Emagic aquisition = improved sound hardware?

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 62
    More replies from moi:



    JYD: I can tell you exactly why Apple refused to make SoundBlaster a BTO option. Simplicity in ordering. I just went to Dell's website and configured a Dimension 8200 (Top of line) and there are 32 choices one has to make to BTO a Dell. By contrast, ordering a Powermac G4 has 16 total options (including Keyboard, Mac OS Language, etc). Apple also doesn't make a lot of things BTO options: USB2.0 cards, 4-port Ethernet cards, extra Gigabit ethernet cards, etc. Why? Don't need to. Why confuse the consumer? I can't tell you how many consumers I've met who bought PCs with Integrated Audio who also bought a SoundBlaster card because they thought that they couldn't get any sound at all without it. True most consumers would buy an iMac, but plenty of people out there (read: parents) will buy a Powermac G4 for its upgradable video card, etc, and would perhaps not need more options.



    cinder: Couldn't be more on target. The DoJ has already ruled (no ambiguity here folks) that MS has a Windows Monopoly. If Apple became no more, all of a sudden there would no longer be a viable *commercial* desktop OS (yes some Linux distros are commercial, but c'mon--we all know Linux isn't and never will be a good desktop choice for newbies) to compete with Windows. If Apple dies the DoJ could take that as an opportunity to regulate Windows pricing, and basically squeeze MS's nuts a little. They've done it before with airlines, cable companies, telephone companies, etc, it could happen again. This is the last thing MS wants. Mac support will continue, regardless, and Apple knows it--thus the latest Switch campaign...essentially taunting MS (We're screwing you and you can't do anything about it!)



    sizzle chest: Agreed on most counts, but don't count on Soundblaster support in Jaguar. There's a chance its there...but I can't tell you how slim a chance that is.



    To All: Yet another reason for not needing Soundblaster/soundcard support? Apple and their partner Harmon/Kardon (they've worked together on iSub, Odyssey, and SoundSticks) are trying to push USB speakers now, and the Powermac G4 has its Digital Amplifier built-in (since Jan 01) to do just that. They don't want anything else.
  • Reply 22 of 62
    johnsonwaxjohnsonwax Posts: 462member
    [quote]Originally posted by ihxo:

    <strong>just got one question, did iPod stop other companies from making mp3 players for Mac??</strong><hr></blockquote>



    No, but if it was selling for $199, which Apple could almost pull off if it wanted market share then you might well see the MP3 hardware market drop off. Apple kept their product in a specific market, and didn't try to sweep the field.



    [quote]<strong>And anyways, if apple makes the best damn hardware and software why worry about other companies not supporting Mac ?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Because Apple will never, ever be able to sell hardware and software that fits all needs. If they marginalize too many companies, they won't stay in business to fill those gaps (see MS acquisition strategy.) Competition is a very good thing for all parties, and I think Apple gets that.



    Apple did compete with its developers too much in the past and it resulted in declining product choice for users. The reversal was USB. It prevented vendors from selling USB access products to future Mac users, but it enabled an enormous market in USB products to develop - one that has far surpassed the ADB market before it. Apple nurtured a technology that enabled developers down the line to benefit and thrive. They might be doing the same here, we simply don't know.
  • Reply 23 of 62
    [quote]Originally posted by ihxo:

    <strong>

    And after seeing those great Xserve benchmarks, I must say that apple got the best damn hardware engineers on earth, how could they get so much performace without a SCSI HD ... Only God knows ...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    4 individual ATA/100 channels for 4 ATA/100 drives.



    Sadly, an Xserve with 1 drive on ATA/100 may not be as fast as a single SCSI drive. But throw a RAID-0 (striping) on 4 individual channels of ATA/100 and it will smoke. Current softRAIDing of ATA drives has poor performance, but that is with 1 channel. Multiple channels or hardware RAID flies.



    Nevertheless, Kudos to the Xserve team.
  • Reply 23 of 62
    wrong robotwrong robot Posts: 3,907member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>



    If Apple ever puts an audio DSP on their mobo I will be VERY surprised. It's just not going to happen, and even then a SB Live is a better solution because it can be upgraded over the life of the comptuer.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Well....I don't know about that....look at the iMac...Apple isn't afraid to make an non-upgradable computer(rather...a computer with very limited upgrades available)

    giving the mobo enhanced sound abilities....for use in the imac...dare I say the powerbooks?!? would be a great idea imo....especially if it saves 1 mm of space



    I hope that thie emagic acquisition leads to good things, I hope Apple has a trump up their sleeves....cause right now their stock has been dropping, and they are riding on bottlenecked hardware that could definatly use an overhaul.
  • Reply 25 of 62
    ihxoihxo Posts: 567member
    [quote]Originally posted by johnsonwax:

    <strong>Because Apple will never, ever be able to sell hardware and software that fits all needs. If they marginalize too many companies, they won't stay in business to fill those gaps (see MS acquisition strategy.) Competition is a very good thing for all parties, and I think Apple gets that.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I think they are focusing on Consumers, Pro Graphics, Pro AV, and some part of server right now, which I think it totally makes sense. How can apple focus on Pro AV if they can't have control over some part of it ? Co-op with other Pro AV companies ?



    [quote]Originally posted by johnsonwax:

    <strong>Apple did compete with its developers too much in the past and it resulted in declining product choice for users. The reversal was USB. It prevented vendors from selling USB access products to future Mac users, but it enabled an enormous market in USB products to develop - one that has far surpassed the ADB market before it. Apple nurtured a technology that enabled developers down the line to benefit and thrive. They might be doing the same here, we simply don't know.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    They compete with their developers long long time ago, it was when apple makes everything. And the ADB/USB example doesnt make sense, ADB is like a more powerful more advanced PS/2 if other companies don't adopt it how is apple supposed to expand it. Also in some ways ADB is still better than USB, USB made the power on button impossible, the power button which all Mac users are proud of btw: how could apple prevent vendors from selling Mac users USB products <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
  • Reply 26 of 62
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by ihxo:

    <strong>

    USB made the power on button impossible, the power button which all Mac users are proud of btw: how could apple prevent vendors from selling Mac users USB products :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>



    My PowerMac G4 doesn't have ADB and it powers on via the keyboard. and I'm pretty sure other macs do if you use an older keyboard. I know powerbooks do
  • Reply 27 of 62
    ihxoihxo Posts: 567member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>



    My PowerMac G4 doesn't have ADB and it powers on via the keyboard. and I'm pretty sure other macs do if you use an older keyboard. I know powerbooks do</strong><hr></blockquote>



    no it's a different type of power on, the power on they had on those old USB keyobards are just cheap hacks like those on PC, they probably dropped it because it's just too cheesy. You'll know it if you used ADB b4. You can do hard reset and stuff with it, and that button is basically a standard throughout all Mac keyboards, if you see that key with a triangle on it, it's a keyboard for Mac.



    [ 07-02-2002: Message edited by: ihxo ]</p>
  • Reply 28 of 62
    zerozero Posts: 39member
    [quote]Originally posted by cinder:

    <strong>



    [...]

    Oh, and I don't think Emagic makes hardware. So, no.



    But yes to Apple Branded audio software.



    [ 07-01-2002: Message edited by: cinder ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Emagic makes Hardware, an good one. The Audiowerk2 was a PCI-Card. The new USB generation has 2 models:



    EMI 2|6 - 2 Inputs (Stereo) / 6 Outputs. Stereo digital in/out. It rocks on my TI550!

    EMI 6|2 - 6 Inputs / 2 Outputs (Stereo). Stereo digital in/out + MIDI Interface. (To be release in October, maybe?)



    Emagic also has MIDI Interfaces and a Logic Controller.



    Have a look at <a href="http://www.emagic.de"; target="_blank">http://www.emagic.de</a>;



    That means that Apple now has professional audio hardware know-how inhouse. I wonder what they will do about it.



    Sorry guys: I don't know any pro-audio user that uses a soundblaster for audio production, and the pro users are the target market for apple with the aquisition of emagic (like Final Cut Pro in Video Editing).
  • Reply 29 of 62
    yurin8oryurin8or Posts: 120member
    [quote]Originally posted by The All Knowing 1:

    [QB]More replies from moi:



    cinder: Couldn't be more on target. The DoJ has already ruled (no ambiguity here folks) that MS has a Windows Monopoly. If Apple became no more, all of a sudden there would no longer be a viable *commercial* desktop OS (yes some Linux distros are commercial, but c'mon--we all know Linux isn't and never will be a good desktop choice for newbies) to compete with Windows. If Apple dies the DoJ could take that as an opportunity to regulate Windows pricing, and basically squeeze MS's nuts a little. They've done it before with airlines, cable companies, telephone companies, etc, it could happen again. This is the last thing MS wants. Mac support will continue, regardless, and Apple knows it--thus the latest Switch campaign...essentially taunting MS (We're screwing you and you can't do anything about it!)

    <hr></blockquote>



    Microsoft does not continue to support office.x because the DOJ is watching...it does so because it's obviously a profitable market. Strategically, it's Microsoft that's screwing Apple, as they can pull the product at any moment. The ad campaign is utter nonsense if you are reliant on office.x to make the "switch".
  • Reply 30 of 62
    [quote]Originally posted by yurin8or:

    <strong>



    Microsoft does not continue to support office.x because the DOJ is watching...it does so because it's obviously a profitable market. Strategically, it's Microsoft that's screwing Apple, as they can pull the product at any moment. The ad campaign is utter nonsense if you are reliant on office.x to make the "switch".</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Don't be so sure. Yes the Mac market is very lucrative indeed, but it would be more profitable to kill Apple, sell *everyone* new PCs with a Windows license AND Office and make even more, THEN upgrades for the next 2 years.



    This is what they would do if they wanted profit and were not afraid of the DoJ. MS constantly thumbs their nose at the DoJ, but mark my words: If Apple falls, the industry will have to band together against MS. Who but Apple is making a stand in the desktop/consumer world? Linux? Not making a dent. LindowsOS? Don't make me laugh. Sun? No chance.



    If Apple falls, consumers will no longer have a choice--they will literally be forced into Windows. There are plenty of wonderful wonderful liberal Senators always watching, who would readily propose legislation to regulate the price of Windows, and perhaps to federally over-see it.



    If Apple falls, the following people/companies will form an alliance: Scott McNealy (Sun), Larry Ellison (Oracle), AOL/TW, SGI, "Linux" (all distros), and the Remains of the Mac community. All of these people has much to lose from MS, and MS has no qualms about destroying other companies (Netscape, for example) so either the DoJ will interfere, the Senate will get involved, or MS will take over the world. That simple.
  • Reply 31 of 62
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I thought that this thread was about the future of audio on the mac? But to tie in the recent spat with audio and software prognostication it's obvious that Apple is slowly becoming a multi-media 'software' authoring company. They will still be a 'hardware' first Apple (for as far into the future as I can see) but should [think remote hypothetial] the user base shrink below 1% of the total market, Apple could at least remake itself into a software first company. X86 would become for them like the 'i' series of harware. All their great consumer and professional apps would have x86 versions, and Apple would cease making any consumer hardware at all. Simultaneously they would move into extremely high end custom hardware to run very fast specialized versions of their software for companies that don't mind paying 3-4 times what a powermac currently costs so long as it gets the job done.



    Apple won't die, but if market share continues to shrink, eventually they will change.
  • Reply 32 of 62
    overtoastyovertoasty Posts: 439member
    [quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

    <strong>I thought that this thread was about the future of audio on the mac? But to tie in the recent spat with audio and software prognostication it's obvious that Apple is slowly becoming a multi-media 'software' authoring company. They will still be a 'hardware' first Apple (for as far into the future as I can see) but should [think remote hypothetial] the user base shrink below 1% of the total market, Apple could at least remake itself into a software first company. X86 would become for them like the 'i' series of harware. All their great consumer and professional apps would have x86 versions, and Apple would cease making any consumer hardware at all. Simultaneously they would move into extremely high end custom hardware to run very fast specialized versions of their software for companies that don't mind paying 3-4 times what a powermac currently costs so long as it gets the job done.



    Apple won't die, but if market share continues to shrink, eventually they will change.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Matsu, take that last post of yours, take out the word "Mac", and put in the word "NeXT", circa say 1990 ... and it would've described things just about as well.



    The endless retrenchment strategy doesn't work, it didn't work then, it certainly won't work now; you simply can't win a war with constant defensive retreating, all you can do is buy time.



    The solution sells the product(s), the complete solution ... and Apple's trying to provide just that, inspiration to distribution media management - so that all you gots-ta-do is say "yes", which is all the suits (who buy for the creative types) want to do anyway...



    If Apple makes this work (and if they can keep their buy-out-and-integerate standards as hi as they managed to with FCP, things look good), people will just buy their stuff because it would both be the best and it would be pretty much turn-key (especially compared to the windows alternatives).



    Put together AltiVec, Unix, Dual processors, FireWire, mLAN, best of breed software and full production file integration (hopefully) ... and a huge pinch of "Oh-God-Please-Don't-Screw-Things-Up!" ... and this becomes one place where the value of Synergy's might actually match the mythology.



    Them's killer Apples.

    (we hope)
  • Reply 33 of 62
    [quote]Originally posted by cinder:

    <strong>The day that M$ pulls support from Apple is the day the DoJ pulls the rug out from under MS.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    but wait, M$ owns the DoJ!

    they bought it from Enron (super cheap).
  • Reply 34 of 62
    neutrino23neutrino23 Posts: 1,562member
    [quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

    <strong>(snip)

    Apple won't die, but if market share continues to shrink, eventually they will change.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Seems I saw that for the first quarter of this calendar year Apple's market share increased slightly.
  • Reply 35 of 62
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    It's somewhat funny to see so few non-logic users trying to analyze the situation without realizing how powerful the software is. Also, while both Pro-Tools and Logic are digital audio applications, they have very different uses and strengths. Logic is becoming a competitor to Pro-Tools, though very few recording studios use it. Logic is composing software and is far more than a sequencer. That's why it's somewhat silly to compare it to DP or Cubase or any other sequencer. Logic is an extremely in-depth digital audio environment with a sequencer at its core. Much of what it can do, esspecially in the environment, is not more than minimally touched on in the manual, which is strange since it's similar to leaving 3/4 of the program out of the manual. But once some of you have sat down with the program for a year or two, and yes it takes that long, you will see why Apple would want no other company. Emagic along with NI are currently developing amazing products for the musician, products completely and totally unmatched by anything else being produced. Many producers are realizing this, switching to Logic and, now, switching to mac if they weren't already there. And Apple, like everyone else, knows this (it's no secret). From now on, the major of people serious about digital composition will be on a Mac. This is huge for Apple at a time when the trend has been leaning towards audio on PCs with their better performance and price. Well, there's no real question anymore...
  • Reply 36 of 62
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    PS



    Emagic makes sound hardware, and anything new will be under that name
  • Reply 37 of 62
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,425member
    Giant,

    What you say matches the enthusiasm from my local Guitar Rep lackey. He said the Logic Audio guys put on a demo so jaw dropping that he was sold on the spot. I mentioned acid and he said Logic has features that put acid to shame. I can't wait to see what happens with this program.
  • Reply 38 of 62
    johnsonwaxjohnsonwax Posts: 462member
    [quote]Originally posted by ihxo:

    <strong>

    How can apple focus on Pro AV if they can't have control over some part of it ? Co-op with other Pro AV companies ?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    There's a big difference between 'some part of it' and 'all of it'. Apple does need to control some part of it - a small part, and it needs to drive a big part of it. Compare with the the DV market;



    Apple controls a small part of that market: iMovie, FCP, iDVD, etc. They drive a huge part of the market: Firewire, consumer DVD creation.



    Apple uses the former to demonstrate how to deliver solutions using the technologies that they are driving. But Apple doesn't 'control' Firewire, even though they invented it. Apple enables the FW market to exist by shipping FW on all it's hardware standard, by offering solutions that make people want FW hardware, and FW based software.



    [quote]<strong>

    They compete with their developers long long time ago, it was when apple makes everything. And the ADB/USB example doesnt make sense, ADB is like a more powerful more advanced PS/2 if other companies don't adopt it how is apple supposed to expand it. Also in some ways ADB is still better than USB, USB made the power on button impossible, the power button which all Mac users are proud of btw: how could apple prevent vendors from selling Mac users USB products :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Stop focusing on technology points. ADB didn't succeed because it was largely unmarketable, better or worse just doesn't matter. It was expensive, perceived as proprietary, and not as flexible as USB.



    Apple could have minimized the market of USB products by selling those products themselves and closing up the drivers. Apple deliberately didn't sell USB scanners, HDs, CD burners, printers, etc. All of where are products Apple did sell previously. Yet Apple wrote generic USB drivers for a wide variety of devices that helped hardware vendors get their products running without excess hassle for the user. Even if a custom driver was needed, odds are that basic functionality would work out of the box.



    Apple took Intels product and giftwrapped it for the Mac peripherals market. At a time when the only good thing you could say about Apple was 'iMac' (and lots of people were moaning about that even) Apple got an incredible number of vendors creating products for the Mac that didn't previously exist. Regardless of ADBs merits, the market for ADB devices was dead.



    To get back on point for the thread. Apple could be doing a similar thing for audio. In fact, every market that Apple has jumped into in the last 3 years has followed this pattern, so I'll argue that it is very likely to repeat here. Apple may be planning on driving Firewire through the audio market. It may come in the form of breakout boxes at first, but I think everybody is clear that hardware integration in the audio market is horrendous - even at the consumer level. Apple might not be interested in taking on that mess, but instead have a computational solution for the audio market. Somewhere, however, I think Apple is going to open something up for all vendors to take advantage of. We just can't see it right now.



    The mistake would be to develop something ala Altivec or Firewire and not share it with the rest of the market - to restrict it to it's own products. That would be an unqualified disaster.
  • Reply 39 of 62
    overtoastyovertoasty Posts: 439member
    [quote]Originally posted by giant:

    <strong> Also, while both Pro-Tools and Logic are digital audio applications, they have very different uses and strengths. Logic is becoming a competitor to Pro-Tools </strong><hr></blockquote>



    These two have been on a collision course since at least '95, though Digi has always been able to rely on the raw horsepower superiority of purpose made proprietary hardware to secure it's niche in the past - it's starting to look more and more (thanks to the horsepower in the - likely - up and coming Dual DDR AltiVec Macs) that the difference in horsepower is quickly becoming virtually moot. Especially if Apple can write a killer core engine which which takes advantage of the horsepower that's there.



    Worse for Digi?



    Despite the fact Digital Audio certainly takes much more bandwidth than MIDI, writing powerful and sophisticated sequencing software is very very difficult to do (Gerhard spent two years in assembly writing Logic's core engine way back when ...), it's certainly easier to start from the MIDI sequencer end of things and move into the Digital Audio space, especially now that the horsepower barrier is falling down, than it is to start in the audio space, protected thanks to the former lack of native DSP, and move into the professional sequencer space.



    It's a good buy for Apple, I'm sure eMagic's got plenty of killer Digital Audio plans up it's (and now Apple's) OSX AltiVec sleeve.
  • Reply 40 of 62
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by OverToasty:

    <strong>



    These two have been on a collision course since at least '95, though Digi has always been able to rely on the raw horsepower superiority of purpose made proprietary hardware to secure it's niche in the.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    But only recently have producers been switching in record numbers from Pro-Tools to Logic. Whereas two years ago, most producers here in the Chicago house scene were using Pro-Tools, every one that I can think of now use Logic, with the exception of Derrick Carter, who still uses Cubase on a mac.



    Many of the guys here are very recent converts. And I, too, have only been using it since the mid ver. 4s.



    But while Logic is very advanced in many ways, for pure audio chopping, it is not as smooth (though it's not really lacking anything). Chicago's NPR, WBEZ, uses Pro-Tools, and that's not going to change even though it has Logic lovers running it. But it's now in the process of taking those producers from digidesign at a rate that has just recently picked up.
Sign In or Register to comment.