jameskatt2

About

Username
jameskatt2
Joined
Visits
65
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
613
Badges
1
Posts
722

Reactions

448Like0Dislike23Informative

  • Compared: 2018 iPad versus the Acer Chromebook 11 in the school

    jameskatt2jameskatt2
    The problem is NOT the hardware.
    The problem is that Apple simply doesn't have the software that schools need for teachers and students to work together.
    Google HAS THE SOFTWARE. Apple ironically does not.

    muthuk_vanalingam

  • Video: iMac Pro vs 2013 Mac Pro (Part 3) - video editing

    jameskatt2jameskatt2
    The problem I have with this comparison is that the $5000 iMac Pro is the Base Model. No Video Professional would choose this model, much less for comparison with their current machine.

    The minimum Video Professional iMac Pro configuration is:

    - 10 core, 3.0GHz Intel Xeon W CPU with 4.5GHz turbo boost.

    - 64 GB of 2666MHz RAM

    - Radeon Pro Vega 64 GPU with 16 GB HBM2 VRAM. 

    - 2 TB SSD system drive

    - built-in 27” 5120x2880 max, 5K monitor.

    - Magic Keyboard and Magic Trackpad

    - Cost = $9,050.89 in 2017

    Interesting is how much faster Final Cut Pro is than Adobe Premiere. 

    The author notes "a much improved editing experience that can save a pro hundreds or thousands of hours in the life of the machine. "

    If you save 2000 hours using the new iMac Pro versus your Mac Pro, then you have just gained an entire year of vacation time if you buy and use the new iMac Pro versus your old Mac Pro. This is equivalent to gaining a YEAR of your income if you use that time to make even more money. As a professional, the new iMac Pro easily pays for itself to the point it is a FREE Mac plus vacation time. $10,000 is cheap when it gives you over a year of your income extra over its lifetime. 


    mdriftmeyer

  • Video: Apple's iMac Pro vs 2013 Mac Pro (Part 2) - photo editing comparison

    jameskatt2jameskatt2
    The problem I have with this comparison is that this the iMac Pro chosen would NOT be what is chosen by a real professional.

    Here is a real professional review:

    www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/2029-new-imac-pro

    The comparison Macs are:

    2013 Mac Pro 
    - 8 core, 3.0GHz Intel Xeon E5 CPU with 3.9GHz turbo boost.
    - 32 GB RAM
    - Dual AMD FirePro D700 GPUs with 6 GB of 1866MHz GDDR5 VRAM each. 
    - 1 TB system drive
    - 27” Apple 2560x1440 max, Thunderbolt Display. 
    - Cost = $9,626.78 in 2013

    2017 iMac Pro
    - 10 core, 3.0GHz Intel Xeon W CPU with 4.5GHz turbo boost.
    - 64 GB of 2666MHz RAM
    - Radeon Pro Vega 64 GPU with 16 GB HBM2 VRAM. 
    - 2 TB SSD system drive
    - built-in 27” 5120x2880 max, 5K monitor.
    - Magic Keyboard and Magic Trackpad
    - Cost = $9,050.89 in 2017

    All media and Libraries are on a Promise Pegasus 16 TB RAID 5, with Thunderbolt 2 connections. All of the tests were run strictly off of the RAID for a real world performance test. Professionals don't store video on the Mac. They store the files on an external RAID.

    Both Macs are running macOS 10.13.2 High Sierra with the current versions of FCPX 10.4.0, Motion 5.4.0 and Compressor 4.4.0.

    -------------------------

    You can read the numbers on the website's review. But I converted them to how much faster the iMac Pro is compared to the Mac Pro 2013.

    USING FINAL CUT PRO X 10.4.0:

    IMPORT CLIPS: 1.046x faster
    COVERT CLIPS TO PROXY MEDIA: 2.09x faster
    COVERT CLIPS TO OPTIMIZED MEDIA: 3.65x faster
    RENDER TIMELINE OF CLIPS: 4.44x faster
    MULTICAM PLAYBACK AND RENDER: 4.42x faster
    FILE EXPORT TO H.264: 6.7x faster
    FILE EXPORT TO MXF BROADCAST FILE: 5.69x faster
    BRUCEX XML TEST: 1.39x faster
    REAL WORLD TV SHOW EXPORT TO H.264: 2.14x faster

    -------------------------

    USING COMPRESSOR 4.4.0:
    REAL WORLD TV SHOW IMPORT PRORES 422 AND EXPORT TO MXF PLUS H.264: 3.069x faster

    -------------------------

    The iMac Pro 2017 simply smokes the Mac Pro 2013 when doing real world video work.

    Exporting files - which can take longer than editing the files - is 2 to 3 times faster on the iMac Pro than the Mac Pro 2013. 

    This is a huge savings in time for real Video Professionals.

    The iMac Pro easily pays for itself. For real Video Professionals, the iMac Pro essentially is a free computer because of the time and money it saves the pro.


    deepinsiderchiaplanetary paulwilliamlondonfirelockStrangeDaysrcponetoysandmeRayz2016tmay

  • Watch: Apple's iMac Pro vs 2013 Mac Pro (Part 1) - benchmarks and specs

    jameskatt2jameskatt2
    The problem I have with this comparison is that this the iMac Pro chosen would NOT be what is chosen by a real professional.

    Here is a real professional review:


    The comparison Macs are:

    2013 Mac Pro 
    - 8 core, 3.0GHz Intel Xeon E5 CPU with 3.9GHz turbo boost.
    - 32 GB RAM
    - Dual AMD FirePro D700 GPUs with 6 GB of 1866MHz GDDR5 VRAM each. 
    - 1 TB system drive
    - 27” Apple 2560x1440 max, Thunderbolt Display. 
    - Cost = $9,626.78 in 2013

    2017 iMac Pro
    - 10 core, 3.0GHz Intel Xeon W CPU with 4.5GHz turbo boost.
    - 64 GB of 2666MHz RAM
    - Radeon Pro Vega 64 GPU with 16 GB HBM2 VRAM. 
    - 2 TB SSD system drive
    - built-in 27” 5120x2880 max, 5K monitor.
    - Magic Keyboard and Magic Trackpad
    - Cost = $9,050.89 in 2017

    All media and Libraries are on a Promise Pegasus 16 TB RAID 5, with Thunderbolt 2 connections. All of the tests were run strictly off of the RAID for a real world performance test. Professionals don't store video on the Mac. They store the files on an external RAID.

    Both Macs are running macOS 10.13.2 High Sierra with the current versions of FCPX 10.4.0, Motion 5.4.0 and Compressor 4.4.0.

    -------------------------

    You can read the numbers on the website's review. But I converted them to how much faster the iMac Pro is compared to the Mac Pro 2013.

    USING FINAL CUT PRO X 10.4.0:

    IMPORT CLIPS: 1.046x faster
    COVERT CLIPS TO PROXY MEDIA: 2.09x faster
    COVERT CLIPS TO OPTIMIZED MEDIA: 3.65x faster
    RENDER TIMELINE OF CLIPS: 4.44x faster
    MULTICAM PLAYBACK AND RENDER: 4.42x faster
    FILE EXPORT TO H.264: 6.7x faster
    FILE EXPORT TO MXF BROADCAST FILE: 5.69x faster
    BRUCEX XML TEST: 1.39x faster
    REAL WORLD TV SHOW EXPORT TO H.264: 2.14x faster

    -------------------------

    USING COMPRESSOR 4.4.0:

    REAL WORLD TV SHOW IMPORT PRORES 422 AND EXPORT TO MXF PLUS H.264: 3.069x faster

    -------------------------

    The iMac Pro 2017 is simply mind-blowingly faster than the Mac Pro 2013 when doing real world video work.
    Exporting files - which can take longer than editing the files - is 2 to 3 times faster on the iMac Pro than the Mac Pro 2013. 
    This is a huge savings in time for real Video Professionals.
    The iMac Pro easily pays for itself. 
    For real Video Professionals, the iMac Pro essentially is a free computer because of the time and money it saves the pro.


    baconstang

  • Watch: Why Apple TV 4K can't play 4K YouTube videos

    jameskatt2jameskatt2
    This is ENTIRELY GOOGLE's fault.

    1) If they want their YouTube App to run V9 video's (Google's proprietary format) then they should re-write the YouTube App to play V9 videos. The YouTube app is Google's app, not Apple's. 

    2) Otherwise, Google should stop blocking access to 4K MP4 Videos on Apple TV.  MP4 is THE STANDARD for video.

    BLAME Google for lack of 4K Videos on YouTube for Apple TV.
    macseekermagman1979macpluspluspujones1chiaericthehalfbeepscooter63RacerhomieXtmayAvieshek