Resolve on PC

[Kujtim Ereqi]

As M Most said, I was referring to a "cheap" CC application. Everybody has his opinion on what is cheap and what is not.. For me cheap means up to 2K (for a program like Resolve). My whole point was: There are two cheap professional CC applications for Mac, none for Windows, so definitely there should be need for at least one in Windows.

 

[jake blackstone]

I really can't believe there is not enough demand from "PC" guys for a professional CC application in Windows.

You did asked about professional apps. Pro apps don't equate "cheap", Resolve is an anomaly and so is Color. The reason they can afford to do it, is the way Gillette can sell cheap shavers or Epson cheap printers. BM also makes money on the hardware, that you must have, even with FREE Resolve. It's a new business model for the post manufacturers. The jury is still out on the efficacy of doing business that way. And that is why you don't see many software manufacturers embracing it.
May be some day AJA will get into doing that too, if this business model proves successful in the long run.

 

[Kujtim Ereqi]

Jake, I agree with every word you say.. Really Resolve and Color are anomaly. So my reasoning is: why can't it be an anomaly in Windows also :smile5:, especially when we all know that BM hardware works in both Mac and PC..

 

[Peter Moretti]

I think the answer has been mentioned, it's that it is a lot of work to develop an application for both Mac and PC. Apparently Linux and Mac share a lot more in common than Mac and Windows do. I asked an Avid programmer how much does the code overlap for Mac and Windows versions. He said about 70 to 80%. And there are certain performance related OS calls that you can you use if you are only writing for the Mac, but can't if you are writing for both OS's.

 

[jake blackstone]

Jake, I agree with every word you say.. Really Resolve and Color are anomaly. So my reasoning is: why can't it be an anomaly in Windows also :smile5:, especially when we all know that BM hardware works in both Mac and PC..

I don't work for BM, so all I can do is speculate.
The simplest reason I can think of is it was much easier to port Linux version of Resolve to OSX, that has very similar foundation. Widows would require a complete rewriting of the app from ground up. Big diff...

 

[Bérenger Brillante]

Just reduce the linux price from 20 000$ to let's say 5 000$ and it's ok.

 

[jake blackstone]

Just reduce the linux price from 20 000$ to let's say 5 000$ and it's ok.

Actually, that wouldn't really help too. You can't just buy the Linux License without buying the hardware from BM as well. And, from what I hear, the markup on it is pretty steep...

 

[Peter Moretti]

I don't work for BM, so all I can do is speculate.
The simplest reason I can think of is it was much easier to port Linux version of Resolve to OSX, that has very similar foundation. Widows would require a complete rewriting of the app from ground up. Big diff...

Jake, I definitely agree with your sentiment, but I believe you are overstating what's involved in writing a Windows/Mac cross platform app. There is a lot of overlap between source code for the two OS's, FWIU. It's just that it's not enough overlap to make a port from one to the other easy.

 

[Peace Villow]

I really hope BMD will not wasting their time & energy to create Resolve on Windows.
Just stick to Linux & MacOS and give the customer more features & tools.


People that don't use Resolve just because they don't wanna buy a mac, obviously they don't need Resolve in the first place.



And all these talk about reducing the Linux version price... GET REAL... you guys don't even want to buy a $995 software, what make you think you wanna buy $30.0000 control panel??? Do you really think the f%&#ing WAVE will works on Linux???

BTW, 2 years ago you're really lucky if you can get daVinci Resolve at $200K

just my 2 cents

 

[M Most]

I don't work for BM, so all I can do is speculate.
The simplest reason I can think of is it was much easier to port Linux version of Resolve to OSX, that has very similar foundation. Widows would require a complete rewriting of the app from ground up. Big diff...

It would also require a greatly expanded support staff, a likely slowdown in delivery of future versions to the Linux/Unix based user base (which is currently the entire user base), and a lot of configuration headaches. Blackmagic did not write DaVinci Resolve, DaVinci did. They bought the existing product, which was built on Linux, and, as others have already said, were thus able to do a rather quick port to OS X.

As for lowering the pricing on the Linux product, geez, isn't anybody allowed to make money anymore? The Linux product is a continuation of the product that has been used in professional facilities for a number of years, and is designed to be scalable, reliable, and fast. It is also designed to accommodate DaVinci's existing 2K panels (greatly preferred by many colorists), and runs on qualified hardware, not a general purpose home built box. It also requires higher level support due to the predominantly facility based user base, and will likely never sell in the quantities that the Mac product will. I'll leave it to everyone else to do the math.

 

[roryhinds]

we're not all large facilities so don't need that support so there should be a Linux option for smaller setups that require Linux power and have their own IT skills to build a box themselves so shouldn't be forced into a support or maintenance contract that you're not going to use like a large facility would.

Also we should be able to purchase just the software and use our own hardware and not be forced into paying for overpriced equipment from a middle man (reseller)
If you need help with installing and setup the pay for it, but you shouldn't be forced into it if you have the resources youself

 

[jake blackstone]

Any high end professional post facility appreciates the level of support, that manufactures, like FL, BM and alike provide. Although, it needs to be pointed out, that BM immediately discontinued the traditional "all you can eat" type of yearly support contracts. Now it is strictly pay per occurrence type of deal. Nevertheless, if needed, Mark or Dwaine will show up almost immediately and will take care of any problem your Resolve may have, provided you pay for it. Actually, even with regular Mac resolve, if you call BM, you will be connected to the same guys, that been providing the support for DaVinci for over 20 years. I lost count how many times they saved my bacon. Overall, not a bad deal!
As to why not just be able to buy only the Resolve license? Well, BL, FM and Lustre all can run on a commodity hardware, but when you buy those systems, you have to buy the package. BM is not different... With Qantel products that's not even an option...

 

[roryhinds]

yeah no one was making and selling Digital Cinema cameras at a cost effective price so you had to just put up with what was the norm.

 

[Brad Allen]

I'm surprised by how heated this discussion seems to have become!

My original intention wasn't a letter of demand to BM. It was simply a question to gauge how many people would be interested in purchasing Resolve if it were on the Windows platform. If there was enough demand, then it could be an attractive way for BM to make more money out of an existing product. Whether there is demand is up to BM to decide but hopefully this thread shows that there is at least some interest.

Having said that there seems to be a few objections to Resolve on PC that seem unwarranted.

Objection: Resolve on Windows will put a strain on Support
Jake has already mentioned this, but support is purchased on a pay per occurrence deal. If the Windows platform caused an additional burden to the support system, then the dollars from those windows users would pay for their support.

Objection: Resolve on Windows will Lengthen Development Time
If there is sufficient demand for Resolve on Windows, then there will be additional funding to pay more staff for development. If the logic in this objection were used for companies as a whole it would mean they could never expand the services and products they offer because it would slow everything down. Truth is that good companies will grow where the demand takes them.

Objection: If you are grading on $100 000+ jobs, you can afford to buy a Mac
This may be true but it ignores a few key things
1. Not everyone is grading 100k+ jobs. This is especially true for people who are using the free and $995 version for Mac. I would hazard a guess and say that facilities who are regularly doing these jobs are probably on the Linux platform rather than a single GPU Mac anyhow.
2. The cost of the Mac is not the only reason for preferring Windows. Ease of upgradability, access to more GPU's and Network Interoperability are also big factors (at least for me)

Objection: Resolve on Mac is an exception and cannot be expected on other platforms
This may be true too. However, no one is expecting or demanding BM to develop it for the Windows platform. We're asking if it is possible or whether they would consider it. The mere fact that the pricing structure for Mac is unexpected in the industry isn't itself a reason that the same pricing structure could not be introduced on Windows.

 

[jake blackstone]

Jake has already mentioned this, but support is purchased on a pay per occurrence deal. If the Windows platform caused an additional burden to the support system, then the dollars from those windows users would pay for their support.

Actually I was talking about Linux support. The Mac support is different. It's strictly phone support, but as I said, eventually you end up talking to the same guys...

The cost of the Mac is not the only reason for preferring Windows. Ease of upgradability, access to more GPU's and Network Interoperability are also big factors (at least for me)

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?54430-DAVINCI-RESOLVE-and-***HACKINTOSH***
Go nuts

 

[M Most]

I'm surprised by how heated this discussion seems to have become!

My original intention wasn't a letter of demand to BM. It was simply a question to gauge how many people would be interested in purchasing Resolve if it were on the Windows platform. If there was enough demand, then it could be an attractive way for BM to make more money out of an existing product.

Resolve on Windows is not an existing product.

Having said that there seems to be a few objections to Resolve on PC that seem unwarranted.

There are no "objections," there are conditions that some of us are trying to point out as reasons why it doesn't yet exist. Since I don't own Blackmagic, or work for them, I personally have no stake in the matter, so I have no "objections." I'm simply saying that a bunch of people who want ultra cheap/free stuff don't in themselves represent a business plan or a case for a company to spend money developing something for them. That's not necessarily what this is, but it's part of it.

Objection: Resolve on Windows will Lengthen Development Time
If there is sufficient demand for Resolve on Windows, then there will be additional funding to pay more staff for development. If the logic in this objection were used for companies as a whole it would mean they could never expand the services and products they offer because it would slow everything down. Truth is that good companies will grow where the demand takes them.

Only if it's profitable, and at the prices you're talking about, they'd have to sell a hell of a lot of seats for that to be the case. Hell, I don't think BM is even sure that the Mac product is going to be profitable over the long term yet.

1. Not everyone is grading 100k+ jobs. This is especially true for people who are using the free and $995 version for Mac. I would hazard a guess and say that facilities who are regularly doing these jobs are probably on the Linux platform rather than a single GPU Mac anyhow.

See above. Free != profitable. Free != paying for the development costs for a port and support on another platform.

2. The cost of the Mac is not the only reason for preferring Windows. Ease of upgradability, access to more GPU's and Network Interoperability are also big factors (at least for me)

I don't know why you would think that Windows has some sort of advantage in terms of networking, but in my world I've never found that to be the case at all. Expandability might be a slightly different story, but BM already has the Linux product for those that need expandability beyond what the Mac can support.

 

[M Most]

we're not all large facilities so don't need that support so there should be a Linux option for smaller setups that require Linux power and have their own IT skills to build a box themselves so shouldn't be forced into a support or maintenance contract that you're not going to use like a large facility would.

Also we should be able to purchase just the software and use our own hardware and not be forced into paying for overpriced equipment from a middle man (reseller)
If you need help with installing and setup the pay for it, but you shouldn't be forced into it if you have the resources youself

I think you're being pretty presumptuous in guising these things as things that there "should be." If you owned your own software/hardware company, you would be right in saying what products you should and shouldn't make. But since you don't happen to own Blackmagic, I think it's fair for you to say that you would like it if they saw fit to do those kind of things because it would benefit you personally. What is not fair is to say these things "should" exist simply because you want them to.

 

[Shane Betts]

There are no "objections," there are conditions that some of us are trying to point out as reasons why it doesn't yet exist. Since I don't own Blackmagic, or work for them, I personally have no stake in the matter, so I have no "objections." I'm simply saying that a bunch of people who want ultra cheap/free stuff don't in themselves represent a business plan or a case for a company to spend money developing something for them. That's not necessarily what this is, but it's part of it.

Do bear in mind, Mike, that free and cheap is exactly what Blackmagic Design has built their business plan on. And it's worked. Seems to be working OK for Apple as well. And no, I don't own BMD, nor do I work there any more - but I did and I still keep in close contact with the guys. The free/cheap business model works and it works because of volume. Spend the money on R&D (and efficiently, very efficiently in BMD's case - talk to any of the now very, very happy engineers at Davinci), reduce the cost of distribution (Apple are leading the way here with the App Store - FCP-X at $299 download will generate far greater profit than the boxed version at $999). Meanwhile Avid are laying people off.

I know how keen you are to protect your patch of turf Mike but this isn't a race to the bottom. Resolve on Mac is a very stable, very powerful application. Nothing bottom about it. Grant just sees a little further into the future than most of his competitors. And just because some of the people on here may not have the money to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on kit doesn't mean they're any less talented or capable. Doesn't mean they're not either. It's just not related at all.

A Windows version of Resolve would take a huge chunk of resources. Not to say the BMD/Davinci won't go there (I have no idea) but it seems a Linux software only version modelled on the Mac version, at a grand for the download, might be faster and cheaper to bring to market. What Grant decides to do will be a matter for a future NAB I'm guessing.

Having said that, The price/performance equation of the Mac version is simply amazing. And it'll run on a used MacPro too. Pretend you're buying a high-end grading app for $3k instead of $1k. Forget about the OS. It's irrelevant. The apps are where you do your work.

My 2c.

 

[jake blackstone]

talk to any of the now very, very happy engineers at Davinci).

You must be talking to different engineers. This statement is an exact opposite from what I hear...

 

[Shane Betts]

You must be talking to different engineers. This statement is an exact opposite from what I hear...

Really? The guys I've spoken to are extremely happy with the change. Less management, more engineering. BMD works at a cracking pace. Always a very exciting company to be with. Are you talking to guys that used to work there or the guys that still do? Not challenging you, BTW, just curious. I guess mileage varies.