Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Next MacPro: Predictions...

10gBaseT runs up to 100 Meters over Cat7 cable. Runs up to 15 meters of Cat 6.
Intel has single port cards for under 1K, but managed switches are still very expensive.
So I'm hoping Lightpeak gets here sooner than later on the PC side. 10gb speeds are more than fast enough for small render farms.
 
Liam Hall said:
I think it's time for someone to do to Apple what RED are currently doing to Sony, Arri et al.

Anyone know any visionary billionaires who want to shake up an industry that is flabby, arrogant and has lost it's way? It wouldn't take much; a decent communications strategy and respect for their customers would probably nail it...
Click to expand...

Do you really see Apple as "flabby, arrogant, and lost their way?" Personally, I can't think of any company - in any industry (and that includes Red) - that has been more influential, visionary, and fearless in its product development and deployment. They didn't make the iPhone and iPad for the motion picture industry, but there has been nothing in the history of cell phones (or land line phones, for that matter) that has been as revolutionary and influential as the iPhone. There wouldn't even be an Android if there wasn't an Apple. In the computer industry, the iPad is about as revolutionary as it gets, in terms of design, form factor, battery life, portability, and, quite frankly, power. Apple does what everyone else only thinks about, and they do it so well that it's usually a year or two before anyone else gets to the starting gate. Now, none of this has anything to do with what they might or might not do on the workstation front, but to characterize Apple as "flabby" and say that they have "lost their way" is a massive stretch.
 
It's not a massive stretch if the comment is viewed through the actual tools used in this industry.

I seem to recall a marketing hype with "Million pro platforms sold" and "It just works".

"Revolutionary" and "evolutionary" sometimes differ in directions.
 
M Most said:
Do you really see Apple as "flabby, arrogant, and lost their way?"
Click to expand...
Yes I do. I'm talking specifically about Pro Aps here.

I congratulate Apple on their successful move into the cell phone industry. I love my iPhone and my iPad, but I wouldn't want to shoot a documentary on them.

You must agree their Pro Aps department is a bit of a mess, certainly in terms of how they communicate with their customers.
 
M Most said:
I don't know of any shop that's using the OS X software for full grading and/or finishing, it's primarily out there as an on-set tool and on occasion a learning tool (as well as being the basis for the Kompressor module, but that's another story). Do you? As far as I know, it doesn't support any hardware surfaces, which limits its usefulness as a production tool even if one did want to use it that way.
Click to expand...

Im not sure about Theatrical work but for Television a large proportion of work is very definitely finished with in OS X apps. May be I have missed something in the tread. We do use Color with CP100 control surface and also but more recently Resolve which is a step forward. We have no real issues with FCS or the Adobe suite of tools or Smoke if we move to it, Not forgetting Protools for audio of course all which run on Apple hardware and Red's tools. We deliver to a number of transmission servers using compressor framework with our own tweeked mpeg and H264 codecs. For us its the underlying Linux based OS and comparitive openness of QT media that allows us the freedom to do what our clients need and tell us they like. YMMV of course depending on what work you have in hand. Like every thing there are issues but a good reason we stick with it is the inovation that Apple provides ahead of others that allows us as a user to stay ahead. It would be a real step backwards if Apple chose to abandon its pro apps even though they are overdue for an update.

And I still would like a roll up AMOled iPad.........
 
Dave Blackham said:
Im not sure about Theatrical work but for Television a large proportion of work is very definitely finished with in OS X apps. May be I have missed something in the tread.
Click to expand...

You did. We were talking specifically about Baselight, not OS X in general.

For us its the underlying Linux based OS ...
Click to expand...

OS X is not based on Linux, it is built on BSD Unix. Similar, but also quite different.
 
M Most said:
You did. We were talking specifically about Baselight, not OS X in general.



OS X is not based on Linux, it is built on BSD Unix. Similar, but also quite different.
Click to expand...

Mike,

I stand corrected. I Still think we are saying the same thing though about Apple's great ability to lead and innovate. We do use both Linux and Unix systems here as well as OSX, as you pointed out we only Windows is used in our commercial office area.

Dave
 
Dave Blackham said:
Mike,

but as you pointed out Windows is only used in the commercial office area.

Dave
Click to expand...

I beg the differ, but as I already had stated, FilmMaster is Windows based color grading system, which is highly regarded by many top colorists and is widely used for feature length work.
 
Apple now is like IBM in the 80's. No one gets fired for buying apple in the creative market, regardless if it's the best option or not.

Windows 7 is stable, fast and has more options than OSX, but none of that seems to matter.
 
jake blackstone said:
I beg the differ, but as I already had stated, FilmMaster is Windows based color grading system, which is highly regarded by many top colorists and is widely used for feature length work.
Click to expand...

Jake, I don't know why you're belaboring this. I made a simple but true statement that Linux is used in many large shops. I also said that in OUR facility - the one I happen to work in, and which has absolutely nothing to do with other facilities that may or may not be similar - Windows is only used for corporate stuff. If you want me to amend that so that you'll stop, fine. Windows is also used in some large shops. So is OS X. And so is Irix.

Happy now?

:emote_headwall:
 
andrewhake said:
....Unfortunately as a publicly traded company you don't get to do whatever you want.
Click to expand...

It's a fair point. It's why I hope RED is able to stay a private company with open-minded leadership.

Adobe is a publicly traded company as well, and not to get into a conversation about how the two handle their businesses, but it does seem that Adobe is putting more effort into communicating with their customers when it comes to professional media creation tools. Perhaps there are two different philosophies at work here. It would appear that Apple is okay with the approach of letting their Pro Apps division work in a very closed environment, consulting with the outside world when needed, and having a select group of beta testers give them feedback when the products are ready for that stage. The only downside to this is that we (the outside world) don't get an advanced look at what they are working on, and we don't get much in the way of timelines. We just hear general statements that indicate something might be in the works.

Which approach is better? RED has been the opposite of Apple in the past. When an idea came to mind, it would be put out there for feedback. I'm sure this has been a double-edged sword for RED. On the one hand it allows you to gauge interest and even get some feedback that might help refine an idea. Yet, on the other hand you have to deal with negative feedback and in some cases people asking for way more than is practical to accomplish. You get put under the microscope. When you miss deadlines, people are on your case. A lot of these things can be avoided with Apple's approach. You'll know when you know. In the case of Pro Apps, you may risk ticking some people off by not giving them a roadmap of where you are heading.

I do know that for the most part, I love my Macs. I will use PCs when needed and there have been many times in my career when I have had to bounce back and forth, often in the same day between a Mac workstation and a PC workstation. I just prefer the Mac interface. So, I'd love to see them continue to provide systems that cater to the needs of professionals. I'm hoping they speak to this at some point. Where are they heading? What do they think of this small market? Are Mac Pros nearing EOL? Pretty please Apple. :-)

Right now, all we have to go on are rumor sites like this.
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/05/18...t-pro-jobs-says-next-release-will-be-awesome/
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...g_final_cut_studio_apps_to_fit_prosumers.html
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20005409-37.html
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...pro_users_worried_about_upcoming_changes.html
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...unch_rumored_for_apples_final_cut_studio.html
 
Steve Sherrick said:
Adobe is a publicly traded company as well, and not to get into a conversation about how the two handle their businesses, but it does seem that Adobe is putting more effort into communicating with their customers when it comes to professional media creation tools. Perhaps there are two different philosophies at work here.
Click to expand...

Software is Adobe's business. It is their only business. Pro users are very important to them because that represents a significant part of their user base and an even more significant part of their marketing efforts. Apple is a hardware company that also happens to do very sophisticated and evolved software. But any company, regardless of size, must set priorities. For Apple to ignore the fact that the mobile devices now represent by far the most significant contributor to their revenue, and an even more significant determinant of their future as a company, would be irresponsible. As large and as cash rich as they might be, Apple has finite resources, and they are going to put them into the parts of the company for which they see the largest growth potential. This is simply good business practice. At one time, the Mac was their flagship product, contributing the largest part of their revenue and creating the need for their other products, like software. Pro users, as with Adobe, were a very important part of their user base (probably a disproportionate amount in some ways) not necessarily in terms of direct revenue contributions, but certainly in terms of marketing. They did a lot of ads and pages on the web site featuring "celebrity" users such as the Coen Brothers and Walter Murch, to convince those in and out of the industry that they should use this stuff, too. But those days are largely gone. Apple today is defined by the iOS and everything related to it - the iPhone, the iPad, app development, and even Apple TV are all items very high on their radar. Final Cut Pro and Mac Pro computers most likely are not, simply because they don't have the same level of importance as they once did in terms of defining Apple's public image. That's not to say they won't be updated, they most likely will. And that's not to say that those updates won't be worthwhile at the least and revolutionary at the most, because they very well might be. But the timetable for these updates is clearly not as critical as it once was because today there are simply more significant things on the company's agenda.

I highly respect both companies, but one shouldn't confuse the needs of either. Adobe exists to sell software and still has a great need for high end users to achieve a higher level of public validation. They are showing a renewed interest in those users because it is in their best interests to do so. Apple is a much larger and more diversified company that has much wider interests and many other product and industry niches to service.
 
M Most said:
Software is Adobe's business. It is their only business. Pro users are very important to them because that represents a significant part of their user base and an even more significant part of their marketing efforts. Apple is a hardware company that also happens to do very sophisticated and evolved software. But any company, regardless of size, must set priorities. For Apple to ignore the fact that the mobile devices now represent by far the most significant contributor to their revenue, and an even more significant determinant of their future as a company, would be irresponsible. As large and as cash rich as they might be, Apple has finite resources, and they are going to put them into the parts of the company for which they see the largest growth potential. This is simply good business practice. At one time, the Mac was their flagship product, contributing the largest part of their revenue and creating the need for their other products, like software. Pro users, as with Adobe, were a very important part of their user base (probably a disproportionate amount in some ways) not necessarily in terms of direct revenue contributions, but certainly in terms of marketing. They did a lot of ads and pages on the web site featuring "celebrity" users such as the Coen Brothers and Walter Murch, to convince those in and out of the industry that they should use this stuff, too. But those days are largely gone. Apple today is defined by the iOS and everything related to it - the iPhone, the iPad, app development, and even Apple TV are all items very high on their radar. Final Cut Pro and Mac Pro computers most likely are not, simply because they don't have the same level of importance as they once did in terms of defining Apple's public image. That's not to say they won't be updated, they most likely will. And that's not to say that those updates won't be worthwhile at the least and revolutionary at the most, because they very well might be. But the timetable for these updates is clearly not as critical as it once was because today there are simply more significant things on the company's agenda.

I highly respect both companies, but one shouldn't confuse the needs of either. Adobe exists to sell software and still has a great need for high end users to achieve a higher level of public validation. They are showing a renewed interest in those users because it is in their best interests to do so. Apple is a much larger and more diversified company that has much wider interests and many other product and industry niches to service.
Click to expand...
I Acknowledge all of this. That's why I'm saying these two companies have different agendas. I also acknowledge that in many ways, Final Cut Pro works really well as it stands right now. There are certainly many areas that can be improved, but for the most part a small shop can get a lot done with it, and larger shops can elect to use it for a variety of reasons that might make sense for their workflows. I don't dispute any of your points, they are very valid as of today.

However, at some point if the Pro Apps were to take a major back seat, as in little to no development, lack of updates that start to add up to reliability issues with new OS and hardware, and things of that nature then I think that changes things. I'm not saying that is going to happen, but looking from the outside in it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that this shift ultimately means some compromises in the Pro Apps. I hope that's not the case. I hope they are able to allot enough resources to keep it active, to make it a viable choice for years to come. If not, does it really make sense for them to keep it? And because it's very hard to know what's actually going on there, I acknowledge that there remains the possibility that they could really surprise us with their future efforts. I never pretend to be on the inside on any of these things. I'm far from it. So, I always take the glass half full approach until I know otherwise. Mostly, my comments are coming from pure curiosity. I'd just love to know what they're up to. :-)
 
M Most said:
Jake, I don't know why you're belaboring this. I made a simple but true statement that Linux is used in many large shops. I also said that in OUR facility - the one I happen to work in, and which has absolutely nothing to do with other facilities that may or may not be similar - Windows is only used for corporate stuff. If you want me to amend that so that you'll stop, fine. Windows is also used in some large shops. So is OS X. And so is Irix.

Happy now?

:emote_headwall:
Click to expand...

Mike.
The post you had quoted was my response to Dave Blackham, not you. It was an incorrect statement, dismissing Windows as a viable platform for high end post. I'm just trying to keep the record straight. I'm sure you can appreciate that...
 
jake blackstone said:
I beg the differ, but as I already had stated, FilmMaster is Windows based color grading system, which is highly regarded by many top colorists and is widely used for feature length work.
Click to expand...

Jake,

No critisism intended towards Film Master. I edited my post to clarify as I intended to refer to our operation for our own use of Windows. My point was to highlight Apple's innovation and the wide use of Apple hardware and various applications from many companies for finishing work. I realise its a general point but I still think Mike point is right in that Linux, Unix and Irix and OS X based systems are more widely deployed.

Dave
 
They probably went copper because it costs less to mass produce and is more predictable for repairs etc. Once every machine has light peak in it they'll go ahead and upgrade slowly (you can't chuck the best at the consumer on first go, break it down and drip it slowly)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top