Apple (silently again) purchased the third video-related company in less than two months. This time, is Prismo Graphics and it comes after the purchase of Nothing Real and Silicon Grail. Our Take: Now that SGI is no longer as “big” as it used to be regarding video software, and no important or many commercial packages have been ported to Linux, MacOSX has a real chance to further strengthen in this niche market about professional video editing. Only problem to solve will be Windows and the faster/cheaper Xeon/P4 PCs. With Steve Jobs being also an exec at Pixar, it should be obvious where he tries to head Apple and why Quartz Extreme is being developed for.
Apple Purchases Prismo Graphics
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Apple is trying to buy out some nice software so that it can get a nice niche in the Hollywood/Movie making market. No conspiracy with Pixar here, just Apple trying to get more share of Hollywood to make some more bucks. It is a good market for Apple because they already have a presence there. I also think that Apple is trying to make sure that these movie-making programs make it to MacOS X, and unfortunately, the only way to do that seems to be to buy them. They would buy Alias|Wavefront if they could, but, it looks like that company is doing well without Apple.
Skipp
‘Cuz A|W makes software for OS X. At least Maya works
on X. Grab the PLEdition if you have a G4 – it’s pretty
sweet.
Maya 3.5 for OS X, 4.0 for Windows and Linux, nuff said
Skipp
But have you tested the feature set on all three
platforms? You’ll have a pleasant surprise in store.
If not, you should. Version numbers can be deceptive.
Kinda like Office on both platforms – which is newer?
I always go by feature sets. And I’ve used the SW on
each platform mentioned, thankfully.
Note, as I try to take the high-road here…
speed is not always the best stat to point to, and, with regard to the Xeon, I would not want a frigen server whuring away at my desk……..any hoo…..OS X just feels better to work in 🙂
With Steve Jobs being also an exec at Pixar, it should be obvious where he tries to head Apple and why Quartz Extreme is being developed for.
The poor guy is the CEO of Pixar. But the poor guy is paid a dollar a year…
‘Cuz A|W makes software for OS X. At least Maya works
on X. Grab the PLEdition if you have a G4 – it’s pretty
sweet.
For Mac OS X, there is only Maya 3.5 Complete and Personal Learning Edition. It doesn’t have 4.0 Complete, Personal Learning Edition, Unlimited, Real-Time Author, and mental ray for Maya 4 (though this addon isn’t created by A|W).
Sorry, I cannot see how this goes towards “professional” editing. I don’t mean this to be specifically anti-Apple, I generally don’t see how a mere software solution could be professional in the sense of what a pro expects. You don’t need a powerful machine, a 500 MHz system would do already, which you then fit with a real professional NLE board. I cannot see how any classic approch in the sense of bigger, fatter CPU + some sort of Premiere, Avid Soft, etc, etc… can come even close to the same results…
Notice they have been buying off companies that have been gear towards professionals. And Adobe Premier, IIRC, isn’t available for Mac OS. (This isn’t the first company they bought off that is related to video)
I noticed both skippy and rajan r, are basing their decisions of better software on versions. You can do this with software that is designed for the same platform, but with cross platform is like saying that GTK for Windows is as complete as it is for Linux.
Nuff said.
Take a look at adobe’s page and you’ll see it is available.
I noticed both skippy and rajan r, are basing their decisions of better software on versions. You can do this with software that is designed for the same platform, but with cross platform is like saying that GTK for Windows is as complete as it is for Linux.
Actually, Maya 4 has a lot of improvements. But there isn’t Maya Unlimited, which has a lot of extra apps. Plus, most of the addons are only available for Windows and IRIX (though quite a number of them are available for Linux). Maya 3.5 for Mac OS X has the same amount of features as Maya 3.5 for Windows NT, Linux and IRIX.
As for the GTK+ port to Windows – GTK+ wasn’t developed to be portable. And therefore, unlike Qt or WxWindows, there isn’t a Windows version. but there is only a unix version of GTK+ that is stable. But in the Maya case, there is a stable release for Mac OS X, but it is a old version with less apps (Maya Complete as oppose to Maya Unlimited).
Take a look at adobe’s page and you’ll see it is available.
Sorry, my mistake. Stupid me..
http://www.gimp.org/~tml/gimp/win32/status.html
But the poor guy is paid a dollar a year…
Don’t pity him too much, even tho he dosen’t make much any more, he has a ton of money!
what I meant to say by mentioning Premiere and alike is, that nothing of the calibre of Premiere and all the stuff that falls into the price range or is meant to compete with it on any platform is faaaaaar from being professional.
You will not see pro editing on a Mac any time soon, you will not see it on x86. You will have to go for dedicated non linear editing boards. Seeing prices nowadays, I cannot see how a _professional_ would spend the money on a Mac, where he could get a PC + NLE board that, with a little extra cash, outperforms Avid-solutions… Pro-editing is broadcast-quality editing in real-time, if you asked me. A Mac is an expensive ambitioned hobbyist toy only.
A Mac is an expensive ambitioned hobbyist toy only.
That about sums up my thoughts on the Mac platform. I was trying for the longest time to come up with a short sentence such as this to express how I felt about the Mac without offending it because I do like it in some ways. Thanks anonymous.
Apple’s attempt to get “professionals” and the Hollywood industry to use Mac hardware/software for their work is like telling a Nascar driver to race with a minivan. Some would say the minivan is more stylish than a Nascar, and make less noise, but is it the right tool for the job? I’m sorry for the lame analogy and I have heard people complain about the overuse. If Apple really wants to compete in those industrys, they have to create dedicated systems for that line of work, not try to bend a platform and make it flexible and do everything.
I applaud Apple for bringing the power of Unix to consumers, but what made Unix sucessful was that it targeted a very specific industry. All the R&D, and software development went towards that goal which is why it’s so great and even today people choose it over any other OS for web hosting and networking, among other things.
It’s about time Apple starts thinking about the rest of the world, and make something more practical. OSX is a good step forward, it made a bunch of Unix fans happy, but Apple really needs a line of products that doesn’t have a hint of the “user-friendly, candy coated, the computer is your friend” non-sense.
How all this fits into pro video editing? Don’t try to turn the Mac into a pro video editing machine, it’s not going to work, I think Apple should make a dedicated video editing system without the Mac brand name and without the ideology of the Mac.
Although Avid and Media 100 film editing were based on top of Macs for years, both companies now have switched to PC systems. SGI had the real high market for years, especially for effects work, this too has moved to PC solutions. Linux has stolen alot of market share from SGI and Avid. Lucas/ILM has moved 2/3 of its systems to Linux (from SGI), and LOTR was done entirely on Linux. To be honest with 24 fps digital video, allowing for total digital and/or seemeless effects/transition back to film CPU power is more important than ever. PC hardware has come to the point where even high end RISC workstations can’t keep up. Realtime film work requires a lot of power, Macs havn’t kept up. Linux and OSX, both benifit from the fact that most of the SGI software is easy to port to another Nix.
My Brother is a filmmaker, he has three Mac based Avids. He is looking at replacing them with Linux systems. By the way, these will cost between $350,000-700,000 each. Depending on whether they are used for editing or effects. So the price is still quite high.
I’m asking this out of ignorance – who uses Apple’s Final Cut Pro?
Only Jobs knows what he’s really thinking but, as far as OS X is concerned, he does obviously have a two front attack going – OS X with Unix hidden for consumers and OS X for *nix geeks. Interesting. I was actually surprised to see him trying to get Apple into the server market. As others have suggested, I can only see this as trying to bolster the Apple “niche”, to have something of that nature for Apple’s niche areas. I know that Sony is Job’s ideal of a company and it seems he’s slowly trying to move Apple in that direction, one step at a time. Yet, my basic idea about that, I have to admit, is somewhat weakened by some of these moves he’s been making. Maybe they are pre-emptive strikes, so to speak. He is a tough nut to crack – you cannot predict precisely what he’ll do. I’m looking forward to MacWorld next month to try and glean what he’s up to.
To jay: who uses FCP?
steve Soderbergh and others:
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/stories/
“I was actually surprised to see him trying to get Apple into the server market” I ‘ve been waiting for the day. But it will be 3-4 years before Sun has anything to worry about…
“Only problem to solve will be Windows and the faster/cheaper Xeon/P4 P”
1) creatives usually have more sense than to use Windoze. The reliability just isn’t there.
2) There you go, Eugenia, with those bogus benchmarks again.
To Ranjar:
“A Mac is an expensive ambitioned hobbyist toy only. ”
I disagree with “expensive”, and it would be a crime to restict Macs to hobbyists only, but I agree with “toy”. I love toys, myself, whether they are high-end Nikons, BMW Z3’s or Macs. Toys are what life is all about. well–and women. PC’s are more cash registers or xerox machines– no fun at all, IMHO.
I agree with Jay. Steve Jobs probably has some nutty long term plan to push Macs even further behind the scenes in Hollywood, and these acquisitions are in order to get a GOOD set (or suite) of products to support the platform, and lure the third parties over later. That, and all these acquisitions also give them the time and opportunity to put together teams of engineers to tackle all that software, and make sure the hardware and software are up to snuff. Basically, expect maybe a few more buyouts, they may even gobble up an NLE board maker (unlikely) or buy into part of a company that makes NLE boards and/or integrated systems. If it all pans out, and Apple doesn’t make too many mistakes (or any BIG mistakes), Apple may become quite a force to be reckoned with, and they just might get another Oscar. (Mac haters may now complain about how the Oscars are rigged anyway ;-).
THEN they can water down all that high end stuff into the next version of iMovie.
Many low-budget film makers use Macs already (cost). This of course, does not stop them from using PCs, as they are used too, I think. Yes, people do use Final Cut Pro. People used it even back when Macromedia owned it (though I think it was called sometihng different). Many studios use it to make promotional trailers for movies and commercials.
–JM
Oh, and I believe the general consensus is that the PowerPC is better at EQUAL CLOCK SPEEDS (megahertz for megahertz), but the x86 descendants have so many danged megahertz that they make up for being “less efficient” by doing it all faster.