PDA

View Full Version : Apple lays off 40 of Final Cut team


David Gray
02-18-2010, 03:21 AM
Only one report so far (not double counting):

"Apple laid off 40 of my old Final Cut team yesterday, lots of good people, despite high profits."

By the way, Pete Warden, who once released free AE filters, was featured on ReadWriteWeb a few days ago in The Man Who Looked Into Facebook's Soul.

Update: The post isn't wrong -- it just reported a Twitter item (first). And while it doesn't mean that Final Cut is doomed, it is interesting that Pro App teams in LA and Austin were cut so confidently before NAB. Also, it's important to remember that Adobe laid off about 600 workers in 2008 and another 680 in 2009 (about 9% of its workforce each time).

Source:
http://aeportal.blogspot.com/2010/02/lone-twitter-apple-lays-off-40-of-final.html

Angus Mackay
02-18-2010, 06:24 AM
Hmmm,

Apple has - and has had for a while now - a window of opportunity to own the pro edit market. They, inexplicably, seem to be doing their best to let that opportunity pass by.

Granty
02-18-2010, 10:28 AM
I don't think we can read too much into that, the lay off can be for many a reason, they are more that likely 'good people' but that doesn't mean they are the right people, or have the skills required to do what is coming next.

But Apple are't the company they were 20 years ago, then all the profits came from high-end creative computing, now most come from low-end consumer gadgets, and that is a major shift.

When we compare Apple tech sales with others they are very marginal until you look at pro computing:

In June 2009, nine out of 10 dollars spent on computers costing $1,000 or more went to Apple. Mac revenue market share in the "premium" price segment was 91 percent, up from 88 percent in May.
By the way, Apple's command of the premium market is way up from first quarter 2008, when, according to NPD, Mac revenue share was 66 percent.

While that is a good figure, I'm not sure that is accounts for the fact that many pro PC sales are self builds and not for off the self products, and it is also pre-Win7.

But when you think about it how many people today edit, what percent of that is Apple based, what percent of that is Final Cut Pro based, what percent of that buy the software - put like that it doesn't sound too big a number.

We have had rumors flowing for a while that Apple may be looking to sell the pro apps dev to a 3rd party, but I feel that would be a mistake and the start of a very rocky road for Apple pro computing.

David Gray
02-18-2010, 10:40 AM
In case anyone is interested there is nearly 1.5million legal FCP licenses.

I don't think Apple really care about much now they're making so much money of the iPhone.

Peter Mosiman
02-18-2010, 12:45 PM
Apple roughly has 10 billion in the bank. It was not for monetary reasons, I can assure you that.

Jared Caldwell
02-18-2010, 03:54 PM
Not to be a naysayer, but it may be a good time to learn other options. Just because you may or may not use Final Cut in the future doesn't mean that you won't be an editor anymore...

Avid no doubt will still be around... :}

Angus Mackay
02-18-2010, 05:03 PM
I've blogged my thoughts on this, and FCP in general, over at my site

blog here (http://corranmedia.com/blog/)

The chrome needs to go, I tell ya! :badputer:

PS, I've also added email blog subscriptions too.

Granty
02-18-2010, 10:24 PM
I've been thinking about this, and I think Apple may be trying to get itself lightweight as a pure design/concept company and pro apps gets in the way of that, with want Google are currently doing and then that odd iPad this fits in nicely. I think Apple may be making a play for that low-end (chrome) OS market and cloud computing, and this suits iTunes and iPhones nicely. If Apple focus on a solid scalable OS and web apps, they can carry on designing nice hardware and continue outsourcing production of that, they become an extremely light-weight company with the potential to take over the world. The one thing they need to start throwing money at is porting some quality gaming, this is the main thing stopping Apple computers being mainstream, and has been for years, it is odd that they have solutions for music, film and video, but ignore the other major gaming market like it doesn't exist, sure you can get some nice game apps, but a high quality game shows a computer at its best. It is very strange why Apple choose to ignore the biggest media market while targeting mainstream hardware sales.

But ever way FCP is going to be around for a few years, if it is made by Apple , or becomes yet another Autodesk product.

Zhibo Lai
02-19-2010, 10:31 AM
Not to be a naysayer, but it may be a good time to learn other options. Just because you may or may not use Final Cut in the future doesn't mean that you won't be an editor anymore...

Avid no doubt will still be around... :}

I did the reverse, started from Avid, hated it first, then loved it eventually. Switched to FCP in 2009 since practically every indie filmmaker i know and work with uses it, and looked like it would pick up heavy momentum. Now it seems Apple doesn't care so much for it anymore. Maybe it's time again for Avid. they have cut prices to a degree.

sbcooler
02-19-2010, 11:32 AM
Apple roughly has 10 billion in the bank. It was not for monetary reasons, I can assure you that.

Apple has almost 40 BILLION in the bank now....that's more than MicroSoft, Google, etc...they are VERY cash rich. So you're point is correct, but off by 400%.

nikharper
02-22-2010, 04:30 AM
this also doesn't mean that final cut is doomed, they just made a new version and i'm sure there will be further versions that will just keep getting better. we have no idea what the reason was behind this. for all we know they could hire all those people back in a year. or maybe their development process got easier with less people. who knows haha.

Bernhard
02-22-2010, 09:59 AM
this also doesn't mean that final cut is doomed, they just made a new version and i'm sure there will be further versions that will just keep getting better. we have no idea what the reason was behind this. for all we know they could hire all those people back in a year. or maybe their development process got easier with less people. who knows haha.

I do also think so. Could imagine, the rewrite for 64bit was a huge chunk of work. Could also mean, this chunk of work has been finished.

And a closer look on Aperture3 let me hope there is some hope for
a final cut finishing system, rumored weeks ago.

Angus Mackay
02-22-2010, 01:59 PM
And a closer look on Aperture3 let me hope there is some hope for
a final cut finishing system, rumored weeks ago.

For Final Cut to go from where it is right now to being a decent finishing system, would be the most gigantic leap in the history of creative software.

Plus, it's difficult to see how the numbers would stack up, given that Smoke, the best finishing system in the world, is now on the Mac platform and relatively affordable.

Not saying it won't happen... it would just be a huge surprise. :)

Snow
02-25-2010, 02:24 AM
And the rumor mill keeps turning...
It seems to me, that some are jumping too fast to conclusions.
Switching away from FCP because of these lingering rumors seems like overkill.
Apple has been pretty constant at investing in their Pro Apps division.
FCS is being updated regularly, soon in 64-bit.
As an Apple Certified Trainer, i know they invest many resources in training and spreading the word.
I doubt they are going anywhere...

Smoke is far from reasonably affordable. Insert Price tag here.

Angus Mackay
02-25-2010, 02:55 AM
I certainly wouldn't advocate turning away from FCP because of the rumours, and I don't intend to do so myself. I do however wish that Apple would get the interface sorted and also address some of the architecture issues.

I guess whether or not you consider Smoke affordable depends on what market you operate in. If your involved in finishing work for broadcast/ TVC etc on a daily basis, it's the market leader for several very good reasons. In that marketplace, the Mac release is very strong value.

PS, Snow, checked out your site - you're stuff is really nicely executed.

Shadow_7
02-25-2010, 05:06 AM
40 cut is nothing in most circles. Most times when I hear of IT cuts, it's thousands, not double digits. Tis the nature of that work. Once the house is built, the house builders get axed. Unfortunately in a bad economy that can mean 26 months or more between paychecks / benefits. And in a niche career field relocation on the unemployed's penny to get that next check.

nikharper
02-25-2010, 10:25 AM
And the rumor mill keeps turning...
It seems to me, that some are jumping too fast to conclusions.
Switching away from FCP because of these lingering rumors seems like overkill.
Apple has been pretty constant at investing in their Pro Apps division.
FCS is being updated regularly, soon in 64-bit.
As an Apple Certified Trainer, i know they invest many resources in training and spreading the word.
I doubt they are going anywhere...

Smoke is far from reasonably affordable. Insert Price tag here.

I don't think what is said here should be percieved as rumors, no one really knows why they dropped 40 people and no one knows what the future of FCS Will be, so I think anything said here should be thought of as just part of a discussion. No ones claiming facts here as far as I can see.

sbcooler
02-25-2010, 12:37 PM
Is 40 people a lot of people to lay off? If the Final Cut division has 80 people I'd say that's huge. 50% cut! So about how many people are in the Final Cut team? Or ProApps? I have trouble believing Apple is moving away from supporting video editing. Frankly many of us have inspired many to go out and switch to an Apple from a PC, so although our numbers are great, our influence far exceeds are numbers....in my opinion.

Also what is a finishing system like Smoke. Not familiar with that word. Ok, yes, I am an amateur!

And how far away do most of you think Apple is to producing Final Cut Studio in 64 bit?

Angus Mackay
02-25-2010, 02:23 PM
Also what is a finishing system like Smoke.

smoke (http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?id=5561833&siteID=123112)

FXguide overview of Smac (http://media.fxguide.com/fxguidetv/fxguidetv-ep072.mov)

Enjoy!

NoahK
02-25-2010, 07:32 PM
Smoke on Mac is pretty sweet though not cheap by any means...

Noah

sbcooler
02-25-2010, 08:06 PM
I have a finishing system. It's called Final Cut Pro. I can finish to DVD, to TAPE (HDV) to YOUTUBE to QUICKTIME for a computer. I can encode in tons of different codecs from PRORES, to UNCOMPRESSED, to ANIMATION. What better finishing codecs are there than those last 3?

What can SMOKE do with "finishing" that Final Cut Pro can't do? Outside of going to Blu-Ray or to film for a theatrical release, I'm not sure I see what Final Cut Pro can't do?

Thx.



smoke (http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?id=5561833&siteID=123112)

FXguide overview of Smac (http://media.fxguide.com/fxguidetv/fxguidetv-ep072.mov)

Enjoy!

NoahK
02-25-2010, 09:10 PM
Kind of a pointless argument isn't it? You can say the same thing about FCP vs. Vegas, Premiere, Avid, etc. It's not really about what one program can do over the other it's about which tool you personally like to use for the job.

Noah

Zac C
02-25-2010, 09:37 PM
Size matters not, how you use it, does....

sbcooler
02-25-2010, 09:40 PM
Kind of a pointless argument isn't it? You can say the same thing about FCP vs. Vegas, Premiere, Avid, etc. It's not really about what one program can do over the other it's about which tool you personally like to use for the job.

Noah

Ok, I'd rather use a $1,000 program (Final Cut) rather than Smoke ($14,000). Make sense right?

NoahK
02-25-2010, 11:19 PM
Sure but do a little research and you'll find out Smoke descends from a far more expensive suite that yes does things FCP cannot- especially in terms of VFX. Now of course you may not need those things and it's certainly not to say how you operate in FCP is all that different. But for a lot of folks this is easily akin to getting Color in FCS down from $25,000/seat Final Touch. But besides- this is getting way off topic. I thought we were talking about Apple layoffs and what it might/might not mean for the future of FCS.

Noah

Angus Mackay
02-26-2010, 04:04 AM
Noah's right, this is going way of topic, and what matters is that your tools are the right ones for the market that you serve.

Smoke is a tool for client attended creative sessions; it's most often used in broadcast and TVC, where its blinding speed and tightly integrated toolset enable the delivery of sharp product very quickly. It's certainly not for everyone.

I don't think FCP needs to become anything it isn't, I just think it needs to get better at what it does.

sbcooler
02-26-2010, 04:59 AM
I wasn't trying to criticize Smoke. I just don't understand the details and differences between Smoke and FCP. I read their web site and a couple of reviews but it was real general and not specific where I could understand what those differences really are.

When someone says hey why use an Apple's FCP for editing vs a PC's Vegas. I can talk about how Apple's can handle DVCPRO HD and has PRORES. Specific differences. I can talk about how you can edit up to 16 videos (provided you have a RAID or fast enough hard drives) in real time - multi-cam editing and you cannot do that with Vegas.

My point is when I don't understand specific detailed differences and I see price tags 14 times higher, it's just real confusing to me. This is OFF topic, but it's interesting and educational so maybe worthwhile too.

Going ON TOPIC, I cannot believe Apple will abandon video editing on the PRO level anytime soon. I know its a small part of their business, but it just seems like a valuable base and good marketing. And as long as it's profitable and it relates to expertise in non pro editing (on iPhone and iPad eventually) I think they've got to keep some presence in this area of PRO editing.

Angus Mackay
02-26-2010, 06:09 AM
I agree that however much Apple need - or don't need - the FCS revenue, it is an important "halo" product in terms of the company's image as the creatives default choice (I don't agree that platform has anything to do with creativity, but the perception exists all the same).

Given that it obviously makes money, it must be worth keeping for that reason alone. As others have also pointed out, it also helps to move high-end hardware, and Apple is shifting plenty of that!

PS, I've done nine-cam edits on both Vegas and Final Cut, and - IMO at least - Vegas knocks it out of the park on that score.

David Rasberry
02-26-2010, 09:28 AM
I've always followed the rule that you buy the software that best suits your needs and buy the platform to run that software. I am platform agnostic.

If you are a small shop or indie going from ingest to finish on your desktop workstation the tools you need are different than the editor or post house that may have to integrate with industry standard work flows across multiple services and faciliities.

In the end to end desktop finishing category, those who have tried Adobe, FCS, and Vegas tend to prefer Vegas. It is a sweet package very reasonably priced. Especially good for things like music videos as it has the best audio support by far. It also has the best Redcode integration to date too.

Angus Mackay
02-26-2010, 01:48 PM
Vegas has tons going for it, David.... all of which make its short-comings all the more difficult to bear. The lack of pro output options (no OMF audio export last time I used it, for example) make it a real bind to integrate into a larger production pipeline. It's a real shame, the core app' is very good, and the timeline is a real gem.

JonFairhurst
02-26-2010, 02:59 PM
I've read that Vegas deals with RAW better than any other NLE. Nothing gets applied until the final render, keeping things clean.

And, yes, it's best for small, tight teams or one man bands.

Snow
02-28-2010, 01:25 AM
Well,
These editing packages are all tools of the trade, and we choose the best for our use/market/budget.

The most expensive packages are usually client oriented, which means they are very fast, get immediate results, super fast renders, etc. and a high price tag per session. These are the high-end solutions.

FCS is not considered high-end software, since it's price tag is $1000, not $10,00 and over. Back in the day, I worked on a $1,000,000 computer. That sounds high-end, but pretty nuts today...

Anyway, FCP and smoke do not compete in the exact same market, although any post house can decide to go with FCP instead and get most of the jobs done. Maybe not in the same time.

Apple will hopefully continue to develop it's pro software division, even if they fire some of the staff. It is not good news to hear, for sure. Still, it does not mean that Apple is quitting on it's pro users. Seems far from it. I'll be waiting for that 64-bit version, a long with 1.5 mil. users...

Angus, thank you for your kind words.

hawaj
02-28-2010, 11:30 PM
I have a finishing system. It's called Final Cut Pro. I can finish to DVD, to TAPE (HDV) to YOUTUBE to QUICKTIME for a computer. ....


You are talking about encoding.
Finishing is about making master data in best possible quality on fine tuning system. For somebody it can be FCP or Vegas but some just needs more control, speed and quality (Quantel, Autodesk, Avid...). After that you are going to encode your master to distribution formats.

Jeffery Haas
03-03-2010, 09:23 PM
I just want to know if they ever plan to take Final Cut to 64 bit.

Jeffery Haas
03-03-2010, 09:27 PM
I've read that Vegas deals with RAW better than any other NLE. Nothing gets applied until the final render, keeping things clean.

And, yes, it's best for small, tight teams or one man bands.

Pleasantly surprised by how easily Vegas 9 pro has been dealing with R3D files, but I would like a little nudge from Apple to help me make a final decision as to whether I will eventually make a move to include FCP or just continue to expand in the AVID/Vegas direction.
If FCP were to go 64 bit I might be tempted to toss AVID over the side and just be a two flavor shop where one can go Apple or Vegas, sort of a nod to "platform bipartisanship" I guess.
Otherwise, if they're going to remain as they are, I'll forge ahead on the same path and never look back!

sbcooler
03-04-2010, 01:32 AM
I just want to know if they ever plan to take Final Cut to 64 bit.

I have the same question. Does anyone know this or has anyone heard whispers? It would seem to make a lot of sense for Apple to do this right?

Angus Mackay
03-04-2010, 07:25 AM
Otherwise, if they're going to remain as they are, I'll forge ahead on the same path and never look back!

The market has a habit of derailing vows like that. :)

I'd say Avid/Vegas is a pretty balanced toolset; Avid for long-form media management and Vegas for wham-bam multi-format stuff (a crude synopsis, but you catch my drift..)

If you can, sit tight and wait for the next FCP release - it needs to be a big one, IMHO. Fully 64bit is a must, and the least that needs to be done.

DrewIGR
03-05-2010, 02:44 PM
DISCLAIMER: IF YOU ARE EMPLOYED BY APPLE INC. THE STATEMENT FOLLOWING THIS DISCLAIMER IS A LIE TO GET MY ONLINE PEERS TO RESPECT ME. I HAVE NO FRIENDS THAT WORK FOR APPLE, MUCH LESS ANY FRIENDS AT ALL, SO I HAVE NO CREDIBLE SOURCE FOR PRODUCING THE FOLLOWING COMMENT. THANK YOU.

I'm often told not to tell anybody certain tidbits and honestly I don't recall if this was one of those or not, but I would hate to get my buddies terminated from Apple, hence the disclaimer. I have been told that a 64bit version of FCS has been in the works for over 2 years now. I know this isn't groundbreaking info, but for me the confirmation that it is on it's way was all I needed. I have no info on release dates, etc. but as a previous commenter stated, the department probably didn't need the extra help any longer.

Also a friend of mine just got hired by Adobe for CS6 testing. Thats right, Adobe is already testing CS6.... And I'm still waiting for CS5 for my 64bit version of After Effects...

Hugh Scully
03-25-2010, 05:19 PM
I'd say Avid/Vegas is a pretty balanced toolset; Avid for long-form media management and Vegas for wham-bam multi-format stuff (a crude synopsis, but you catch my drift..)

If you can, sit tight and wait for the next FCP release - it needs to be a big one, IMHO. Fully 64bit is a must, and the least that needs to be done.

I have a choice to make soon perhaps you can offer some advice. I need a new machine whether a Mac Pro or a capable 2 proc PC. Mine is just too old now. I have Sony Vegas and I like it. I have been considering switching to FCP for two reasons: 1. The operating system, which I like better than windows and 2. FCP, as one other post suggests, is the standard for editing indie cinema and seems the choice of the majority of RED users. If you know both I would be grateful for your opinion.

What if any disadvantages or incapabilities are there with Sony Vegas? Is FCP better or more capable?

NoahK
03-25-2010, 05:29 PM
I say if you're comfortable with one NLE and you like the OS- stick with it. There's nothing in FCP that makes better edits Vegas. As someone who's tried both I greatly prefer FCP and it (along with Avid) is a standard you'll find jobs for in the industry way above and beyond any such prospects for Vegas editing. Also I got tired of spending half my life doing my own PC IT support, which is practically non-existent on my Mac. But it's all about the tool and system you personally like to work with.

Noah

Granty
03-25-2010, 06:33 PM
Also I got tired of spending half my life doing my own PC IT support, which is practically non-existent on my Mac. But it's all about the tool and system you personally like to work with.

Noah

Propaganda, those days have been and gone - it ain't 1990 on more.

You buy a quality PC and edit on it, you ain't going have a problem, you spend twice as much on a Mac you also ain't going to have a problem.

Buy a cheap low class Mac, and it may look pretty, but you are going to have issues, spend nothing on an ugly PC then you will also have issues - and then some.

I've had issues on PC's, but guess what folks I've had issues on a Mac - believe it or not I've actually seen a Mac crash!!!

But like you say, beyond that it is all about becoming an expert on a system, and exploiting that for your own needs.

Angus Mackay
03-25-2010, 06:52 PM
Hi Hugh,

I have great respect for Noah;his opinion is well worth listening to. My experience is quite different to his though.

I've used HP workstations for many years with very little hassle, I really admire their gear. If you go the PC route, I don't think you can do any better than spend your money with them. I think a lot of people (and I'm not suggesting this is the case with Noah) run into problems on PC, because they tried to save money by building their own rig and made mistakes. Sure, some people can do that and make it work, but most fall short and pay the price. If you go down the PC route, buy a proper unit from a reputable re-seller.

Also, in my experience, producers want to work with you either on the strength of your reputation or because of a pre-existing relationship. Gear used to matter a lot, but it makes much less difference these days because the market is so open.

I'm a year into my Mac adventure now, the initial frustrations are over and I like it a lot. But does the hardware/ OS fundamentally alter the quality of the work I produce? Not at all. It's a marginally nicer user experience, and that's all.

As for software, well, all I can really say is that each editing package has its own strengths. I found the lack of timeline interactivity in FCP an absolute killer after Vegas, and getting into and out of effects mode is also painfully clunky. On the whole though, it gets the job done, and the integration with Color is terrific.

And Color is just brilliant, it's more than worth the cost of FCS on its own. It's what swung me to FCS in the first place, and I don't regret the move one bit.

So, in short, if you see grading as a substantial part of your future plan then it's definitely worth making the move. Otherwise, it's six and two three's really.

Hugh Scully
03-25-2010, 07:25 PM
I say if you're comfortable with one NLE and you like the OS- stick with it. There's nothing in FCP that makes better edits Vegas. As someone who's tried both I greatly prefer FCP and it (along with Avid) is a standard you'll find jobs for in the industry way above and beyond any such prospects for Vegas editing. Also I got tired of spending half my life doing my own PC IT support, which is practically non-existent on my Mac. But it's all about the tool and system you personally like to work with.

Noah

That's exactly it. I'm sick of the Windows operating system. Editing in Vegas is great. The tools for color correction, as far as I can tell are adequate. I just wonder about the output, whether or not there are more or better options with FCP and that is the reason professionals prefer it or if it is just the de facto standard. In any case. That mac operating system smokes that big and lazy windows operating system. That's my main concern buying a new PC.

Angus Mackay
03-25-2010, 07:40 PM
I just wonder about the output, whether or not there are more or better options with FCP and that is the reason professionals prefer it or if it is just the de facto standard.

Depends which outputs you're talking about.

If it's file outputs, then Vegas is obviously missing OMF sound export, which for a pro edit package is borderline unforgivable.

Hugh Scully
03-25-2010, 08:08 PM
Thanks Angus, that's exactly the type of information I'm looking for. I agree that you can get a good PC. I was looking at the HP's and systems by a company called Puget Systems, if you've ever heard of them. I have to admit that going with a PC would save me a couple of grand, the fact that I have a copy of Sony Vegas, notwithstanding. I'm directing a short in June, after which, I'll be getting a chance to work with a real pro who uses FCP. I'm looking forward to finding out more about it.

More on topic, I'm also a software developer and it is my opinion that laying off developers happens for lots of reasons. I would be shocked if Apple didn't do everything possible to continue to provide utility to it's already loyal user base. 64bits is mandatory. I would bet they'll do it.

NoahK
03-25-2010, 08:29 PM
I don't know if I'd call 64-bits a gamechanger. I'm testing the Adobe Lightroom 3 beta in 64-bits right now. Is it night and day different in user experience from FCP? Not at all. Now I'm not saying that 64-bits isn't the inevitable future, just that not having or having it will not be the second coming for your user experience.

Noah

NoahK
03-25-2010, 08:31 PM
And Granty- I have a lot of respect for you because you have balls. But first-hand experience and personal opinion is not propaganda. And I know you know the difference. So you can apologize now...

Noah

Granty
03-25-2010, 10:37 PM
I apologize your right but I think you are missing what I am saying.

I know the difference but, for the money FCP has got to be the best editing experience around, and the Mac is a very stable system.

But their ain't much in it no more - meaning that if you fish around online for parts then install Vegas or other editing software you are going to hit a wall, even if you spend top dollar, but if you know what software you are building for you can go to the website of the company or a forum and find the best and most stable hardware for that, all I am saying is that you can get a PC system that is stable for a lot less money. And yes for that you need to be able to go under the hood, but I guess that is the key difference between why people buy a Mac or PC, Mac owners what to go to the car mechanic and say here's the money fix it today, PC only want to get under the hood and say, oh is that all it was.

It ain't going to 100%, but ever is a Mac. The 2 biggest problems with solid PC's not being stable are virus on the net and tinkering under the hood, but if you don't tinker and you stay off-line, which you should on any pro system, then you really won't have much of the problem.

I know what you are saying and you are right, I use a lot of pro sound equipment on a good PC system, too many things can go wrong, I have software that is really stable and some software which is really unstable, but I know from the system crash why it is unstable when windows re-boots and checks of the error it tells me that the issue is a USB soundcard (that I use for it's preamp). Now this may also be happening because it is a new version of the software, and these glitches may be solved with a few updates over then next few months, hence why I haven't resolved the issue yet. I mention this because I can get a Mac and that same software for the Mac and I can also get a driver for that USB soundcard preamp, but I can't do that without destroying all my workflow and software features, many USB devices I use for sound won't work on the Mac, but mainly all those 100's of small sound apps and VST's and VSTi's that I'll need to say goodbye to. So while this setup is a little glitchy at the moment and I can solve the hub of the problem with a Mac for the use of one application, at the same time I would need to say goodbye to some hardware, many other apps and a shit load of VST's and VSTi's which wouldn't be like losing a limp, it would be like losing 4 of them - not a practical solution.

Now otherwise this software and setup is 100% stable outside this new updated application, and I don't just use it for sound, I use it for art, some video/effects, 3D, and even games & online (only sometimes) and it has never had a major issue in about 3 months since a dual boot setup of Windows 7-64 and Windows 98SP3. But if I want to resolve the one issue that is crashing it, the OS is telling me the issue, and telling me how to resolve it. I do admit I am cheating a bit, as I have the dual boot. The plan was to install everything on win98 and overtime transfer over to Win7-64bit, but I discovered that all those VST's ain't going to be working under a 64bit OS any time soon, so I hardly use the win7-64bit, which is a shame as it is so much faster, but maybe if I run the application and software from that OS the glitch I'm having would stop, but I'd again lose all those VST's, like with the Mac - something I my try, just to see.

But I think many people have the same issues happening with moving to a Mac, they want to make that move, but if they can only afford one good workstation system, then yes it will be easier to resolve an issue using a Mac, yes it will be more stable in the long run. But those two issues become very minor points compared to all the software that they have to say goodbye to, many of which not only aren't on the Mac but sometimes has no comparable app to the missing software, and then all the hardware that won't work on the system also with no comparable.

I've worked on Mac's and I've used FCP quite a bit, I even had a job training people up on it years back, so I know what a useful bit of kit it can be, I also know for costly it can be for upgrading, and frustrating when a great piece of kit comes out that doesn't have a Mac driver. If I didn't currently have a workstation (or laptop) and I had $5-7k I'd get both, a solid Mac and PC workstation plus a little net book for online, business and writing - prefect solution.

And nobody say, oh but you can get (Mac or PC) and dual boot Win/OSX, because I'm currently dual booting just win7-64 and win98 and it is a major pain in the ass, no big issues just lots of little things - like you forget you are dual booting switch the system on and walk out the room to do something, come back ready to work to find the wrong OS there, or download something in the wrong OS browser by mistake and need to re-boot just to install a small driver, plug-in or app, or working on something creatively is the bigger pain, as you just lose the whole flow and feel for it.

I'm not saying a PC is more stable than a Mac, outright, but I am saying it ain't far off. A solid Mac may be stable 99.99% of the time while a solid PC may be stable 99.9% of the time. But when you consider the number of variations of PC parts, and the almost infinite combinations of that we can have, and how stable it is under every combination that is more than pretty amazing. You can't go on ebay and say that GPU at that price and expect it to work with a Mac, let alone blow up in your face, but we can buy a random GPU and know it will work with a PC, and sometimes it will have a issue.

My issue here is that Mac's are great for what they do and what you get for them - but they don't do that much and you can't get much for them, and what you can get for them will cost you. And PC's are good at what they do and amazing for what you can get for them, and that won't cost you much. And while a PC may have the odd issue we feel that is a reason to attack them, yet I don't know of any technology in the history of the world that has ever been that compatible, or that modular - and if the price of that is a glitch here and there, that ain't much of price to pay for something that is truly amazing.

NoahK
03-25-2010, 10:44 PM
Sorry but my interest in a Mac vs. PC debate is so small that I couldn't even spend the time to read all that. Agree to disagree and thanks for the apology.

Noah

Granty
03-25-2010, 11:25 PM
That debate has long been over, both just tools, but every person needs to be aware of what those advantages and disadvantages are - they do exist!

The digest from my above post for the TV generation is:

Don't get down on PC's because they are 0.09% less stable than a Mac, as they are the most affordable, compatible and modular technology the world has ever know par none.

Anyone can disagree with that statement, they have a right to do so, but be aware that in choosing to disagree it is purely an exercise in taking a liberty.

Angus Mackay
03-26-2010, 04:23 AM
Granty,

Your post (the long one :)) is a great summary of the Mac Vs PC situation; it almost perfectly reflects my experience over the years (apart from the fact that I don't do sound).

Both the OS and NLE software markets are now very mature, there's less development but more stability.

The dark horse in all of this is Premiere. There's the core of a great app there now; if Adobe don't lose heart, it could really go places. They neglected it for too long and are now playing catch up; but since they set their mind to it things are looking very promising.

If there's one game changer that I can see in the post market at the moment it's Cuda, and the Adobe demo of it was very exciting. I've already seen how GPU power can be leveraged in Autodesk products and it completely alters your idea of what is technically possible.

Granty
03-26-2010, 09:29 AM
I also wonder on Cuda and Premiere as I see it is going to be an exciting thing to watch, I'd really like Adobe to integrate Premiere and AF that would be a killer combination, if you had the simple and effective Premiere workflow with a Pro button that would form a AF style layout with features on the same timeline. The way that Adobe have formed their packages over the last years you kinda have this already across the two, and more packages, but be nice to get that effective and hard core setup in one killer app, at one killer price - what more would you need.

Angus Mackay
03-26-2010, 12:41 PM
A few people, including Stu Maschwitz, have been saying that for a while.

Premiere = Flame (http://prolost.com/blog/2008/10/1/what-should-adobe-do-with-premiere-pro.html)

In reality, I can't see that happening entirely, for two reasons:

1. It goes against Adobes fundamental approach to building a complete toolset.
2. It would, apparently, involve the most enormous re-write of AE.

I think Adobe will continue to develop their live link technology, if they can resolve that properly it should be good enough. I think they'll leave the integrated toolset market to Autodesk/ DS.

Part of the problem for companies like Adobe is that they can't buy too much into one given technology, as they risk alienating many of their customers who might not have invested in it. Strategic planning meetings at Adobe must be a nightmare :)

Granty
03-26-2010, 01:49 PM
Very true