Well, you pretty much already understand how it works. The Mac Pro just has the advantage of having a lot more cores and also the ability to add a lot more RAM. That extra horsepower when all cores are being used can chew through video a lot faster than an iMac. Even an older Mac Pro can still run circles around the latest iMac for tasks that can use all cores.
What a coincidence... I have been debating on whether to ditch the 2009 MacPro have and go with a 27" iMac i7. My MacPro has 24 gig RAM and dual 4 core processors (8 cores) and (last night I was) storing to a Hitachi drive on a eSATA dock. I did a compile of a video last night. Transcoded a 58 minute 1080/30p video to DVD (did not include the actual burn because I used different burners). I put the same project on my Retina MBP running an i7 at 2.6 GHz with 8 gig RAM, writing the file to a Thunderbolted Hitachi hard drive. I ran a stop watch on both machines. The MacPro completed the task in 35 minutes, the MBP in 37. That is not a huge gap in time and the iMac has a lot more horsepower than the MBP. Then factor in the cost of the machines and that iMac starts looking pretty attractive.
Well then go. If you are that upset about it stop the crowing and get on the Windows 8 bus!
Thanks for the advise, but I think I understand my business better than you do and hence, know better why to switch, or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmcboston
I'm waiting for an update Aperture. Light Room is getting cooler with each release while Aperture languishes...
Like you I was holding out for Aperture 4 last summer. Then the summer passed and nothing happened. It dawned on me that even if Apple released Aperture 4 the next day, all this uncertainty is really frustrating to me. I want to stable, predictable upgrade cycle. On the other hand, the image quality in Lightroom as its noise control are far above that of Aperture 3. I downloaded Lightroom 4, and despite hating every bit of that stupid GUI (still hates it now), I have to admit: it's a better RAW converter than Aperture.
I have software with bugs that are fixed by an update I can't install until I get a newer machine, so I'm anxious for an updated Pro, too. I don't want a rushed machine though, as its likely to introduce as many problems as it solves. I'd much rather put up with the issues I know and understand a while longer so that when I plop down what is sure to be a dump truck full of cash I don't wind up with something that's two years short of being useful and reliable.
I have to chuckle at the notion that any Mac Pro released after this much time would have been a "rushed machine". Sure, give it another two years For there not to have been a stopgap Mac Pro with a solid video card and ports current to whenever the release was is enough of a statement of Apple's priorities.
Lots of people can wait two years for something (not that there was ever an assurance of two years and not five), but there's a whole world of people who can't buy into something (speaking of FCPX here, not the hardware) that's not ready, and may not be for years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsmith
We've been an Apple shop for 20 years. I'm a huge Apple fan at work and at home.
For us the eroded trust isn't just a matter of FCP X, (which I really like by the way) - it's about a perceived pattern - Apples absence from NAB, dropping Xserve, dropping Final Cut Server, a lack of MacPro updates and the FCP X issues.
So for us, we're waiting to see if this is a campaign of words or of actions. I'm hoping for the latter!
That's pretty much how I feel. And I'll add the lack of attention to Logic to the list (and Aperture, though to a lesser extent but still having the effect). I'm amazed at how the percentage of Logic as the main DAW by both casual musicians and pro producers has slipped, and not by just a little. It's unbelievable that there are problems with Logic related to Lion and ML updates that Apple doesn't fix. Like joelsmith says, it's not that the products are horrible, it's just that the confidence from people who need to be confident just isn't there any more.
What a coincidence... I have been debating on whether to ditch the 2009 MacPro have and go with a 27" iMac i7. My MacPro has 24 gig RAM and dual 4 core processors (8 cores) and (last night I was) storing to a Hitachi drive on a eSATA dock. I did a compile of a video last night. Transcoded a 58 minute 1080/30p video to DVD (did not include the actual burn because I used different burners). I put the same project on my Retina MBP running an i7 at 2.6 GHz with 8 gig RAM, writing the file to a Thunderbolted Hitachi hard drive. I ran a stop watch on both machines. The MacPro completed the task in 35 minutes, the MBP in 37. That is not a huge gap in time and the iMac has a lot more horsepower than the MBP. Then factor in the cost of the machines and that iMac starts looking pretty attractive.
If you are only looking at raw CPU power, the new iMacs are attractive. But there are other requirements in a studio, like color accuracy, color uniformness (we equip all workstations with NEC PA monitors to make sure clips look the same to all editors), expandability (plenty of PCI extensions cards), massive RAM, etc. iMac screens are good, but are not suitable for pro video editing, and (I can't emphasize this enough) are glossy. Torture the iMac for 8 hours a day, and you will see discoloration on the LCD screen. The Mac Pro will simply kick along.
I don't need a propaganda campaign to convince me to use garbage. I need a useable piece of video editing software. Apple hasn't produced one since creating the abomination called Final Cut X.
I do all my editing on an old MacBook Pro (ca. 2006) running Final Cut 5.x. I expect that machine to crash and burn before Apple admits its mistake. Any suggestions on video editing software?
I have to chuckle at the notion that any Mac Pro released after this much time would have been a "rushed machine". Sure, give it another two years
LOL! I hadn't thought about it that way. Good point! Still, the basic sentiment still applies -- if, for reasons that are hard to imagine, it still isn't ready, I'd rather wait while they do whatever's required to make it 100% than pay multikilobux for something with issues that will be resolved in the next update.
Of course, I say that in the context of so far still being able to get daily work done. If that were to change, I'm not sure what I'd do.
I need a useable piece of video editing software. Apple hasn't produced one since creating the abomination called Final Cut X. I do all my editing on an old MacBook Pro (ca. 2006) running Final Cut 5.x.
Why would you read that from his statement? I know LOTS of professional video editors who use FCP7 for their work who know their way around FCPX very well.
He's complaining that it's crap. That tells me he hasn't used it in the first place. Never mind that he goes on to say that he still uses version FIVE.
I don't consider that an update. I mean, really. It wasn't. They just moved chips around.
But they explicitly stated it's getting one this year.
No, actually they did not. They stated that they have something for pro users coming later in 2013. That's all. The context was the Mac Pro, but Cook said nothing specific, so it could mean anything.
You need more than an updated Final Cut to win them back. You need that elusive updated Mac Pro. Video editing needs all the horsepower you can get.
Well, I'm sure Apple would LOVE to announce and ship a new MacPro, the problem is Intel has to announce and start shipping their new Ivy Bridge XEON processors which haven't been released yet. That, I think, is what is holding every thing up, and I hope that these "ASSUTE" video editors know that it's not Apple's fault they haven't released a major upgrade to the MacPro.
No, actually they did not. They stated that they have something for pro users coming later in 2013. That's all. The context was the Mac Pro, but Cook said nothing specific, so it could mean anything.
Although we didn't have a chance to talk about a new Mac Pro at today's event, don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year…
He's complaining that it's crap. That tells me he hasn't used it in the first place.
That should tell you that he HAS used it!
But seriously, I actually haven't tried it myself. Not because it lacks features I need though, I just don't care much for the new interface or Apple's "atypical" file management system.
Hopefully WWDC will be interesting from a pro standpoint.
Of course, after it's over we'll have dozens of trolls on here whining about how "all the products were updated at once; that means Apple is failing".
News flash, idiots: Apple doesn't get to choose when the chips come out. If Intel releases them all at once, then Apple should probably update as soon as possible. We'll likely see the Haswell iMac, Mac Mini, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air roughly around WWDC, and maybe they'll have the Mac Pro done by then, too. If not, hey, they should take their time.
I don't think that's how it works. The MacPro uses XEON chips and I don't think Intel has updated the XEON chips to Ivy Bridge, yet.
The Haswell chips for laptops and lower level desktops start shipping at different times than the XEON chips. I don't why other than that's what Intel is actually doing. I also read Intel is readying a new Thunderbolt chip set and there are some new graphic cards getting released.
Comments
When Final Cut Pro X was released aside from complains about functionally, half the complains were also about its huge price cut.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
Well, you pretty much already understand how it works. The Mac Pro just has the advantage of having a lot more cores and also the ability to add a lot more RAM. That extra horsepower when all cores are being used can chew through video a lot faster than an iMac. Even an older Mac Pro can still run circles around the latest iMac for tasks that can use all cores.
What a coincidence... I have been debating on whether to ditch the 2009 MacPro have and go with a 27" iMac i7. My MacPro has 24 gig RAM and dual 4 core processors (8 cores) and (last night I was) storing to a Hitachi drive on a eSATA dock. I did a compile of a video last night. Transcoded a 58 minute 1080/30p video to DVD (did not include the actual burn because I used different burners). I put the same project on my Retina MBP running an i7 at 2.6 GHz with 8 gig RAM, writing the file to a Thunderbolted Hitachi hard drive. I ran a stop watch on both machines. The MacPro completed the task in 35 minutes, the MBP in 37. That is not a huge gap in time and the iMac has a lot more horsepower than the MBP. Then factor in the cost of the machines and that iMac starts looking pretty attractive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quitchur Fussin
Well then go. If you are that upset about it stop the crowing and get on the Windows 8 bus!
Thanks for the advise, but I think I understand my business better than you do and hence, know better why to switch, or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmcboston
I'm waiting for an update Aperture. Light Room is getting cooler with each release while Aperture languishes...
Like you I was holding out for Aperture 4 last summer. Then the summer passed and nothing happened. It dawned on me that even if Apple released Aperture 4 the next day, all this uncertainty is really frustrating to me. I want to stable, predictable upgrade cycle. On the other hand, the image quality in Lightroom as its noise control are far above that of Aperture 3. I downloaded Lightroom 4, and despite hating every bit of that stupid GUI (still hates it now), I have to admit: it's a better RAW converter than Aperture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
I have software with bugs that are fixed by an update I can't install until I get a newer machine, so I'm anxious for an updated Pro, too. I don't want a rushed machine though, as its likely to introduce as many problems as it solves. I'd much rather put up with the issues I know and understand a while longer so that when I plop down what is sure to be a dump truck full of cash I don't wind up with something that's two years short of being useful and reliable.
I have to chuckle at the notion that any Mac Pro released after this much time would have been a "rushed machine". Sure, give it another two years
Lots of people can wait two years for something (not that there was ever an assurance of two years and not five), but there's a whole world of people who can't buy into something (speaking of FCPX here, not the hardware) that's not ready, and may not be for years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsmith
We've been an Apple shop for 20 years. I'm a huge Apple fan at work and at home.
For us the eroded trust isn't just a matter of FCP X, (which I really like by the way) - it's about a perceived pattern - Apples absence from NAB, dropping Xserve, dropping Final Cut Server, a lack of MacPro updates and the FCP X issues.
So for us, we're waiting to see if this is a campaign of words or of actions. I'm hoping for the latter!
That's pretty much how I feel. And I'll add the lack of attention to Logic to the list (and Aperture, though to a lesser extent but still having the effect). I'm amazed at how the percentage of Logic as the main DAW by both casual musicians and pro producers has slipped, and not by just a little. It's unbelievable that there are problems with Logic related to Lion and ML updates that Apple doesn't fix. Like joelsmith says, it's not that the products are horrible, it's just that the confidence from people who need to be confident just isn't there any more.
Not that Apple needs it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justamacguy
What a coincidence... I have been debating on whether to ditch the 2009 MacPro have and go with a 27" iMac i7. My MacPro has 24 gig RAM and dual 4 core processors (8 cores) and (last night I was) storing to a Hitachi drive on a eSATA dock. I did a compile of a video last night. Transcoded a 58 minute 1080/30p video to DVD (did not include the actual burn because I used different burners). I put the same project on my Retina MBP running an i7 at 2.6 GHz with 8 gig RAM, writing the file to a Thunderbolted Hitachi hard drive. I ran a stop watch on both machines. The MacPro completed the task in 35 minutes, the MBP in 37. That is not a huge gap in time and the iMac has a lot more horsepower than the MBP. Then factor in the cost of the machines and that iMac starts looking pretty attractive.
If you are only looking at raw CPU power, the new iMacs are attractive. But there are other requirements in a studio, like color accuracy, color uniformness (we equip all workstations with NEC PA monitors to make sure clips look the same to all editors), expandability (plenty of PCI extensions cards), massive RAM, etc. iMac screens are good, but are not suitable for pro video editing, and (I can't emphasize this enough) are glossy. Torture the iMac for 8 hours a day, and you will see discoloration on the LCD screen. The Mac Pro will simply kick along.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjanders
Maybe Apple will have a wonderful surprise for us and introduce a new Mac Pro during NAB.
I believe Tim Cook said it would be later in the year.
I do all my editing on an old MacBook Pro (ca. 2006) running Final Cut 5.x. I expect that machine to crash and burn before Apple admits its mistake. Any suggestions on video editing software?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd
I have to chuckle at the notion that any Mac Pro released after this much time would have been a "rushed machine". Sure, give it another two years
LOL! I hadn't thought about it that way. Good point! Still, the basic sentiment still applies -- if, for reasons that are hard to imagine, it still isn't ready, I'd rather wait while they do whatever's required to make it 100% than pay multikilobux for something with issues that will be resolved in the next update.
Of course, I say that in the context of so far still being able to get daily work done. If that were to change, I'm not sure what I'd do.
Originally Posted by TheBlackbird
I need a useable piece of video editing software. Apple hasn't produced one since creating the abomination called Final Cut X. I do all my editing on an old MacBook Pro (ca. 2006) running Final Cut 5.x.
Ah, so you've never even used it. Gotcha.
Any suggestions on video editing software?
Final Cut Pro X.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Ah, so you've never even used it. Gotcha.
Why would you read that from his statement? I know LOTS of professional video editors who use FCP7 for their work who know their way around FCPX very well.
Originally Posted by jlandd
Why would you read that from his statement?
He's complaining that it's crap. That tells me he hasn't used it in the first place. Never mind that he goes on to say that he still uses version FIVE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't consider that an update. I mean, really. It wasn't. They just moved chips around.
But they explicitly stated it's getting one this year.
No, actually they did not. They stated that they have something for pro users coming later in 2013. That's all. The context was the Mac Pro, but Cook said nothing specific, so it could mean anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
You need more than an updated Final Cut to win them back. You need that elusive updated Mac Pro. Video editing needs all the horsepower you can get.
Well, I'm sure Apple would LOVE to announce and ship a new MacPro, the problem is Intel has to announce and start shipping their new Ivy Bridge XEON processors which haven't been released yet. That, I think, is what is holding every thing up, and I hope that these "ASSUTE" video editors know that it's not Apple's fault they haven't released a major upgrade to the MacPro.
Originally Posted by dysamoria
No, actually they did not. They stated that they have something for pro users coming later in 2013. That's all. The context was the Mac Pro, but Cook said nothing specific, so it could mean anything.
Although we didn't have a chance to talk about a new Mac Pro at today's event, don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year…
So, uh, want to revise that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So, uh, want to revise that?
You can still read it very openly. Yes, the implication is a Mac Pro, but why assume this is a definite statement?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
He's complaining that it's crap. That tells me he hasn't used it in the first place.
That should tell you that he HAS used it!
But seriously, I actually haven't tried it myself. Not because it lacks features I need though, I just don't care much for the new interface or Apple's "atypical" file management system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Hopefully WWDC will be interesting from a pro standpoint.
Of course, after it's over we'll have dozens of trolls on here whining about how "all the products were updated at once; that means Apple is failing".
News flash, idiots: Apple doesn't get to choose when the chips come out. If Intel releases them all at once, then Apple should probably update as soon as possible. We'll likely see the Haswell iMac, Mac Mini, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air roughly around WWDC, and maybe they'll have the Mac Pro done by then, too. If not, hey, they should take their time.
I don't think that's how it works. The MacPro uses XEON chips and I don't think Intel has updated the XEON chips to Ivy Bridge, yet.
The Haswell chips for laptops and lower level desktops start shipping at different times than the XEON chips. I don't why other than that's what Intel is actually doing. I also read Intel is readying a new Thunderbolt chip set and there are some new graphic cards getting released.
Twelve-core Xeon, HD-SDI capture card options, terabytes of internal storage, and a nvidia Quadro not enough?
Originally Posted by drblank
I don't think that's how it works. The MacPro uses XEON chips and I don't think Intel has updated the XEON chips to Ivy Bridge, yet.
They will this year. Marvin knows more about all this.
Originally Posted by dysamoria
You can still read it very openly.
Sure. That doesn't mean you're right in doing so. But it's physically possible to do so.
Yes, the implication is a Mac Pro, but why assume this is a definite statement?
Because it is.