Apple starts selling LumaForge video production servers to business customers

Posted:
in General Discussion edited December 2018
Apple has started to sell servers from video software production hardware provider LumaForge through its retail channels, with three servers from the range now available to purchase by filmmakers and video editing firms via the Mac producer.

LumaForge's Jellyfish servers


LumaForge produces servers for video production, combining high-capacity video storage systems with its own Jellyfish software to create a plug-and-play management solution. The servers are compatible with many video production tools including Final Cut Pro X, Adobe Premiere, and DaVinci Resolve, covering the vast majority of professional video editing systems.

The company claims its servers and software are being used at more than 200 companies, including Activision, Adobe, BBC, CBS Interactive, Disney, Google, NASA, Pandora, Reuters, Sony, and WeWork.

Capable of handling 4K content and offering RAID-based protection of stored files, the servers can be connected to a Mac directly using a standard gigabit or 10-gigabit cable without needing a switch or other networking equipment, as well as via a more conventional network. Once connected, the Jellyfish Desktop App for macOS automatically completes the set-up process for users, with the unit preconfigured to work straight out of the box if required.

Apple currently lists three LumaForge servers in its online store.

The LumaForge Jellyfish Mobile 4K Shared Storage Solution is seemingly ideal for on-the-set collaboration, with four 10-gigabit and four 1-gigabit connections and 2,300MBps of bandwidth. Prices start from $11,995.95 for the 32-terabyte model, rising to $19,995.95 for the 80-terabyte version.

The second option, the $39,995.95 LumaForge 120-terabyte Jellyfish Tower 4K Shared Storage Solution, offers eight each of the 10-gigabit and 1-gigabit network connections and up to 4,400Mbps of bandwidth, all in a tower case. Lastly, the LumaForge 120-terabyte Jellyfish Rack 4K also costs $39,995.95 and has identical specifications to the Tower, but is designed to be rack-mounted alongside other network hardware.

At the same time as the servers going on sale through Apple, LumaForge announced it had received a "significant financial investment" from Steve Bayes, former Apple senior product manager and an expert in video editing. Bayes will join the company's newly-formed Board of Advisors.

"LumaForge has built the best storage product in the marketplace for editors who need to work in a collaborative environment," said Bayes. "Their commitment to the professional community and laser focus on delivering solutions was key in my decision to become an investor and advisor. I expect great things to come from LumaForge and hope to be closely involved in helping to make them even more successful."

Bayes joined Apple as the senior product manager for Final Cut Pro in 2006, leading the development and marketing for the editing tool, helping the software reach almost 50 percent of the professional video market in less than two years. Bayes also assisted Apple in directing the marketing and release of Apple's video formats Pro Res and Pro Res RAW, which have become recording and broadcast standards.

He retired from Apple in July 2018, but continues to consult and advise on film and video technologies.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 44
    Well that’s an interesting tangent. 
    randominternetperson
  • Reply 2 of 44
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
  • Reply 3 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,330member
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    edited December 2018 racerhomie3StrangeDaysRayz2016Deelronbackstabrandominternetperson
  • Reply 4 of 44
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,385member
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    You trolls just refuse to give up!

    Xserves were great machines, but couldn't compete with commodity servers.  Fact.  Get over it, or go troll elsewhere.
    backstabmdriftmeyermacplusplus
  • Reply 5 of 44
    flydogflydog Posts: 150member
    melgross said:
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    Lots of bare statements without facts.  What did customers want that Apple wouldn't give them?   What supports that App lacked interest in servers? 
  • Reply 6 of 44
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Except that it was Steve Jobs who pulled the plug on Xserve, not Cook. Why? "Hardly anyone was buying them." Oops. Cool nonsense-narrative, bro.

    https://appleinsider.com/articles/10/11/08/alleged_steve_jobs_e_mail_says_hardly_anyone_was_buying_apples_xserves

    I imagine in your company, you continue to make and offer for sale products that people aren't buying? How does that work out for ya?

    Troll Score: 1 of 10
    edited December 2018 Rayz2016radarthekatDeelronbackstabfastasleep
  • Reply 7 of 44
    sandorsandor Posts: 493member
    Being a professional who has used Apple's professional products for the better part of 15 years, and still has racks of fibre arrays, XSan & Mac Pros feeding off of them, i wish Apple would just pull the band-aid off.

    They only desire to be a consumer company, and no longer consider any advantage to maintaining the mind share of the creative professionals.
    It does make bottom line sense, and will trim the supply line quite a bit. But i am sad to know that the decade + of running OS X Server for web services, mail, calendars, OD, etc, is now at an end.

    We were the users that happily paid $999 for OS X Server, and rejoiced in the simplification of complex, capable Unix tools that Apple created with Server. We are creators and the idea that we were also capable of running and managing our tools was the promise that Apple sold us, and it worked, until the past three OS revisions that quickly chipped away the self-sufficiency.  :(



  • Reply 8 of 44
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,555member
    flydog said:
    melgross said:
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    Lots of bare statements without facts.  What did customers want that Apple wouldn't give them?   
    Same thing they won’t give then now, I imagine: top line specs at below cost prices. 
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 9 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,330member
    flydog said:
    melgross said:
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    Lots of bare statements without facts.  What did customers want that Apple wouldn't give them?   What supports that App lacked interest in servers? 
    You could have looked it all up if you were really interested,  but you clearly aren’t. I’ll just give a couple. Apple aimed its servers at Apple shops. At first, that went well. But then they aimed at general purpose uses. Fine. But they didn’t follow through on what those customers wanted. While Apple was selling single height servers, customers wanted an upgrade pathe to two, for and larger versions. Also, while the industry was going to blades, Apple refused to follow along.

    as I said, sales went down. You can look up terms I used.
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 10 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,330member

    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Except that it was Steve Jobs who pulled the plug on Xserve, not Cook. Why? "Hardly anyone was buying them." Oops. Cool nonsense-narrative, bro.

    https://appleinsider.com/articles/10/11/08/alleged_steve_jobs_e_mail_says_hardly_anyone_was_buying_apples_xserves

    I imagine in your company, you continue to make and offer for a sale products that people aren't buying? How does that work out for ya?

    Troll Score: 1 of 10
    It’s annoying when some people here, who know nothing, make comments about the current company, as though everything was perfect before. They forget all of the major mistakes Jobs made as though they never happened.
    mdriftmeyerStrangeDayswelshdog
  • Reply 11 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,330member

    Rayz2016 said:
    flydog said:
    melgross said:
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    Lots of bare statements without facts.  What did customers want that Apple wouldn't give them?   
    Same thing they won’t give then now, I imagine: top line specs at below cost prices. 
    You also know nothing about this. Why don’t you guys look up the history of what happened first, instead of making inane comments?
  • Reply 12 of 44
    melgross said:
    flydog said:
    melgross said:
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    Lots of bare statements without facts.  What did customers want that Apple wouldn't give them?   What supports that App lacked interest in servers? 
    You could have looked it all up if you were really interested,  but you clearly aren’t. I’ll just give a couple. Apple aimed its servers at Apple shops. At first, that went well. But then they aimed at general purpose uses. Fine. But they didn’t follow through on what those customers wanted. While Apple was selling single height servers, customers wanted an upgrade pathe to two, for and larger versions. Also, while the industry was going to blades, Apple refused to follow along.

    as I said, sales went down. You can look up terms I used.
    Wasting your time on the 'kiddies', Mel.
  • Reply 13 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,330member
    backstab said:
    melgross said:
    flydog said:
    melgross said:
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    Lots of bare statements without facts.  What did customers want that Apple wouldn't give them?   What supports that App lacked interest in servers? 
    You could have looked it all up if you were really interested,  but you clearly aren’t. I’ll just give a couple. Apple aimed its servers at Apple shops. At first, that went well. But then they aimed at general purpose uses. Fine. But they didn’t follow through on what those customers wanted. While Apple was selling single height servers, customers wanted an upgrade pathe to two, for and larger versions. Also, while the industry was going to blades, Apple refused to follow along.

    as I said, sales went down. You can look up terms I used.
    Wasting your time on the 'kiddies', Mel.
    Yeah, but you have to try.
    welshdog
  • Reply 15 of 44
    sandor said:
    Being a professional who has used Apple's professional products for the better part of 15 years, and still has racks of fibre arrays, XSan & Mac Pros feeding off of them, i wish Apple would just pull the band-aid off.

    They only desire to be a consumer company, and no longer consider any advantage to maintaining the mind share of the creative professionals.
    It does make bottom line sense, and will trim the supply line quite a bit. But i am sad to know that the decade + of running OS X Server for web services, mail, calendars, OD, etc, is now at an end.

    We were the users that happily paid $999 for OS X Server, and rejoiced in the simplification of complex, capable Unix tools that Apple created with Server. We are creators and the idea that we were also capable of running and managing our tools was the promise that Apple sold us, and it worked, until the past three OS revisions that quickly chipped away the self-sufficiency.  :(

    You realize this product is not anything to do with OS X Server or Xserve? It’s just a giant NAS with a built in switch optimized for video, which works with Mac, hence why Apple is selling them. What possible difference would it make if it were an Apple product or not, if you work in a video house that needs $30K worth of shared video storage if it’s compatible and works well?

    As a creative professional, I just bought a top end i9/Vega 20 MBP and I’m going to be creating more than ever before on it. I don’t need Apple to build me every other part of my production pipeline, third party stuff is fine. 

    mdriftmeyerrandominternetperson
  • Reply 16 of 44
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,555member
    sandor said:
    Being a professional who has used Apple's professional products for the better part of 15 years, and still has racks of fibre arrays, XSan & Mac Pros feeding off of them, i wish Apple would just pull the band-aid off.

    They only desire to be a consumer company, and no longer consider any advantage to maintaining the mind share of the creative professionals.
    It does make bottom line sense, and will trim the supply line quite a bit. But i am sad to know that the decade + of running OS X Server for web services, mail, calendars, OD, etc, is now at an end.

    We were the users that happily paid $999 for OS X Server, and rejoiced in the simplification of complex, capable Unix tools that Apple created with Server. We are creators and the idea that we were also capable of running and managing our tools was the promise that Apple sold us, and it worked, until the past three OS revisions that quickly chipped away the self-sufficiency.  :(




    Mmmm. 

    So so they come up with a Mac Pro, and when they realise it wasn’t working, they upgrade it while telling their customers they’re working on a new version. 

    They introduce a professional level iMac. 
    They introduce working groups to study professional workflows. 

    They alter their development plans to ensure that professionals  can get the memory they’re screaming for when Intel lets them down. 

    And here we have an example of providing access to professional kit that they don’t cover. 

    If you’re saying they don’t care about creative professionals then I’m not seeing the proof. If you’re saying they’re not covering every single niche for every single creative professional, then I’d point out that they also don’t make chefs’ hats. 

    edited December 2018 randominternetpersonfastasleep
  • Reply 17 of 44
    melgross said:
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    Apple had a "server" all the way back to 1986 which would convert a Mac Plus with a 40 MB HD to a workgroup server for file sharing across LocalTalk. From 1993 they added dedicated hardware with the Workgroup Server 95 running Apple Unix (A/UX). Apple hardware server configs were discontinued on October 22, 2013 with the Mac Pro "cheese grater" Server config. 

    A cheese grater config upgraded to 2018 standards in combination with the right storage would have fit perfectly into such workloads as this LumaForge thingy.

    Since SJ passed Cook has been on a mission decimating anything that resembles pro, business and enterprise offerings. 
    edited December 2018 sandor
  • Reply 18 of 44
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,179member
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Except that it was Steve Jobs who pulled the plug on Xserve, not Cook. Why? "Hardly anyone was buying them." Oops. Cool nonsense-narrative, bro.

    https://appleinsider.com/articles/10/11/08/alleged_steve_jobs_e_mail_says_hardly_anyone_was_buying_apples_xserves

    I imagine in your company, you continue to make and offer for sale products that people aren't buying? How does that work out for ya?

    Troll Score: 1 of 10
    If you decide to get into this kind of business you need commitment, communication and you need to convince your customers that you will stand behind your product. Apple has been abysmal at that. So much in fact, that you actually think twice before buying any Apple equipment that might be considered a critical component in your setup. Too many people have learnt the lesson the hard way.

    Apple's focus is on the consumer.

    The only way for Apple to gain any serious traction in areas where it once dabbled would be for them to create a division dedicated to those areas and focus on developing them in line with competitors.

    It goes without saying that the cylinder Mac Pro fiasco would never have happened in such an environment.
    ElCapitanrandominternetperson
  • Reply 19 of 44
    xsmixsmi Posts: 127member
    Besides upgradeability to dual racks, I also seem to remember redundancy being an issue with Xserve as well. They wanted hotswappable hardware, something they weeds getting from IBM:HP blades at the time. 
  • Reply 20 of 44
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,330member
    ElCapitan said:
    melgross said:
    ElCapitan said:
    So rather than producing the best servers and storage options themselves like they used to do, they are peddling someone else's kit. How Cook-ish!
    Oh, stop it. Apple had servers for years, with Jobs at the helm, but discontinued them a long time ago. It wasn’t the first time either. That was even further back, when Apple had a floor standing server that ran on IBM’s Unix variation.

    the problem is that Apple has never really had an interest in this area. While their PPC servers were given very good reviews, and as Apple didn’t charge for their OS per seat, as everyone else did, they were considered a real bargain. But as Apple never wanted to do what their customers, and, more importantly, their potential customers wanted, sales began to drop.
    Apple had a "server" all the way back to 1986 which would convert a Mac Plus with a 40 MB HD to a workgroup server for file sharing across LocalTalk. From 1993 they added dedicated hardware with the Workgroup Server 95 running Apple Unix (A/UX). Apple hardware server configs were discontinued on October 22, 2013 with the Mac Pro "cheese grater" Server config. 

    A cheese grater config upgraded to 2018 standards in combination with the right storage would have fit perfectly into such workloads as this LumaForge thingy.

    Since SJ passed Cook has been on a mission decimating anything that resembles pro, business and enterprise offerings. 
    Some of what you mentioned wasn’t even with Jobs at the helm. Much was tried when he left. Plus, everything he did in that space was also discontinued by HIM.
Sign In or Register to comment.