In a statement given to MacCentral in response to the recent page posted on Adobe’s site showing that Adobe After Effects performs better on a PC than on a Mac, Apple states that After Effects is slower on the Mac compared to Apple’s own Final Cut Express, and that comparable effects in FCE perform better than After Effects on a PC or a Mac.
Apple Responds to Adobe’s ‘PC Preferred’ Site
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 states that After Effects is slower on the Mac compared to Apple’s own Final Cut Express, and that comparable effects in FCE perform better than After Effects on a PC or a Mac.
Yes, but.
There is no Final Cut E/Pro for the PC now is it? So how can they know that if they recompile/optimize/whatever FCE for the PC won’t be faster than the Mac one?
So their statement “Final Cut is faster than After Effects” doesn’t solve the real issue here (Pc vs Mac speeds). Final Cut might also be faster on a PC, we will never know!
Instead, what we get is Apple’s marketing blurb which only vagues the whole issue and we implicity get Apple to sell more of their FCE instead of Adobe After Effects on the Mac platform.
Blah.
Their response has nothing to with the original issue. Its like a little kid saying: “…yeah? well…”.
But I’m sure the MacFacists will have plenty to say in record time, so let the games begin..
Eugenia,
I don’t think you read the article correctly.
What Apple was saying regarding the FC/Pro vs After Effects, is that FC/Pro does the “same” calculations “faster” than After Effects, on the “same” platform.
What that means, is that the After Effects calculations do not take full advantage of and are not optimized for the platform they are operating on.
Therefore, the Adobe program is not a good benchmark for the PC vs Mac platform for the calculations performed by After Effects.
They don’t challenge the outcome of the benchmark, otherwise they had done so _NOW_
Apple is screwed.
I don’t get it. Apple says, “After Effects is not a good measure. Take a look at our product…”
Well, excuse me, but the article was written BY Adobe. The article says, in essense, if you want to use Adobe, we recommend this platform. They’re not saying PCs are better than Macs. just that PCs are better than Macs for Adobe programs.
Apple people make me laugh.
What Apple is doing right now is the very thing that makes me so mad at them. I go to their website to look at new computers. I have interest in getting a mac in a year or so. Everything is usualy fine then the put some BS benchmarking in there. Saying a powerbook out performs a dual athlon desktop system at photoshop or something outlandish like that. How anyone can respect Apple for saying stuff like this I don’t know. Clearly a high end windows box wins over a top end powermac. And it’s not like adobe was using the highest end of stuff. A dual athlon box could very much be consider a normal computer without being some workstation level computer. But then again even at that for the price to price comparision why not compair something of equal price of a top end Mac. It’s not the windows worlds fault apple doesn’t have workstation computers. No sane person can honestly belive that any Mac comes close to a x86 box. This isn’t trolling, it’s just the simple matter that so many out there eat up the BS Apple feeds them. I wouldn’t belive some perfomance spec from Dell or Gateway, why would i belive it from Apple. How one can really question benchmarks from adobe on this subject I don’t know, they are what one would expect. And it’s not like adobe has any reason to have bias. Their interest is in having people using the best price for performance computers a person can have. That way their product looks better. And as it was shown that’s clearly x86 land.
Also as other’s pointed out, the software apple says is faster then comprable software isn’t avalible on windows. So it doesn’t matter. You compairing apples and oranges, and that doesn’t mix, unless their greek.
Doing stuff like this doesn’t help apple ether. When people go to their website and look down through info on a computer many people out there, much more then apple thinks, looks at some of the stuff they say and goes “Bullshit!” this will not help gain costomers. It’s the same as the crap they push in the switch commericals. People know it’s BS. People don’t buy from BS’ers or Philosophers.
I had to read Mac-comments for years that were complaining about synthetic benchmarks, because they wouldn’t be comparable cross plattform.
You, the Mac-audience have asked to compare real-world apps, therefore, that are available on *both* platforms. Now where you got them, you complain again. Don’t try to consieve me and don’t try to lie to me because I am not stupid. This is your real-world, Mac-slapping comparison, and even *if* it doesn’t take full advantage, this doesn’t matter what so ever, because this is how close you’ll ever get. You have to measure with what you’ve got, that’s what you wanted, now where you’ve got it eat it.
also, I know apple basicly said they bow to those benchmarks and are loosing. But most of the time they claim to be the leader. And many in here seam to be a sheep to apple’s claims.
…that I’m dating a super model, drive a ferrary and am currently flying to europe on my private jet (for dinner) while sipping champagne and eating caviar.
Delusional rantings are fun!
Jobs/Apple needsa kick in the head. If they keep repeating to themselfes their own bullshit propaganda maybee they’ll actualy start to believe it.
Haha, funny one.
Someone should port the GLExcess benchmark to MacOS X, then we could do a “real” comparison of several important subsystems (CPU, RAM, video card)…
– chrish
Adobe photoshop elements always crashes on OS X. It’s time they did a rewrite.
The real life is the real benchmark. It has been mentioned long time that the applications the Apple community is really interested in would be allegedly faster on a Mac – that is namely Photoshop and its few remaining “friends” like After Effects. Why would you be interested in a benchmarks result once in a sudden, if all you want is to work fast on the apps you need in your graphics office? Read your comment again: It says: Shite ! I have to sell my Mac!!
Your suggestion is not good at all – I have been to a Mac-shop here in the weekend and for 2000 Euros, I get 800 MHz, 256 MB RAM and a Geforce MX inside. Now, I LAUGH at the performance of a MX and everybody in his right mind does so as well. Same goes for the RAM – the PC has left this throughput behind “ages” ago… the CPU is slow either way. So I have to ask what you want to proove by porting this benchmark?
….what the h**l is wrong with you Mac bashers. Adobe has clearly optimized After Effects heavily for the Pentium 4 and has not done so for the G4. The point of Apple’s statement is that YOU CAN GET THE SAME WORK DONE FASTER WITH APPLE’S PRODUCT! This isn’t bullshit, this is a simple matter of fact statement. It’s one thing to compare the same app across platforms when it’s been sufficiantly optimized and tweaked for both platforms, but this is a case of severe bias in the software. And yes, those Photoshop effects that show Macs “troucing” PCs are just as flawed, because they’re obviously optimized for the Mac over the PC. But the point I’m trying to make here is that there is less of a performance gap here than the PC-luvin’ trolls would like to admit.
Regards,
Jared
This responce just seems childish from Apple, I agree with Brad for years they have used real world apps to claim that the mac is faster. As a mac user I know that currently apple is behind in the raw processor power stakes. They should at least have teh good grace to admit that this time they got beaten, maybe adding something about the PowerPC 970 if they really feel they need to say something to make up for it.
OK, the PPC 970 might be pushing it considering Steve’s love of keeping things secret for the big splash. But this is just going to get them laughted at.
You disappoint me. Clearly, Adobe still has some work to do to optimize their software for the Mac. Other software by other companies (including, but not limited to, Apple) that HAS been optimized has been shown to perform admirably on the Mac. I know how much you like to dump on the speed of the Mac platform every opportunity you get, but this is a bit much, don’t you think?
Jared
Apple is getting along with Open Source now…
After the job they’ve done on Safari, maybe they could do some clean-up work on The Gimp! Then those pesky Adobe benchmarks wouldn’t matter anymore.
Oops, is the Gimp a cross-platform, Open source, competitor to your cash cow?
P.S. Adobe, don’t pick fights you can’t afford to loose!
About Apple’s move into software cutting into 3rd party developers share and making them mad. Adobe is mad at Apple for competing with them, so they struck back by publishing benchmarks where the PC is killing Apple.
>Clearly, Adobe still has some work to do to optimize their software for the Mac.
Why is this ‘clearly’? How do you know?
It is true that GCC is not as good on the PPC as it can optimize for x86. It is also true that Adobe doesn’t even use GCC for x86, but Intel’s ICC/VStudio which creates better code than GCC. If you put all these facts together, you will see that is of no wonder why the Mac versions of the PC equivenlant products are not as fast. But this is nothing that Adobe can do to fix. It is up for Red Hat and Apple to fix it (Red Hat has a contract with Apple to keep optimizing GCC for PPC).
>but this is a bit much, don’t you think?
No, I don’t think so. I just expressed my opinion, like you did and the rest did in this forum. I find that statement of Apple very distotioned, through and through. It doesn’t talk about the problem, instead it tries to sells more copies of their own software. It is a distasteful statement. If I was them, I would have completely shut up, I wouldn’t make statements, instead I would hunt down Motorola with a stick and a whip.
I agree, however I think Jared’s point was that Adobe software isn’t optimized compared to other apps on the SAME platform though. This is the issue that they are trying to make clear but I guess they aren’t very clear. AE on the Mac runs like crap compared to FCE or FCP effects on the same platform. This really shouldn’t be a Win vs. Mac arguements even though it has gone that way, again.
Apple in my eyes just used Adobe’s neutral statement to push their own product in an attempt to capture that 28% of Adobe’s sales to Mac.
Any publicity is good publicity I suppose in Job’s eyes.
> I think Jared’s point was that Adobe software isn’t optimized compared to other apps on the SAME platform though
This is completely wrong thinking.
What CAN be measured is the SAME code on different platforms. But you CAN’T measure different code and algorithms that only run on one platform. Therefore Apple’s response was distorted and did not gave an answer to the issue.
You see, FCE, yes it can be FASTER than Adobe After Effects! This is because Apple’s algorithms are better.
But you can’t go out and make that statement, because FCE doesn’t run on the PCs, so we don’t have a real comparison. they gave no real answer to the issue! They just reverted the issue to another one (FCE faster than AAE)!
The real issue here was Mac Vs Pc speed, and what Apple turned it into for their own profit, was FCE Vs Adobe After Effects.
Very clever turn around don’t you think? You can’t even compare how FCE’s faster algorithms would run on a PC (they might still be faster than in the Mac, or slower).
This is MY problem with the whole situation. Apple’s marketing dpt.
> but Intel’s ICC/VStudio which creates better code than GCC
better code? what do you mean by that? if you talk about speed, it depend of the build of what week do you talk? it change each week with each new build…
Overall, ICC/Vstudio creates faster code than GCC. This is a known fact, *especially* on P4s. Read our archives for more news and benchmarks about that issue.
Adobe’s page is strange (I mean, not the content, but just the fact they have it) and Apple probably should not have responded at all. Apple’s been dancing as fast as it can ever since the G4 started falling behind Intel, AMD, etc. There’s not much they can say right now. Hopefully, they will be able to soon, if they adopt the IBM chip.
But, just for kicks, because Corel put itself up for auction yesterday, wouldn’t it be something if Apple bought them? Talk about proprietary software, Microsoft would look weak compared to Apple’s lineup. Oh, just to cap things off, they should buy Macromedia too 😀
Jared shouted to the audience with, “The point of Apple’s statement is that YOU CAN GET THE SAME WORK DONE FASTER WITH APPLE’S PRODUCT!”
That’s 100% not true. FCE’s feature set does not have an exact 1:1 correlation with AfterEffect’s feature set. FCE is a video editing program AE is a motion graphics compositing program. While some of the tools will be similar, AE is a tool for a different job than what FCE does.
“This isn’t bullshit…”
Yes, yest it is. It’s just Apple trying to cover up quantifiable benchmark results that don’t paint them in a good light to their core audience.
“…this is a simple matter of fact statement.”
No, it’s patently false. It’s an apples to oranges comparison that doesn’t clarify the matter at all. If/when FCE can do 100% of the tasks that AE can do, then it might be a valid statement.
> Adobe’s page is strange and Apple probably should not have responded at all. [..] There’s not much they can say right now.
I agree. This statement from Apple looks more like a stumb on the back of Adobe for putting that page up in the first place, rather than an explanation about the real issue. It seems that all of us here are trapped in a PR GAME between Adobe and Apple (one stumbing another on the back). We are wasting our time. Nothing to see here… move along..
One app that only macs seem to be able to run is altiverb. This is convolving reverb, so it takes enourmous amounts of CPU power to run. I can’t get anywhere near the same performance and decay times with any convolving reverb on my PC, though I don’t know if anyone has written one that fully uses mmx+sse etc in the same way as altiverb uses altivec.
The upshot of this is that people just don’t use real time convolution plugins on the PC, but they do on the mac.
The same kind of operations used in the reverb are also used for real time video effects and image processing, so I can believe that in some cases the mac will have the processing advantage.
Thats my point though. Apples software runs better on their platform vs. After Effects. Has nothing to do with the PC. I’m not comparing PC to Mac for the same reasons you are. You can’t compare the two and YES the PC is faster no matter the software. No one with sense can argue that.
My point is that AE needs to be rewritten because it doesn’t run as well as FCE or FCP. This is the reason, it don’t cut it no more on the Mac. If your software is crap, don’t bitch about it fix it. If they get it up to par with FCE or FCP then I don’t see a problem.
I do agree with you on the BS PR of Apple on the issue, but these are the view I personally see with AE ve. FCE/P. All these benchmarks can be turned to show whatever the other wants I agree. Both are trying to show an advantage to sell their product. Welcome to corporate 101. LOL They are both about as trustworthy as an honest politician but what the hell, thats life. 🙂
Adobe’s page is strange (I mean, not the content, but just the fact they have it) and Apple probably should not have responded at all. Apple’s been dancing as fast as it can ever since the G4 started falling behind Intel, AMD, etc. There’s not much they can say right now. Hopefully, they will be able to soon, if they adopt the IBM chip.
Agreed.
I mean, what matters to a platform are the apps, so apple should sit down with adobe and try to find solutions instad of slapping each other. And from adobe’s point of view, there’s no reason whatsoever to optimize for MacOSX, it’s much more valuable (and easier/cheaper) to do it on the PC side.
And, if I use aftereffects all day (which many aftereffects users do), speed *does* matter – often regardless of price. (which is why I wouldn’t be surprised to see those people using dual Xeons on the PC side).
What if Adobe tells Apple “well, you know what, from now on we won’t upgrade photoshop for the Mac”. Then, we will see who would enjoy the knife stub better. Apple should be careful with their statements. I would hate to see them losing Adobe with all this stuff happening.
The vitriolic statements about Macs by PC advocates are really weird. Why do these trolls want slam the Mac? I can’t think of a single good reason. At a minimum, from the standpoint of rational self interest, a PC zealot would want the PC platform to have some competition so that the platform would have an incentive to improve.
As a Mac user (who was a PC user until 3 or 4 years ago), I can tell you that I am fine with Intel improving its chips and keeping the pressure on Apple to find a way to get faster and more powerful chips for its own products. As to PC users, you seem to have so much anger — why are you so unhappy?
Nobody slams the Macs here. I am not anyway. I like Macs and I have two here. But that doesn’t mean that I will close my ears and eyes and follow a distorted reality that is served to me. I ->think<- of my own.
That apple is basically saying adobe did a poor kob optimizing AE on the mac. (havent I said that before ?).
The problem is that AE and FCP do very different things. FCP is an edititng program with some compositing functions. AE is a pure breed compositing app.
You hit the nail on the head. Thats what I’m saying. They should fix the problem not bitch and cry like babies. LOL If Adobe isn’t gonna bother to optimize Apple has the right to do it themselves, at the same… if Adobe feels its not worthwhile they move on. Simple solution, yet handled all wrong.
Quote of the day… ‘They need to FIX the problem instead of bitching about it’. Maybe we should send them a memo?
As for Photoshop remember they DID have problems carbonizing. Adobe took their time yet, delivered a good update and everyone shutup. They addressed the problem and it paid off. Apple stepped in to help I believe as they should do now, if they have a problem with it, or just move on.
See quote of the day above. LOL
Eugenia,
Bottom line is how long it takes to do the effect. Apple is saying the effect can be done faster on the mac with mac software, even compared to Adobe After “Being Optimized for PC” Effects on a PC.
Even if you don’t think that’s the bottom line, certainly it is an entirely legitimate thing to point out in response. Your claim that apple marketing is deceptive is just total BS. They have every right to point to other evidence, they aren’t somehow limited to making some comparison you want. Since when do you dictate what’s legitimate counterargument by Apple?
Mark Wilson: “The vitriolic statements about Macs by PC advocates are really weird. Why do these trolls want slam the Mac? I can’t think of a single good reason. At a minimum, from the standpoint of rational self interest, a PC zealot would want the PC platform to have some competition so that the platform would have an incentive to improve.”
In short, they get annoyed by people saying the mac is better (in any way) than the PC. At the same time, the only reason to buy a mac is if it’s better (at least in some ways). Hence the never ending confict.
> Since when do you dictate what’s legitimate counterargument by Apple?
Since I am a customer (and it would be even more pressing if I was a stockholder). If an answer doesn’t satisfy me, as a customer having paid money for my hardware and software, I have the right to complain. And this answer Apple gave today doesn’t satisfy me, as it doesn’t answer the real question that was raised two days ago.
Surprisingly, the Inq has the best take on it, so I’m summarizing their argument…
“The real issue here was Mac Vs Pc speed, and what Apple turned it into for their own profit, was FCE Vs Adobe After Effects.”
Wrong–that wasn’t the issue in the first place and not Adobe’s intention… If it was, they could publish benchmarks for every one of their products.
But the fact remains, Photoshop is still faster (for certain tasks) on the Mac because it is better optimized.
So what is Adobe’s take?
They are saying Premiere/After Effects is better on the PC. It is specifically a software (+arch.) argument, not an architecture argument.
Why? It doesn’t sell more or less product for Adobe. But what it does do is discourage people from purchasing Macs.
Why? Because Adobe is bleeding in the video segment–they have steadily lost marketshare to FCP.
Now, Apple ups the ante by introducing FCE–at least previously they could make a cost argument–now Apple beats them from the top and bottom.
Apple responds–people dig into Apple, say they are pathetic. Why? What we are seeing is companies responding to competition. So what are the responses?
Adobe is saying we can’t compete on price, power, or capabilities with FCP/FCE so we will DISCOURAGE the sales of our Mac product.
Apple is saying they have a superior product that doesn’t require architecture specific benchmarks because it simply burns Premiere/After Effects.
Anyway, the simple point: bitter competition–what is the response from each company?
I’m confident that we are looking at 970 PMs in 4-6 months. Let’s say 8-12 months to be conservative.
What is Adobe going to do to make Premier/After Effects so much more compelling than FCP/FCE in the next 6-12 months? Anyone? Anyone? That’s right–Apple is more on track to respond than Adobe is. Adobe has been bleeding and will continue to do so. And they do not want to lose 30% of the market either.
Simple.
Imagine if Apple did buy Corel and Release a greatly improved Wordperfect Office Suite which kicks MS Office butt and they lowered the prices on that. That could cause MS to regret leaving Corel. People, I need some venture capitalists here. I spot a cash cow.
“I had to read Mac-comments for years that were complaining about synthetic benchmarks, because they wouldn’t be comparable cross plattform.”
That’s NOT what I said.
I was simply restating what Apple was trying to communicate.
Also, until 1 year ago, I have never owned a Macintosh. I have owned, used, programmed, repaired and supported computers since 1981.
PCs are fast. Macs are slow.
mac users want to argue this point? WHY? it’s obvious that a 3.06GHz P4 is faster than a 1GHz G4. apple tries and tries to confuse its users with the “megahertz myth” disinformation campaign. but what does that mean really? maybe that a 1.5GHz P4 is the same speed as a 1GHz G4 at MOST. 3.06GHz P4 is obviously faster, and the benchmarks prove it.
meanwhile apple has SCREWED adobe by releasing competing product. Adobe is one of the companies that helps sell apple hardware! Then apple takes money from their hardware sales and uses it to develop software to compete with adobe products. And people say Microsoft is bad! this is absolutely terrible, and if I were Adobe I’d be pissed off at Apple too.
Adobe is just looking out for their userbase. there is no way a mac makes a better platform for things like photoshop, because the pc version is exactly the same, but the underlying hardware is cheaper AND faster. people who use macs over pcs for things like photoshop are just stupid mac zealots who go “i hate pcs because I’m stupid and they scare me” all I can say is grow up and stop wasteing money!
Is it just me or does this:
“all I can say is grow up and stop wasteing money!”
sound really funny immediately following this:
people who use macs over pcs for things like photoshop are just stupid mac zealots who go “i hate pcs because I’m stupid and they scare me”
If it hadn’t been all FUD, I would have said Apple had a nice rebuttal.
Okay… so the Wintel Weenies are having a field day claiming Apple is trying to have it both ways. They must be confusing their own faces in the mirror with Apple.
Ugly Fact:
Adobe’s After Effects and Premiere are NOT optimized for Mac OS or the G4 processor. Neither program recognizes the AltiVec register or dual processors on a Macintosh. However, the Windows version *IS* optimized for Win XP, recognizes MMX-2 and utilizes second processors on a PC. That means that it is a rotten software platform to use for a comparison test. in fact, choosing those particular applications smells blatantly of test rigging.
Since Adobe has not properly optimized their obsolete video software for both platforms equally, it is not a fair comparison and both Adobe and Wintellers know this. That is why they prefer to use it.
The only viable alternative is to run the most comparable software that runs on each platform when properly optimized software is not available. that means Final Cut Pro on a Mac against Premiere on a PC. Denying this exposes you for what you are, even if you and your cronies can’t see the spinach in your teeth.
“PCs are fast. Macs are slow.
mac users want to argue this point? WHY?”
Because it isn’t a black and white issue. THe Mac platform frequently does a better job of optimizing for the platform than the PC world, and the PPC does have advantages that does show in certain applications. We want to argue because it IS erroneous to say PCs are faster and that’s that.
Show me where Adobe is recommending a PC for all their apps. Show me where Adobe is saying the PC is the better platform for everything.
The fact is this is specifically about getting crushed by a better app, and they are bitter.
“meanwhile apple has SCREWED adobe by releasing competing product.” Isn’t Adobe screwing Apple more my discouraging the SALE of THEIR OWN FREAKING product jsut to spite Apple?
“Then apple takes money from their hardware sales and uses it to develop software to compete with adobe products.” Doesn’t nearly 30% of all of Adobe’s business still come from Mac users? These benchmarks aren’t for all their apps, but by dissuading users from Macs they ARE HURTING their OWN sales ACROSS THE PRODUCT LINE–including Photoshop (which I bet they would happily still benchmark as FASTER at MWs), Acrobat (which is superior on the Mac), et al…
“there is no way a mac makes a better platform for things like photoshop, because the pc version is exactly the same, but the underlying hardware is cheaper AND faster.” That’s a ridiculous argument–any professional making a living using Adobe products can afford the initial cost. Can those same professionals afford tech support? Windows license for a simple studio network? And it is not true they are 100% the same–there are lots of differences.
The one I will point out is the best argument against maximize: on the PC, in PS, maximize gives you a gray useless canvas blocking out your other image files–this is undesired behavior for every graphics professional. There are many others.
Also, many graphic artists know their own work flows–its work that requires non-computer art/creation, research, proofing, comping, etc… You could not demonstrate to me that I lose the time gained in processing speed because I use a Mac, you could only show that I have more time to do non-computer work which is something that is finite and I don’t need to maximize.
my question is….
why now…
now i am a hardcore mac-bigot, i admit that..
but i can also admit that its been about 2 year since apple rulled the speed game…
so why is adobe comming out with this now…
in the end it doesnt really make a difference to them what platform is faster… if people want to know, the info is out there and common knowledge..
my thought is maybe they have got wind of something new at the NAB “strategic roadmap” meeting..
now apple already have 60% of AE’s functionality built in…
but they have also bought Shake and Rayz…
both apps that were certainly regarded as much higher up the food chain than AE… yes, this was in the VFX compositing world rather than the Motion Design compositing world..
but the technology is the same.. it just slight inteface things that make one more suited to either…
and if apple can get anything right.. its a decent interface (and no i dont want to make this a debate about that)..
..
it just seems to me that adobe are making a preemptime stike.. because after apple drop the bomb.. people wont give a diggity-S about AE opn the man…
that how i read it anyway…
(and if apple do release somthing, it damn sure better be “optimised” for all the advantages of the “Pro” G4 desktop… or have something hot in the pipe)
“now apple already have 60% of AE’s functionality built in.”
sorry i meant built into Final Cut
My theory is FCE.
This isn’t preemptive–it seems embittered, which makes me think: reactionary.
Final Cut Pro has superior functionality to Premiere, but is more costly ($1000 vs. $550). And FCP hits a better target–as you note it includes most of the functionality of AE and far surpasses Premiere).
But they still had price. But now FCE is say 85% of Premiere but only $300. They lose another selling point, but even worse, Apple may have a better low-end target than Adobe can muster–and it ain’t even low end. So Apple beats them at the free/consumer level (iMovie vs. nothing), mid to pro level (FCP vs. Premiere), and loses on cost/integration at the high end effects/compositing level (Shake, Rays, Cinema Effects, and others vs. AE) but this will very soon change.
But right now the immediate pressure is coming from FCE. “Why buy Premiere for $550 if you can get FCE for $300?” This is the same argument we heard from Adobe a few months back about FCP just different names and prices.
The real question is: if a 970 PM beats a current P4, will Adobe release a similar page with Macs winning? If you think the answer is “No”, then you have answered the question as to who is more pathetic.
This whole episode is a loss for Adobe. I suspect when they put up that one webpage they didn’t expect all this.
I doubt Adobe is really going to sell much more software by touting After Effects for the PC. Pros using FCP aren’t going to ditch their mac for a Dell running Premiere. More likely they would just buy a PC to run After Effects on the PC (rather than their mac), with no net gain to Adobe.
On the other hand, this webpage has caused a lot of embarrassment and bad press for apple. I think the most direct comparison is all the bad press Apple got for being slow on web browsing, which led to Safari. Steve is volatile and vindictive enough to launch a Photoshop and Illustrator replacement plan right now because of this. Of course it will all be kept in the dark and 18-24 months from now Apple will have a product
In Design is not a major threat – Quark for OS X will be out and the new apple “Document” (tentative name) program will probably have basic layout for newsletters and so on (a la MS Publisher).
Apple could absolutely kill Adobe on pricing. Apple could sell a Photoshop and Ilustrator replacement for 199 each.
you said: “people who use macs over pcs for things like photoshop are just stupid mac zealots who go “i hate pcs because I’m stupid and they scare me” all I can say is grow up and stop wasteing money!”
Maybe if you only are doing photoshop, you are right (although isn’t color mgmt better on the mac? not sure) But I like using iPhoto 2 with Photoshop and there’s no eqivalent no the PC. Basically the overall mac package is better, and you can run photoshop.
i would say that rather than FCE having 80% of the functionality of Premiere..
that it completely matches, if not beats it…
and has the huge advantage of being part of a larger range..
you can move a project from iMovie.. up to FCE up to FCP
…. from the Free.. to full HD conform… scalability
with premiere.. life starts and ends with Premiere..
id say the only real competitor FCP has is Avid DV express.. which is better is much debated, in other words, they are both very good.. (but DVX is 2 or 3 times the price)
yes currently Shake is very porely intergrated, but thats because the current release is a straight port of the Linux/NT version with zero customizeation for the 10 platform.. normal apple would have held back untill they had a “propper” apple version, but due to market concerns they had to get something out there..
i think what we see at NAB will be the true intro of Shake for Mac…
and thats why adobe is in a tizz
Steve is volatile and vindictive enough to launch a Photoshop and Illustrator replacement plan right now because of this. Of course it will all be kept in the dark and 18-24 months from now Apple will have a product.
This isn’t very realistic. Apple would first need to purchase some existing software. I’m not aware of anything with even the core functionality of Photoshop which is currently on OS X. Anything else would require a major porting effort.
…unless you buy into the proposed “Apple-branded Gimp” foolishness. While this is a conceivable scenario, the amount of development necessary to bring the Gimp up to the level of Photoshop would be rather costly. Being a GPL application, Apple couldn’t very well sell the resulting product either, so they’d have nothing to offset their R&D costs. Ouch.
And what are they going to do for Illustrator? Take Kontour under their wing and improve it?
” This isn’t very realistic. Apple would first need to purchase some existing software. I’m not aware of anything with even the core functionality of Photoshop which is currently on OS X. Anything else would require a major porting effort.”
my bet is..
if they wanted to do this, they would base the product off shake..
effectively Shake, with better paint functionality (it does have it now, but it needs refinement)
and no timeline..
shake already handles colour much better than Photoshop..
the work flow would be different..
but you would have the adavantages or a true procedural (rather than destructive) image editing package
..
and yes i agree GIMP basedwould be a waste of time
I have used iPhoto 2. IPhoto is not the greates app in the world, All it is is a slide show that you can pick photos from. Who cares, Besides this argument isnt about iPhoto and Photoshop, it is about After Effects and Final Cut Pro. Apples statement was pure marketing and Apple propaganda. If Adobe cuts Mac support and refuses to update its software for the Mac, Apple is dead–Flatline–Golfing with JFK, Singing with Elvis. I dont see that happening but let Apple keep messing around with Adobe, there is a old saying, dont bite the hand that feeds you. Apple has just about got MS fuming and it wont take long to get Adobe pissed if Apple keeps talking trash and trying to push competing products on customers. I am not a pro digital artist so it really doesnt affect me. For me Windows Movie Maker is just fine but most of the time I use Linux software for whatever needs to be done, Im glad SuSE 8.2 will finally have a video editing App because then I can kiss the Mac and Windows goodbye, the only reason I kept a Windows and Mac partition was for iTunes for my iPod and Windows Movie Maker for my Camcorder, now I will just use Sume for my iPod and Main Actor for my Camcorder. Linux has finally reached a point to where I can finally dump Windows and Mac OS X for good, isnt life Grand. Use whatever works for you, who cares who is faster, who is slower and I hear nothing but petty children who say ” My toy is better than yours”
Yeah, I haven’t really checked out FCE too closely yet so I just said 80% to be on the safe side.
I also agree with much of what you posted. I disagree agree that Shake is the motivation though… Again, I do agree NAB is going to show the signs of pro video app integration for Apple…
But as you point out Premiere is limited and stuck in the middle. AE doesn’t compare to Shake, et al. I also don’t think this is preemptive. So: not preemptive, Adobe doesn’t really compete with Shake anyway means to me they are sore about FCE.
Bascule, I agree with you that Apple can’t and won’t try to compete head-to-head with Adobe across their product line, but I still think this is bad for Adobe. Steve is going to rub this in when it comes to talking about FCP,FCE,Shake,Cinema Effects, and other pro video apps coming from Apple; he’s going to talk about it when he launches the 970; he is going to talk about it when they do a Photoshop bakeoff.
Most people are going to dump sh!t on Apple, but when it comes to the video segment, the people who understand are just going to give up on Adobe. Do you think the same is true of the Mac using Photoshop, Illustrator, Adobe users? A lot less likely.
No reason to crap on a partner when you are losing a segment of the market that you haven’t done anything to hold onto, don’t deserve in the first place. Premiere and After Effects–that’s it–with little improvement. Of course, Apple is kicking their ass in video right now.
Use whatever works for you, who cares who is faster, who is slower and I hear nothing but petty children who say ” My toy is better than yours”
LOL good one.
“Adobe doesn’t really compete with Shake”
not right now, but i dont think Shake will stay at US$5000 forever…
apple need to give shake back some of the momentum it has lost since the apple buyout…
its been a year since a single new feature has been implemenmted… and they are slowly cutting back to just OSX (a platform that almost 0 of the current houses are using for it) so they really need to give it a kick before someone else steps in (like Digital Domain with Nuke)
i think apple will do a FCP, and trying take everyone out lower price point.. it needs to be good enough and affordable enough for people to switch…
” In Design is not a major threat – Quark for OS X will be out and the new apple “Document” (tentative name) program will probably have basic layout for newsletters and so on (a la MS Publisher).
Apple could absolutely kill Adobe on pricing. Apple could sell a Photoshop and Ilustrator replacement for 199 each. ”
Not very likely and not very smart, because a real pro is going to use what he knows best and real pros do not change from what works to something new just because. As stated, I will never understand Mac zealotry, I use Linux becuase for me it just works. But man Mac users dont just love their computers, they LOVE their computers and to me it makes no sense whatsover. A computer is a computer is a computer, All they are are chunks of Metal, Plastic and glass. But Mac users boy, their entire wardrobe consists of Apple shirts and shorts, They decorate their homes in ” Think Different” posters and they put those ridiculous looking Apple stickers all over their cars. I wish someone would explain to me what a Mac does that a PC cant do I dont want to know about Apps I want to know why a Mac user is so die hard about a Mac, they fight whenever they know they are losing. The Mac cant bear their children, I dont find the user experience on a Mac to be better or worse than that of Windows or Linux. So what makes a Mac user want to jump off of a bridge if Steve Jobs asks them to?
I own a couple of Macs and I just want to know what makes them so special.
What part? The part about FCP performing the same task faster than Premiere? 100% true.
“If Adobe cuts Mac support and refuses to update its software for the Mac, Apple is dead…”
It would be easy to argue that it would hurt Adobe more; 30% of revenue instantly gone, and they are very volatile/subject to growth pressures on the market now… Many pro GDs are still using Photoshop 5.0–it wouldn’t be the end of the Mac.
So why are they discouraging the purchase of their own product?
“I dont see that happening but let Apple keep messing around with Adobe, there is a old saying, dont bite the hand that feeds you.”
Goes both ways.
“it wont take long to get Adobe pissed if Apple keeps talking trash and trying to push competing products on customers.”
Competing products? Shake existed before. FCP kicks Premiere’s ass. iMovie has no equivalent. FCE has no equivalent. Cinema Effects has no equivalent. And Apple has purchased other products yet to really show up… Adobe isn’t “COMPETING” in this market. That sat around at the low end for years comfortably with no competition–now the market is different and THEY (Adobe) aren’t competing.
Talking trash? A reporter asked a couple of questions and someone responded. They didn’t post web pages. They haven’t insulted Adobe. They haven’t said they are going to kick Adobe’s ass around the block. What trash talking are you talking about?
Let’s face it… we all know that Apple needs some speed under the hood. Moto’s been dropping the ball the last few years.
So Apple put up a comparison of Final Cut Pro… So What? Would ANY Hardware Vendor come out and say… “You know, that such and such article IS right. We’re slower then dirt!” Of course not! Is it Marketing Babble, some of it is.
One poster rightly pointed out that even though Adobe’s solution may be slower on the Mac, FCP keeps pace with Premier on the PC. Here’s Adobe’s “Fast” solution and here’s Apple’s “Fast solution. It may not be a direct comparison of the same program, but if I want to get the same job of video editing done it is an equal comparison. Is it true? I’m sure there will be argument over that…
yes indeed…
thats why a lot of people still use Avids built around 604 based 9600s
because in the end, all the other factors mean they can get there work done faster…
FCP is a better solution to the problem than Premiere at any speed..
………..
now AE is a nice program, but it isnt really evolving.. (and its got a nasty stigma…”ahh your an after effects user, well your rate should be nice and low”
you can get your work done quickly, possibly faster than on a pc, by using a different app (final cut) that is actually better than that which is offered by adobe anyhow.
The objective is getting work done.
Dohnert:
“I wish someone would explain to me what a Mac does that a PC cant do I dont want to know about Apps I want to know why a Mac user is so die hard about a Mac . . . I dont find the user experience on a Mac to be better or worse than that of Windows or Linux. So what makes a Mac user want to jump off of a bridge if Steve Jobs asks them to?
I own a couple of Macs and I just want to know what makes them so special.”
Your question has it wrong. It’s not what a mac can do that a PC can’t. It’s how it does it.
(1) It’s just easier to use. No dopey wizards. Unnecessary. No cluttered dialog boxes that go ten layers deep. There’s just more care put into it. Many of the apps work the same way – there’s “playlists” for iTunes, iPhoto, the address book, even Safari now has similar bookmark organization. There’s consistency. Also, it all comes in the box, you don’t have to make choices about which photo organizer to use, which music player, which this, which that. You get a high quality apple version that keeps on improving (and usually there’s no charge for the upgrades).
(2) There’s much fewer problems and glitches because one company is making it all — hardware, OS, apps, online service — and if there is a problem, you call one company. I have to work to make my PC work. Not my macs.
(3) New and exciting stuff is implemented faster because apple makes the whole package and can put in the necessary harware, OS hooks and write the app. Glad to hear you’re excited about Main Actor for Linux coming out. Let’s see, it’s been how long since the mac had iMovie? 1999? So it only took 3 years to get something on Linux. Windows is just becoming usable for consumer video editing – the initial few years trying to copy iMovie were horrors – just lots of glitches. Go to cnet and review the articles on the windows programs. It’s getting better and Movie Maker 2 isn’t a joke, but again, look how many years this took.
I don’t really care about Apple, I care about buying the best. If Linux, overall, offers the best, I would switch. You are mistaken in your assumption this is some kind of religion. Windows is just sucky (why are you so much in a hurry to switch to linux?) Linux I admire but it just isn’t there yet for nontechnical users. The poor software installation alone is a dealbreaker for nontechnical users.
despite the speed claim by current wintel pc’s it still is cheaper to own a mac, especially in the long run…..a pc is cheaper the day you buy it but as time goes on that argument doesn’t hold true…this is a well known and documented fact….if apple really wanted to give adobe something to worry about they’d buy Live Picture from corel and update it to run under OS X…that application still runs circles around photoshop despite being discontiued some time ago(you can blame john sculley for that)
” This isn’t very realistic. Apple would first need to purchase some existing software. I’m not aware of anything with even the core functionality of Photoshop which is currently on OS X. Anything else would require a major porting effort.”
How close does the now defunct Caffeinesoft product TIFFany get? It’s a cocoa product as well…
http://www.caffeinesoft.com
I think Windows is not as bad as what Mac users make it out to be, in my time I used Windows, I never had 1 BSOD, I never had any kind of mysterious reboot. Sure I have always used the Pro versions, Windows NT 3 – XP, But whats a deal breaker for me is not the performance of Windows, its the price of Windows. I dislike Apples interface, Aqua to me is not the most beautiful screen in the world, I think its ugly. Also Apple Mac OS X does not work well on G3s and Such, Its so slow that I put my mom and dad on Yellowdog Linux 2.3 which is very fast and easy for them, I did not know about SuSE Linux 7.3 PowerPC edition at the time. I like SuSE because of all the distros out there its the easiest and most intuitive, also I have my Alphas and Macs and I like to remain consistent, for the Alphas I use SuSE Linux 7.1 very updated and I use SuSE Linux 7.3 PowerPC edition very updated. I dont like to have to upgrade several different Distros. But the Mac users yes I see a little bit of cultish behavior there. As for the initial iMovie, that was Apples market, But Bill Gates & Co. had the insight to know Moto and IBM were going to Lag in the processor dept. so he implemented Movie Maker, IMHO it wasnt to steal Apple customers he was preparing for the future, But thats an opinion not fact. I established my opinion because before 1999 Bill Gates used to cover these topics he gave speeches about them, in his interview with Playboy he talked about Multimedia. But the question is, even if the benchmarks prove the PC is faster, then why argue. I dont feel Adobe made any negative remarks about the Mac or the other people who perform Benchmarks make negative remarks about the Mac, yet Mac users come along and try todistort reality by pointing to an App that Apple makes for the Mac, thats not available for the PC and try to pass it off as the best video editing App on the market, yet before this article came out Premiere was the considered the best app. Apple coming along making a retalitory statement such as FCP is better and that Adobe doesnt optimize for the PowerMac therefore buy FCP, doesnt solve the problem. Help Adobe solve the problem get with Moto and IBM and get them to start pumping out processor speeds, Dont come into forums online and call the PC crap because one company says the product is faster on a PC. Apple shoots itself in the foot, instead of working to improve the machine and show Adobe and other ISVs how to optimize. I have been a member of MSDN and ADC for along time. If I go to MSDN and tell them I have a problem, I never leave with a ‘ I dont know’ answer, they either tell me how to fix a problem or a work around and they do it in a relatively short period of time. I think the longest response took me 3 days. I call ADC and tell them I have a problem, I wait a week for a call back, then by that time I call ADC back and I ask them what the problem is and I get a response like this ” Well Mac OS X is still in its infancy and there are bugs in the system that maybe hampering your applications performance and as soon as the problems in the system get fixed we will help you then ” Excuse me but an ADC membership is not cheap, and if Mac OS X still has that many bugs then why in the bloody bluest of hells did you release it. Thats an example of customer support, if I have a problem with the system they blame Mac OS X age and not all drivers for hardware will act reliably. I can see where Eugenia and these other people come from, If I spend that much money on a system I expect it to work. The other day I was in CompUSA stockpiling computer parts and a priest came in with three Macs to get them serviced, I have been in CompUSA and I see more iMacs, iBooks and TiBooks then I have ever seen of Dell, gateway and even CompUSA’s own PC’s. So if you dont have glitches man you are lucky. And yet Apple wonders why people dont like their systems. With a PC i can get good performance and if something breaks I go to Comp or another computer store I buy the parts and I fix it, with a Mac I have to send it back to Apple, CompUSA all they do is send the Macs back to Apple. I think that Priest wishes he had your glitch free systems.
How many times have people told you to use line breaks, Roberto?
Not that it matters, nobody cares to read your stupid repetitive posts about hanging Apple posters and working Apple socks.
But if you are trying to make it so that people 100% disregard you, you do a good job of it.
Apple didn’t show any benchmark that proves what they claim, that is their software is actually faster. So in essence what Apple claims is a claim, there is no hard proof for it. So apple zealots should show a study that shows what apple claims.
Second Apple does a good job, however it actually makes enemies. Some apple people think that design community where adobe appeals to is actually using macs all the time. This is not true at all. Certainly many macs are used in design community, but that’s changing, and now there is no dominance in that market. Apple simply appeals to such people because their products look pretty, not because their products are doing things faster or better. Some people in that community like style, and that’s why some of them buy Apple. However it is not all people.
Apple’s whole saling point is that their products look pretty. This is not a good point, and in the long term Apple will go out of business. I think people at Apple know that, and I think that’s why they desparately make stupid claims. At the end if they can convince one more people to buy expensive hardware and software they will make money, and it is all about money.
Your question has it wrong. It’s not what a mac can do that a PC can’t. It’s how it does it.
How do you evaluate “how it does it” ? It is a personnal opinion based on personnal experience.
I like the command line, but MacOS 9 had none, but Windows 95 have one, from this point of view, Windows 95 does it better.
We also could based our opinion on the overall stability of the OS. Then again, your opinion would depend on your experience : linux, Windows XP, Mac OS X, MacOS9, Windows ME, Windows 9x, DOS, BSD, real time OS …
Or maybe we could choose to base our opinion on the hardware available…
That said, Apple will soon need to have an updated processor, video editing is the one field where you need raw processing power. Have you ever done some video encoding… When you have to encoded 10 clips at 4 differents quality, the mac is becoming less and less relevant.
The speed issue is becoming more and more important : 970, x86-64, Itanium. And Apple needs to become independant from a single chip maker, look at the present situation Moto is not interested by desktop cpu anymore. So Apple will probably move for IBM, but what if IBM choose to dump the 970…. Anyway this year will be an interesting one for Apple.
People (Mac and PC) are generalizing their personnal experience to other. Try to be more open guys. Try to think different!!
I love it how everyone is always saying that, thinking what a profound observation they’ve made. Guess what? Much more famous people than you have been saying that for years and years, and guess what? Hasn’t happened yet. Sorry.
Check this page out:
http://www.macobserver.com/appledeathknell/index.shtml
Very entertaining read.
Regards,
Jared
What it can do ain’t subjective? It’s just as subjective as saying how you do it? Stability is equalliy subjective. Trying to factor many criteria becomes more subjective. (This is my real explanation for why Mac users put up fierce fights. PC users think they can reduce the argument to speed and cost and be done with it–Mac users want to argue more nuanced issues that PC users never even thought about so they reject them immediately. The Mac users then argue harder, and the PC user says, “I don’t mind mapping drives to letters of the alphabet” or whatever and dismiss the Mac user. The truly subjective elements are the most defining and compelling. Unfortunately, they are difficult to argue about.
You are also enbarking on the criticism levelled at Apple users–comparing Windows with a 2 year old version of Apple’s OS.
“Apple will soon need to have an updated processor” And is coming. Much faster than Adobe’s products are improving.
“And Apple needs to become independant from a single chip maker” Why exactly? AMD was a none issue until a couple of years ago–Apple already gets chips from both IBM and Mot.
“So Apple will probably move for IBM, but what if IBM choose to dump the 970” Umm, the 9×0 series is going to be big. As far as I can tell IBM is geting all the business–Sony, Apple, AMD, Nvidia… They are licensing the PowerPC design. They are partnering and/or manufacturing for other chipmakers.
Your dire posting is actually reassuring–I like what I see up ahead.
“I wish someone would explain to me what a Mac does that a PC cant do I dont want to know about Apps I want to know why a Mac user is so die hard about a Mac . . . I dont find the user experience on a Mac to be better or worse than that of Windows or Linux. So what makes a Mac user want to jump off of a bridge if Steve Jobs asks them to?
I own a couple of Macs and I just want to know what makes them so special.”
its a really hard question to answer
and i dont want to come across as rude…
but if you have to ask, i probabally have zero hope of explaining it to you…
that isnt meant to be condersending.
its just the things that mac people love about their macs are rarely tangable…
im a mac user, but i spend most of my day running linux on hp hardware… and i always finish the day wanting to get back onto my nice smooth Cube
yes the Dual Xeon i use at work runs rings around it (actually i have 2 of them)
but they dont give me the same feeling… i know thats all touch feely BS, “a computer is just tool you ignorant maclot fool”
but thats its just how im wired..
for reference i also have a Bang&Olufsen stereo…
i know i could build i component system for half the price with twice the peformance…..
but i wouldnt get joy from touching it and looking at it..
(and dont try and put a quasi sexual spin on that)
so yeah if i have to explain why mac users are passionate about there macs, your not the kind of person who will get it…
preface: i can hold my own when it comes to x86 skills. i’ve done admin work on the microsoft side AND the *nix side. i’ve setup fairly intricate machines using compaq’s top of the line $25,000 server with 15k rpm drives and 2k advanced server down to commodity systems running ide raid (via 3ware), AMD & linux. i’ve setup dns servers, postfix mail servers, exchange server, audio workstations, visual workstations, yada yada yada.
that said,
note to you antimac ppl: you are not the target market. so why don’t you take your little “Calvin peeing on Ford/Chevy” sticker and stick it where the sun don’t shine.
i don’t even have a mac at home. i’ve got like 10 PCs, including a dual celery, a p4 zeon, a couple athlonXPs, and even a dec alpha….running nt4/2k/xp/redhat/freebsd & beos.
why do i defend the simple choice of using an apple?
because i support 500 PCs at work, and about 50 macs.
the mac people are definitely underrepresented when it comes to being a pain in the ass.
and i can appreciate that.
this has been my observation, at every company that i’ve worked or consulted for.
your average pc user is a dumbass, when it comes to the computer (regardless of a high intellect)
your average mac users, seems to be a little more self sufficient.
you could throw adobe numbers at me all day long.
when adobe comes down and provides support for Quark, Outlook, IE/Mozilla, and the rest of the software that IS NOT ADOBE,…maybe i’ll give a shit if they benchmark faster.
when adobe comes out and trains the hordes of mindnumbing pc users, that despite numerous company paid trips to ms-office training, still innundate my junior techs with stuff like: “i don’t know how to insert a bullet”, “i have this ppt thing on my desktop and i can’t open it in word”, etc etc etc……THEN MAYBE adobe benchmarks will be meaningful to me.
as of now, i have no plan to increase the ratio of macs in the org. but when the people from prepress or production ask for a replacement mac….they get no fight from me.
My analysis of Apple’s response is that they are saying that, if you are interested in using a product that does the kinds of things that Adobe’s After Effects does, consider that our product…FCExpress…does those same types of things, and does them…faster on a Mac, than Adobe After Effects does them on a PC.
SO, if you want to do these particular things, you can do them faster on a Mac, because with the Mac, you will be able to take advantage of the superior speed of Mac hardware, coupled with superior Mac software (i.e. FCExpress).
They are answering the Adobe challenge by countering with a faster solution. The fact that FCExpress isn’t available for the PC is…depending on how you want to look at it…either the whole point or totally irrelevant.
Conclusion? Buy a Mac…with FCExpress. Save money. Save time. Maybe even be famous. Edit your life the way you want it to be. Grow a third eyeball…in the middle of your forehead (the way it was meant to be).
What else would you have them do? Throw in a coupon for a free dual-processor 970? I bet you would, at that. Figures.
P.S. Hey! Here’s a real PC success story for you. I bought an ATI Radeon 8500DV card for my PC, because I thought it was really cool how you could record TV right onto your computer…and then burn it to SVCD or DVD. Yes…great idea…if the d thing would ever work! Intuitive this interface isn’t…for starters. Must have been designed by a crack team of caffeine addicted schizophrenics. Typical PC junk. Always feels thrown together…and functions (or malfunctions) as if it actually was.
I think they are too busy disregarding you more than me, because you never have anything to add but insults to everyone that posts. Try saying something insightful, if I went beyond the scope of your vocabulary with insightful try looking it up in a dictionary, be sure to find one with lots of pictures.
Final Cut outperforms After Effects and Primier. Yes that is a period.
Ask all the reporters in Iraq compiling their own segments.
I am a Mac user, but uses both platform to develop media design (print, web, video, 3D).
The fact is the PC is now just faster machine. And that the fact. So Mac users, face reality. Apple has been plagued with the speed problem since the G4 been introduced and still is. Remember G4 500mhz problems? In order to keep up, Apple has to use 2 processors (why not add another one? (he he)) Only hope for Apple is PPC970.
yeah…
indeed current x86 hardware is faster…
SGI’s fate is an example of what could happen if they dont get some roids into the processor sooner rather than later..
VFX companies held onto SGI for a long time… because they liked the OS and system better…
but in the end, the price performance ratio could not be ignored..
now apple is nowhere near that far behind yet, but if things dont change soon, it may well happen..
hopefully the 970 will be the white knight….
but ill belive it when i see it..
This isn’t very realistic. Apple would first need to purchase some existing software. I’m not aware of anything with even the core functionality of Photoshop which is currently on OS X. Anything else would require a major porting effort.
Well, it seems that Corel Painter is now up for auction. ; )
does adobe AE go against final cut?
i thought AE was a compositor? if so…wouldn’t AE go against Nothing Real’s Shake? (if so wouldn’t shake just kick the ever living crap out of AE?)
if Adobe has a finalcut competitor wouldn’t it be Premiere?
i don’t know.
“does adobe AE go against final cut?”
no….and yes…
AE is a compositor…
Premiere is an Editor…
and FCP is an editor with stong compsoiting skills…
you wouldnt use FCP as full compositor..
but for many of the tasks people used to use AE for…
like basic effects, and titling etc etc
FCP has all the tools built in…
for the kind of stuff that AE is still stronger in…
well Shake eats AE in…
so the answer is…. well… kinda
Well, another defining salvo in the PC vs Mac war.
It amazes me that the same arguments persist over the years…however, they are soo out of touch and irrelevant these days, it makes Mac users look particularly antiquated, like their hardware.
…but, but, the beauty and elegance of aqua and OSX, I hear them cry (when they’re not trashing the preferences or doing ‘clean’ installs, twice daily). You people will have to go through beta testing again with, wait for it, Panther. Can’t wait till you bet to ‘Lion’…or it may be ‘dead cat’ by then!
What about the IBM 970 rumours (psst…notice no one mentions the G5 anymore). If Mac people don’t get ‘their’ 970, I think they will just die…gob-sMACked…
Of course, there won’t be any stability issues because MACs JUST WORK
Me, I have progressively upgraded my PCs over the years as the lure of speed has enticed. My current 3.06GHz PC is now working happily, overclocked at 3.87GHz … and I know I could push it to 4.2GHZ if I wanted…but hey…why push it…I’ll simply upgrade the chip and get to 5GHz by year’s end. The Mac on the otherhand, is pushed hard against its 1.43256848937 GHz limit with a leaf blower ventilator to get it there.
Mac zealots just don’t get it! They don’t know what it is like to work on computers like the current PCs! The stability of XP and the amazing snapiness of response on anything I do, can only be understood if experienced…and the computer never ever crashes.
I don’t need to defend the PC…the figures tell the story. Adobe HAVE obviously noted the amazing difference as well. Hey, if the PC was as bad as Mac nerds implore us to believe, why hasn’t Adobe discovered the same? They are now staking their reputation on it, as well.
Mac users are like unpaid Mac sales staff desperatly trying to get PC people to switch, I couldn’t care less if you guys never switched to PC, I sure aint no PC evangelist…
Hope you take your Macs with you to the ultimate kernel panic in the grave. Maybe then you can really trash your preferences, for good!
“Mac zealots just don’t get it! They don’t know what it is like to work on computers like the current PCs! ”
ok man… whatever..
you seem to be under the impression that we mac users are all completely unaware of the wonderfull world of superfast lifechanging x86 windows/linux systems…
i have to use them every day….
and yes, they are quick, but i still choose to use a mac when i get the chance….
it doesnt make me a fool..
it just means im putting priority on things other than speed…
Lookee here for how badly AE sux on a multiprocessor.
http://www.creativemac.com/2003/03_mar/editorials/smack105030326.ht…
Also, note that a P4 (as opposed to Xeon) is not multiprocessor capable. So don’t go on about how a dual P4 will crush the dual G4 as they don’t exist. The Xeon which can go dual, IIRC, only goes up to 2.4GHz although they did announce the 3GHz processor last week.
i think i’m reasonably intelligent, and well adjusted human.
I own a BMW. There’s a guy across the street who happens to own one as well. He thinks we have some kind of “brotherhood” thing going on…that we are on the “same side” because we both own the same make of automobile.
he’s a loud mouthed boob, that i’ve gotten close to slugging (it wouldn’t be hard) because he does not know that standing 10 inches from my face is standing in “my personal space”…anyway, he likes to rail on about how all the other “jerks” in the neighborhood are idiots because they are not superior like us “beamer dudes”.
note to everyone: i don’t have a mac amongst my 10 plus systems at the apartment. But in no way, do I identify with strike3, even though we both run x86es. i imagine strike3 to be much like my neighbor.
now where’s that osnews kill filter…
These speed comparisons are like one car company saying to another, “Oh yeah, well our car goes 180MPH, and yours only go 140MPH.”
Modern computers are way faster than anybody needs. My 400 Mh G3 gets me through graphics work perfectly fine, even with files over 300MB. There’s so much more to computer usage than processor speed, I can’t believe people are still talking about it. Grow up, people.
I’m with Anonymous 206.208.110.— on this one.
But in my own words…… You people need to get a life!
Apples responce shows that its worried that ppl are realising even the Maccentric (its an aweful set of programs really, esp its design) Adobe products.
Wasnt Final Cut bought by Apple? Gee ill put myself on the line and say if Apple didnt abuse its position and buy out final Cut then it would be faster on PC.
Go on microsoft kill virtual PC for Mac.. go on .. Apple more than deserves it.
To all of you PC loosers.
Enjoy it while it last…
with all you jokers crying about how fast are PCs…. how Apple sucks…etc. No one forces you to use Macs or PCs, it’s a personal choice. Big deal if Adobe apps are faster on a PC, but at least I spend my time enjoying my computer not dealing with bullshit blue screens, invasive product activations and being part of bunch of asshole PC followers that don’t have a clue what Apple is all about. I rather own a calculator that owning a PC for what it’s worth.
Richard,
you’re right in many situations, but one area where you are wrong is video processing, especially in professional situations where time is money. You might think it doesn’t matter if it takes 4 seconds or 5 seconds to process a frame of video, but if you have an hour’s worth of video to process with a four hour deadline that difference could be vital. It is of course not the only factor.
But unfortunately this thread seems to be mostly about people’s loyalties, preconceptions, conjecture and riteous idignation, whichever camp they might fall in.
Funny thing is, when checking processor use on a dual processor G4 and After Effects, the program does not use them to full extent. Compared to Lightwave 3D wich does. Im sure the pc machine is faster, but not as much as the benchmark with photoshop and After Effects show. Maybe time for Adobe to try to optimize a bit?
Let Adobe do the tests again, this time lets run continuous rendering for say 120 hrs. Which platform required the most restarts? Anyone care to venture a guess?
“I own a couple of Macs and I just want to know what makes them so special.”
Puppeteer: its a really hard question to answer
Why? Perhaps because there is nothing when you think hard about it?! A Mac is a computer and a tool, not your sexpartner (or perhaps that’s where I’m wrong).
and i dont want to come across as rude…
but if you have to ask, i probabally have zero hope of explaining it to you…
Puppeteer, did you ignore the fact that he owns several Macs? He knows what a Mac is; to repeat, a tool a computer, NOT a magical thingy.
its just the things that mac people love about their macs are rarely tangable…
Then you have no hard facts to back it with. Just a “feeling” and that is not an objective argument now is it?
yes the Dual Xeon i use at work runs rings around it (actually i have 2 of them)
but they dont give me the same feeling… i know thats all touch feely BS, “a computer is just tool you ignorant maclot fool”
But if you know all this yourself then why all this PC bashing. If a Mac does the job for you then great I’m truely happy for you and all that feels the same way. But because of this you cannot claim a Mac is “better” without hard facts! I use a x86 based computer and FreeBSD and Windows is perfect for me and a Mac will not be better for me unless I severely change my computing habits and that’s not something I’m willing to do unless I’m forced to and then it wouldn’t be by choice.
so yeah if i have to explain why mac users are passionate about there macs, your not the kind of person who will get it…
Look, he owns several Macs but he sees the Mac for what it is, a tool. You state you know this as well but then in the same breath you claim “you’ll not get it” as if it was something ilogical about seeing the Mac as just a tool.
Please people! can’t we just drop this pointless arguing and use the tool we find is better for ourselves and not try to force our opinion onto others. I think we see enough of this “if you’re not with us, then you’re against us”-thinking in todays world politics already.
In other news, Apple has recently announced their new slogan will be Be Different; Don’t Think (TM).
Mr Jobs was unavailable for comment at press time, after it was revealed the Reality Distortion Field (TM) was showing visible cracks.
Industry insiders believe Apple’s market share will dip further this year.
Please people! can’t we just drop this pointless arguing and use the tool we find is better for ourselves and not try to force our opinion onto others.
Is it your opinion that the Mac is just a tool? Would you tell a car fanatic that his ’82 Alfa Romeo Graduate is just “a means of transportation”.
Sure, when it all comes down to it the Mac is a tool… and yes a Lamborghini in all it’s glory is just a means of transportation. BUT that Mac “tool” works best for me and I work BEST when using my Mac. I have a work flow, I’m an artist and my Mac doesn’t interfere with my workflow it enhances it. And yes, I’ve tried to use my workflow in a windows machine several times and I’ve always found myself clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking, clicking just to get the simplest things done.
I appreciate the Mac for what it is: a simply better personal computer design. Same reason why I drive a Volvo and eat organic food. I appreciate the finer things in life.
But for those people who would describe a painting as “blobs of colored goop on a canvas,” I’ll outline two things which sum up why I use a Mac:
1. Serial number of back of optical drive on iMac G4. How brilliant. Instead of having to flip the computer over or peer around the back somewhere, you can just hit a button on your keyboard and there’s the number. This is just an example of how Apple is constantly thinking about how they can improve the user experience of their products.
2. I picked this up from xvsxp.com (great site, BTW). Let me give you two button titles and see if you can tell me what the dialog box is for:
Yes, No, Cancel
Now tell me what this dialog box is for:
Save, Don’t Save, Cancel
Isn’t that amazing?!?! You don’t have to read all the text in the dialog box. Just look at the buttons, and they actually TELL you something. Again, an example of how Apple really cares about the user experience.
I’ve seen alert messages in Windows and Linux that are completely incomprehensible, and I’ve been using computers for years. I have yet to see a properly-designed OS X program that doesn’t tell you exactly what’s going on at all times. I never have to figure out why stuff breaks, or why program X won’t run anymore, or why I can’t perform Z task. It just works. Sure, OS X isn’t crash-proof, but it’s consistent. From day to day, things operate as expected.
I appreciate the fact that there are a certain amount of pixels between the close, minimize, and zoom buttons in OS X. I mean, I’ve actually spent time in my own custom program interface aligning those buttons manually to match the standard OS X window buttons pixel-for-pixel. Seriously. If there were more space, they’d look disconnected, not grouped. If there were less space, they’d look crowded and it’d be too easy to hit the wrong button by mistake. I care about these things. I have yet to see another computer platform with this level of detail. Not even the venerable BeOS was that sophisticated, IMHO.
Regards,
Jared
After MS ruined hardware markets by playing favorites, hardware vendors don’t tolerate ISVs dogging the hardware.
Adobe, don’t upset the maker of 30% of your installed machines! [unless you’re ready to loose the $$$ next quarter.] This is a bad, bad thing! You can’t tell people, even suggest, that hardware is preferencial. You must remain neutral. Aside from any PC-MAC thing it’s just business. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. Otherwise, the hand [Apple in this case] quickly looks to replace your services as you just became a liability by trying to lure its customers away.
I only made the Gimp comment because Apple is a “Hardware” maker. Open Source works great for them because it increases the value of “their” machines. Sure you could port the software elsewhere [i.e. Safari] but it wouldn’t be the same without the OS & hardware combo to back it up. Yes, Apple can just buy someone else for the same effect, but they primarily sell machines not software–if a necessary tool to their userbase is threatened, O.S. is an easy way to shore up their market to keep users from leaving[or retailiate against a wayward ISV].
Repeat, ISVs don’t play [or appear to play] hardware favorites–ever! It’s deadly for business!
I have read this forum and I am going to say this, thank god I dont use a mac. I never have and I never will, Macintosh Sucks. If Adobe decides to lose that 30% hey, thats great they will go to another platform and make up for it, you ever heard of Linux? With more and more film studios and other digital media producers going to the Linux platform and begging Adobe for Photoshop on Linux, Im sure Adobe will make up the lost 30% in no time. The Mac userbase does more to harm Apple than any ISV or developer could ever do. Because those of us that have considered buying a Mac look at these forums and go and check these machines out and we run into Mac users and we say to ourselves ” I dont want to be associated with these people.” Mac users claim they are objective, yet they are more shortsighted than any other computer user out there.