A few weeks ago Apple said that they will unveil their “multimedia strategy” in the NAB conference. Indeed, new press releases describe Shake 3, DVD Studio Pro 2, Final Cut Pro 4 and there is also the recent Logic 6. This strong line up seems to aim on bringing Mac OS X closer to the same position SGI with IRIX were a few years ago: the high-end creative/media market. Additionally, Alias|Wavefront today announced Maya 5, the latest version of its Oscar award-winning 3D software. Update: New, 900 Mhz G3 iBooks soon!
Apple Announces New MultiMedia Titles; Maya 5 Announced
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Its good that Apple has decided to maintain Shake for Linux and Irix but I think its priced a little bit too high. I think Apple may be trying to sabotage its own Irix and Linux support to try to get people to buy more Macs, Will it be successful or will it wind up slapping Apple in the face, only time will tell. But for $9,900 dollars for the product and a $1,485 per year maintenance fee. I think some studios will be looking for alternatives to this product.
This strong line up seems to aim on bringing Mac OS X closer to the same position SGI with IRIX were a few years ago: the high-end creative/media market.
Look were is SGI now, doesn’t look too promising…
But these new tools will be cool to play with and we sure can do some amazing stuff.
“ts good that Apple has decided to maintain Shake for Linux and Irix but I think its priced a little bit too high. I think Apple may be trying to sabotage its own Irix and Linux support to try to get people to buy more Macs, Will it be successful or will it wind up slapping Apple in the face, only time will tell. But for $9,900 dollars for the product and a $1,485 per year maintenance fee. I think some studios will be looking for alternatives to this product.”
You have no clue how the movie industry works, do you? My cousin makes commercial and programs like Shake are a tiny fraction of the cost of production and paying someone for yearly maintenance is standard procedure.
Jobs is getting Apple closer and closer to his vision of what it should be. I don’t know much about these high end applications, but I wonder if making them only-for-Mac will be part of it in the end? I don’t know. Jobs has, in some cases, tried to force people to go to the Mac with these type of products. If so, it could have mixed results. Back to the point though – when Apple makes hardware that can run these applications at an optimal level, it will be a sight to see.
Apple is looking to conquer the creative workstation market and they are making inroads into digital appliances (ipod) and the general server market (xserve). Overall, apple is moving in the right direction. The key here is to provide value and performance to the professionals that justifies apple. Some of that will just be the user experience. I can already see some pc head whining about speed. I can’t speak about video but in audio DSP accelerators are a standard for high-end studios. AS for windows XP its okay but it starts to get caught up once you task it with too many tracks, effects, etc (at least from my experience doing 24-32 track work).
The apple strategy is superb. They need to excecute though and in time they will need to build differentation in that high-end (64 bit?) so that they can start offering consumer desktops for a lower price. That final aspect will give them volumes. In the end they will have a high end and volumes! that should help apple.
if this is a smart move or not. The big hook for shake on mac, apart the shake interface at half price, is the unlimited render licence on the mac version (as opposed with something around $1.500 per render license on linux/irix). This “gift” is close to the cost of an xserve cluster node version, and would allow studios to build rather “cheap” and “simple to manage” render farms.
The problem is that most studios already have these renderfarms working on 2k or linux, and I do not see them scraping 300 perfectly up to date boxes tomorow to buy 300 xserve nodes.
Also, I regret that Apple did not specify anything about future Xserve nodes working with the IBM 64 bit chip and their performance. This is the kind of roadmap vision that studio and post facilities IT execs need before shelling a few million dollars on a hardware/software solution.
Jobs is getting Apple closer and closer to his vision of what it should be. I don’t know much about these high end applications, but I wonder if making them only-for-Mac will be part of it in the end? I don’t know.
…..
They already did that with Logic; left PC Logic users completely in the dust.
Is it all what Apple can think of something better? Sorry, I do really have to say that. I find it’s pretty no excuse for Apple to think of something better. I always want try MacOS X, but too bad, Apple’s hardware destroy my insterest. Come on, Apple!
I don’t really know if Apple is going to last in the media creation market. Think of what Apple represents: proprietory, high-quality hardware with moderate performance and a significant price markup. That’s exactly what the media industry has tried to avoid in their move from high-end SGI and Sun machines to commodity x86 machines. For the high-end to mid-range media creation markets, commodity x86 machines running Linux are far superior for many uses. Consider:
1) Ease of use doesn’t matter a whole lot. Most time is spent within particular applications (Maya, Shake, etc) that are the same regardless of platform. Once the system is set up, the configuration stays static for long streches of time. This is precisely the type of situation that Linux handles extremely well. The high-end shops usually have an IT department skilled in maintaining UNIX machines anyway, so it doesn’t matter if the artist can configure things.
2) Stability under extreme workloads is very important. OS X is generally considered to be stable under desktop workloads, but does not have the “hundred-day+” reputation more traditional UNIXes have.
3) Interoperability is critical. Studios like ILM want to be able to quickly and easily port over their existing UNIX software. OS X does not have that kind of compatibility just yet, though it’s getting there.
4) Flexibility is very important. The fact that most of the Linux platform is open source facillitates this.
5) Commodity hardware support is important. This is the killer. The price/performance ratio of Apple hardware just can’t compare.
6) Support is important. I don’t really know what kind of support Apple has, but I doubt they have the support resources that a company like IBM can bring to the table.
Yeah, thats the thing I was telling Steve the other day, your completely right. Facts are simple, the processor on the iPod is 4 times faster than a P4 3.2 ghz. Amazing but true. If you can imagine the iPod processor being that fast, just imagine the photoshop content crunching you get with a G4!!
We would just love the get CE running on that bitch!!
From Microsofts and my own personal viewpoint (as Steve and I are ol buddies), Apple has done right with its entrance into the server market: XServe is a wonderful package, usless, good looking, overpriced hardware is an easy sell to the new generation of IT professionals. Since the tech boom of the late 90’s, Neo-Cons and half retarded television execs have been pounding the young people of today with images specifically designed to lower their IQ’s and deaden there response to brain numbing ideas. Not to mention:
Steve and I are going to secretly announce in Q4, a project that M$ and Apple have been working on that we are all sure you will all love:
The 800mhz G4 is getting a speed bump! By Q2 2004, Apple lovers will be able to get their hands on the new speed demon: 833mhz rock solid performers.
So in short, stick around for more fun from Apple! I sure will be fun!!
My 800 iBook can nicely heat my ham sandwidth, I feel deeply disappointed in myself for ever buying. Now you are telling me I can make coffee on my lower right hand corner, ALRIGHT!
On Apple site, “Product Info” for Shake 3 links to http://www.apple.com/dvdstudiopro/ as oppose to http://www.apple.com/shake/ 🙂 The blunders of modern webmasters. Besides, Apple seem to have the applications (I don’t know, I’m not in video, imaging, animation or sound), but most surely don’t have the speed advantage. The reason why SGI was popular then and still is popular now is their sheer speed – you can get more done in less time. I’m not talking merely about processor speed – other things also comes to mind: GPU speed, FSB speed, RAM speed, SCSI by default…
Besides, on Shake, the only app that I’m remotely interested it – it is funny the main window is all dark/black and no strips (so much for consistency). It looks exactly.. well, almost.. like how Shake look before Apple bought it over. Besides, as oppose to what is said on http://www.apple.com/software/pro/ – Middle Earth was composed on the version of Shake that was readily available BEFORE Apple. Who knows? Maybe Apple f*cks up the latest version. Sad thing it doesn’t come for Red Hat 8.0 and 9 (and then they wonder why binary compatiblity is important).
But this really bites “Shake 3 for Linux and Shake 3 for Irix are available only as a floating network license. ”
In other words, Irix and Linux is probably there for the rendering only 🙁
And I wonder why Logic still have the old brand (emagic), logo, and box look? Are they gonna release a new version of Logic under the Apple brand?
SGI f*cked up their market the very same way Sun is doing it. They failed to realize who their main competitor is. Their biggest mistake is offering Windows NT/ Linux x86 workstations – there is little profit there (commodity) and they have to compete with companies more experience with that certain section of the market (HP, Compaq, IBM, etc.) in addition to having their competitive egde wattered down. This caused SGI downfall. Not the strategy Apple is using now.
Glad i bought my iBook last month, only 900 mhz iBooks.
that makes me feel great, now i can sell this before i go NZ for a decent price!
xServe has been selling well
The ipod is a run away sucess
OS X has allowed apple to attack the “work station” market.
You might not like it but apple is making inroads into several new markets. That means apple will no longer need to rely on their “overpriced” desktops for margins. Those successes will only be magnified by the introduction of 64 bit capabilities, especially since apple is doing it in a more user friendly way than wintel or even AMD. Just wait and see. Apple’s desktop is suffering right now because of the prices and the fact that we are in a major recession (and recessions gnerally hit higher price tag items hardest). Give it time and i think we will all be surprised, Apple can’t continue to sell overpriced desktops. Change will come. Apple is going for a massive landgrap and most of the PC “elite” (hahaha) don’t even get it.
On that note, i have a feeling that logic six must kick butt on OS X. I am sure apple has optimized it for OS X and that will make a huge difference compared to the crap that is available on the windblows XP. If i had more money i’d pick up a few thousand shares of apple stock. Massive returns guaranteed if you hold on for five years (which you are really supposed to do with any stock since that is roughly the annual cycle for the stock market)
One of SGI’s biggest mistakes was allowing Softimage to be bought by Microsoft. Because it started to break SGI’s dominance in the 3D market. Apple is not going to allow that to happen. They have bought companies and made their own products so to fill the gap and prevent this from happening. Will this work? Who knows.
As for the pricing. Yes Roberto is right that the Linux/SGI versions are much higher thus rewarding people for buying Macs, But if you look $9,900 is competative compared to Discreet and their solutions.
I have a feeling that you may see Apple/Microsoft starting to buy more software companies in the future. Apple is doing it for survival.
Ryan: You might not like it but apple is making inroads into several new markets. That means apple will no longer need to rely on their “overpriced” desktops for margins.
I think it is good for Apple that they are focusing on new markets but this is relatively small volumes compared to the computer sales. This means that these new markets let’s Apple promote their hardware and pose the Mac even more strongly into the creative market and therefor will be able to justify their overpriced desktops.
Those successes will only be magnified by the introduction of 64 bit capabilities, especially since apple is doing it in a more user friendly way than wintel or even AMD.
More userfriendly? What are you talking about. Do you know Apples strategy about 64bit? Yes the IBM PPC970 can run 32bit PPC code but that’s the same approach as AMD Athlon64/Opteron. So how is a supposed (as in not known) strategy from Apple better than the same strategy from AMD then? Intels 64bit strategy is completely different and have been a big turd sofar but then it have not been directed at ordinary user yet as they’ve pitched Itanium against companies (and somewhat unsuccesful at that too). You obviously don’t know enough about Intels and AMDs respective 64bit plans to comment on them. You seemed to just assume; “not apple = bad”.
Just wait and see. Apple’s desktop is suffering right now because of the prices and the fact that we are in a major recession (and recessions gnerally hit higher price tag items hardest). Give it time and i think we will all be surprised, Apple can’t continue to sell overpriced desktops. Change will come. Apple is going for a massive landgrap and most of the PC “elite” (hahaha) don’t even get it.
Apples desktop sales will continue to suffer even if (read IF = still nothing announced and thus not a fact) they’ll pick up the IBM PPC970. Their desktop prices will need to go down severely before they can make any significant inroads into x86 sales at all, people have simply gotten used to the price by now. This also means that the G4 will be shoved downwards into the iMac at faster Mhz but I doubt the price will get much lower and this will continue to plague Mac sales.
If i had more money i’d pick up a few thousand shares of apple stock. Massive returns guaranteed if you hold on for five years (which you are really supposed to do with any stock since that is roughly the annual cycle for the stock market)
If you have nothing else than a feeling based on your (obvious) love for Mac then I’d not make statements about stock returns. I have some money to invest into shares but Apple is not looking attractive at all to me as an investment until they get their priorities, hardware and prices straight (I’m gonna stay the h*ll away from SUN, MS and AMD for that part also and I have no desire whatsoever to invest into either Intel och IBM).
<<< Apples desktop sales will continue to suffer even if (read IF = still nothing announced and thus not a fact) they’ll pick up the IBM PPC970. Their desktop prices will need to go down severely before they can make any significant inroads into x86 sales at all, people have simply gotten used to the price by now. This also means that the G4 will be shoved downwards into the iMac at faster Mhz but I doubt the price will get much lower and this will continue to plague Mac sales. >>>>
Apples sales will go back to the pre-recession pace when the recession is over. But i was trying to point out that apple needs to address the low end of the market. If they can establish other margin segments then they can do that. Otherwise, apple will slowly lose market share. i said that.
<<<If you have nothing else than a feeling based on your (obvious) love for Mac then I’d not make statements about stock returns. I have some money to invest into shares but Apple is not looking attractive at all to me as an investment until they get their priorities, hardware and prices straight (I’m gonna stay the h*ll away from SUN, MS and AMD for that part also and I have no desire whatsoever to invest into either Intel och IBM).>>
Quite a bit more than “feelings.” These include
1) a recent history of execution
2) an os that is opening up new markets
3) legitimate progress in those markets
4) A strategy (the new markets) that will free apple from relying exclusively on overpriced mini-towers for their profits.
5) opponents (SGI, SUN, and even Windblows MS) who are having difficulty executing (clearly to different degrees).
6) The prospect of 64 bit capabilities and an ability to capitalize on that. In other words apple is the system integrator and they now control some critical software (something AMD can not claim).
I think Apple sees a weakness here. Many of the “standards” — Office, Photoshop, Quark are really overpriced. In computing, things are supposed to get cheaper. Instead, whenever somebody gets their product to be “the standard” such that you literally can’t do business without it, they won’t lower the price. And there’s a minimal upgrade every year for yet another $150 or so. It’s milk the customer time. So along comes apple and see an opportunity to sell hardware by making better and cheaper apps.
Apple is being very, very aggressive on the pricing of these media apps (as well as the iApps – which are essentially free including upgrades). So taking the whole package of hardware and free or low-priced software into account, you may end up spending less on the mac. Even if it’s an “overpriced” pro desktop mac. There’s little to no penalty on the laptops, or the iMac (which is really one-of-a-kind still).
As for the 970, I don’t think there’s any doubt it’s coming – that’s just wishful thinking for a few mac haters and PC builder boys. All recent indications are that it’s coming sooner rather than later. Hell, there are even rumors that it may make it into the laptops sooner than expected if IBM has a bunch of 1 to 1.2 970s lying around from the early runs that aren’t too exciting (numerically) for a desktop, but would be spectacular in a laptop (that’s speculation, but interesting).
The primary mac hater line now seems to be, yes the 970 will be out, but it will still be “overpriced.” Well it will close the price/perf. gap a whole lot. Second, Apple probably will price them at current powermac levels at least temporarily because of demand. If you have only so many units, you might as well make some money off them. We will really know about powermac price/perf about a year or so from now.
I really feel sorry for all you mac haters. This next year or so is gonna suck for you.
I think apple is leveraging two things in making these high-value apps — ease of development on OS X using Cocoa, not being burdened by decades old legacy code and (maybe most important of all): the fact that supporting a mac app is inherently easier and cheaper because of the standard hardware and hardware/OS integration. Adobe, MS and the rest all have a lot more work to do. I get the sense that Apple is using small teams of people on these apps and running circles on bigger, older, more bloated competitors.
A Powermac is not over priced if you consider what producers already pay for editing equipment and hardware…
Before Avid Express came out the cheapest Avid editor was around $50,000. and that’s with out the bells and whistles. A typical Avid editor (the industry standard) is around $100,000. To do HD will cost you another $100,000.
FCP4 with it new features (livetype for titles, soundtrack to manage soundtracks, and cinema tools included)is a god send. Even if you get a tricked out Powermac with every option that cost $10,000 it is still chepaer than other NLE on the planet that offers this type of functionality…by far the cheapest
Suck for us? or suck for you? Yep I can see the headlines now ” Adobe cuts Mac support because maintaining a 32 bit and 64 bit version of their products is too costly according to inside sources ” ” Quark drops Mac support because of support costs ” ” New PowerMac 970 w/ DVD-R, 1 ghz of RAM 250 gig Hard Drive, cost $9,000.00 get em while you can suckers ” There was never any future in PowerPC, if there was, everyone would be using them. All the 970 will do is help Apple siphon more money out of its current customers. I personally dont care what Apple does because Macs suck, PCs dont, and thats the bottom line, point blank and PERIOD. I have no use for an under powered, overpriced system and I most assuredly wont have much need for an overpriced, useless no application base that the 970 will represent. Sorry Appleforever, the 970 is not the cure all save all and most of us dont care about power, I dont care if Apple produced a computer that had a 15 ghz processor I dont need it, why waste my money.
A mac was walking down the beach and it ran across a genies lamp.
The Mac picked up the Lamp and rubbed it and the genie came out.
The Genie told the Mac ” You have freed me from the Lamp for that you get three wishes ”
The Mac thought about his first wish ” I wish I had the fastest processor in the world ” the Mac said.
” Done ” said the genie, and the mac was fitted with a 5 ghz processor.
” I want the biggest harddrive in the world ” said the Mac
” Done ” said the genie, and the Mac was fitted with a 10 terabyte Hard Drive.
” I want to be the best computer in the world ” said the Mac,
” Done ” said the genie, and he turned the Mac into a Dell.
Guess what, all that cheap hardware has a BIG TIME downside. One of which is more costly application development and support. So pay 999 for your homebuilt Athlon. Then go out and pay another thousand or two over the next 3 years for inferior and more expensive software. Boy, you really saved money!
Of course right now you can steal software if you want, but MS with Palladium is making sure that one goes away too.
“I personally dont care what Apple does because Macs suck…”
Don’t even pretend you don’t care. Whenever, whatever Mac subject appears you post and post and post…
And rant and rant and rant…
This article is about (semi)pro video and audio gear. Do you have anything to offer besides your ridiculous and dire predictions? By the way, I’ve cut-and-pasted your $9,000 price tag–it’ll be fun to remind you of that prediction in Sept.
Anonymous wrote:” Don’t even pretend you don’t care. Whenever, whatever Mac subject appears you post and post and post… And rant and rant and rant… ”
Or he sends you nasty e-mails with false source e-mail addresses.
As for Appleforever, Dude I hate to say it but unless Apple severly changes its ways it’s going to loose.. All the pretty mac buzz is over and they need to seriously do something about marketshare.
“Guess what, all that cheap hardware has a BIG TIME downside. One of which is more costly application development and support.”
But then any differences in cost may well be more than outweighed by the fact that the potential market for PC software is around 30 times that of Mac software.
As a matter of interest, how do prices and features compare with the PC on Software which ISN’T from Apple?
Actually, having just had a quick look at the Apple site, I’d have to say that even the software which is supplied by Apple (which they might perhaps use as a loss leader to tempt people into the Mac) isn’t cheap.
It may be nice, it may well be worth every penny (A quick scan of reviews of Final Cut Pro all say it’s great for example), but it’s not cheaper than rival PC software. That’s pretty much accross the board for the products I looked at (Final Cut Pro and Express, DVD Studio, etc.)
Quality products? Seems like it, but I don’t see any sign that “Apple is being very, very aggressive on the pricing of these media apps” or that their development costs are significantly lower
” It may be nice, it may well be worth every penny (A quick scan of reviews of Final Cut Pro all say it’s great for example), but it’s not cheaper than rival PC software. That’s pretty much accross the board for the products I looked at (Final Cut Pro and Express, DVD Studio, etc.)”
Isn’t that to avoid upsetting Adobe any more than they already have?
FCP isn’t cheap???? it’s a bargin for what it does. I know I’m a filmmaker this is what I do. Adobe Premeire maybe cheaper..but it doesn’t do half as much as final cut. The only other serious competitor is AVID Express and it cost $1,500 and still doesn’t do as much as Final Cut.
Apple may not have the cheapest hardware or the fastest, but when it comes to the film industry it is plenty fast enough and Apple makes the cheapest solutions..PERIOD
FCE $300
FCP $1000 (Now includes Cinema Effects, LiveType, SoundTrack, Compressor)
DVDSP $500
Shake for OS X $4950
Adobe Premiere $550
Adobe After Effects $1500
Adobe Encore $550
Pinnacle Commotion $1000
Discreet Combustion $1000
ULead DVD Workshop $1000
Avid Xpress DV $1000
Shake for Linux/Irix $9950 + $1,485 per year
David, what were you comparing FCP to? Pinnacle Studio for $70? Sorry that’s not comparable software.
Shake is expensive but has definitely been priced to be excessively attractive–it is THE standard for highend compositing.
FCP can be slightly costlier to comparable products (but not by much) and contains many, many more features. It would take several apps now to accomplish the functionality of FCP.
FCE is MUCH chepaer than comparable products.
DVDSP is MUCH cheaper than comparable products.
No I really dont care, I just like to push the Mac users buttons. I really could give two craps less what Apple does. Appleforever, I only need one Windows machine, I dont want to install Windows on multiple machines, besides Mac users arent supposed to install Mac OS X on more than one Mac either, but Apple doesnt care because you have to buy the hardware anyway so they win either way. Palladium doesnt bother me, it just bothers people who want to be too cheap and not play by the rules. Anonymous, If Apple tries to produce a 970 and keep the price margin the way it is now, the joke will be on them because they will seriously be subsidizing the hardware and I have called IBM and priced the Power chips and if Apple charges less than $7,000 dollars per machine it is taking a cut from hell, so either way Apple loses. Have fun.
“No I really dont care, I just like to push the Mac users buttons.” And why do you care to push Mac Users buttons? Why do you like it? Because you care…
But what I meant about proving my point was this bit:
“If Apple tries to produce a 970 and keep the price margin the way it is now, the joke will be on them because they will seriously be subsidizing the hardware and I have called IBM and priced the Power chips and if Apple charges less than $7,000 dollars per machine it is taking a cut from hell, so either way Apple loses.”
It proves my point that you have no clue what you are talking about. The Power4 is a multicore chip with 128MB of L2 cache. The 970 is not multicored, is much smaller, and doesn’t have the large cache. It doesn’t take a call to IBM to figure this stuff out. The 970 will run at about the cost of a current G4, if not cheaper.
@Roberto
“No I really dont care, I just like to push the Mac users buttons. I really could give two craps less what Apple does.”
I guess thats why you get all wet, hot and bothered with responses that contribute nothing to the discussion.
As usual the experts on Macs are the ones that don’t even have one, like in another OS News thread where Roberto claimed to have 3 of the same Macs but didn’t know what models they were. Your a Genius Roberto, well..not really.
Apple continues to churn out good software and there is growing software support from non-traditional markets. They are a good software company but where is the hardware? The PowerPC970 is a logical path to go to, hopefully Apple will have a chipset and motherboard architecture that can really exploit the processor unlike what Mac users have today.
Actually it is you who doesnt know what you are talking about, price the chips. You wont because you know I am right, and no I do not care about Apple or you. Buy what you want, use what you want. I just dont care, I use my computers I am happy I am happy if you are happy but jesus h. christ you people take zealotry and stupidity to a whooooooole nother level. Im not even going to comment on this article anymore because A) you have gotten stupid and extremely off topic B) Now Im bored, typical Mac zealotry. See it everyday. I have one thing to say, if the PowerPC was so great why isnt everyone using it? because it aint that great, next thing you people will be citing license issues and spew other crap. You always do.
Have fun
bye, bye
it ain’t no good if I and everyone else isn’t using it. Whatever, dude. We don’t have to go into the history of MS abandoning their multichip architecture plans to form the mega-duopoly that slows the whole industry.
I don’t need to price a thing because I know the 970 is much more like a G4 than it is a Power4. I am also aware of the size of the chip, power dissipation, cache size, memory used, etc… I won’t try to make an argument because I don’t need to and because I’ll let reality speak for itself in 6 months or so.
Don’t know how we got off subject–my first post was pricing for comparable apps. You brought up the 970 and I followed–so does that mean you “bore” yourself, and are “stupid”, and are “extremely offtopic”?
I wholly agree, and we’ll enjoy your departure.
Oh, did you forget that you were the one who brought up the deflection: “well, the 970 might be nice but it’s going to cost at least 7 G’s!!”
Yeah, that was you.
Are you afraid or something?
when ALL my mainstream stuff is running on x86 linux, servers on x86 linux/bsd, and my badass creative workstations are mac os x, cpu?.
but the apps have to be good, and the price in line.
I don’t understand this argument of “I don’t use Macs, so they suck.” Or maybe I do. I mean I don’t eat white bread, so it sucks. I much prefer wheat bread. White bread is under-nutricious and overpriced. Why bother? White bread makers are doomed. I don’t see how they can compete. And don’t even think about bringing up “nutrient enrichment.” What a lacky response that is. Why not go with the real thing? White bread is doomed, and so are Macs.
Of course, what any of this has to do with Final Cut Pro, Shake, etc., is beyond me.
Flamebait is flamebait, trolls are trolls.
It’s interesting that virtually no poster here has ever heard of Vegas Video+ DVD, even from the “filmmakers”. Recieved rave reviews, and cheap as well. Premiere/Avid express are hardly the only other options on the PC.
Here’s a review of ver#3:
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2001/12_dec/reviews/cw_vegasvid3…
appleforever: No I do not hate Mac’s or Apple at all. Just because a Mac doesn’t fit my needs do I in no way hate Macs. I do however detest truth-believers of any sort and Mac-zealots like you are just as bad as religious fanatics. Instead of your “I really feel sorry for all you mac haters. This next year or so is gonna suck for you” they say “Just wait until judgement day, then you’re gonna be sorry”. Frankly, I don’t care. Your problem is that is have been this “next year” for quite some time now and no change of tides sofar. I do hope that Apple gets the 970 and that it performs good. IBM have good engineers and tho they traditionally have thaken the brute-force route with their CPUs (much like the x86 manufacturers) they are still in buisness. You must remember tho one EXTREEMELY important thing, IBM is NOT an Apple partsupplier first. Remember Motorola? Why have they not adressed Apples needs? Because it pays very little money in return when you have a different agenda of your own! IBM are bigger and have a different agenda too so if they feel Apple might interfere with their or give too little in return then they will drop Apple faster than you’ll be able to say “doh”. This is buisness and wishful thinking have zilch value here.
There is a very important factor involved in IBMs decisions as well and that is Itanium. Itanium might have been a big turd sofar but a giant like Intel has a leverage as no other company when the cpu’s are the issue. If Intel decided to put AMD out of the 64bit buisness then I my guess is that IBMs PPC division will be an unfortunate collateral damage in the process (xecpt for embedded purposes).
I hope for Apple to get the 970 and I hope it will perform well as the “CPU-population” needs to grow as the G4 currently is the odd cousin that just aged too fast tho it looked like it had bright prospects.
Wont work, the 970 will only increase the price of the Mac, just buy a PC who cares anymore, PCs are faster and have much more software than a Macintosh. The PowerPC has no future, just wait till WWDC my prediction is either a Intel or AMD alliance. That is the only way Apple will be able to save itself.
When the 970 Mac hits the the Marketplace Apple is going to have all the software in place to make a run at 10 to 15 percent of the marketplace, the first 64 bit desktop and Laptop available to general public in 3 to 6 months. PS an all new appleworks within 6 months along with Safari 1.0.
” When the 970 Mac hits the the Marketplace Apple is going to have all the software in place to make a run at 10 to 15 percent of the marketplace, the first 64 bit desktop and Laptop available to general public in 3 to 6 months. PS an all new appleworks within 6 months along with Safari 1.0.”
Will not be successful because 99.9 % of the computing public are on 32 bit platforms
WOW, Roberto had advanced OEM bulk pricing info on the PowerPC 970! Sweet! He also know what will happen at WWDC! Cool! Ok, sure your right Roberto no one will buy or have a need for a 64-bit, I wonder why MS is making a version of Windows for Opteron, I guess its just for fun.
Ok, sure your right Roberto no one will buy or have a need for a 64-bit, I wonder why MS is making a version of Windows for Opteron, I guess its just for fun.
Ok what is the major benefit for 64bit? Using more than 4GB RAM! Where do you need more than 4GB RAM? Servers and advanced workstations!
Ok say with me now: Servers! again please; Servers!
MS is releasing Windows 2003 Server for Opteron and Windows XP Pro for Athlon-64. You’d need a 64bit OS to get the extra 30% performance advantage from recompiling apps.
Will PPC 32 – 64 bit give 30% boost in performance too? NO! x86-64 doubles the amount of available registers (the biggest problem with x86) but PPC already have enough registers. PPC-64 will get a boost only when an app uses a lot of 64bit integer calculations and need lots of memory (>4GB). An application compiled for 64bit will get bigger as 64bit memory pointers take double the amouth of space => larger app size => slightly lower performance.
I have zero faith that Mr Jobs will sell PPC-64 truthfully and I know all the Maczealots will be joining tha choir saying 64bit apps are twice as fast. In truth 64bit compiled PPC apps that really doesn’t need to be 64bit will be most likely be slower. Yes, 970 can run 32 bit code (as can Opteron/Athlon-64) but that will not stop vendors from compiling them for 64bit.