Apple today introduced Xsan, a high-performance enterprise-class Storage Area Network (SAN) file system priced at US$999. Xsan is a 64-bit cluster file system for Mac OS X that enables organizations to consolidate storage resources and provide multiple computers with concurrent file-level read/write access to shared volumes over Fibre Channel. A beta version of Xsan is available immediately to qualified customers. The final version of Xsan is expected to be available this fall. On other news, Apple introduced Shake 3.5, Final Cut Pro HD, DVD Studio PRO 3 and a new application named Motion. Go to MacMinute.com for up to the minute updates on the new products unveiled as we write this.
Xsan: 64-bit Cluster FS for Mac OS X; Apple Unveils More Products
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I guess we are going to see a Pixar film, “Completely made on the Macintosh!” soon.
maybe smthng like iFinding Nemo or iMonstert iNC. ?
anyone know sth ’bout the new laptops yet? there were quite some rumors around
The real surprise is the new Motion application – it looks like a direct competitor to After Effects (AE) and at a $299 starting price, it substantially undercuts the price of Adobe’s offering. We’ll have to wait for the reviews and general user comments to see how it compares to AE, though I notice that the recommended (not minimum) system reqirements are quite substantial: Dual 2GHz Power Mac G5, 4GB of RAM or more. Interesting times indeed!
>anyone know sth ’bout the new laptops yet
Tomorrow.
Yeah, Motion competes with After Effects. And from the looks of it, it’s going to make After Effects obsolete pretty quickly. Adobe seems to be having a hard time entering new markets. Their web tools were great until Macromedia took to top rank again with MX, and their media production tools used to at least compete until recently with Apple outdoing them at every turn. Premiere, Encore, and now After Effects have been pushed down to second class status.
nope, word on the street is that they will become available on apple.com tomorrow but, won`t be announced till Tuesday… i wonder how there going to deal with battery life
Seems to me that Apple has already lost a great deal of favor with Adobe, viz, Adobe’s recommendation that their users use PC’s for their apps rather than a Mac (they claim that the PC is faster – I won’t go THERE!).
With the announcement that Motion is out there, and After Effects is obsolete, can it be too long before Adobe announces that it will no longer ship Photoshop for the Mac?
And, for that matter, isn’t only a matter of time before another Apple iApp comes out that competes directly with Photoshop (and don’t tell me that iPhoto does that!).
does this mean that apple’s geared more towards the enterprise? I mean, I know that xsan + final cut pro hd is for video production, but doesn’t this also apply to enterprise storage?
it’s exciting owning a mac these days even though most people probably won’t be buying an xsan solution this fall, but the price is not entirely inplausible…
And slowly mac os x is separating itself from ‘other’ computing platforms.
The os that’s used for professional video, music, graphics production, plus e-mail, web, file serving, and general daily computer usage. I don’t know how they do it, but the vision is slowly starting to unfold.
can you imagine an apple services division? kind of like ibm services or hp services, however, used to work with clients in the audio/video/production industry? That would be a great company to work for…
So you mean that they would ditch their investments in Linux and go for Apple to gain what? What would be the advantage of running RenderMan on macs compared to a linux cluster? the higher pricetag?
Linux will be _the_ standard in the movie industry with studios like Pixar leading the way.
watch out about how much your praise apple around here. after the praise-o-meter gets above a certain point, the trolls come out to play.
Pixar already does all their creative work on Macs, and they spent all that time porting renderman over to OS X, and apple is creating products like Xserve, Xraid, and Xsan.
it would seem to me that Apple is creating these products with Pixar type companies in mind.
With the announcement that Motion is out there, and After Effects is obsolete, can it be too long before Adobe announces that it will no longer ship Photoshop for the Mac?
They will continue to support MacOSX as long as their customers are using it. Running away because they are afraid of Apples competition would be rather stupid don’t you think?
But since more of their costumers are moving to Windows it’s likely that they will stop supporting PS for Mac in a few years. But it’s not really due to apples competition.
It’s very interesting to see Apple’s actions as they are all geared towards helping their high-margin hardware business survive.
In order for Apple to sell G5 boxes and server components at the extremely high profit margins they do, Apple needs to lower the total cost of purchase in other areas otherwise Apple would completely price themselves out of the market — even the high-end luxury market Apple caters to has budgets and limits.
To keep pushing software prices down, Apple is taking more and more software business inside the company. Thus we find the next piece of Adobe’s product line for Mac, After Effects, being subsumed by Apple in the form of Motion. The upside to Apple is reducing the price of the software and being able to make sure the software fits Apple’s roadmaps, not Adobe’s roadmaps.
The downside to pulling more and more Macintosh software inside the company is that further alienation of ISV’s will occur. I am sure Adobe is looking closer and closer to when they will discontinue all their Macintosh applications and let Apple go it alone. Adobe is doing very well in the PC enterprise space after all. Without a large pool of ISV’s, the overall solution space becomes stagnant and customers flee to other platforms where there is more activity, choice, and evolution.
XSAN is the server-space equivalent of low-priced Motion or Logic. XSAN will enable Apple to offer their high-priced G5 servers and RAID systems more competitively as the software to use the expensive hardware will be more affordable. Apple needs an offering like XSAN for Apple’s high-end video/film market niche.
It is interesting to see Apple’s strategy is not geared towards increasing the number of basic systems they sell, just maintaining a basic status quo.
There is no significant cost advantage in going with Apple as the overall cost “hardware + software” is market competitive in various high-end markets, but not market competitive in any value markets.
It will be interesting to see how Apple evolves over time. More and more they are beginning to resemble the old time UNIX houses who offered a custom version of UNIX (Mac OS X), custom hardware unavailable elsewhere (G5/PowerPC), and software made only for their custom hardware (all Apple software except the low-end iTunes/Quicktime).
Perhaps the analogy most appropriate for looking at Apple’s future is to look at the history of SGI. In many ways, Apple is building themselves into a current day SGI.
SGI has certainly found it to be a very difficult business to be a closed-system provider of high-end/high-margin niche market computers and software.
Let us hope Apple ends up as something more than SGI, a company with many brilliant ideas coupled to a flawed business model that does not match the major trends in the world at large.
RenderMan has been ported to OS X:
http://www.macnn.com/news/24002
And Pixar has migrated to OS X:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/10/28/pixarosx/index.php?r…
http://www.macplus.org/magplus/article.php?id_article=5743
I suppose there is a gain, and an advantage.
Pixar already does all their creative work on Macs, and they spent all that time porting renderman over to OS X, and apple is creating products like Xserve, Xraid, and Xsan.
When did this change? last time I checked (2002) both Pixar and Dreamworks were doing all their rendering on linux boxes and where also moving their creative work from SGI to Linux. It seems like they are wasting a lot of resources if they switched to macs that quickly?
thats a nice false fact.
here is a real fact…. no one on the mac platform used adobe tools outside of PS and 2 or 3 others.
most of PS users use mac os.
OK Manik, my bad. I haven’t read about those things in a while. Just didn’t seem logical to switch that often.
“The new Motion program allows for interactive animation of text, graphics and video, with an instant preview of different filters and effects.
It also has what Apple calls “behaviors,” which allow artists to add natural-looking movement to type and graphics, such as gravity and wind, without the use of the traditional, complex method of using keyframes.”
“That’s the one I think is just out of this world,” said Jon Peddie, president of Jon Peddie Research, a multimedia industry research firm based in Tiburon, California. “I think Apple has got an incredible tool there that will find applications beyond just enhancing and editing motion capture data.”
“!
what? pal you are losing it.
for what you get in a g5 xserve, you get a nice price. Better in fact than standard retail prices of other U1 servers.
the words that come out of your mouth about apple are references that might have made sense in the mid nineties, but today, you just sound like a lunatic.
OK, here’s actually something I do know about because I’ve been working with people in that industry for a long time and still do. A LOT of design studios are moving to Windows and are using PS on Windows. It’s still true that most pro PS-users are using MacOS but things are changing. MacOS is no longer technically superior for that kind of work, and it’s really a matter of taste these days.
Numerically Adobe has far more Photoshop users on Windows. The bad part is that as a percentage, fewer of the Windows users pay for Photoshop.
However, if Adobe’s foray into product activation helps revenue generation on the Windows platform, Adobe could feasibly drop their Mac business — all of it. Photoshop is the big money maker for Adobe, not Illustrator or In Design.
And if Adobe were so inclined, they could lead a major push onto Linux and offer the Adobe CS suite for a very good price and still make money.
Once someone establishes a “low cost hardware” + “good enough software” basis on Linux, the game show will be very tough for Apple.
I think that the major move will come (I am not denying that it will come) when Longhorn appears.
if it has the robustness and security MS claims it will have, I think that it will be on par with OS X today, just because of Avalon.
I will say though that I love doing creative work and school work on my mac rather than on my PC because of the PDF support that the system has.
I can create a PDF from the print dialogue of a paper and send it anywhere, I can take that PDF and export it to an image file of any format I choose directly from the PDF viewer, and then I can use Office to create nice portfolio pages using those image files I just created from the PDFs I created from my document.
the little features of OS X is what makes it such a nice system to work with, if Avalon can export to PDF natively, that will be a great bonus.
However, if Adobe’s foray into product activation helps revenue generation on the Windows platform
I seriously doubt that since it’s just as easy to crack it. They shouldn’t bother trying IMO.
But the thing is that more pro user are moving to Windows, and they are generally paying for it.
I really don’t think it matters much. those people who do not pay for it would not pay for it if they were forced to and would just jump to the GIMP.
at any rate, the movements of Adobe have to be alarming to Apple and I will bet that there is some internal development on a Photoshop killer coming for the Mac…. and if the software was really that good (which it might be considering apple’s track record) to really piss off Adobe, Apple could make it available on the PC as well, but I think that it would be a stupid thing to do considering their strategy over the last few years.
hell, maybe if Adobe keeps getting clobbered in these new markets they try to get into, their price might be at a level where Apple might just buy them.
If I was to guess… the long term strategy seems to be; getting ready for a complete collapse of Apple’s hardware market, except for the consumer items, and to become a software ( and maybe OS ) company.
It would seem probable, logical, and financially sound.
They would be offering best of breed quality “creative” software (the Office Suite for the rest of your life) for everyone.
Now, let’s watch them move into the digital photography (Photoshop) space!
I think that is a wee bit drastic.
Apple has always maintained good software for its customers, and with the creation of the iApps, saw that for media creation, they can have a consumer, prosumer, and pro line of software. then they build the back end hardware systems to support such pro apps, and blamo, they are a computer media creation company.
“Just didn’t seem logical to switch that often.”
Companies that do that stuff tend to upgrade all their hardware with each major release, and for Pixar, who develops their own software, porting isn’t too huge a deal. The advantage is simple, QuickTime.
This Adobe disliking Apple thing is getting stale. They discontinue products that don’t do well. No one used Premiere on a Mac, and no one would’ve used Encore had they bothered with it. But they do use Photoshop, and it sells more on OS X than on Windows. Adobe is streamlining. They have dropped things like LiveMotion altogether because it wasn’t selling. If Apple competed with Photoshop, they would have to compete with Illustrator and InDesign too, all at once. It’s a workflow issue, and it’a a lot to tackle.
“Numerically Adobe has far more Photoshop users on Windows. The bad part is that as a percentage, fewer of the Windows users pay for Photoshop.”
That would also be the problem with Linux.
“However, if Adobe’s foray into product activation helps revenue generation on the Windows platform, Adobe could feasibly drop their Mac business — all of it. Photoshop is the big money maker for Adobe, not Illustrator or In Design.”
If somehow or another they end up selling more copies on Windows, that still wouldn’t justify dropping OS X. Like you said, Photoshop is their main revenue, and even dropping a third of that would be a huge hit. It would have to be really bad before they dropped OS X altogether.
“And if Adobe were so inclined, they could lead a major push onto Linux and offer the Adobe CS suite for a very good price and still make money.”
They would have to charge the same amount they do on other platforms.
“Once someone establishes a “low cost hardware” + “good enough software” basis on Linux, the game show will be very tough for Apple.”
Good enough software doesn’t work in the professional markets, and print is about the only one where low end hardware works.
I think Apple is setting up for the change in the print industry. Desktop publishing was huge for them in the past, but not because it was desktop publishing, but because it was something that no one else could do. And now no one else can do things like FCP and the rest of their pro titles. Print/prepress is going through a major change right now, as things like direct-to-press is taking over and film is moving out. InDesign is taking over Quarks turf because it’s bundled with CS. It’s usually thought of as a better product, but they have found a way to make it plausible to move off of Quark. Photoshop sales on OS X will pick up soon as more print houses move off OS 9 to OS X, and have to upgrade their software.
“I think that the major move will come (I am not denying that it will come) when Longhorn appears.
if it has the robustness and security MS claims it will have, I think that it will be on par with OS X today, just because of Avalon.”
They have the same hype with every Windows release, and they never live up to it. XP was supposed to be virus and hack proof.
“I will say though that I love doing creative work and school work on my mac rather than on my PC because of the PDF support that the system has.”
They rewrote it instead of lisencing it from Adobe. That may have made them a bit mad, especially since it’s faster than Adobes.
“at any rate, the movements of Adobe have to be alarming to Apple and I will bet that there is some internal development on a Photoshop killer coming for the Mac…. and if the software was really that good (which it might be considering apple’s track record) to really piss off Adobe, Apple could make it available on the PC as well, but I think that it would be a stupid thing to do considering their strategy over the last few years.”
It would be cool, but they would have to cover the whole CS at once.
“hell, maybe if Adobe keeps getting clobbered in these new markets they try to get into, their price might be at a level where Apple might just buy them.”
That would be very interesting.
“If I was to guess… the long term strategy seems to be; getting ready for a complete collapse of Apple’s hardware market, except for the consumer items, and to become a software ( and maybe OS ) company.
It would seem probable, logical, and financially sound.
They would be offering best of breed quality “creative” software (the Office Suite for the rest of your life) for everyone.”
There high end software depends on their hardware. The OS is portable, but the high end stuff isn’t. For example, the work they have done on FireWire has now evolved into FCP HD being the only way to transfer lossless high def video over a single FireWire cable, no extra hardware required.
Adobe has a $9.92 billion market cap. Apple is about the same size, a bit bigger at $10.88 billion.
In terms of financial strength, Adobe is far stronger than Apple. Adobe has a much stronger earnings per share and a P/E ratio that is in line with the market, not riding on a hype wave like Apple. Adobe also offers a dividend which endears them to institutional investors.
ADOBE:
P/E (ttm): 30.17
EPS (ttm): 1.377
Div & Yield: 0.05 (0.12%)
APPLE:
P/E (ttm): 64.27
EPS (ttm): 0.454
Div & Yield: N/A (N/A)
Adobe’s venture into the enterprise has been incredibly successful. It is core business for Adobe whereas graphics/video for a niche platform is becoming less and less core business.
http://news.com.com/2030-1046-5190097.html
If Adobe continues their strong growth, they will soon be able to walk away from the Macintosh and never look back.
is there any reason for them to walk away other than you disliking apple?
really, as long as there is a lot of money to be made on the mac, Adobe will sell software there.
The equation is not simple like “oh, I am making a dollar a year selling on Macintosh, so I will keep supporting Macintosh”.
A return on investment analogy is more appropriate.
If Adobe looks at all the resources they put into the Macintosh platform and realizes those same resources applied to the Windows enterprise business would make them a lot more money, Macintosh will be dropped.
In simple terms, why invest your money at 5% when you could simply move it to a different account and get 20%?
“In simple terms, why invest your money at 5% when you could simply move it to a different account and get 20%?”
Because the current return is over 50% of their revenue, and that’s hard to replace, especially in an industry that’s currently going through major changes.
It appears that Steve Jobs is steering Apple to produce the software and hardware his other company, Pixar, can use. The software announced today at NAB, including XSan, is all directed towards that purpose.
Apple is strengthening it’s position in digital video and professional graphics, and that will only increase Adobe’s desire to support the Mac market. Note the interoperability of Photoshop and Shake.
Given that OSX and Linux are both Unix-like (to say the least), I would presume that it would be “easy” to build an app to run well under both. So if Adobe wants to port to Linux, it would not be a big jump to also keep the OSX users happy.
So what is Apple doing? By far, they have the best desktop unix OS. It has a pretty interface, actually works, is very fast, and has the “blessing” of Microsoft because they have MS Office. I think Apple is being shrewd by playing up that advantage: Apple are going to compete with Linux because they are doing it better. And people are willing to pay for that. And because of this, they will stay relevant, and may actually increase their market share. And Adobe will then have to listen.
And their “let’s-build-lots-of-cool-software” fits nicely with this idea: The more software you have now, the more likely you are going to make sure you have the best unix desktop os. Thus the user base will increase. Sure it ticks off the ISVs now, but in the long term, they’ll come back.
Go Apple!
(and no, I don’t use a Mac: I use WinXP and Linux when I have to)
“Go Apple!”
In omnia secula seculorum.
Amen. 😀
(And yes, I’m a Mac Zealot!)
Some of the arguments put forth by the Macintosh owners simply don’t make sense.
If Apple is doing so well, why are more people (both numerically and as a percentage) choosing Windows/Linux compared to Mac?
Apple’s market share plummets every day because no one can afford Mac. It is a high-end platform for high-end uses. The recent announcements only strengthen Apple’s high-end focus.
As Apple gets more and more specialized in their application model, UI, etc., it will cost more and more for an ISV to support Macintosh. The number of ISV’s that will want to develop for Mac will shrink. Oh there will still be a few who sell high-end applications. Just like SGI.
I see Apple becoming another SGI. Unaffordable and irrelevant to most people. There will be few ISV’s other than Apple.
Adobe and Microsoft have both publically floated the idea of dropping the Macintosh platform. This is more than negotiation tactics with Apple. As there was little complaint, these companies are likely roadmapping when their Macintosh support will be end-of-lifed.
I believe Apple is trying not only to create software that generates Pro Hardware sales and money in general.
I think Apple is mainly trying to POSITION itself as the company of choice when it comes to digital media: Video, Music, Sound, DVD, Television, Film.
The above combined with the MacOS X, and the hardware and software for media delivery over the internet (such as the iTunes music Store, a great start) is showing a way of how thing will be in the future (maybe):
Digital Media Broadcasting in the future may happen over the internet. Maybe HD Television of the future is connected to the internet, and the TV maybe will have an IP.
Maybe Movies will be sold or rented online.
Until then, Apple seems to want to have a brand name into these areas. If you get a name, then you can enter ANY new market that comes near your path.
And Apple seems to believe that there is great future in digital media with good money. And if a company gets there first, the good fresh money come first. That is a good positioning.
“If Apple is doing so well, why are more people (both numerically and as a percentage) choosing Windows/Linux compared to Mac?”
You are confusing people with sales. Most PC sales are to large businesses. Those people may have something different at home, and as such the Mac marketshare has been growing in the home market, just shrinking in the business market.
“As Apple gets more and more specialized in their application model, UI, etc., it will cost more and more for an ISV to support Macintosh. The number of ISV’s that will want to develop for Mac will shrink. Oh there will still be a few who sell high-end applications. Just like SGI.
I see Apple becoming another SGI. Unaffordable and irrelevant to most people. There will be few ISV’s other than Apple.”
SGI was pushing something irrelevant to most people because it was something too complicated for most people to do, or want to do. Apple has a habbit of making those things accesible. Media production is becoming what desktop publishing used to be.
“Adobe and Microsoft have both publically floated the idea of dropping the Macintosh platform. This is more than negotiation tactics with Apple. As there was little complaint, these companies are likely roadmapping when their Macintosh support will be end-of-lifed.”
You don’t drop markets that make money. Overall marketshare and the number of people who would buy a specific title are very, very different things.
mitsakos, exactly. That’s how iTMS was pulled off. Apple had THE name in that area. They are unmatched in audio any way you look at it.
I saw a story on the news here in Alberta Canada, that I thought might be interesting. It was kind of a science story concerning propane cell technology (similar to hydrogen cell technology, but alot cheaper) . The battery system allowed for a 40 hour stretch between re-fueling, and refueling could be done during uptime. If the thing ever comes to life, sooner would be better. And no I don’t work for them… but it would be rather handy to see an end to the waste involved with throwing out batteries. I could realy see the benifate with the new wave of super computer chip being stuffed into laptops.
And my first laptop will be a g5 chipped powerbook to match my g5 desktop. Flame away
hehehe yeah it was in the Edmonton Sun a few days ago.
BTW Calgary pwns Edmonton. :p
Don’t read too much into P/E. It’s important, but it’s not everything.
Apple has sales 5 times Adobe’s. Even more important is that Apple’s assets (mostly cash) are 4 times Adobe’s. Subtract off the current assets and Adobe’s business is worth 8.59 billion while Apple’s is worth only 4.99 billion.
Apple as a company has a lot of profit potential.
Talk about arguments making no sense:
Apple’s market share plummets every day because no one can afford Mac.
Mac owners can afford Macs. There are several million of us.
It is a high-end platform for high-end uses.
Thank you very much, but actually it is a general purpose computing platform.
why are more people (both numerically and as a percentage) choosing Windows/Linux compared to Mac?
It has always been true that more people chose Windows, even at version 3.1 when it was total crud. Why? Because it was cheaper, a desire to pirate from work and from friends, etc. You know the reasons, and it has little to do with quality or survivability. There are fewer Linux installations than there are Macs. Fact. Probably won’t always be true, but of course more platforms can run Linux.
The comparison to SGI is interesting, but I believe SGI lost marketshare primarily because it’s distinguishing characteristic was superior graphics performance. Modern desktops and graphics cards caught up to SGI’s hardware at a much lower price.
The Mac lost much of it’s advantage as a platform when unique applications like Photoshop and Quark XPress became available for Windows also. That’s why it’s important for Apple to continue to develop best in class software on it’s own like Final Cut Pro and Shake. ISV’s like Adobe have shown they simply aren’t interested in putting the effort into writing to the Mac’s strengths (like AltiVec, 64-bit, Multi-processors).
Regarding Adobe’s support of PS on the Mac:
Any software company worth their salt should know how to do cross-platform development, especially if they have been writing software on both platforms for a while. If they spend ‘x’ amount of effort and money to write a new version of PS for Windows they certainly are not spending a total of ‘2x’ to include a version for Mac OS X.
Who are these “people” you speak of? Business sales make up a large percentage of PC sales. I didn’t “choose” to use a PC at work. I was just told to.
Why did my management choose Windows? Because no one ever got fired for choosing IBM^H^H^HMicrosoft. Choose anything other than Windows and your head is on the line.
If the system goes down because of a new virus or worm it won’t hurt their job security. But if an existing system doesn’t interact well with the new Macs they just purchased and it could mean their job.
Not to mention that new Macs are expensive compared to the machines they give us. I am using a P3-600 (or something like it) with 512MB RAM. Trying running WSAD on that. LOL There are a few new HP POSes scattered around the place. They are a little better but still struggle with basic tasks. Companies that buy computers this way are not about to make an “investment” in their computing future by buying Macs.
And so, every two-three years they have to do another round of computer buying, thus bumping up the marketshare numbers for PCs.
And the SGI comparison is just terrible. The fact that Apple is catering to the high-end does not mean they are abandoning the low-end. Try showing some sense.
“Numerically Adobe has far more Photoshop users on Windows”
No it’s split, 50/50, and mac user’s buy 39% of Maya animation software. 39% off all animation companies are using Mac’s,,,and 29% in Broadcasting,,,,,,,and according to Videography.com it’s rising because of the intro of the G5.
MOTION looks GREAT!! I can’t wait to used it!! I’ve been a After Effects user for a ton-long-time……..I’ve been waiting for another great program……..Motion!!!
“I see Apple becoming another SGI. Unaffordable and irrelevant to most people. There will be few ISV’s other than Apple.”
Another problem with this comparison is that Apple doesn’t only sell high-end graphics workstations. I don’t remember seeing SGI ever trying to market its systems to the average home user back in its heyday. Apple has products that targets every market EXCEPT the ultra low end.
“Given that OSX and Linux are both Unix-like (to say the least), I would presume that it would be “easy” to build an app to run well under both. So if Adobe wants to port to Linux, it would not be a big jump to also keep the OSX users happy.”
Yes it is easy to make an app that works well under both, but it’s very kludgy (well under OS X anyways). They have a few options, first what tool kit to use? If they use GTK or Motif, the application must use the Apple X server which is not installed by default and is more of a hack. If they use QT it’s a simple recompile and the application would work on Mac/Linux/Windows no sweat and integrate with each OS well (so long as you use KDE on Linux). They would just have to buy a liscense. The other option is to code for both platforms, which would be a little easier than porting from Mac – Windows (or vice versa).
So they have 3 options to make a Mac/Linux app: easy low cost and kludgy (on the Mac, where you especially don’t want a kludgy hack of an app), a easy but costly application with QT, or a costly/time consuming 2-tier codebase 1 for Mac 1 for Linux.
Apple’s product prices are well in line with the pro-sumer to Pro offerings of companies like HP and Dell.
The XServes have more bang for the buck (when you consider the price of software) than anything from Dell and are bargains compared to anything from Sun and especially SGI.
SGI coasted for a long time on the fact that they were the 64 bit game in town and nobody but nobody could build machines quite so insanely fast or massively powerful as theirs when it came to modeling graphics or crunching graphical data. (SGI is still a big hit with the USGS, Petroleum companies and the US Military.)
However, technology caught up them and they remained insanely expensive. You can walk out of Apple with a maxxed out dual G5 for $5k. $5k doesn’t even get you started at SGI.
When OS X is compiled to 64bits and when Shake, FCP, Motion, PShop etc are avalible 64 bit versions, SGI will go into its final death throes.
When Terrasoft starts shipping G5 Xserves with a 64bit YDL, they’re going to take a big bite out of SGI’s scientific market.
“ISV’s like Adobe have shown they simply aren’t interested in putting the effort into writing to the Mac’s strengths (like AltiVec, 64-bit, Multi-processors).”
Yeah and make lousy 2nd rate programs like Premiere 6.5 for the mac. Adobe keeps forgetting what brought them to the market, it was mac users in graphics.
But take a companies like Alias, Dicreet, Maxon, Anark, are really making great products for OS X and are selling softwares.
Adobe hasn’t made a good name of itself in the last few years on the Mac side, and it is their own fault. I would of stuck with Premiere on my Mac if 6.5 was a good editor, but it absolutly SUCKED!
“Given that OSX and Linux are both Unix-like (to say the least), I would presume that it would be “easy” to build an app to run well under both. So if Adobe wants to port to Linux, it would not be a big jump to also keep the OSX users happy.”
Shake already is being written and sold under OS X,and Red Hat 7.2.
The news keeps getting better and better for design professionals like me who are planning imminent switches to Macs. In fact, I’m currently using only Linux (+ Wine and VMware), because I just couldn’t afford to lose any more time to worms, trojans, and Windows re-installs. I’m tired of MS, I want something that just works.
I priced out a Powerbook as a portable workstation the other day – $4300 (Canadian dollars). I priced out an equivalent high-end Dell laptop at dell.ca – $5000. And the Powerbook, with its 17″ screen and superior colour, is much more suitable anyway. Who says Macs are more expensive than PCs?
“Apple X server which is not installed by default”
I’ve never programmed for GTK or Motif (I use Cocoa if I need a native OS X app), but if you are talking about X11, it’s out of beta and in the default install of OS X now.
“Shake already is being written and sold under OS X,and Red Hat 7.2.”
Shake will render on Linux. Render only. So a lot of people use Linux on their rendering clusters. If you want to actually work in it you are going to need OS X. You can also use Shake on Linux to render from Maya.
Something that seems to have been forgotten here is QuickTime. No matter what happens with Photoshop, media applications will always, and I do mean always, run better on OS X because of QuickTime. They are all QuickTime based, and will remain so because there simply is NO alternative. So now ask yourself who controls QuickTime, and what operating system does it run best on? What operating system is it integrated into?
“46
The news keeps getting better and better for design professionals like me who are planning imminent switches to Macs. In fact, I’m currently using only Linux (+ Wine and VMware), because I just couldn’t afford to lose any more time to worms, trojans, and Windows re-installs. I’m tired of MS, I want something that just works.
I priced out a Powerbook as a portable workstation the other day – $4300 (Canadian dollars). I priced out an equivalent high-end Dell laptop at dell.ca – $5000. And the Powerbook, with its 17″ screen and superior colour, is much more suitable anyway. Who says Macs are more expensive than PCs?”
Oh boy is that gonna start something in this thread. Anyway, there should be some new PowerBooks soon. Keep an eye out.
“It would be cool, but they would have to cover the whole CS at once.”
People said the same thing about Office, then Apple put out Keynote.
is dreamworks still using linux or did they also move over to mac?
“People said the same thing about Office, then Apple put out Keynote.”
Keynote isn’t really aimed at users who rely on PowerPoints features. Keynote kills PowerPoint graphicswise, and produces a ton more oohs and ahhs, which are great for presentations. But PowerPoint integrates into Office, and Keynote doesn’t. If you are making just a presentation on it’s own, it’s hard to beat the simplicity and what I call the ‘coolness factor’ than comes with Keynote, but if you are basing your presentation on data collected in Office, you will be stuck with PowerPoint. Photoshop requires extremely tight integration with InDesign. An Apple Photoshop killer would need to keep 100% compatibility with Adobe’s offerings, because Apple competing with Photoshop would no doubt make Adobe stop Mac development of not only Photoshop, but the entire CS suite…putting Apple in a bad position of needing to fill the void.
Do professional rendering studios (e.g., Pixar) really use quicktime? I mean, it’s good technology for compressing and distributing video, but wouldn’t they work with something uncompressed or at least lossless for video production? Just want some info.
“Pixar already does all their creative work on Macs, and they spent all that time porting renderman over to OS X, and apple is creating products like Xserve, Xraid, and Xsan.
it would seem to me that Apple is creating these products with Pixar type companies in mind.”
You do know who the CEO of Pixar is, don’t you?
but as of last june 20th or so at wwdc steve jobs said the g5 would be at 3ghz within 12 months.
steve now has 2 months to jump a full ghz and that is looking rather remote considering that for 10 months now we have seen not one speed bump or price drop on the 2ghz g5.
nice big announcement about software that isn’t yet shipping and a beta storage system sounds like a diversion to me.
wow. apple comes in last place for enterprise class storage systems. can anyone count how many vendors already have this implemented, including ms?
“Another problem with this comparison is that Apple doesn’t only sell high-end graphics workstations.”
Apple doesn’t sell “high-end graphics workstations”. Their “pro” models have little in common with “high-end graphics workstations” but the price tag.
IBM not too recently released its own SAN solution — Storage Tank. It also happens that the protocol is completely open and they even released a GPL’d implementation for people to hack on and improve. I wonder how this compares…
“Do professional rendering studios (e.g., Pixar) really use quicktime? I mean, it’s good technology for compressing and distributing video, but wouldn’t they work with something uncompressed or at least lossless for video production? Just want some info.”
Yes. They no doubt use uncompressed formats. QuickTime is not a codec though. MPEG is a codec, WMV is a codec. QuickTime is a technology. All the audio and video applications that run on OS X are QuickTime based, including playback/encoders like iTunes all the way up to top of the editors like FCP HD. QuickTime, among other things, acts as a container for codecs, sprites, scripts, markers, timelines, animations, all of it. For example, say you film something. On film, it’s uncompressed. Then you want to digitize it so you go buy a capture card. With the respective software that comes with the card, you plug in the camera and take off the video. The capture card converts it to a codec. QuickTime, on the other hand, allows you to capture, edit, and transfer uncompressed audio and video. But as I said, it’s a technology. You can do more than video and audio with it. Check out things like QuickTime VR to see examples. Games can be written in QuickTime using interactive sprites. You can write QuickTime components that all QuickTime enabled applications can tap into (mainly an OS X feature as QuickTime is tightly integrated into the OS). The part you are used to seeing is just the player.
“steve now has 2 months to jump a full ghz and that is looking rather remote considering that for 10 months now we have seen not one speed bump or price drop on the 2ghz g5.”
Well no one said anything about incremental speed bumps or price drops in between. I think the 3 GHz chips he was counting on are the 90nm G5s IBM is now making. It’s rather up for grabs at this point as to whether or not they will make it at this point, but it really depends on IBM.
“nice big announcement about software that isn’t yet shipping and a beta storage system sounds like a diversion to me.”
The nice big software announcement was because of NAB, and they have been announcing the beta’s of things like Xsan for a while now (XGrid comes to mind). G5 or no, they are still half software.
“wow. apple comes in last place for enterprise class storage systems. can anyone count how many vendors already have this implemented, including ms?”
It’s a new market for Apple. Like XGrid, they didn’t say they were the first, but they can’t not do something just because it’s already been done.
“IBM not too recently released its own SAN solution — Storage Tank. It also happens that the protocol is completely open and they even released a GPL’d implementation for people to hack on and improve. I wonder how this compares…”
I wouldn’t be surprised if the two were developed together.
keynote is $99 and users are new to it so new learning curve means less productive.
on mac–
ms office x for students and teachers (3 license version) can be had for $138 (powerpoint, excel, word, and entourage)
ms office x oem version can be had for as low as $249
ms office x full version is as low as $305 (powerpoint, excel, word, and entourage)
on pc–
powerpoint 2003 is as cheap as $94 for an upgrade (almost everyone is eligible for this as you only need have virtually any old version of Office or Works to qualify)
or if a student or teacher you can have 3 license version of ms office 2003 standard with powerpoint for as little as $124 (word, excel, powerpoint, and outlook 2003 versions)
or stand alone powerpoint retail version is available as low as $188
ms office 2003 standard upgrade is $200.
product is even cheaper when factored into total cost of ms office suite if the user has need for word, excel, outlook/entourage, etc. as well.
ms office pro 2003 oem is $264 (Microsoft Word 2003 Microsoft Excel 2003 Microsoft Outlook 2003 Microsoft PowerPoint 2003 Microsoft Access 2003 Microsoft Publisher 2003 Microsoft Outlook 2003 with Business Contact Manager)
ms office standard 2003 full retail can be had for $280
so $99 for a single untested and new Keynote doesn’t appear to be much of a deal.
as for what the two programs can do
with powerpoint you get a program that people have been trained to use for years
hundreds of millions of machines have software to run the files so you have better compatability
thousands and thousands of templates are available for free or for a fee if you dont have the time to produce one from scratch.
Powerpoint is infinitely extensible via plugins like
Microsoft Producer for Microsoft Office PowerPoint 2003 (free)
plugins to export right from powerpoint to Flash
to create screen savers…
pantone color controls…
ms makes powerpoint viewers available for free on their site…
tight integration with presentation hardware like pointers, handheld mice, and projectors
the list is endless…
fact is Powerpoint is so much more powerful than Keynote that the only people claiming otherwise are folks that have no idea what they are talking about. Powerpoint 2003 is to Keynote as Word 2003 is to OS X’s TextEdit.
“fact is Powerpoint is so much more powerful than Keynote that the only people claiming otherwise are folks that have no idea what they are talking about. Powerpoint 2003 is to Keynote as Word 2003 is to OS X’s TextEdit.”
Not exactly. All those PowerPoint features you named are things that have to do with Office. As I was saying, Keynote produces much better looking standalone presentations. It does not integrate with an Office suite, if you need that you would use PowerPoint.
You don’t sound like you’ve used Keynote. There is no learning curve. None. It’s about the simplest to use application ever written. The transitions and effects it produces are a world away from what PowerPoint does, there’s just no comparison. The downside is that it doesn’t integrate with Office, but if you don’t need that, it’s a million times better than PowerPoint, and a million times easier to use, even if you’ve never used it before. The two apps simply cater to different types of uses, yet both produce presentations.
a few of you think that apple is pricing themselves out of the market.. but the machines like the dual 2GHz G5 and wot not are aimed at the high end and no mater what platform you are on you are going to spend at least 2500 for good workstation. at least.. 3 -5k isn’t a lot of money for the market they seem to be aiming at. they used to spend 100000$ on a SGI system or a flame / flint system. where now they can spend around 20 -30k and get a HD system that performs as well. if not better.
thats a pretty big saving.
also look at graphic production houses it nearly all SGI and Mac, using both the systems together.. or its mostly mac and maybe the person at recception using a PC.. heh..
“or its mostly mac and maybe the person at recception using a PC.. heh..”
I’ve even started noticing a lot of the reception PCs moving over to Linux when they don’t have to network with other Windows boxes.
Well done Apple.
You’re looking stronger everyday. What an awesome time to be using a Macintosh!
Today at NAB2004, Microsoft Corp. and Sonic Solutions unveiled DVD Producer (TM) — WMV HD Edition, a special version of Sonic’s award-winning professional authoring application that supports the production of DVD titles using Microsoft® Windows Media® Video High-Definition (WMV HD). WMV HD delivers dramatically superior image quality with high-definition video at data rates comparable to standard-definition DVD video.
Today at NAB2004, Microsoft Corp. announced that leading broadcast companies are developing or deploying tools and services that support Microsoft® Windows Media® 9 Series. Among the companies adopting Windows Media 9 Series for its high quality and compression efficiency are Rainbow DBS, the satellite services division of Cablevision Systems Corp.; Akimbo Systems; Shanghai Broadcasting Lab; and U.S. Digital Television Inc. (USDTV).
Today at NAB2004, Microsoft Corp. announced that Windows® XP and Windows Media® 9 Series are powering leading software and hardware solutions for the professional film, video and broadcast production community, and enabling real-time, end-to-end, high-definition (HD) video production on the desktop for the first time. Solutions from Adobe, BOXX Technologies Inc. and CineForm Inc. are now available for Windows XP, making desktop real-time, multistream, 10-bit high-definition serial digital interface (HD-SDI) video editing a reality. In addition, real-time Windows Media Video 9 Series HD (WMV HD) encoding is being demonstrated at the show, with both software-only and hardware-accelerated solutions.
yeah, well, when Windows Media Platform allows the user to export to 30 different formats, then maybe I will think it has some potential.
“Windows Media brings the high fidelity multichannel audio experience to your Windows PC today.
Why are today’s hottest artists using WMA 9 Pro for their music? Because Windows Media Audio 9 Pro delivers the highest possible audio fidelity—with up to 7.1 channels of audio and full 24-bit, 96 kHz support. That’s better than CD quality! See for yourself by checking out the selection of WMA Pro tracks available today!
See if your PC is ready for 5.1!
Windows Media Audio 9 Professional vs. MP3
Hear for yourself how WMA 9 Pro enables you to immerse yourself in 5.1 channel surround sound at the same bit rate as stereo MP3 files. You will need a broadband connection, and a system capable of playing back multichannel audio.”
windows media does that today. as for the mac…….nope.
“Do professional rendering studios (e.g., Pixar) really use quicktime? I mean, it’s good technology for compressing and distributing video, but wouldn’t they work with something uncompressed or at least lossless for video production? Just want some info.”
Final Cut Pro 4 works in 8 and 10 bit uncompressed.
I’m raising my glass and cheering to Apple. I LOVE this POSITIVE, FORWARD MOTION! It’s great to be a creative and an Apple user.
Jb
umm, yeah, nice troll.
ever here of Quicktime?
oh, and musicians do not compress their music when they make it.
oh, BTW, Pixelet is a new tech that is being used by Apple and Quick Time, read up on it at apple.com.
Incase everyone was in battle to much, the new books are out. 1.5ghz G4 17 inch PB for 2800 bucks.
The low end PowerBook, 12″, is a fantastic deal. 1.33GHz, Airport Extreme built in. Oh yeah. B-)
“Is this the death of Photoshop”
I certainly hope so! Apple can certainly come up with something much better than Photoshop.
another thing to point out is about Final Cut Pro HD, native HD without having to use an uncompressed board. That’s just wonderful…
Cheers, great job Jobs!!
If you claim that’s BS then back it up with either statistics or personal experiences please.
“Why are today’s hottest artists using WMA 9 Pro for their music? Because Windows Media Audio 9 Pro delivers the highest possible audio fidelity—with up to 7.1 channels of audio and full 24-bit, 96 kHz support. That’s better than CD quality! See for yourself by checking out the selection of WMA Pro tracks available today!”
Umm, today’s hottest artists aren’t using WMA9!!
Certainly, none of them are recording in 5.1, nevermind 7.1, so Microsoft is saying: look the only feature that we can tout is a highly useless one… it helps in the video markt and with DVDs, but is useless with audio!!
Not a single one of the music links contains 5.1 or 7.1 audio! The artists don’t select a format… they encode master tapes into whatever they need to distribute in!
Pathetic marketing speak on MS’s part.
http://www.adobe.com/products/aftereffects/main.html
Interesting….
“http://www.adobe.com/products/aftereffects/main.html
Interesting….”
I doubt Adobe knew about Motion ahead of time, so why not release an update…it’ll sell more.
I just don’t see After Effects making it to version 7 on OS X now that Motion is out, cheaper, and will probably be bundled with the next FCP (the current one comes with Cinema Tools, Soundtrack, LiveType, and Compressor). It certainly won’t make it to version 8.
Considering Adobe dropped Premiere you are probably right….
I hope Motion isn’t bundled, I hope it remains part but gets stronger. With ease I can already see this program saving me tons of time over After Effects. Like Final Cut the program looks cool, cooler than AE.
AE already looks ARCHAIC! But than again AE is still my 2nd favorite tool, Final Cut being 1st. Have to wait and try motion….
After reading the post “The quantum attractor of high-margin hardware” I was curious whether there was a price difference for the sort of hardware that a video editor would want to use. I’m not a Apple fanboy or vice versa, just somebody who was curious.
PowerMac System: $3,149 ($3,449 with ATI 9800 Pro)
Dual 2Ghz PowerPC G5
1GB DDR400
160GB SATA drive
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
SuperDrive(DVD-R)
Dell Precision System: $4,419
Dual 3.2Ghz Xeon
1GB DDR266 (2 DIMMS)
Quadro NVS 280, 64MB
120GB SATA drive
8X DVD+RW/+R
Dell Dimension XPS: $2556
3.4 GHz Pentium 4
1GB DDR400
ATI 9800 Pro
120 SATA
DVD+RW
This is as close in terms of configuration that I could get it. I haven’t cited any video-editing-relevant benchmarks, so I can’t say how close these are. However, I bet they’re in the same ballpark. So, is Apple hardware more expensive than the Dell hardware? Yes and no depending on whether you’re comparing with the dual-processor or single-processor systems, but the Apple hardware is definitely price-competitive. With prices this close, the final decision will come down to the preference of the users and the quality of the software available not the price. I don’t think that Apple is trying to make up for higher hardware costs with the latest products. They have been trying to build an integrated system of software products which will make the PowerMac the no-brainer choice for video editors. They could never do that if that software ran on Windows and Mac OS
To me this suggests that apple will continue its assault on the high end audio/video world, once the domain of SGI.
This target is a logical expansion for apple. They have always been strong in the audio/video world and the G5 and OS X raise the bar.
“…it’s a million times better than PowerPoint, and a million times easier to use, even if you’ve never used it before.”
This is hardly true. Keynote’s main screen isn’t that dissimilar to Powerpoint, and while, yes, Keynote has a more polished user-interface than Powerpoint, it hardly represents a gigantic leap in usability. Keynote’s major strength is the high-quality display and graphics: crisp anti-aliased text, swish-looking transitions etc. But one major deficiency in the program is its inability to export to HTML, although I’m sure Apple will add that in a future release.
“This is as close in terms of configuration that I could get it. I haven’t cited any video-editing-relevant benchmarks, so I can’t say how close these are. However, I bet they’re in the same ballpark. So, is Apple hardware more expensive than the Dell hardware? Yes and no depending on whether you’re comparing with the dual-processor or single-processor systems, but the Apple hardware is definitely price-competitive. With prices this close, the final decision will come down to the preference of the users and the quality of the software available not the price. I don’t think that Apple is trying to make up for higher hardware costs with the latest products. They have been trying to build an integrated system of software products which will make the PowerMac the no-brainer choice for video editors. They could never do that if that software ran on Windows and Mac OS”
The other huge factor is the complete lack of software on Windows. If you are pricing pro setups, Premiere just does not come close. You’d need to look into the hardware/software that you’d need to add coming out of Avid.
“This is hardly true. Keynote’s main screen isn’t that dissimilar to Powerpoint, and while, yes, Keynote has a more polished user-interface than Powerpoint, it hardly represents a gigantic leap in usability. Keynote’s major strength is the high-quality display and graphics: crisp anti-aliased text, swish-looking transitions etc. But one major deficiency in the program is its inability to export to HTML, although I’m sure Apple will add that in a future release.”
The difference in usability is from Keynote’s lack of features in comparison to PowerPoint. The lack of HTML export was probably a decision to keep the effects up. If you want what PowerPoint offers you probably don’t look at Keynote at all, and if you want a ton of polish on your finished piece then Keynote is the way to go. Different needs.
“The other huge factor is the complete lack of software on Windows. If you are pricing pro setups, Premiere just does not come close. You’d need to look into the”
Somehow I doubt you’ve evaluated Premiere Pro or any other Windows-only editing suite.
“hardware/software that you’d need to add coming out of Avid. ”
Or not.
that adobe makes such nice software for Johnny Consumer that sells at the local wal-mart. priced so cheaply for non-pros too!
complete lack of pro software for Windows starts here:
adobe video collection 2.5 for WINDOWS
upgrade is $249
full is $999 (from adobe, but you can buy for oh $750-$800 once it makes it into the sales channel)
both include a $99 training dvd of your choice if bought before June 30
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 is a complete DV, SD and HD editing system and the heart of the Adobe Video Collection. It features an impressive set of professional real-time video and audio production tools — from automatic color correction to 5.1 surround sound mixing and support for industry-leading video and audio hardware.
Adobe After Effects 6.5 Standard provides more than 150 visual effects, flexible text animation tools, and integrated vector paint tools, all within a 2D or 3D compositing environment that gives you the power and control to create dazzling motion graphics and visual effects.
Adobe Audition 1.5 delivers the professional tools you need to record, edit, mix, and master digital audio, including soundtracks for your video productions.
Adobe Encore DVD 1.5 transforms DVD authoring into a truly creative process with full support for Photoshop CS, a comprehensive set of menu design and layout tools, and a flexible interface optimized for DVD production.
or for
$249 upgrade price
$1499 for full version
With the Adobe Video Collection Professional Edition you also get:
Adobe After Effects 6.5 Professional includes everything in the Standard edition plus dozens of additional tools for the most demanding professionals — such as advanced motion tracking, scripting, and effects.
Adobe Photoshop CS Adobe Photoshop is at the center of every creative professional’s tool set, whether they’re working in print, Web, or video. Adobe Photoshop CS offers more speed and functionality than ever before.
http://www.adobevideocollection.com/vidcoll.asp
“Adobe After Effects 6.5 Standard provides more than 150 visual effects”
Motion comes with 90 and any AE plugin can be added to Apple’s Motion like FCP. Plus all in real time, try to do that in AE.
Frankly I love AE, I work with it both on the pc and mac with Premiere Pro and Final Cut Pro, but I prefere my mac loaded with Final Cut much more. Now with the ability of HD over firewire with Final Cut Pro HD that is sometime to talk about!
Some Motion Specs
Real-Time Design
Design using real-time, interactive filters and effects.
Behavior Animation
Animate with behaviors, a procedural alternative to keyframes.
Natural Simulations
Simulate natural phenomena such as wind and gravity.
Particle System
Interactively customize sparkles, smoke and fire.
Photoshop Integration
Import Photoshop layers with blend modes and transparency.
Bezier Keyframe Editor
Animate precisely with Bezier-style keyframe tools.
Text on a Path
Animate text rapidly and change the path interactively.
Apple-Designed Templates
Customize professional templates to speed your projects along.
After Effects Plug-ins
Use your favorite third party plug-ins for After Effects.
90 Accelerated Filters
Apply and tweak filters in real-time, including PrimatteRT keying.
“that adobe makes such nice software for Johnny Consumer that sells at the local wal-mart. priced so cheaply for non-pros too!”
I never said anything bad about Adobe. I love what they make, but their video apps, as well as their web apps, are more prosumer than pro.
“complete lack of pro software for Windows starts here:”
Before we go any further, keep in mind this is a discussion of video oriented software, I hold Adobe’s print oriented software in the highest regard, it’s truely unmatched.
“adobe video collection 2.5 for WINDOWS
upgrade is $249
full is $999 (from adobe, but you can buy for oh $750-$800 once it makes it into the sales channel)
both include a $99 training dvd of your choice if bought before June 30
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 is a complete DV, SD and HD editing system and the heart of the Adobe Video Collection. It features an impressive set of professional real-time video and audio production tools — from automatic color correction to 5.1 surround sound mixing and support for industry-leading video and audio hardware.”
Go talk to anyone in this profession. ANYONE. Premiere is second rate in comparison to FCP. That is not an opinion. It’s simply not in the same class of software. If you had any clue about what you are talking about, you would be looking into Avid and not Adobe.
“Adobe After Effects 6.5 Standard provides more than 150 visual effects, flexible text animation tools, and integrated vector paint tools, all within a 2D or 3D compositing environment that gives you the power and control to create dazzling motion graphics and visual effects.”
Adobe After Effects is what this thread seems to be boiling down to. It’s an excellent app, and up until this point is has set the standard. Motion hasn’t been released yet, but from the looks of it the standard is about to be raised. Apple has done this before, and with more than excellent results.
“Adobe Audition 1.5 delivers the professional tools you need to record, edit, mix, and master digital audio, including soundtracks for your video productions.”
Adobe isn’t even a competitor here. Apple owns this market any way you spin it, and any audio pro knows this. Audition is a prosumer app. Again, if you knew anything about this, you wouldn’t be looking at Adobe.
“Adobe Encore DVD 1.5 transforms DVD authoring into a truly creative process with full support for Photoshop CS, a comprehensive set of menu design and layout tools, and a flexible interface optimized for DVD production.”
I used Encore extensively when it came out. I was looking into a new application that was meant to compete with DVD Studio Pro. Encore would’ve been a great alternative to DVD Studio Pro 1. At this point in time it’s more of a middle ground between iDVD and DVD Studio Pro, only with a bad interface.
“or for
$249 upgrade price
$1499 for full version”
A great prosumer price for great prosumer software. It’s a very good collection. It’s not a professional collection though, and shouldn’t be looked at as one. Come to think of it, it’s not looked at as one.
“With the Adobe Video Collection Professional Edition you also get:
Adobe After Effects 6.5 Professional includes everything in the Standard edition plus dozens of additional tools for the most demanding professionals — such as advanced motion tracking, scripting, and effects.”
Those were advanced features. Motion looks to be raising the bar. One of After Effects biggest holes is it’s so-so integration with FCP.
“Adobe Photoshop CS Adobe Photoshop is at the center of every creative professional’s tool set, whether they’re working in print, Web, or video. Adobe Photoshop CS offers more speed and functionality than ever before.”
Photoshop is an unrivaled application. Once again, I was commenting on video oriented software, not print.
(IP: —.chvlva.adelphia.net), you are once again showing that you don’t know the first thing about this. We are discussing professional video editing software and you decide to list a bunch of new hardware based rendering software. Those do nothing but render video…they are used for clusters. They have absolutely nothing to do with this discussion. You set up a cluster with those and use it to render your work from an editing suite. You are posting things that are unrelated to the discussion, and you are showing you don’t have the first clue as to what you are talking about.
And by the way, I am at work now, typing this from a dual G5 with an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro with 128 MB DDR. You need to start looking at other Apple resellers. What they have on their site isn’t all there is.
Get over it…Macs rule the professional media market. It’s not a new concept.
quite familiar with the fact that the best video card you can build to order for a powermac is the
ati 9800 pro with just 128mb video ram and that it is another $300 on top of the $3000 powermac dual 2ghz g5. wow, now we are at $3300 for a computer with high middle of the road video card..
no 256mb option
no radeo 9800 xt 256mb option
no top end nvidia fx5950 solution. no quadro cards, no firegl cards…..
that same ati 9800 pro 128mb card can be had for as little as $199 stand alone at http://www.buycyberpc.com/sara98proat1.html for a windows or linux box.
on a mac it is $300 as an upgrade over a video card you are already paying something for, or compare with $199 for a windows or linux box.
with the money saved you can start building a render farm.
Once again, Apple’s site isn’t the only place to buy this stuff. Other resellers sell better video cards cheaper, and most install them for free. Same with RAM. Start looking elsewhere. I’ve listed them for you a few times in other threads, but you refuse to look, and thus refuse to debate like an adult.
show me a site
give me a direct link
to any vendor that sells a more powerful video card than the ati 9800 pro with 128mb ram that works in the dual g5 you are now working on.
“show me a site
give me a direct link
to any vendor that sells a more powerful video card than the ati 9800 pro with 128mb ram that works in the dual g5 you are now working on.”
We’ve discussed this in two other threads. I’m not having the same arguement with you over and over again. Be an adult and cut your loses. This is a thread about high end media production software, a market where Macs rule. Get over it, there is nothing you can say and no way to spin it that will change that fact. You can complain about it not being in your price range, but it doesn’t matter because you don’t do this stuff. You have already proven that more than once, both by thinking Adobe was on par with FCP instead of looking at Avid, and by your complete lack of high end hardware and software knowledge. You do not know what are are talking about and are outclassed here.
you cant get any ati card better than the 128mb radeon 9800 pro mentioned above.
apple doesn’t sell a better one anywhere on their site.
ati lists the same card as a stand alone retail sale at:
http://ati.com/products/radeon9800/radeon9800prome/specs.html
again no 256mb option is made. no 9800 xt model is made for mac.
you cant provide the link cause there is nothing to link to.
once again you are sadly mistaken.
if you got some knowledge share it. if you are whaling, whale on by not posting a link.
Whaling (hoping you mean wailing) I’m not. I was trying to keep this thread on topic. If you’d like to debate things like this, there is a place for it on this site, and many other sites.
As for the video card, I’ve given you names of place that sell them in two other threads, and am tired of giving you the same information over and over again. No, I will not go find a link, I am at work and have better things to do that search for things like that. I have this site open in a tab and check it every once in a while, but I’m not going to spend all my time here. I actually have work to do. I’m sure you are fully capable of using Google, and you can even start your search with the companies I’ve listed in other threads. You don’t need to turn every Mac article into the same discussion, there’s a place for that, and if you want to start a thread in the OS Wars forum about how you don’t think Macs are good for media development be my guest, but I have a feeling you will be surprised when even the die-hard Wintel people tell you that it’s a Mac market.
macmal
clubmac
owc
apple stores
apple online
no one makes or sells an ati radeon 9800 pro with 256mb ram for a mac.
no one makes an ati 9800 xt with 256mb ram for a mac
you cannot post a link because they do not exist. if they existed all of the above would have them on display in their stores and online in their shops.
proof positive that what you write is inaccurate. we cannot take your word as you cannot give proof of what you say. i have linked over and over to sites that directly contradict what you try to deceive us with.
Whale on Captain Ahab.
best card listed on macmall
http://www.macmall.com/macmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=260126
128mb ati radeon 9800 pro
$329
for PC it is $199.
Sorry.