I appreciate your comments about Apple offering something more in Pro
Audio, but a digital sequencing application such as Logic,
does not offer much help to musicians or songwriters wishing to make high quality multi-track recordings of voice, acoustic instruments and other miked or line-in analog sounds.
You must not have looked at Logic Pro recently. In addition to being one of the best sequencers available on any platform it can handle as many channels are your computer has grunt for. A G5 Dual 2Ghz can do 50+ channels with effects on every channel. Basically Logic Pro+G5+Interface is what you need. As for I/O interfaces there are too many to count. Want 8 Mic Pres Presonus Firepod. Want 56 inputs up to 24/192 RME Fireface 800, want 18 I/O and Firewire get the M-Audio 1814. ProTools is lauded for it's audio editing prowess but if you need good Midi it's not going to make you forget about other sequencers.
Quote:
I suppose I was hoping that Final Cut could be improved in Sound Studio and Compressor to include the best features of Protools TDM software and thus enable musicians to not only record their music from scratch, but then also enable them to create a matching DVD.
Final Cut Pro audio is expected to get a huge boost with the next version. Todays FCP is limited in audio by Quicktime. Once the limitations are gone from Quicktime they are gone from FCP and any other app based on Quicktime. There have been rumors that Apple might be creating another app specifically aimed at Protools. This app would focus primarily on audio editing. It would be 64bit and probably would be pushed as the preferred environment for doing Audio Post Production for FCP users. Right now people are using Automatic Duck($495) to transport files to Protools Rigs. Apple could easily have this DAW seamlessly support a future version of FCP much easier. With a quarter of a million FCP installs I could see this app having a lot of users in 3 years. Apple will never move to TDM systems. They are a proponent of Native Systems...when we get to Quad Core systems, running beefy plugins shouldn't be too hard a task.
Quote:
Anyone else that get the feeling that SATA is killing FW?
Initially I worried about SATA especially with the SATA II spec including support for external drives. However SATA can only support one drive per controller and doesn't have the isochronous abilites of Firewire. Last NAMM a bunch of FW interfaces hit and I expect even more. FW is leaving USB behind once you step off of the entry level interfaces. Video is the same. Teh Aja I/O isn't possible with a SATA connection. I think FW external drives might start disappearing but FW will "keep on trucking" in many other areas.
I'm with Zap on processor speed. I think 2.8Ghz is as high as we go for the next refresh. Then 3Ghz dual cores come. IBM has to be sufficiently embarrassed and will be a bit more cautious when jumping to 65nm.
I also look forward to seeing what the Freescale chips can do. eMacs and iBooks would be a natural for these chips.
Currently there is no room for a both a PM and ProPM line, short of going quattro on the Pro models.
If the PM line has gone across the 3GHz line within the next 6-8 months and there are dual cores aviable in good numbers, then might be the time to split the PM to PM and pPM.
But until there is a better full featured Mac that is as capable in all fields as a PC I'm staying away from them.
What makes you think I don't need it for more than just 3D?
I didn't say more than 1 field... I said ALL fields. I use mine for programming, unix dev, 3D, and graphics. That is 3-4 fields. But I don't need it for video, audio, cad, hosting, games, etc.
I find it extremely rare (I'd say impossible) that people need a computer to be fully functional in EVERY field. They may need it fully functional in certain fields but can get away with it being mediocre in other fields.
If you need a computer for $100k engineering programs, or games... I can see why you wouldn't consider a mac at this point. However, if you need a computer to web host and be in a rendering farm... I don't see the harm of mac vs. pc.
The stability of a mac sure makes up for a lot. Lets not forget that.
Ok, I didn't necessarily mean "All" fields either. But I was more or less referring to being able to configure the big 3 highend like at the Alienware, or BOXX sites.
You said it yourself. You need it for video, and audio, but apple sells Pro Video, and Audio Applications.
Which is why I think they need a ProMac, above the PowerMac. The PowerMac just isn't a Professional grade workstation.
Ok, I didn't necessarily mean "All" fields either. But I was more or less referring to being able to configure the big 3 highend like at the Alienware, or BOXX sites.
You said it yourself. You need it for video, and audio, but apple sells Pro Video, and Audio Applications.
Which is why I think they need a ProMac, above the PowerMac. The PowerMac just isn't a Professional grade workstation.
In your mind what makes it a non professional workstation besides the graphics card? Seems to have everything except mhz , 1mb cache, and on-chip mem controller (all is ibm's deal). Even has a faster bus than any other consumer system. So you want better graphics cards (we all do... it will happen someday)... and you want pci-express. I'm sure next Rev will have pci-e. What more do you want? Another thing you might say is more ram! Well guess what... If I could choose the option... I'd choose NO RAM from apple. I would rather find the best deal on the market and pay a lower price for the machine than pay for their high priced ram. Their ram is very good ram... hardly seen it fail... but when I'm building pc's... I get to start with 0mb ram. Not 512 then figure out your ratio of adding more.
So tell me? What do you need for hardware?
Btw... us going back and forth has easily added another 100 posts for me
Apples motherboard is a great design and except for the FW write flaw(slows FW write speeds) it was a very stable platform. The problem is people over the years have always expected an immediate speed increase when moving to a new CPU architecture and these increases are present from the start but what we generally miss is that last %20 of optimization that turns a good app into a great app. We're not there on the G5. It takes about a couple of years before your bread n butter apps are tuned and purring. The Spec scores don't lie..the G5 is a nice CPU which will only get better. We haven't seen anything yet as depending on what features make if from the POWER5 the next derivative is going to be even sweeter.
Powermacs will be a force to be reckoned with for the next 3 years at a minimum. Apple simply needs to get the OS running as good as possible and keep the ISVs doing the right things. Everthing else will take care of itself.
Comparatively Pro workstations on the PC side have mass expandability on all categories. 3D, Audio, and Video. You can also fit over a terabyte of storage in one if needed, There is no need to go into detail. Macs have considerably lower Limits. Maybe if this Mac was around like 2, to 3 years ago it would have been a competitor, but the competition is out featuring the PowerMac in all areas.
Even if you exclude processor configurations.
Everything on the highend PowerMac is base model stuff on the PC side for this type of machine. And even if you do order the base model PC (anybody smart would) You have the option to upgrade it in the future rather than buy another inadequate UPM.
I think the expandability of PCs is overkill and actually inappropriate for Workstation uses. I'm seeing boxes that can handle 6 internal drives and that's just insane because really only Servers should hold this much internal storage and in a cool room. It's of no use to Pros running Audio or Video workstations. Audio requires as quiet a machine as you can muster. Today's G5 still isn't enough and they will often build Hush Boxes. Video isn't as stringent but they have thermal issues with the high end capture cards.
Look around at setups and you will see fast PCs or Macs connected to very fast Medea, HUGE Systems, XRAID or insert RAID vendor of your choice. And these are hooked up via U320 or Fibre Channel. There are a myriad of reasons for going this route. Speed, flexibility and avoiding thermal issues.
As an audio person I want to get my audio stuff as far outside the computer as possible so that I don't get noise from the PS or other components.
I know its frustrating to wait for Apple's product cycle to revolve at times and it looks like Apple is being really chintzy with everything. However I think Apple is one of the more honest companies. Sure they could add and promote a bunch of external and internal bays without regard to thermal conditions but that gives people a false confidence in cutting corners. Internal Drives are cheap but the can't be hot swapped or serviced should they die without pulling the case apart which means unhooking all the connections. It's a false economy that is being hyped on the PC side. Sure stick in a bunch of HD and Optical drives but just don't forget those 4 80mm fans and a robust powersupply or a baybus. Definitely not Pro and not Apple.
XSAN is the future for small groups working on DCC content. SAN requires fast external storage and SAN software. Looking at the trajectory of Pro storage you see that we moved from internal SCSI systems to external to NAS and then SAN. Flexibility is paramount.
The computer needs to shrink in size...no grow larger. Everything is becoming componentized and networked. Really cool shit is happening but those on a shoestring budget can't see beyond their internal JBOD systems and the "cost savings"
Cheer up. Pro is more about flexible work environments than flexible chassis.
Look around at setups and you will see fast PCs or Macs connected to very fast Medea, HUGE Systems, XRAID or insert RAID vendor of your choice. And these are hooked up via U320 or Fibre Channel. There are a myriad of reasons for going this route. Speed, flexibility and avoiding thermal issues.
Sure, but everybody getting off the ground can not afford the huge price tag on an Apple XserveRAID - those things are another fortune. That fortune can be spent by Pixar, but chances are not the persons that were in need of, and just shelled out a great deal of money on an Uberfast workstation.
Quote:
I know its frustrating to wait for Apple's product cycle to revolve at times and it looks like Apple is being really chintzy with everything. However I think Apple is one of the more honest companies. Sure they could add and promote a bunch of external and internal bays without regard to thermal conditions but that gives people a false confidence in cutting corners. Internal Drives are cheap but the can't be hot swapped or serviced should they die without pulling the case apart which means unhooking all the connections. It's a false economy that is being hyped on the PC side. Sure stick in a bunch of HD and Optical drives but just don't forget those 4 80mm fans and a robust powersupply or a baybus. Definitely not Pro and not Apple.
You obviously have not seen the new Alienware chassis.
Quote:
XSAN is the future for small groups working on DCC content. SAN requires fast external storage and SAN software. Looking at the trajectory of Pro storage you see that we moved from internal SCSI systems to external to NAS and then SAN. Flexibility is paramount.
I'm sure thats an Apple dream, but who is using it. Pixar Maybe, but do you have to wonder why.
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
Yet we've had it for over a year *shrugs*
In the consumer machine? Not...., but Most AMD boxes have.
Once again, I must thank you all for the time you've taken so kindly to answer my wish/question.
I've also heard that Apple may have something in the works to compete with Protools and other DAW production software.
We know that a nicely equipped G5 Dually or Quadra :-) will have no problem handling professional audio production, but currently you're still looking at additonal thousands of dollars in 3rd party outboard gear to have a complete system that will handle non-midi analog tracks.
A good entry level Protools 8 I/O system starts at around $2500 in the LE line
and starts at $10,000 if you have the stones to go for the HD system.
If it were possible for Apple to come up with something Native, of equal or better quality, ( like 64bit production )
you bet your booties that the musicians will take notice.
Intigrating this level of quality into Final Cut Pro would give you a truly complete audio/video production suite or one could purchase the stand
Once again, I must thank you all for the time you've taken so kindly to answer my wish/question.
I've also heard that Apple may have something in the works to compete with Protools and other DAW production software.
We know that a nicely equipped G5 Dually or Quadra :-) will have no problem handling professional audio production, but currently you're still looking at additonal thousands of dollars in 3rd party outboard gear to have a complete system that will handle non-midi analog tracks.
A good entry level Protools 8 I/O system starts at around $2500 in the LE line
and starts at $10,000 if you have the stones to go for the HD system.
If it were possible for Apple to come up with something Native, of equal or better quality, ( like 64bit production )
you bet your booties that the musicians will take notice.
Intigrating this level of quality into Final Cut Pro would give you a truly complete audio/video production suite or one could purchase the stand
hmurchison, I'm not trying to argue with you, or emig647. I'm just a little freaking upset that everything I need is on the other side of the fence as usual, and when these things get updated nothing will change. It will all still be on the other side of the fence.
A good entry level Protools 8 I/O system starts at around $2500 in the LE line and starts at $10,000 if you have the stones to go for the HD system.
Yes and that's what has people pissed off. $2500 should get you at a bare min 16 I/O high quality Mic Pres and more than 32 tracks. Digi is horribly overpriced but if you want to learn Protools you have to pay the price. Personally I think that someone composing music is better off with Logic Pro or Digital Performer and a a nice interface. A Fireface 800 and either program would exceed the Digi stuff in almost every area save overall audio editing(which is close but not equal to protools in some ways)
Painlessly automate every facet of up to 32 guaranteed audio and 256 MIDI tracks, incorporate a large variety of high-quality Digidesign and Development Partner plug-ins and use ReWire-compatible audio applications such as Propellerhead Software?s Reason and Ableton's Live,
emphasis added.. 32 audio tracks and 256 midi? That's a joke. The iMac G5 can do more than 32 audio tracks easy in fact Logic Express supports 48 channels of audio and 128 midi tracks for $299.
I think we see some fun stuff starting with AES in late October. Logic Pro 7 should be coming and odds are we may see ProBand(which I think are plugins) announced as well. Then if the mythical 64bit DAW actually exists we could see that at Winter NAMM or NAB 2005(I'm really hoping. I didn't really believe the rumors until I found out Tiger is mostly 64bit...now the thought of a 64bit DAW is possible)
Onlooker- Man I know the frustration. We all want to put a boot in Apple's arse to get them moving. The next Powermac refresh needs to happen by Q1 2005 with some "nice" stuff. No AGP..no 5200fx and some "Wow" stuff we hadn't imagined. Waiting ...just feels like an eternity.
Quote:
That must have been the most inappropriate claim I have ever read here.
Wow is your middle name "hyperbole" LOL. Spec scores don't tell the absolute truth but in the G5s case they are pretty much correct. FPU performance is more of their forte and looky...Xserves are being used in high performance clusters. The G4 would have never even been considered. Sometimes we never think about how the G5 would do if it wasn't running a beefy GUI like OSX...it, like a lot of CPUs, would smoke.
Hey back on topic what's the chances that we see FW1600 next year. I'm wondering about the future of FW. Will Apple see a need for faster connections? I'm thinking that moving from FW800 to 1600 is just going to be speeding up the signaling..meaning no new high pincount interfaces needed on this next round. The reason why I wonder is that eventually perhaps Fibre Channel to RAIDS can be replaced with FW1600 at a much cheaper cost someday. Just speculating.
Comments
I appreciate your comments about Apple offering something more in Pro
Audio, but a digital sequencing application such as Logic,
does not offer much help to musicians or songwriters wishing to make high quality multi-track recordings of voice, acoustic instruments and other miked or line-in analog sounds.
You must not have looked at Logic Pro recently. In addition to being one of the best sequencers available on any platform it can handle as many channels are your computer has grunt for. A G5 Dual 2Ghz can do 50+ channels with effects on every channel. Basically Logic Pro+G5+Interface is what you need. As for I/O interfaces there are too many to count. Want 8 Mic Pres Presonus Firepod. Want 56 inputs up to 24/192 RME Fireface 800, want 18 I/O and Firewire get the M-Audio 1814. ProTools is lauded for it's audio editing prowess but if you need good Midi it's not going to make you forget about other sequencers.
I suppose I was hoping that Final Cut could be improved in Sound Studio and Compressor to include the best features of Protools TDM software and thus enable musicians to not only record their music from scratch, but then also enable them to create a matching DVD.
Final Cut Pro audio is expected to get a huge boost with the next version. Todays FCP is limited in audio by Quicktime. Once the limitations are gone from Quicktime they are gone from FCP and any other app based on Quicktime. There have been rumors that Apple might be creating another app specifically aimed at Protools. This app would focus primarily on audio editing. It would be 64bit and probably would be pushed as the preferred environment for doing Audio Post Production for FCP users. Right now people are using Automatic Duck($495) to transport files to Protools Rigs. Apple could easily have this DAW seamlessly support a future version of FCP much easier. With a quarter of a million FCP installs I could see this app having a lot of users in 3 years. Apple will never move to TDM systems. They are a proponent of Native Systems...when we get to Quad Core systems, running beefy plugins shouldn't be too hard a task.
Anyone else that get the feeling that SATA is killing FW?
Initially I worried about SATA especially with the SATA II spec including support for external drives. However SATA can only support one drive per controller and doesn't have the isochronous abilites of Firewire. Last NAMM a bunch of FW interfaces hit and I expect even more. FW is leaving USB behind once you step off of the entry level interfaces. Video is the same. Teh Aja I/O isn't possible with a SATA connection. I think FW external drives might start disappearing but FW will "keep on trucking" in many other areas.
I'm with Zap on processor speed. I think 2.8Ghz is as high as we go for the next refresh. Then 3Ghz dual cores come. IBM has to be sufficiently embarrassed and will be a bit more cautious when jumping to 65nm.
I also look forward to seeing what the Freescale chips can do. eMacs and iBooks would be a natural for these chips.
Originally posted by DrBoar
Currently there is no room for a both a PM and ProPM line, short of going quattro on the Pro models.
If the PM line has gone across the 3GHz line within the next 6-8 months and there are dual cores aviable in good numbers, then might be the time to split the PM to PM and pPM.
But until there is a better full featured Mac that is as capable in all fields as a PC I'm staying away from them.
Originally posted by onlooker
But until there is a better full featured Mac that is as capable in all fields as a PC I'm staying away from them.
Why if you don't work in all fields?
Originally posted by onlooker
What makes you think I don't need it for more than just 3D?
I didn't say more than 1 field... I said ALL fields. I use mine for programming, unix dev, 3D, and graphics. That is 3-4 fields. But I don't need it for video, audio, cad, hosting, games, etc.
I find it extremely rare (I'd say impossible) that people need a computer to be fully functional in EVERY field. They may need it fully functional in certain fields but can get away with it being mediocre in other fields.
If you need a computer for $100k engineering programs, or games... I can see why you wouldn't consider a mac at this point. However, if you need a computer to web host and be in a rendering farm... I don't see the harm of mac vs. pc.
The stability of a mac sure makes up for a lot. Lets not forget that.
You said it yourself. You need it for video, and audio, but apple sells Pro Video, and Audio Applications.
Which is why I think they need a ProMac, above the PowerMac. The PowerMac just isn't a Professional grade workstation.
Originally posted by onlooker
Ok, I didn't necessarily mean "All" fields either. But I was more or less referring to being able to configure the big 3 highend like at the Alienware, or BOXX sites.
You said it yourself. You need it for video, and audio, but apple sells Pro Video, and Audio Applications.
Which is why I think they need a ProMac, above the PowerMac. The PowerMac just isn't a Professional grade workstation.
In your mind what makes it a non professional workstation besides the graphics card? Seems to have everything except mhz , 1mb cache, and on-chip mem controller (all is ibm's deal). Even has a faster bus than any other consumer system. So you want better graphics cards (we all do... it will happen someday)... and you want pci-express. I'm sure next Rev will have pci-e. What more do you want? Another thing you might say is more ram! Well guess what... If I could choose the option... I'd choose NO RAM from apple. I would rather find the best deal on the market and pay a lower price for the machine than pay for their high priced ram. Their ram is very good ram... hardly seen it fail... but when I'm building pc's... I get to start with 0mb ram. Not 512 then figure out your ratio of adding more.
So tell me? What do you need for hardware?
Btw... us going back and forth has easily added another 100 posts for me
PCI-X
Hypertransport links
Dual Sockets
Gigabit
Apples motherboard is a great design and except for the FW write flaw(slows FW write speeds) it was a very stable platform. The problem is people over the years have always expected an immediate speed increase when moving to a new CPU architecture and these increases are present from the start but what we generally miss is that last %20 of optimization that turns a good app into a great app. We're not there on the G5. It takes about a couple of years before your bread n butter apps are tuned and purring. The Spec scores don't lie..the G5 is a nice CPU which will only get better. We haven't seen anything yet as depending on what features make if from the POWER5 the next derivative is going to be even sweeter.
Powermacs will be a force to be reckoned with for the next 3 years at a minimum. Apple simply needs to get the OS running as good as possible and keep the ISVs doing the right things. Everthing else will take care of itself.
Even if you exclude processor configurations.
Everything on the highend PowerMac is base model stuff on the PC side for this type of machine. And even if you do order the base model PC (anybody smart would) You have the option to upgrade it in the future rather than buy another inadequate UPM.
Originally posted by emig647
Agreed and I forgot about hypertransport and pci-x... very non consumer.
Very non consumer on the mac but it'll be standard PC soon.
I think the expandability of PCs is overkill and actually inappropriate for Workstation uses. I'm seeing boxes that can handle 6 internal drives and that's just insane because really only Servers should hold this much internal storage and in a cool room. It's of no use to Pros running Audio or Video workstations. Audio requires as quiet a machine as you can muster. Today's G5 still isn't enough and they will often build Hush Boxes. Video isn't as stringent but they have thermal issues with the high end capture cards.
Look around at setups and you will see fast PCs or Macs connected to very fast Medea, HUGE Systems, XRAID or insert RAID vendor of your choice. And these are hooked up via U320 or Fibre Channel. There are a myriad of reasons for going this route. Speed, flexibility and avoiding thermal issues.
As an audio person I want to get my audio stuff as far outside the computer as possible so that I don't get noise from the PS or other components.
I know its frustrating to wait for Apple's product cycle to revolve at times and it looks like Apple is being really chintzy with everything. However I think Apple is one of the more honest companies. Sure they could add and promote a bunch of external and internal bays without regard to thermal conditions but that gives people a false confidence in cutting corners. Internal Drives are cheap but the can't be hot swapped or serviced should they die without pulling the case apart which means unhooking all the connections. It's a false economy that is being hyped on the PC side. Sure stick in a bunch of HD and Optical drives but just don't forget those 4 80mm fans and a robust powersupply or a baybus. Definitely not Pro and not Apple.
XSAN is the future for small groups working on DCC content. SAN requires fast external storage and SAN software. Looking at the trajectory of Pro storage you see that we moved from internal SCSI systems to external to NAS and then SAN. Flexibility is paramount.
The computer needs to shrink in size...no grow larger. Everything is becoming componentized and networked. Really cool shit is happening but those on a shoestring budget can't see beyond their internal JBOD systems and the "cost savings"
Cheer up. Pro is more about flexible work environments than flexible chassis.
Re: Mass Expandability
Quote:
Look around at setups and you will see fast PCs or Macs connected to very fast Medea, HUGE Systems, XRAID or insert RAID vendor of your choice. And these are hooked up via U320 or Fibre Channel. There are a myriad of reasons for going this route. Speed, flexibility and avoiding thermal issues.
Sure, but everybody getting off the ground can not afford the huge price tag on an Apple XserveRAID - those things are another fortune. That fortune can be spent by Pixar, but chances are not the persons that were in need of, and just shelled out a great deal of money on an Uberfast workstation.
I know its frustrating to wait for Apple's product cycle to revolve at times and it looks like Apple is being really chintzy with everything. However I think Apple is one of the more honest companies. Sure they could add and promote a bunch of external and internal bays without regard to thermal conditions but that gives people a false confidence in cutting corners. Internal Drives are cheap but the can't be hot swapped or serviced should they die without pulling the case apart which means unhooking all the connections. It's a false economy that is being hyped on the PC side. Sure stick in a bunch of HD and Optical drives but just don't forget those 4 80mm fans and a robust powersupply or a baybus. Definitely not Pro and not Apple.
You obviously have not seen the new Alienware chassis.
XSAN is the future for small groups working on DCC content. SAN requires fast external storage and SAN software. Looking at the trajectory of Pro storage you see that we moved from internal SCSI systems to external to NAS and then SAN. Flexibility is paramount.
I'm sure thats an Apple dream, but who is using it. Pixar Maybe, but do you have to wonder why.
Originally posted by emig647
Yet we've had it for over a year *shrugs*
In the consumer machine? Not...., but Most AMD boxes have.
I've also heard that Apple may have something in the works to compete with Protools and other DAW production software.
We know that a nicely equipped G5 Dually or Quadra :-) will have no problem handling professional audio production, but currently you're still looking at additonal thousands of dollars in 3rd party outboard gear to have a complete system that will handle non-midi analog tracks.
A good entry level Protools 8 I/O system starts at around $2500 in the LE line
and starts at $10,000 if you have the stones to go for the HD system.
If it were possible for Apple to come up with something Native, of equal or better quality, ( like 64bit production )
you bet your booties that the musicians will take notice.
Intigrating this level of quality into Final Cut Pro would give you a truly complete audio/video production suite or one could purchase the stand
alone ProBand application for less.
Anyway,
Thanks guys,
Guess I better save some more money!
Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
Once again, I must thank you all for the time you've taken so kindly to answer my wish/question.
I've also heard that Apple may have something in the works to compete with Protools and other DAW production software.
We know that a nicely equipped G5 Dually or Quadra :-) will have no problem handling professional audio production, but currently you're still looking at additonal thousands of dollars in 3rd party outboard gear to have a complete system that will handle non-midi analog tracks.
A good entry level Protools 8 I/O system starts at around $2500 in the LE line
and starts at $10,000 if you have the stones to go for the HD system.
If it were possible for Apple to come up with something Native, of equal or better quality, ( like 64bit production )
you bet your booties that the musicians will take notice.
Intigrating this level of quality into Final Cut Pro would give you a truly complete audio/video production suite or one could purchase the stand
alone ProBand application for less.
Anyway,
Thanks guys,
Guess I better save some more money!
informer? fallen from the tree?
The Spec scores don't lie.
That must have been the most inappropriate claim I have ever read here.
A good entry level Protools 8 I/O system starts at around $2500 in the LE line and starts at $10,000 if you have the stones to go for the HD system.
Yes and that's what has people pissed off. $2500 should get you at a bare min 16 I/O high quality Mic Pres and more than 32 tracks. Digi is horribly overpriced but if you want to learn Protools you have to pay the price. Personally I think that someone composing music is better off with Logic Pro or Digital Performer and a a nice interface. A Fireface 800 and either program would exceed the Digi stuff in almost every area save overall audio editing(which is close but not equal to protools in some ways)
Protool LE only supports 32 Tracks
Painlessly automate every facet of up to 32 guaranteed audio and 256 MIDI tracks, incorporate a large variety of high-quality Digidesign and Development Partner plug-ins and use ReWire-compatible audio applications such as Propellerhead Software?s Reason and Ableton's Live,
emphasis added.. 32 audio tracks and 256 midi? That's a joke. The iMac G5 can do more than 32 audio tracks easy in fact Logic Express supports 48 channels of audio and 128 midi tracks for $299.
I think we see some fun stuff starting with AES in late October. Logic Pro 7 should be coming and odds are we may see ProBand(which I think are plugins) announced as well. Then if the mythical 64bit DAW actually exists we could see that at Winter NAMM or NAB 2005(I'm really hoping. I didn't really believe the rumors until I found out Tiger is mostly 64bit...now the thought of a 64bit DAW is possible)
Onlooker- Man I know the frustration. We all want to put a boot in Apple's arse to get them moving. The next Powermac refresh needs to happen by Q1 2005 with some "nice" stuff. No AGP..no 5200fx and some "Wow" stuff we hadn't imagined. Waiting ...just feels like an eternity.
That must have been the most inappropriate claim I have ever read here.
Wow is your middle name "hyperbole" LOL. Spec scores don't tell the absolute truth but in the G5s case they are pretty much correct. FPU performance is more of their forte and looky...Xserves are being used in high performance clusters. The G4 would have never even been considered. Sometimes we never think about how the G5 would do if it wasn't running a beefy GUI like OSX...it, like a lot of CPUs, would smoke.
Hey back on topic what's the chances that we see FW1600 next year. I'm wondering about the future of FW. Will Apple see a need for faster connections? I'm thinking that moving from FW800 to 1600 is just going to be speeding up the signaling..meaning no new high pincount interfaces needed on this next round. The reason why I wonder is that eventually perhaps Fibre Channel to RAIDS can be replaced with FW1600 at a much cheaper cost someday. Just speculating.