He's right iPhoto itself might be able to be turned into a plugin. I would use it.
FCP has done something interesting. A lot of video production operations that would have gone with AVID or with a PC solution have gone with FCP and Macs because of cost, features and the fact that it is not cross platfrom.
I think the same goes for iMovie and iPhoto. As long as apple continues to make the OS itself cross platform friendly I think the software can continue to be Mac only and draw people to the platform. I do value my cross platform Clarisworks 5.0 CD, but only because I am forced to work on a PC at work and hate MS Office at least for the things I'm used to using clarisworks for.
Just look at FCP 3. It shouldn't run as well as it does...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes it should. It actually runs worse than it should. Don't believe ANY of that real-time crap. I have been using FCP 3 almost since it came out, there are still many obvous things that could be faster. I have never had ANYTHING be real-time. The real-time engine only works if you have NO effects on a particular clip. NO color correction, nothing. I personally don't know too much about how it could be faster, but I have a programmer friend who had several idea's. (The obvous reaction to this is: What does your programmer friend know? Well, he is 16 and was invited to pixar for an "executive tour" after he wrote an algorithm that sped up thier rendering process.) He described to me several things that could speed up the rendering process, making some things truely real-time and others much faster.
Sorry, I went off on a tangent here, but FCP 3 is NOT "faster than it should be". It is slower than it should be. (On a DP 800 & single 733.)
what's the point of any of this software speculation if apple's so called 'pro' hardware still sucks? We can't get the same high end cards that PC workstations (cheaper than apple's) can use. We don't have DDR. Our MOBO is arthritic. FCP3 is not fast - at all. That's just hype a la full speed ahead.
Creatives who use Pro machines are not easily fooled and can see through this very easily. Most software can run on Mac and PC and there is very little that is apple only. For the saem money as FCP 3 and a dual 1Ghz with a nice monitor you can buy a far more 'real time' PC hardware solution.
<strong>what's the point of any of this software speculation if apple's so called 'pro' hardware still sucks? We can't get the same high end cards that PC workstations (cheaper than apple's) can use. We don't have DDR. Our MOBO is arthritic. FCP3 is not fast - at all. That's just hype a la full speed ahead.
Creatives who use Pro machines are not easily fooled and can see through this very easily. Most software can run on Mac and PC and there is very little that is apple only. For the saem money as FCP 3 and a dual 1Ghz with a nice monitor you can buy a far more 'real time' PC hardware solution.
where is the hardware?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Spooky,
Did you forget your meds today? Just kidding...relax you sound like you've been reading too many PC sites. I'm writing this on my mother's Gigahertz PC running XP with the DDR RAM that you covet and this machine is not fast! Apple doesn't have the HW yet but Dual Gigs are nothing to sneeze at. If you really take a look around it's Linux that seems to be growing in areas like 3D rendering...Windows seems to have plateaued but we will see. Apple has only focused on Desktop Video for less than two years...give'em some time.
Like I said, FCP shouldn't run as well as it does. The hardware is kinda pokey, so the fact that it runs as well as it does, even though 'real apple time' and 'real time' probably describe two different expectations, is a testament to some good programming. We have to remember that Apple hardware was basically stalled for a whole generation. While it isn't half the performance of windows platforms, it's half the speed it should have been if things had progressed in a more Moore's Law compliant fashion. One gets the feeling, especially in OSX that Apple really had hoped machines on X were going to be about 50-100% faster than they currently are on the top end -- That at least by now 800-1000Mhz machines would've defined the bottom end and consumer lines, with something a lot faster for the mid and top end. It didn't happen, so while the machines are on the whole competitive with x86, they aren't where Apple wanted them. If the hardware catches up, he software is gonna seem even greater.
I really don't know who makes them, but as someone here pointed out before Microstar lists Mac OS compatibility on some of their GeForce cards on their website. I think it is a typo, but why would they even be thinking about Mac OS unless some of their cards are shipped to Apple?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would say all the GeForce cards should work on the Mac if the you had the drivers. NVidias processors are now all cross platform. There is no seperate Mac, PC GeForce 4 Ti chip. They said last year that it would be the same processor on both.
Nothingreal's web site is still down. I wonder if apple will brand it an Apple product ala PowerSchool or will it remain externally branded NothingReal ala FileMaker Pro.
NAB comes in April and is a big event in the video world. This would be a good event to release the next version of shake/Tremor on Apple hardware.
Will they continue to support SGI, Linux and Windows?
I don't think Raycer has anything to do with this. Raycer might have ended up being a mistake.
Comments
FCP has done something interesting. A lot of video production operations that would have gone with AVID or with a PC solution have gone with FCP and Macs because of cost, features and the fact that it is not cross platfrom.
I think the same goes for iMovie and iPhoto. As long as apple continues to make the OS itself cross platform friendly I think the software can continue to be Mac only and draw people to the platform. I do value my cross platform Clarisworks 5.0 CD, but only because I am forced to work on a PC at work and hate MS Office at least for the things I'm used to using clarisworks for.
<strong>
Just look at FCP 3. It shouldn't run as well as it does...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes it should. It actually runs worse than it should. Don't believe ANY of that real-time crap. I have been using FCP 3 almost since it came out, there are still many obvous things that could be faster. I have never had ANYTHING be real-time. The real-time engine only works if you have NO effects on a particular clip. NO color correction, nothing. I personally don't know too much about how it could be faster, but I have a programmer friend who had several idea's. (The obvous reaction to this is: What does your programmer friend know? Well, he is 16 and was invited to pixar for an "executive tour" after he wrote an algorithm that sped up thier rendering process.) He described to me several things that could speed up the rendering process, making some things truely real-time and others much faster.
Sorry, I went off on a tangent here, but FCP 3 is NOT "faster than it should be". It is slower than it should be. (On a DP 800 & single 733.)
[ 02-20-2002: Message edited by: Eupfhoria ]
[ 02-20-2002: Message edited by: Eupfhoria ]</p>
Creatives who use Pro machines are not easily fooled and can see through this very easily. Most software can run on Mac and PC and there is very little that is apple only. For the saem money as FCP 3 and a dual 1Ghz with a nice monitor you can buy a far more 'real time' PC hardware solution.
where is the hardware?
<strong>what's the point of any of this software speculation if apple's so called 'pro' hardware still sucks? We can't get the same high end cards that PC workstations (cheaper than apple's) can use. We don't have DDR. Our MOBO is arthritic. FCP3 is not fast - at all. That's just hype a la full speed ahead.
Creatives who use Pro machines are not easily fooled and can see through this very easily. Most software can run on Mac and PC and there is very little that is apple only. For the saem money as FCP 3 and a dual 1Ghz with a nice monitor you can buy a far more 'real time' PC hardware solution.
where is the hardware?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Spooky,
Did you forget your meds today? Just kidding...relax you sound like you've been reading too many PC sites. I'm writing this on my mother's Gigahertz PC running XP with the DDR RAM that you covet and this machine is not fast! Apple doesn't have the HW yet but Dual Gigs are nothing to sneeze at. If you really take a look around it's Linux that seems to be growing in areas like 3D rendering...Windows seems to have plateaued but we will see. Apple has only focused on Desktop Video for less than two years...give'em some time.
<strong>
I really don't know who makes them, but as someone here pointed out before Microstar lists Mac OS compatibility on some of their GeForce cards on their website. I think it is a typo, but why would they even be thinking about Mac OS unless some of their cards are shipped to Apple?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would say all the GeForce cards should work on the Mac if the you had the drivers. NVidias processors are now all cross platform. There is no seperate Mac, PC GeForce 4 Ti chip. They said last year that it would be the same processor on both.
[ 02-20-2002: Message edited by: onlooker ]</p>
NAB comes in April and is a big event in the video world. This would be a good event to release the next version of shake/Tremor on Apple hardware.
Will they continue to support SGI, Linux and Windows?
I don't think Raycer has anything to do with this. Raycer might have ended up being a mistake.