systems, LSI Logic, Magma Design Automation etc.

Nice article it shows G4s with 1/2 the RAM.
from the article" ... price tag of $5728 is steep.."

For that price you can get a fully loaded G5 that would infact be very close to any top end system.

there was no date on the article but it looks to be just before the G5s were released.

I had contacts with people that worked for PIXAR. and from what I understand they went to LINUX few years ago becuase it was the only real option to do what they needed. As the life cycle of there LINUX implementation coming to and end of its life cycle they are looking to for a new solutinon and apple does have a viable alternative.

All you WIN, LINUX zelots have good points, but are missing the real issue here Apple is emerging as an alternative and infact can be agured that it is a better solution.

as were several pcs that have components and cpus in them that have been out for some time....current with that mac.

since theyve come out they have dropped in price substantially with more amd athlon64 and intel p4 extreme cpus coming to market. newer pc stuff is faster and cheaper now 10 months on from the announcement of the dual 2ghz g5. apple has no update to date and the price has not dropped, nor does it have build to order options for newer video cards etc that have come out in the last 10 months.

the p4 extreme and athlon64 cpus are also available single cpu in laptops.

you can buy pc laptops with workstation grade video cards as well.

the best you can do today on a mac portable is a retail/game video card with a slightly faster single cpu g4.

also on the pc side you can run 64 bit on a portable right now.

the review states that apple has not supplied them with a dual g5. since they have been out for some time and that is one of the best known video review sites on the web and the macs are so great at video, wouldnt you think apple would like to promote its prowess?

"These packages have better workflow, are faster, way more powerful (and expensive) - true high-end."

Well, bully for that, but that's *exactly* how SGI shot itself in the foot.

The apple products might not do the ultra high end stuff, yet, but believe you me, that's apple's next move.

In the mean time, though, if I were a small production house or a small local news station, I can get ass-kicking, it-just-WORKS solutions from apple much cheaper than from a competitor.

A TV station can, for the cost of a training seminar, FCP, and a PowerBook, produce broadcast quality material in the field. Is there a Linux based laptop that can do this? As cheaply (software, hardware, IT time) as a PowerBook?

"FCP is great for commercials, clips and stuff, but that's about it."

The movie Cold Mountain was done in FCP on 2 powermacs and 2 powerbooks, and the total cost of all hardware and software for those machines is half of what ONE of your setups cost.

Believe me, Apple's next move will be into the ultra high end, and they will offer it at prices that will undercut their competitors.

Kady hit the nail on the head. All these companies charging outrageous prices for these applications is going to be there downfall in the market. (This is not to say that these tools can't do great things or aren't good tools) Not only can you get an "ass kicking" system from Apple but for the price you would pay for the Avids, Piranaha's, etc. you could get multiple G5 machines or laptops with all the software I listed previously and training. And soon you will be able to add XSan to this list.

I am not an Apple apologist. They still have some ways to go as you have pointed out with the graphics cards, etc. but they are quickly, very quickly erasing the enourmous strangle hold companies like Avid have had on this market. As they did with iMovie, Apple is helping to democratize media.

Let's talk one year from now and see where Apple stands in this field.

HD over firewire is just so awesome!! Without an additional board!!,,,and uncompressed HD that is!! That is just one of the announcements this week about the new version of Final Cut Pro(hd). I was amazed when I heard that, and that it did it over firewire.....wow!!

Hei Metic, I'm a finn also, well in the U.S(fam in finland). No wonder I have this facination with Linux!!!!

According to the Business and Company Resource Center database (9/2003 data) Apple has:

3.4 Billion in Cash and Cash Equvalents

and

6.8 Billion in Total Assets.

and

6.2 Billion in Total Revinue.

The company has ZERO long term debt; total short term debt is about 2 billion.

Apple is alive and well.

I have a software house here and I deliver multiplatform solution based on Runtime Revolution, I use a nice G4 machine that gives me the best from unix and is also able to play quicktimes and to edit movies (selling some multimidia CDs). It's the best from both worlds. No way you can have Apache running, visual studio and premiere in a win box without something exploding on your face. I've got RunRev, Final Cut Express and Apache (so that customers may track my work) running very fine.

no real high-end software like XSI, Smoke, Piranha, Nucoda, Amazon... - nothing!

You need to keep a better update on these companies. Descreet plans to make it's products compatable with Mac OS X and Final Cut, based on Final Cut's implimentation of XML.

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/04/19/discreet/

Autodesk Inc. subsidiary Discreet announced Monday plans to support Apple's Final Cut Pro .XML-based interchange format in upcoming versions of its editing and visual effects systems. This means that editorial decisions made by users with Final Cut Pro will be directly transferable to Discreet's smoke and fire editing and finish systems, as well as its lustre digital grading and color correction system.

Calling Final Cut Pro a mainstay of Hollywood, Discreet vice president of product development Marc Petit noted that Final Cut Pro is already the editorial tool of choice for many professionals who also use Discreet products. "Discreet's strategy is to support standards that give customers maximum flexibility in their production environments," he added.

Discreet plans to demonstrate the exchange of metadata between Final Cut Pro and its own systems later this year, with file format support to follow in future versions.

Mr. Anonymous, i feel so sorry for you. You just don't get it at all. Value does not equal (performance)/(price), when you must interact with that performance to produce something.

And even if it did, Apple would win. V-Tech's Supercomputer cluster is the 3rd fastest in the world, and cost less than the 4th, 5th, 6th,.... you get my point. 5 million dollars to have the 3rd fastest computer in the WORLD is a price to performance ratio AMD and INTEL are still working at.

Using wine to emulate apps on the Linux box is cool and all, but its just not good buisness practice to throw these home-brew solutions together so you can run your computers without the microsoft tax. Thats just one reason why Disney's animation studios are now a JOKE, where PIXAR is where all the attention is.

The most "powerful" application is no application at all. You just program specifically what you want your computer to do. So I guess all those great Linux programs offer a lot of "power".

pixar runs linux after dropping sun. they are just now moving to os x. so im not sure what you are talking about.

we arent talking about home brew computers and slapping boxes and apps together with wine.

this thread is about tech in hollywood and reasonably high end video/ 3d scenarios. that means folks are using packaged solutions or they have their own teams of coders that have developed their own software. pixar made renderman for linux.

as an aside, the va tech supercomputer i dont believe was independantly verified. it has since been torn apart. it was built with free labor from college students. apple has not been forthcoming about pricing for va tech. and finally, va tech so loved that cluster that 6 months later they tore it apart again using free labor and will put together a new one again using free labor.

i wonder how productive that 5 million dollar "super computer" has been while all of this has been going on?

the va tech supercompuer in other words was a marketing event, not a production machine.

Ghibertii reminded me of a few things when he said:
[quote]Kady hit the nail on the head. All these companies charging outrageous prices for these applications is going to be there downfall in the market. (This is not to say that these tools can't do great things or aren't good tools)[/quote]

I just want to agree that Ghibertii is right when he says that the Piranahas, Avids, etc are very good systems. I have no doubt that a Linux based system can be a very good, rock solid, powerful machine to produce and edit video.

However, I've yet to work on a Linux system where everything just worked without the need for additional configuration. (Yes, I have played with Linux, both on the PC and an iMac. I was unimpressed.)

So, if I were doing video production and I wanted low to middle end production stations, if I go with a Linux based solution, the cost for the box *might* be cheaper (actually they're very close), but I will need to have an IT person come in and do a custom setup on my hardware/software, and should I upgrade a major hardware component, I've got to call my IT person back to test it before I deploy. Either way I've now got to pay my IT staff, AND, I *don't* have an off the shelf solution.

If I buy an "off the shelf" Linux solution with everything guranteed to work, the cost of *their* IT staff's trips to the command line is factored into the price.

The cost for pro-quality rock solid Linux video software is *not* cheaper than FCP or Shake. It's equally or more expensive. (No, Linuxlots, we will not be editing our video in a half-baked program like Cinelerra. I don't want to pay an IT crew to scrub the cruft out of a "free" program, and I need to get going ASAP.)

However, contrast that with the time, effort, and cost it took to set my powermac up to edit video.

Step One: Unbox video capture widget and read instructions.

Step Two: Install drivers.

Step Three: Plug widget into firewire port, screw in coax-cable, turn it on and test capture Mythbusters clip. (Woohoo! My PowerMac can now double as a TIVO!)

Step Four: Install Final Cut Express.

Step Five: Open FCP and start playing with my Mythbusters clip.

Total Time: 15 minutes.

I could walk into Frys with $5k in my pocket and walk out 15 minutes later with everything I'll need to shoot and edit video in the field on a *nix based platform. I'll unbox it, install it, plug it in, and go. No IT costs. No futzing with drivers.

Linux/Irix does not offer this. Not at any price.

Ease of use plus cost.

Wait until Apple deploys evenly across the high-end market.

The show scrubs (comedy central I think) is useing a mac to edit the show. Saw it on the discovery channel.

for smaller companies, who in their right mind would use linux? Unless they hire some guy to setup and install the OS, compile a custom kernel that works with the high-end hardware they're using (like linux supports newer hardware, maybe a month or two after it's release) then install the programs. Unless you have the knowledge (the majority don't) or cash flow to pay someone else to do it, macs look alot more friendlier. And hiring someone to fix problems would be alot cheaper.
I like linux, but look at the apple market. One button mice to avoid confusion, simple to use right. Now throw in some really good apps, service, and hardware and even your aunt Tilly could probably set the damn thing up. Looks alot more simpler than the alternative even if the hardware has steep prices. the linux people are just to blind to see that no matter how great something CAN be, unless it attracts the attention of the guy in the suit who makes the choices, it will go nowhere.

"Using wine to emulate apps on the Linux box is cool and all, but its just not good buisness practice to throw these home-brew solutions together so you can run your computers without the microsoft tax."

Not good business practice? It saves tons of money as you can read in the URL. Which is a part of a business practice. Now why isn't it good business practice? I don't see any arguments from you, only some fallacy where you evade the argument. (Did you learned that at the US military? ))

"The most "powerful" application is no application at all. You just program specifically what you want your computer to do."

After which that is programmed, what exactly do you think that end-result is called? Perhaps that would be.. an application? Which... makes your statement "The most "powerful" application is no application at all" quite.. worth a laugh..

Amazing how many ppl are quick to spout off dribble they either know nothing about or refuse to give credit where credit is due. Apple *is* big in Hollywood and just about anything media related. Apple's Shake has been used for the special effects for all Academy Award winning movies for the last 7 years. Including Return of the King. Yes thats right, WETA used Shake on G5s with Linux render farms for the special effects in ROTK. I recently picked up the Indiana Jones Trilogy on DVD. The entire restoration and mastering of those movies to DVD was also all done on Macs. These are just a couple of examples, and I dont want a flame war here...just give Apple their due credit please.

doesn't this go to show that Apple would have been better off buying BOTH beos and NEXT with Steve's vision but
BeOS being the platform with which to base Mac OSX?

you can now buy 2, 4, and even 8 processor opterons configuration, as well as athlon 64 mobile.

perhaps apple should port os x to 86-64, in case ibm fails to deliver on powerpc?

you can now buy 2, 4, and even 8 processor opterons configuration, as well as athlon 64 mobile.

perhaps apple should port os x to 86-64, in case ibm fails to deliver on powerpc?

Im sorry but thats total BS. I have a labtop with an Intel Centrino processor (1.7GHZ) and I can verify that I get about 4 1/2 to 5hrs of battery life.

Centrino is not a processor. It's a marketing term for the combo of the Pentium-M and wifi.

to retreat to the high-end alone would kill apple. can't do that. they don't need a $300 pc but a pro machine in the $800-$1000 space is essential.

What constitutes a "pro" machine then? The $800-100 eMac already is very competitive with the machines available from PC manufacturers in that price range.

ROFL
dual 1.25 GHz G4? How old is that machine? It's over a year at least. No one ever said the G4s were fast, workstation material. But there is something called a