FORUMS: list search recent posts

Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Steve Connor
Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 29, 2017 at 5:26:49 pm

http://www.redsharknews.com/technology/item/4470-amd-s-forthcoming-radeon-r...


Return to posts index

Tangier Clarke
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 29, 2017 at 5:38:28 pm

Thanks for that link. Intriguing. Apple is so tight-lipped about future products it's anybody's guess what's happening with the Mac Pro. Pair this finding with the benefits of Apple's Metal technology and maybe there's something worth waiting for...maybe.


Return to posts index

Rich Rubasch
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 29, 2017 at 8:31:28 pm

Really want to see 10GigE in the new MacPro. I want to set up a new 10GigE network here and having a port on each machine without needing a PCI card would be, as Trump would say, Huge.

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index


Michael Gissing
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 30, 2017 at 1:05:52 am

If Apple are prepared to wait so long for AMD to catch up to NVIDIA's second tier cards from 2016 when they know in five months those cards will be behind this years NVIDIA offerings then they are not really serious about the MacPro.

If they want to make cutting edge pro computers with the best graphics they could have done that years ago by using replaceable NVIDIA cards. I think the long wait for a MacPro that will be easily surpassed by cheaper PC hardware almost before it is released is a poor commercial decision. Also if they make the mistake of a non upgradable graphics card with a history of overheating again they might find buyer resistance.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 30, 2017 at 2:21:15 am

Michael Gissing

I agree with your comments. I have made mention of AMD's Ryzen CPUs and AMD's Vega Chips several times in these forums. The 2013 Mac Pro does run hotter than the PC counter parts. At least the article made mention of Nvidia's Volta GPU. With Apple you get one or the other but not both. The market for 2013 Mac Pro's GPU is to small for all the manufactures to worry about it. I love being able to pop any card into my computer that I want to. I know some Mac uses want that ability as well.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 30, 2017 at 5:37:48 pm

My lord I do NOT miss those days when I had to split my brain between editing and system integration issues.

Decades ago when I was starting in digital editing, I remember having to buy my systems from ProMax because they were among the few who understand the special "Granite Digital" Firewire busses that made DV (DV!) deck editing fluid in and out of a Mac.

(Yes, youngsters, there was actually a time when 3.5Mbps content streams were a CHALLENGE to edit with!!

Today, I bought a laptop via mail order. Downloaded my software of choice. And was editing everything I needed to edit in less than an hour - with fluidity and ease.

To me, THAT is the delivered promise of the modern editing era.

I don't have to waste my time trying to benchmark everything to eek out enough grunt to get my day to day jobs done and delivered, quickly and efficiently.

I understand that there are a few who must live on the edge of performance to get what THEY do done efficiently. And if you're 3d modeling, Or chasing billions of polygons - bless you and I hope you get what you need.

I'm just a content creator.

Where my work used to be mostly for broadcast, today it's mostly for on-line distribution. I work in 4k or lower masters, because I'm typically NOT delivering to motion picture theaters - tho I'm aware that even the higher end filmmakers I know are often delivering 2k anamorphic and doing just fine.

For me, the old "chasing hardware" days are gone.

No time for it. Not when my "off the shelf" gear runs rings around anything I've ever had on my desktop before.

YMMV.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 30, 2017 at 5:43:59 pm

[Bill Davis] "For me, the old "chasing hardware" days are gone.

No time for it. Not when my "off the shelf" gear runs rings around anything I've ever had on my desktop before."


Lucky you, for many of us (there are more than a "few") more power is very useful.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 30, 2017 at 5:54:23 pm

[Steve Connor] "Lucky you, for many of us (there are more than a "few") more power is very useful."

Didn't say that it wasn't.

Only suggesting that there MIGHT be a time in the not too distant future, where trading dollars for grunt for a noticeable improvement in performance stops making the same sense that it used to.

Isn't that kinda what's being discussed on the QNAP oriented threads?
And what the LumaForge guys figured out two years ago retrofitting those broadcast operations in Europe?

Technology evolving past where it's SENSIBLE to start playing a different game, judged by different metrics?

That's all I'm saying.

My MacBook Pro experience over the past few years has SHOCKED me. It's changed my orientation. When I go to NAB in two weeks. I'll take my laptop and one or two 4TB USB 2 drives in my lightweight briefcase - and the experience I'll have working in my hotel room will be EXACTLY equivalent to working at my desk. The ONLY limitation is I won't have my Fiber line for upload and download. But my hardware array and system performance will be identical. I define that as " proven to allow me to work at the top end of my skills without impediment."

And I do NOT think that type of change is going to slow down.

That's all.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 30, 2017 at 8:08:02 pm

Are the new AMD GPUs what's kept the nMP locked in stone for nearly 4yrs? I don't think so. Whatever Apple is waiting on (assuming they are waiting on anything) is a mystery to all but a select few in NorCal. Since 2010 the only Mac Pro releases have been in 2012 (a slightly faster 2010 cMP) and in 2013 (the nMP). This is obviously not the market segment Apple is spending much time with, and to Bill's point, why should they? For a lot (I dare say most) of the people that need to edit on a somewhat regular basis a 'normal' desktop or laptop is adequate.

In 2002 I remember our Smoke operator using an SGI Octane because an off-the-shelf computer just wasn't good enough. Now Smoke runs on a laptop. Apple has never been a 'big iron' computer maker and these days off-the-shelf workstation computers are basically 'big iron'. Mobile devices are the new laptops, laptops are the new desktops and desktops are the new workstations. That market segment certainly still exists but it is getting smaller, not larger.

15-20yrs ago many of us here were the beneficiaries of the DV Revolution and/or the desktop NLE revolution? Working out our homes (or small offices) w/o the need for $100k Avids and $70k Betacams? That downward pressure trend never stopped, we've just aged out of Apple's target demo.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 12:01:58 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Are the new AMD GPUs what's kept the nMP locked in stone for nearly 4yrs?"

I'd just be happy if Apple used chips that did get trashed by Adobe and Resolve renders. I get more trustworthy render results from iMacs and MacBook Pros than the trash can Mac Pro.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 12:58:26 am

Tim Cook sent a crystal clear message a bit ago with the world and Wall Street all watching.

A) Pro users matter to Apple
B) Creatives particularly.

Good enough for me.

I make my living communicating via video - and I'm having absolutely no issues doing so via the current Apple hardware and software.

I'll be DELIGHTED if something faster and newer arrives someday.

But I'm just not living in gear or capabilities "frustration" at present, so that "commitment message" is plenty for me. If others are struggling and pining for faster boxes or renders or struggling against huge noise reduction requirements, I'm sorry. But I'm just not. My work is getting to the screens it needs to get up to reliably and smoothly.

I get that there are those who need or want to pass 8k uncompressed 20 camera streams around. But it's not most of us. Most of us face communication challenges that are more modest. And certainly no more complex than what the folks doing multi-million dollar budget commercials and traditional movies are doing just fine day in and day out on the same software, so I just don't feel bereft of capability.

Maybe I'm just funny that way. But it was an enjoyable 2016 on my system. All work and no payments!

So I'm good for now.

That's all.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 1:05:08 am

[Bill Davis] "A) Pro users matter to Apple
B) Creatives particularly. "


Except that none of this means anything related to the Mac Pro. As the rest of your post illustrates quite well. Apple makes other products that work well enough for pros. Although as I responded to Tangier, I do believe the Mac Pro has a little more life to it. If that means another 3 years, then that might be all that's needed, given the acceleration of all computing products.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Michael Gissing
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 12:48:35 pm

[Bill Davis] "A) Pro users matter to Apple
B) Creatives particularly. "

If I had the misfortune to believe this means Apple wants to make hardware for pro users I would be much the poorer. I saw the writing on the wall for Apple producing both software and hardware that does the work I need long ago. Its now 8 years since I bought anything from Apple. They are way behind the game in hardware both in performance and cost effectiveness. If you think they care then judge those quotes by what is comparatively on offer.

Good luck if a laptop with soldered in 16 gigs of RAM and an under powered graphics card works for you. Setting the bar pretty low for Pro. I get that editing seems like the alpha and omega to some here. Don't be dissing those that need real render and RT performance to do their jobs with big fat RAW files. There comes a time when proxy meets reality.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 11, 2017 at 11:42:37 am
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Apr 11, 2017 at 4:19:10 pm

[Michael Gissing] "Good luck if a laptop with soldered in 16 gigs of RAM and an under powered graphics card works for you."

Oddly, it does. And for everyone else I know that has a current model MBP (increasing sales by 20+% btw). Not sure what that has to do with "luck". But apparently you know of something relevant that I CAN'T do with it? Please, do elaborate, since I appear to be missing something.


[Michael Gissing] "Setting the bar pretty low for Pro."

Right. How exactly? Care to share your findings? What is it that I and the other noobs are missing out on that the "high-bar pros" are enjoying?

Also, what do you suggest as an alternative? I'm curious. Maybe a "Razer Blade Pro"? Or maybe this??







- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 3:55:10 am

[Bill Davis] "Tim Cook sent a crystal clear message a bit ago with the world and Wall Street all watching."

Nothing is crystal clear with Apple. 😉

Flash storage, video on mobile devices, streaming music services, e-readers/digital books, smaller iPads, bigger iPhones, etc., all things denounced by Apple... right up until the point Apple decided to dive into those market segments. And as we've seen with X and the nMP, even when Apple makes a definitive sounding statement the actual product might not be what you were expecting (or wanting or needing).

Maybe Apple really has been waiting years for low power GPUs to come to market at the same time as an Intel CPU with an onboard ThB 3 controller... Or maybe they've just been waiting to see if demand dips so far down that they can just let the MP drift into the night.


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 6:36:55 am

[Bill Davis] "So I'm good for now.

That's all."


You may have mentioned that before


Return to posts index

Tangier Clarke
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 12:46:21 am

I just hope that the iMac does not become the only answer. I love the iMac and use a iMac 5K Retina daily, however I preferred being able to choose the monitors I wanted; particularly two or three of the same running off of the Mac Pro when I was working on one.

Now if the iMac became the top of the line from Apple and they offered a Retina Display as an option to buy separately that'd be different perhaps. Though make no mistake that I still prefer (having a choice) working with the Mac Pro over the iMac; particularly when doing multiple tasks and editing.

Hopefully we'll no soon what Apple is up to.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 1:00:12 am

[Tangier Clarke] "Hopefully we'll no soon what Apple is up to."

My own take is that the Mac Pro will survive for political reasons, because it's the only US-assembled Apple product. Good leverage. However, I doubt it will survive past one more rev. OTOH, it would be nice to have the full blown guts of an iMac in a Mac Mini package. The Sonnet rack-mount Mini package performs really well with macOS Server. Of course, that's for general use, not editing or rendering.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 1:41:25 am

And then there's something like this:

http://www.postmagazine.com/Publications/Post-Magazine/2017/March-1-2017/Re...

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tangier Clarke
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 2:31:40 am

Nice machine indeed. Not ready to leave macOS though. I agree Oliver. I think the MacPro isn't gone yet. Sure is a funny thing to go from stated "...can't innovate my ass" to hearing crickets in the Apple winds passing over their halo machine.

Is it really as simple as perhaps Intel isn't meeting their timetable causing an Apple delay? Could there be something else yet unexpected?

I haven't felt this uncertain about Apple desktops (and I use 'desktops' intentionally since "pro" is an increasingly moving target) in quite a while.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Mar 31, 2017 at 3:47:18 pm

Innovation hasn't been their problem. It's the follow up/follow through that is suspect.

_______________________________________________________________________
http://BretFX.com FCP X Plugins & Templates for Editors & Motion Graphics Artists


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 2:31:31 pm

[Tangier Clarke] "I just hope that the iMac does not become the only answer. I love the iMac and use a iMac 5K Retina daily, however I preferred being able to choose the monitors I wanted;"

I agree, I have always liked the separation of the monitor and the computer. I felt like if the monitor would go down on the iMac it takes the whole computer down with it.

I remember the first mac I ever had the monitor went down (after years of use). I got another monitor and kept going. The computer never went out.

I watch the clips of people who have cut big budget Hollywood films with X on that now old Mac Pro and I never see them complaining that the computer bogged down or couldn't handle the work.

Is it beach balling on these big projects, and if it is why aren't they saying that, and if it isn't what are they doing differently?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 3:28:58 pm

[Tony West] "I have always liked the separation of the monitor and the computer"

Agreed. The trouble is that currently, it's hard to find any third party monitor that is reasonably color-accurate without a lot of fiddling. Nothing out there is as close or seamless with Macs as Apple's own (now defunct) monitor line. That's not to say they were totally perfect or completely accurate, but they did a better job of displaying the right color across multiple applications. It's a shame that you can't get a new Apple display, especially since they obviously still have custom displays made for the iMacs and laptops.

[Tony West] "I watch the clips of people who have cut big budget Hollywood films with X on that now old Mac Pro and I never see them complaining that the computer bogged down or couldn't handle the work."

Right now, that's only two films ☺ But in general, that's because they are either working with actual FCPX proxy files or externally generated "proxies" for editorial.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 4:34:54 pm

[Oliver Peters] "with Macs as Apple's own (now defunct) monitor line. "

This is a good point. I really like my mac display, but if they don't put out a new one I will be very disappointed.
Seems like they would need a new display if they put out a new mac pro.


[Oliver Peters] "But in general, that's because they are either working with actual FCPX proxy files or externally generated "proxies" for editorial.
"


Wouldn't you work that way anyway if you were dealing with that much large format footage?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 6:03:30 pm

[Tony West] "Wouldn't you work that way anyway if you were dealing with that much large format footage?"

Maybe. For example, I deal with 4K ProRes files as native a lot these days on some fairly large projects. OTOH, if it's a RED job, I'll transcode or use FCPX's proxy mode. But turnaround time is a big factor and understanding how to manage the media. Letting X transcode RED files to internal proxies is time-consuming. And it doesn't do any good if the proxies are incorrectly created by someone else and then later the camera masters won't sync. Certainly not everything needs to be 4K either. So Alexa 2K and HD files are fine natively. Rewrapped FS7 files, for instance, are also something you might stay with in a native form. As with so many things, the answer is "it depends".

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 11:23:08 pm

[Oliver Peters] " I deal with 4K ProRes files as native a lot these days on some fairly large projects."

What kind of mac do you use?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 11:33:16 pm

[Tony West] "What kind of mac do you use?"

A mix, since I'm an independent contractor. But in general, several different machines, between clients' and my own. Range includes Mac Pro towers (8 & 12 core, 2009-2012), iMacs, 2013 Mac Pro (8-core), and a MacBook Pros.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 12:28:30 am

[Oliver Peters] " Mac Pro (8-core),"

Does this one beach ball on your 4k stuff?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 12:55:57 am

None of them beachball, but it depends on the format - RED or ProRes or FS7, etc. The absolute worst is 4K GoPro or DJI footage. Generally with ProRes, what I see is stuttery playback, but it depends on the app. A lot has to do with the media drives you are using. On this machine for effective 4K, you want something like an 8-drive SAS array, like the old MaxxDigital units. Or better. You'll note that a number of the big films using Premiere were using all-SSD drive arrays, like those from Open Drives. But, if I were doing something like a feature film on this machine with all 4K ProRes or RED sources, I would definitely proxy it for the creative cut and do the 4K relink and finish in Resolve.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 2:26:38 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "For a lot (I dare say most) of the people that need to edit on a somewhat regular basis a 'normal' desktop or laptop is adequate."

This was true before widespread use of 4k cameras. The nMP was released in 2013, and probably some design work done in 2012. In 2012 few people envisioned that by 2017, 4k acquisition would be this widespread. Back then people thought the limited 4k distribution and playback infrastructure would diminish the need for 4k acquisition and editing, leading to slow adoption.

What happened is 4k has become the "new color". Content producers with no immediate plans for 4k distribution still shoot 4k to improve shelf life, plus editors like the compositional flexibility. Today, inexpensive drones, GoPros, even cell phones are shooting H264 4k. This happened much faster than most people anticipated.

This has greatly impacted editing. Adobe's Mercury Playback Engine that was like quicksilver on 1080p is sluggish on 4k. Even FCPX on the highest-end iMac can struggle. Compute-intensive effects on 4k material are maddeningly slow, and they can be laggy even on a nMP.

The near term answer is use proxy. That's fine but it knocks us back to the pre-Mercury era when everything must be transcoded before editing. Editing camera-native content with no transcoding was pretty nice. As shooting ratios skyrocket, we need camera native editing more than ever. Yet we are increasingly knocked back to transcoding due to 4k performance issues.

I've seen countless cases where recreational editors are mystified at why their computer became so slow at video editing -- "it's only a GoPro/iPhone/DJI clip", they say.

If we want similar editing performance (without transcoding) on H264 4k as we had on 1080p, this takes a lot more hardware muscle on both CPU and GPU sides.

If Apple knew this was going to happen back in 2012, and if they weren't going to release an updated nMP until 2017, they might have designed the nMP differently with more upgrade options. If people can't get the performance they need on a Mac platform, they'll just use Windows. Whenever the updated nMP and iMac are released, a lot of people will buy them because this time the video editing workload as truly changed and the additional performance is needed. This assumes they haven't already given up and moved to Windows.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 5:05:03 pm

[Joe Marler] "This was true before widespread use of 4k cameras. The nMP was released in 2013, and probably some design work done in 2012. In 2012 few people envisioned that by 2017, 4k acquisition would be this widespread. Back then people thought the limited 4k distribution and playback infrastructure would diminish the need for 4k acquisition and editing, leading to slow adoption."

It's an old cycle though. DV (and MPEG-2 DVD) was a drag on computers until the early 2000's (an editing PC I built in '99 had a hardware card designed to improve real-time DV playback). Computers got faster, storage got cheaper and fewer people need to do the offline/online dance with SD. Then HD came out and all of a sudden our computers were 'slow' again and offline/online came back. I remember HDV just being a slide show on most computers back then. Now we are seeing the same thing with HD and 4K.

And it's not just the frame sizes it's the codecs as well. Even when computers could play a very compressed codec back okay like HDV (MPEG2) or XDCAM EX (MPEG4) a less compressed codec like ProRes or DNx would still perform better. So that was trade off (and still is today). Even with the Mercury Playback Engine you'll still get better performance using ProRes or DNx than you will using camera native codecs, but if using the camera native codec is 'good enough' then people will go that route. That's certainly what I have done.

6 or 7 years ago I'd always know what cameras were using during production so that I could properly setup FCP 7 or Avid. These days when I'm using PPro I generally don't need to know. The last three docs I've worked on with PPro I couldn't tell you what cameras were used other than it was a mix of DSLRs, some higher-end handicams and the occasional Alexa shoot.

[Joe Marler] "I've seen countless cases where recreational editors are mystified at why their computer became so slow at video editing -- "it's only a GoPro/iPhone/DJI clip", they say. "

A recreational editor isn't going to drop $6,000 on a beefy computer though. They'll being using an iMac or MB and cutting with proxies or optimized media in FCP X which is exactly what Apple intended.


[Joe Marler] "If Apple knew this was going to happen back in 2012, and if they weren't going to release an updated nMP until 2017, they might have designed the nMP differently with more upgrade options. "

Steve Jobs' vision for Apple since day one has been to release sealed box, computing appliances and the Mac Pro was the last hold out against that philosophy. I don't think Apple would've changed the design of the nMP because Apple's solution to the problem is to use proxy editing. If Apple wants a faster nMP all they have to do is release a faster nMP.

Maybe Oliver and other's are correct in guessing that Apple will release another MP. Maybe the product cycle will be once every 5 years or so (big leaps as opposed to incremental improvements).


[Oliver Peters] "Right now, that's only two films ☺ But in general, that's because they are either working with actual FCPX proxy files or externally generated "proxies" for editorial."

I had to refresh my memory, but "Focus" was cut at online rez. It was shot in anamorphic 2048 x 1536 ProRes 4444 and then converted/ de-squeezed to 2048x1152 ProRes 4444 for editing. They had 145 hours of footage so that's around... 25TB of data. I think working w/online media was one of the feather's in X's cap on that project.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 5:55:59 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I had to refresh my memory, but "Focus" was cut at online rez. It was shot in anamorphic 2048 x 1536 ProRes 4444 and then converted/ de-squeezed to 2048x1152 ProRes 4444 for editing. They had 145 hours of footage so that's around... 25TB of data. I think working w/online media was one of the feather's in X's cap on that project"

This was still a proxy created for editorial, although "full quality", but technically still a proxy. However, that's still a far cry from dealing with 145 hours of ARRIRAW or RED RAW at 4K and higher in a native format. Both "Focus" and "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot" benefitted from the fact that these were ARRI shows. Alexa files and ProRes are ideal for Macs and FCPX in particular. For more info, here's the link to my original interview. Look at the media management section. And the editing didn't use cheese-grater Macs.

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2015/03/31/focus/

And the changes made for "WTF":

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2016/03/25/whiskey-tango-foxtrot/

Finally, one other (sort of) "Hollywood" film and FCPX:

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2016/06/18/voice-from-the-stone/

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 12:04:34 pm

[Oliver Peters] "2048x1152 ProRes 4444 for editing."

You almost make this sound like a toss off. ProRes 4444 looks amazing and the Academy only wants 422 from you.
Many people's computers would choke on 4444.

[Oliver Peters] " Both "Focus" and "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot" benefitted from the fact that these were ARRI shows."

A lot of people like ARRI. Many better than RED. I think they made a"smart" decision going that route.
I don't remember seeing them complaining about the quality of their footage. They seemed super happy about the way things went and they didn't even have .3


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 1:14:20 pm

[Tony West] "I don't remember seeing them complaining about the quality of their footage."

I never said they did. People make a decision about cameras and formats for reasons that generally have little to do with post. In this case it benefitted the films, because ARRI designed a camera with a built-in workflow that was optimized on purpose for Apple and FCP ("legacy" originally).

I routinely work with footage from both cameras and there are pros and cons either way. From the standpoint of post, ARRI definitely makes it easier to get in and out with minimal fuss in between, assuming you shoot ProRes and not ARRIRAW.

At home I cut a series of corporate videos shot with Alexa in 2K size. I cut this fine in X on my 2009 8-core MP with media from a simple G-RAID connected via an eSATA card. The only issues I had were performance on unrendered greenscreen composites. At CES I cut 4K/UHD Alexa Mini footage on my 2015 MBP in X with media coming off of a Thunderbolt drive.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 8:15:08 pm

[Oliver Peters] "This was still a proxy created for editorial, although "full quality", but technically still a proxy. "

Proxy implies a much smaller, lighter weight file compared to the camera master. Maybe transcode would be a better term? Since we are talking about hardware required for the workflow, if someone told me the proxy workflow would require the same fast, expensive hardware as the online workflow I'd reply that their proxy workflow needed improvement. 😉

With that being said, the Focus team did use actual proxies when editing on location so it's not like they were trucking around big RAIDs with them all over the place.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 8:51:18 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Proxy implies a much smaller, lighter weight file compared to the camera master."

Not in my frame of reference. It's simply a"stand-in" for the original. I make a differentiation between proxy and ProResProxy. One is a substitute, the other a specific format. In fact, in Adobe's "proxy" parlance, you can specify the size and codec of the "proxy" file. In other cases, a proxy file might be the same resolution as the original, but with a LUT and TC burn added.

Just like the terms offline and online editing. The de facto assumption is that offline would use lower-res media and online would use higher. But there's nothing that says it can't be the other way around.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 3:01:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Not in my frame of reference. It's simply a"stand-in" for the original. I make a differentiation between proxy and ProResProxy. One is a substitute, the other a specific format. In fact, in Adobe's "proxy" parlance, you can specify the size and codec of the "proxy" file. In other cases, a proxy file might be the same resolution as the original, but with a LUT and TC burn added.

Just like the terms offline and online editing. The de facto assumption is that offline would use lower-res media and online would use higher. But there's nothing that says it can't be the other way around.
"


Haven't thought of it like that before. Though even Apple and Sony use 'proxy' to refer to low res media that's a place holder for the high res masters. Maybe my definitions just haven't changed with the times?

[andy patterson] " I don't see loyalty to HP or Dell although there may be a few. Keep in mind there is a difference between real facts and pure personal bias."

While now dated, have you ever heard the phrase, "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM?" Do you remember the Zune Tattoo Guy? There are certainly a lot of Windows/PC loyalists that wouldn't be caught dead with anything made by Apple. Maybe you hang around too many Mac-centric places so you don't notice, but get around a more general cross section of the computing user base (which is still by and large PC users) or go to PC-centric places and you'll certainly run into those that vehemently prefer PCs (or as they are known in gaming circles, The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race ;)).


Return to posts index

Dominic Deacon
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 10:01:39 pm
Last Edited By Dominic Deacon on Apr 3, 2017 at 10:03:11 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "you'll certainly run into those that vehemently prefer PCs (or as they are known in gaming circles, The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race ;))."

That's more refering to their preference of a desktop over a console. There's a difference between those guys and the dedicated Mac users though in that the "PC Master Race" tend to really know their computers. They're usually rabid about building their own kit and know their machines back to front so their preference for a PC is an educated choice. The same can not generally be said of the dedicated Mac user. Macs are just better and it begins and ends there. I was having to use a mac the other day and I enquired of it's dedicated Mac only owner how much free storage it had before I dumped a load of files on it and got the reply "I don't know, I bought the most expensive one".***

Obviously there are a lot of savvy folks here who needs Macs because of the maccentric software they run but that's a small part of the Apple business. The cult of mac that Andy's refering to is a different beast altogether and they're everywhere and they are spending a fortune on hardware they don't understand or need and could save thousands on a better machine if they put the marketing to one side. I find it a fascinating trend myself and marketing guruswill no doubt be studying it still hundreds of years down the line.



***Worryingly it was an i3 but she was convinced she had bought the most expensive Mac available. Ever since I've been haunted by the possibility that she dropped $5,000 on a Mac and they sent her the wrong one and she never knew...


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 10:10:24 pm

[Dominic Deacon] "I was having to use a mac the other day and I enquired of it's dedicated Mac only owner how much free storage it had before I dumped a load of files on it and got the reply "I don't know, I bought the most expensive one""

You would have received the same answer if that person had bought a PC.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 6, 2017 at 12:42:23 am

[Oliver Peters] "You would have received the same answer if that person had bought a PC."

Exactly.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 3:39:26 pm

[Dominic Deacon] "That's more refering to their preference of a desktop over a console. "

My reference was more gaming-centric, but in my overall experience with people (both in real life and on various Mac and PC forums) I can't say I've noticed once demo being inherently more clueless and/or platform loyal than the other.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 6, 2017 at 12:00:53 am

[Andrew Kimery] "[andy patterson] " I don't see loyalty to HP or Dell although there may be a few. Keep in mind there is a difference between real facts and pure personal bias."

While now dated, have you ever heard the phrase, "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM?" Do you remember the Zune Tattoo Guy? There are certainly a lot of Windows/PC loyalists that wouldn't be caught dead with anything made by Apple. Maybe you hang around too many Mac-centric places so you don't notice, but get around a more general cross section of the computing user base (which is still by and large PC users) or go to PC-centric places and you'll certainly run into those that vehemently prefer PCs (or as they are known in gaming circles, The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race ;))."


There is a difference between brand loyalty and a product that is better than another for certain tasks. I don't remember the Zune guy. I know people who buy Dell, Lenovo and HP with no loyalty. There are gaming fans who would never buy an Apple computer but that is because a custom built PC is a much better option for gaming. Even Apple users would admit to that. If a product is better for a certain work flow don't confuse it with brand loyalty. I made response prior to your post that if HP did away with their current line of computers and only offered a 2013 Mac Pro clone they would get backlash as opposed to loyalty. As of now HP makes good products that work for many professional and non professional work flows. Don't confuse brand loyalty with a brand that actually makes a good product.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 3:19:55 am

[Bill Davis] "I understand that there are a few who must live on the edge of performance to get what THEY do done efficiently. And if you're 3d modeling, Or chasing billions of polygons - bless you and I hope you get what you need."

Shouldn't Apple offer the best solution possible?

[Bill Davis] "Where my work used to be mostly for broadcast, today it's mostly for on-line distribution. I work in 4k or lower masters, because I'm typically NOT delivering to motion picture theaters.

I thought this thread was about the Mac Pro not your workflow.

[Bill Davis] "For me, the old "chasing hardware" days are gone.

No time for it. Not when my "off the shelf" gear runs rings around anything I've ever had on my desktop before."


I doubt your laptop will run circles round my system and I also doubt your system can edit native 8K R3D file at full resolution. In another six months from now you may have a client who needs you to edit 8K R3D files. Why trans-code to Pro Res? Wouldn't it be faster and more effective to have a system than can playback the native R3D video files?

You claimed you started using FCPX from day one. That is fine but there are people who needed multi-cam, broadcast monitor support, closed caption and a lot of other things that FCPX lacked. It was not because the GUI was different but because FCPX could not fulfill the needs of many editors when it was first released. Just because your Apple laptop and FCPX work OK for your needs doesn't mean Apple shouldn't make improvements to meet the needs of others.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 11:37:03 am

[andy patterson] "Why trans-code to Pro Res? "

Because most people will have to ultimately deliver in that anyway right?


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 8:28:55 pm

[Tony West] "[andy patterson] "Why trans-code to Pro Res? "

Because most people will have to ultimately deliver in that anyway right?"


Maybe maybe not. Some people use Red Cameras for commercials that will be output to 1920 X 1080i for broadcast. Some may output to Pro Res some may opt for AVCHD Intra or even MJPEG. There is the Cineform Codec as well as H.264. Some people are using the Red Cameras (R3D files) for YouTube videos. Even if you are to output (render) to Pro Res for delivery why trans-code 2-200 hours of video files to Pro Res? I wouldn't do it. Trans-coding would waste time and would also be like skipping a generation in the world of analogue tapes. Some data would be lost from the original. Especially when going from an R3D file or Camera RAW file to Pro Res. Pro Res is a good codec but it is not as good as R3D or camera RAW files. It is easier for FCPX to playback Pro Res so trans-coding makes sense if you have an inept and low powered editing system.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 5:36:02 am

[Tony West] "Because most people will have to ultimately deliver in that anyway right?"

You can transcode to whatever you want if you are doing a proxy edit/ reconnect to camera originals workflow for grading. Once you transcode from a camera RAW codec to ProRes you have baked in colour temp, ISO and gamma. This may limit you in grading so transcoding has potential penalties. If you use Resolve to transcode and do a basic correction from the RAW you may be able to minimise those compromises.

Delivery can be multiple codecs for different viewing environments. ProRes is a bit of a nuisance as many consider it a bit of a standard. Compared to DNx it is far from useful as a standard as it is proprietary and not open to encoding on any platform or NLE.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 1:13:17 pm

[Michael Gissing] "You can transcode to whatever you want if you are doing a proxy edit/ reconnect to camera originals workflow for grading. "

Yeah, that's exactly what I do.

I like that I can edit 6k on my "old inept computer" even though nobody ever hands me 6k footage because it's super overkill for most things.

[Michael Gissing] "ProRes is a bit of a nuisance as many consider it a bit of a standard. "

It's not a nuisance for me. People consider it "a bit of a standard" because they get asked to deliver that so often.
Which was my point. So, I guess we kind of agree?


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 11:10:45 pm

[Tony West] " It's not a nuisance for me. People consider it "a bit of a standard" because they get asked to deliver that so often. Which was my point. So, I guess we kind of agree?"

No its a nuisance because unlike DNx codecs it is proprietary and can't be easily used on all platforms and NLE software. And not everyone wants it as a deliverable. I have noticed recently that broadcasters are asking first for AVC Intra codecs wrapped as .mxf. ProRes is down the list so I guess they are shifting away from Mac hardware and software too which is pertinent to this thread.

So I agree that it became a defacto standard but I am seeing a trend away from ProRes and QT wrapping.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 8:46:04 pm

[Michael Gissing] "No its a nuisance because unlike DNx codecs it is proprietary and can't be easily used on all platforms and NLE software. And not everyone wants it as a deliverable. I have noticed recently that broadcasters are asking first for AVC Intra codecs wrapped as .mxf. ProRes is down the list so I guess they are shifting away from Mac hardware and software too which is pertinent to this thread.

So I agree that it became a defacto standard but I am seeing a trend away from ProRes and QT wrapping."


Seems to me the era of whoever's doing the content delivery having to set the delivery codec is kinda ending.

The rise of the pubic facing CDNs like Vimeo and YouTube already take a variety of input types - then do their own transcoding and create "tiered deliverables" to satisfy the devices that will attach to the streams.

THAT's where this is going, I think.

Even for a high end movie deliverable, if what Michael Cioni referred to as your "digital O-neg" is parsable, and stores adequate resolution and color descriptives, then from that point on, the files - including the metadata described "master" should be able to be transcoded as needed for any target deliverable.

Much easier than making a million producers figure out just WHICH deliverable standard works best for all the downstream folks.

This seems like something that just won't be a very big deal as time goes on.

FWIW.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 8:55:46 pm

[andy patterson] "[Bill Davis] "I understand that there are a few who must live on the edge of performance to get what THEY do done efficiently. And if you're 3d modeling, Or chasing billions of polygons - bless you and I hope you get what you need."

Shouldn't Apple offer the best solution possible?"


Why? Do you understand Apple's business model? Look at what happened to the historical big iron companies of the past, like Cray or SGI. Simply not what Apple does. In fact, they shed themselves of as much of this as possible - XSAN, XSERVE, XSERVE RAID, etc. The margins are just too small and require more of a support structure than Apple wants to invest in.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 2, 2017 at 11:32:03 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Shouldn't Apple offer the best solution possible?"

Why? Do you understand Apple's business model? Look at what happened to the historical big iron companies of the past, like Cray or SGI. Simply not what Apple does. In fact, they shed themselves of as much of this as possible - XSAN, XSERVE, XSERVE RAID, etc. The margins are just too small and require more of a support structure than Apple wants to invest in."


I think it is implied "the best solution" on par with a PC. I am not asking Apple to be like Silicon Graphics or Cray Computers of the 1990s. Apple should offer better solutions for creative people but I know they will not. They still have the iPad running iOS and that is why many creatives have switched from Apple to a MS Surface Pro. The Surface Pro runs Windows 10 64 bit. That is kind of what I meant by "shouldn't Apple offer the best possible solution" as opposed to gimmicks but Apple knows their their loyal customers will drink the Kool-Aid no matter what flavor. I doubt a lot of Apple users know the difference between LGA 1151 and LGA 2011(not that all PC users do). Technology scares many Apple users so they assume the Apple products are the best out of ignorance. For some Apple is more like some kind of crazy tattooed beat rodeo messiah cult than a computer company.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 12:14:50 am

[andy patterson] "Technology scares many Apple users so they assume the Apple products are the best out of ignorance. For some Apple is more like some kind of crazy tattooed beat rodeo messiah cult than a computer company."

Don't you think that's a rather insulting, unfair, mean, and simplistic characterization? It could be equally applied to any Windows user. It pretty much defeats the rest of the argument you were attempting to make.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 2:14:23 am

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Technology scares many Apple users so they assume the Apple products are the best out of ignorance. For some Apple is more like some kind of crazy tattooed beat rodeo messiah cult than a computer company."

Don't you think that's a rather insulting, unfair, mean, and simplistic characterization? It could be equally applied to any Windows user. It pretty much defeats the rest of the argument you were attempting to make."


I stated for some. Some being the keyword. Some Apple users have built hackintoshes and others have ditched the iPad for the Surface Pro. Apple does rely on brand loyalty. There are people that will stick with Apple no matter what. Do you disagree with that? I don't see loyalty to HP or Dell although there may be a few. Keep in mind there is a difference between real facts and pure personal bias.


Return to posts index

Ronny Courtens
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 12:32:45 pm

Some Apple users have built hackintoshes and others have ditched the iPad for the Surface Pro.

And most Apple users haven't done anything like this. I think the vast majority of people using Apple computers are quite happy with what Apple has to offer these days, and I don't see the MacPro as something this vast majority uses or even needs. Not even those of us working in television or film production.

A year ago a friend who works at a large tv production company asked if they could have a few MacPros to try out because they were planning to buy 42 new computers to use with FCP X. They tested them for a few weeks and they decided to buy 42 maxed out iMacs instead because the price difference did not justify the performance gains. And these guys need performant hardware because they produce long-form television programs that often involve heavy 4K multicam projects that they want to edit natively. I spoke again with my friend not so long ago. He told me that since their purchase they have been delivering 200 hours of on-air content with the iMacs without any problems. So it seems to me like Apple's current product line is more than powerful enough to handle even the most demanding editing tasks.

But I do agree that some people who work in specific niches in our business (VFX, 3D, VR etc...) would like to see more CPU and GPU power than the current MacPro can offer. If Apple does come up with an improved MacPro, good for them. If Apple does not produce a more powerful MacPro, I think those people may rightfully decide to switch to another platform. The question is: is this really important? Because I already see quite some companies who happily use Macs for media management, editing and delivery alongside with Linux computers for VFX work or PCs for VR stitching (most stitching applications are Windows-only anyway).

As an example: another friend of mine is currently editing a 10 million Euro drama tv series for Spanish television. The show is cut on FCP X using 4 iMacs, VFX is done in-house with Mistika on a PC, audio is also done in-house running ProTools on an old MacPro, and all systems are happily connected with each other over a 100TB LumaForge Tower. Even if Apple releases a more powerful MacPro today, this won't matter to them at all. So where is the problem? Just use what you think is the most efficient hardware available for the specific work you need to do today, because we all know that tomorrow things may be completely different. At least, that's one thing I learned from being in this business for the past 38 years.

- Ronny


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 6:13:38 pm

[Ronny Courtens] " I think the vast majority of people using Apple computers are quite happy with what Apple has to offer these days, and I don't see the MacPro as something this vast majority uses or even needs. Not even those of us working in television or film production."

My experience echoes Ronny's. I've been in the TV biz since 1971 in college. In that time, I've built, managed, and worked out of facilities at all levels. I have been part and parcel to buying a lot of expensive heavy iron for my employers. The majority of it is barely worth the scrap metal value these days. I stand by my belief that when it comes to buying hardware, software, and easily producing product, today is significantly better - and a far sight cheaper - than yesterday. And that's with largely off-the-shelf commodity equipment. And most of us have Apple to thank for that - at least getting the ball rolling.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 11:36:40 pm

[Ronny Courtens] "And most Apple users haven't done anything like this. I think the vast majority of people using Apple computers are quite happy with what Apple has to offer these days, and I don't see the MacPro as something this vast majority uses or even needs. Not even those of us working in television or film production."

I agree Apple could release a new laptop with an old Pentium 4 and call it The Retro and some people would still buy it.

[Ronny Courtens] "A year ago a friend who works at a large tv production company asked if they could have a few MacPros to try out because they were planning to buy 42 new computers to use with FCP X. They tested them for a few weeks and they decided to buy 42 maxed out iMacs instead because the price difference did not justify the performance gains. And these guys need performant hardware because they produce long-form television programs that often involve heavy 4K multicam projects that they want to edit natively. I spoke again with my friend not so long ago. He told me that since their purchase they have been delivering 200 hours of on-air content with the iMacs without any problems. So it seems to me like Apple's current product line is more than powerful enough to handle even the most demanding editing tasks."

No one stated they could not. Do you want to watch 4K ,6K and 8K at full resolution or draft quality?

[Ronny Courtens] "But I do agree that some people who work in specific niches in our business (VFX, 3D, VR etc...) would like to see more CPU and GPU power than the current MacPro can offer. If Apple does come up with an improved MacPro, good for them. If Apple does not produce a more powerful MacPro, I think those people may rightfully decide to switch to another platform."

That is my point : )

[Ronny Courtens] "The question is: is this really important? Because I already see quite some companies who happily use Macs for media management, editing and delivery alongside with Linux computers for VFX work or PCs for VR stitching (most stitching applications are Windows-only anyway)."

For some a laptop will work.

[Ronny Courtens] "As an example: another friend of mine is currently editing a 10 million Euro drama tv series for Spanish television. The show is cut on FCP X using 4 iMacs, VFX is done in-house with Mistika on a PC, audio is also done in-house running ProTools on an old MacPro, and all systems are happily connected with each other over a 100TB LumaForge Tower. Even if Apple releases a more powerful MacPro today, this won't matter to them at all. So where is the problem?"

Where is the problem? I thought you already answered your own Question. As you stated everyone has different needs. For them it is not a problem nor did I ever state or imply everyone is edit 8k R3D video files. I stated Apple should have more options. Having said that I know they will not offer them.

[Ronny Courtens] "Just use what you think is the most efficient hardware available for the specific work you need to do today, because we all know that tomorrow things may be completely different. At least, that's one thing I learned from being in this business for the past 38 years."

I agree but it would not hurt any Apple user to have the option of dual CPUs and Nvidia and AMD/ATI. That is my point. I am not saying the Apple computers do not work I am saying there should be more options.


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 5, 2017 at 4:12:56 pm

[Ronny Courtens] " I don't see the MacPro as something this vast majority uses or even needs. Not even those of us working in television or film production....a friend who works at a large tv production company...decided to buy 42 maxed out iMacs instead because the price difference did not justify the performance gains. And these guys need performant hardware because they produce long-form television programs that often involve heavy 4K multicam projects that they want to edit natively...."

Is their "native" 4k content H264 or ProRes? In general a top-spec iMac 27 does well on ProRes and lots of content producers use ProRes acquisition. It also does well on 4k H264 with proxy, but you must generate the proxies. We became accustomed to fast camera-native editing on H264 1080p, but that doesn't work so well at 4k -- even using FCPX on the fastest possible iMac. It is borderline usable for limited single camera editing, and it's much faster than Premiere on the same hardware, but it's not remotely fast enough for multicam without proxy. That would be expecting too much.

From one standpoint this is sort of a niche within a niche -- 4k H264 acquisition, native editing, no proxy. However 4k is everywhere now, regardless of final distribution resolution. H264 acquisition is very common and nobody who's gotten used to native editing wants to go back to transcoding. For this scenario either a well-equipped Mac Pro or an improved iMac 27 would help a lot. Fortunately it appears Apple is working on both of these, based on the recent announcements.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 6:02:43 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "While now dated, have you ever heard the phrase, "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM?" Do you remember the Zune Tattoo Guy? There are certainly a lot of Windows/PC loyalists that wouldn't be caught dead with anything made by Apple. "

Having done Microsoft videos, as well as others for various software vendors, I can certainly attest to the fact that each has just as loyal of a set of core users as does Apple. That doesn't make any of them wrong. Same reason so many film editors are content to stay with Avid.

But, a prime example is my son. He's a musician and up until a few years ago a committed Windows/PC user who was more that happy to trash-talk Macs. As a guitarist, he's more than familiar with musicians' gear loyalty - Fender vs. Gibson, and so on. Yet, a couple of years ago, he decided to shift to a 2013 Mac Pro, Apogee, and Logic Pro X and hasn't looked back since. He's now more than willing to admit he's had to eat most of his words.

[andy patterson] "Some Apple users have built hackintoshes and others have ditched the iPad for the Surface Pro. Apple does rely on brand loyalty. There are people that will stick with Apple no matter what."

Andy, as far as the iPad/Surface comparison, you must be seeing a small sliver of the market. Surface is a cool product and so is the larger desktop model. Yet, the only creatives I know who are using them are those that were given them by their company to use. Most Surface users I see are using it as a smaller laptop. Apple rightly or wrongly has decided to target the iPad as first and foremost a consumption device and not a reduction of the laptop, yet with enough power and features to support other needs. When I travel, unless I need my MBP for editing on-site, I only travel with the iPad and sometimes an external keyboard. It fits my needs just fine. Whether or not Apple will evolve the pro into a different type of product is something we'll see in the future.

In my original reply, I commented on SGI and Cray, not because these were high-end machines, but because they were high-end machines that the market could no longer support. In the end, Apple is there to make money. Investing in the R&D for a super-duper machine that attracts .01 % of the market simply isn't good business and doesn't serve the larger set of users.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 3, 2017 at 11:51:50 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Andy, as far as the iPad/Surface comparison, you must be seeing a small sliver of the market. Surface is a cool product and so is the larger desktop model. Yet, the only creatives I know who are using them are those that were given them by their company to use. Most Surface users I see are using it as a smaller laptop."

You can find Youtube video where Apple users state the iPad runs iOS but the Surface Pro runs Windows 10 64 bit. The Surface Pro allows people to draw on the Surface Pro with the Adobe programs. The Surface Studio brings it to a whole new level of interaction. By not making OS X touch screen compatible Apple is losing out.


[Oliver Peters] "Apple rightly or wrongly has decided to target the iPad as first and foremost a consumption device and not a reduction of the laptop, yet with enough power and features to support other needs."

That is the problem. Without an i7 and OS X the iPad cannot meet the needs of many creative professionals.

[Oliver Peters] "When I travel, unless I need my MBP for editing on-site, I only travel with the iPad and sometimes an external keyboard. It fits my needs just fine."

With the Surface Pro you only need one device. You are actually proving my point.

[Oliver Peters] " Whether or not Apple will evolve the pro into a different type of product is something we'll see in the future."

Why would a PC user switch to an inferior product?

[Oliver Peters] "In my original reply, I commented on SGI and Cray, not because these were high-end machines, but because they were high-end machines that the market could no longer support. In the end, Apple is there to make money. Investing in the R&D for a super-duper machine that attracts .01 % of the market simply isn't good business and doesn't serve the larger set of users."

I want everyone to know I am fully aware that Apple makes money in the consumer market. That is what allows me to make my criticisms. Apple is not about making the best product for the consumer. They want to make products that make the most profits. Most Generic ATX computers have a 5%-10% profit margin. It would be good for the consumer for Apple to offer them but bad for Apple's profit margins. I know the game well.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 12:07:20 am

[andy patterson] "By not making OS X touch screen compatible Apple is losing out. "

I'm not sure the numbers bear that out. Yes, iPad sales aren't increasing, but they still beat other tablets.

[andy patterson] "Without an i7 and OS X the iPad cannot meet the needs of many creative professionals."

I don't see many creatives clamoring to use a tablet as their main computer. So it's really a non-issue.

[andy patterson] "With the Surface Pro you only need one device."

Baloney. You're the guy arguing for a hot-rodded machine to do RED Raw at 8K natively in real-time. Not exactly in the Surface's wheelhouse. So a single machine doesn't actually serve all the needs.

[andy patterson] "You are actually proving my point. "

How do you figure that? I use the iPad when traveling in the case that I didn't need to edit on-site. It's a purpose-designed device and I use it accordingly.

[andy patterson] "Why would a PC user switch to an inferior product? "

Again, we're talking about iPads. So it just seems like you don't understand its market.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 2:53:19 am

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "By not making OS X touch screen compatible Apple is losing out. "

I'm not sure the numbers bear that out. Yes, iPad sales aren't increasing, but they still beat other tablets."


People are becoming hip to what the Surface Pro has to offer. Especially the Surface Studio. The Surface Studio will drop in price and get even better.

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Without an i7 and OS X the iPad cannot meet the needs of many creative professionals."

I don't see many creatives clamoring to use a tablet as their main computer. So it's really a non-issue."


I think you are kind of stuck on video editors. People that use Photoshop and Illustrator user the Surface Pro to draw on. The Surface Studio is even better. I remember when the iPad launched and they showed people using the iPad as a sketch pad. Many people do the same thing with the Surface Pro. That is why MS made the Surface Studio to make the interaction even better.

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "With the Surface Pro you only need one device."

Baloney. You're the guy arguing for a hot-rodded machine to do RED Raw at 8K natively in real-time. Not exactly in the Surface's wheelhouse. So a single machine doesn't actually serve all the needs."


You had stated at times you had to chose between your iPad and Macbook. You left that part out of the quote. With the Surface Pro you have one device that can work as a laptop or a tablet. No need to but two products. You can edit 4K using the Surface Pro. You will not see it playback at full resolution. That is why having a beefy system is still needed by a select few. Keep in mind I stated for many people a laptop will work OK. You forgot to mention that. It should not be hard to comprehend that everyone will have different editing needs and Apple should offer solutions to meet those needs. I stand by that statement but I never stated everyone needs to edit 8K R3D files. Try to comprehend what I am actually saying instead of what you think I am saying.

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "You are actually proving my point. "


How do you figure that? I use the iPad when traveling in the case that I didn't need to edit on-site. It's a purpose-designed device and I use it accordingly."


Once again you left out the part about choosing between the iPad and Macbook. With the Surface Studio you only need one device. You can use it as a tablet if you use the Metro GUI or you can use it a laptop if you have a keyboard connected. The iPad cannot function in two different modes and does not support a desktop OS. You do realize the Surface Pro uses Windows 10 64 bit don't you?


[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Why would a PC user switch to an inferior product? "

Again, we're talking about iPads. So it just seems like you don't understand its market."


There is not a market for the iPad anymore other than loyal Apple customers buying it. As I stated people do use the Surface Studio as a sketch pad for Illustrator. Why would the creative professionals that use Adobe's CC opt for an iPad over the Surface Pro? Illustrator does not work on the iPad. Let me put it to you like this. What if the Surface Pro used a 32 bit Cellphone CPU from 3 years ago and also ran a 32 bit OS. Then you might have to say I use my Dell laptop for some things and my Surface Pro for other things. Don't get me wrong. In another two years Apple will either have iOS on all their devices or OS X on all their devices. Some Apple users talk about the great integration between iOS and OS X. Why bother? On the Windows side there is simply one OS that does it all. Does it kind of make sense now?

I know of several Apple users who still have an iMac but opted for the Surface Studio over the iPad Pro. Even Leo Laporte who once was a big Apple loyalist loved the Surface Studio and even stated there is no need to opt for an iPad over the MS Surface Pro. Many people have criticized Apple about the iPad still using a mobile OS. Leo even said Windows 10 is awesome. Many people think MS is doing a better job at giving graphic designers a more useful product than Apple. If you don't want to believe me you don't have to. I am just telling you like it is. Having said that please explain to me why an Apple iPad Pro would be a better option than a MS Surface Pro?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 2:53:22 pm

[andy patterson] "People are becoming hip to what the Surface Pro has to offer. Especially the Surface Studio"

The Surface Pro and Studio have completely different objectives. Just because they have touch in common doesn't mean they are simple variations of the same product.

[andy patterson] "I think you are kind of stuck on video editors."

Not at all. I actually see very few folks with iPads or Surfaces. The ones with Surfaces (which also includes my daughter) are largely using them as a lighter laptop. Professionally these include ad agency creatives. Sure, drawing may be part of it, but not for much other than doodling on glass instead of paper.

[andy patterson] "You had stated at times you had to chose between your iPad and Macbook. You left that part out of the quote. With the Surface Pro you have one device that can work as a laptop or a tablet. No need to but two products. "

That's because it's irrelevant. I want two different products because they service different purposes. The iPad is light to travel with (lighter and less cumbersome than the Surface) and does what I need. If I need to edit, then I bring the laptop. The alternative option for me might have been the small MacBook, but then that would be more challenged for editing.

[andy patterson] " You can edit 4K using the Surface Pro. You will not see it playback at full resolution. That is why having a beefy system is still needed by a select few"

I can edit 4K on my MacBook Pro AND see it at full resolution. Plus I can connect USB3 and Tbolt external drives.

[andy patterson] "You can use it as a tablet if you use the Metro GUI or you can use it a laptop if you have a keyboard connected. The iPad cannot function in two different modes and does not support a desktop OS. You do realize the Surface Pro uses Windows 10 64 bit don't you? "

I personally hate the Metro GUI and yes, I know it can run W10. In general, I'm not enamored with a touch GUI to start with, but it's functional on the iPad. Sony's Catalyst products and changes made to Premiere Pro to address touch interfaces in order to provide cross-platform support, have made parts of those interfaces worse when using these apps on standard high-resolution desktop and laptop screens. The UI design is needlessly "horsey" as a result. This is part of the justification for a macOS/iOS separation and I think Apple has been quite successful with it.

[andy patterson] "If you don't want to believe me you don't have to. I am just telling you like it is. Having said that please explain to me why an Apple iPad Pro would be a better option than a MS Surface Pro?"

It's not a question of belief. Show me the numbers. As I've said all along, these two products are aimed at different objectives, which is something you aren't willing to accept. Whether or not you or I might want Apple to produce a different product is not important. Apple is going to produce the best product for the market that it is trying to address - or in some cases - create. They'll make the necessary changes based on feedback and sales criteria. So far I'm not seeing that here.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 9:18:53 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "People are becoming hip to what the Surface Pro has to offer. Especially the Surface Studio"

The Surface Pro and Studio have completely different objectives. Just because they have touch in common doesn't mean they are simple variations of the same product."


I never stated they are the same thing. You should be able to look at the bigger picture without my guidance. Many iMac users have stated the Surface Studio is way better than their iMac when using Adobe's CC. Once the price of the Surface Studio drops you may have iMac users opting for the Surface Studio instead of an iMac like some have opted for the Surface Pro over the iPad. Does it make sense now?


[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "I think you are kind of stuck on video editors."

Not at all. I actually see very few folks with iPads or Surfaces. The ones with Surfaces (which also includes my daughter) are largely using them as a lighter laptop. Professionally these include ad agency creatives. Sure, drawing may be part of it, but not for much other than doodling on glass instead of paper."


Don't include your daughter. As I have stated some Apple users have opted for the Surface Pro because it runs the Adobe CC. The iPad cannot. With the Surface Studio MS has offered a better solution for Adobe's CC users than Apple's iMac. As I stated earlier some iMac users (not all) that have Adobe's CC have stated once the price drops on the Surface Studio they will get one. I am not a fan of all in one computers like the iMac but the interaction of Surface Studio with the Surface Dial even got my attention.


[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "You had stated at times you had to chose between your iPad and Macbook. You left that part out of the quote. With the Surface Pro you have one device that can work as a laptop or a tablet. No need to but two products. "

That's because it's irrelevant. I want two different products because they service different purposes. The iPad is light to travel with (lighter and less cumbersome than the Surface) and does what I need. If I need to edit, then I bring the laptop. The alternative option for me might have been the small MacBook, but then that would be more challenged for editing."


If the iPad had OS X with touch screen support and an i7 you would not need two device. Do people bring a touch screen Dell Laptop and a Surface Pro both? Do you finally see my point? I don't doubt in a few years Apple will have all their products use either iOS (total revamp) or OS X (total revamp) but not both.


[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] " You can edit 4K using the Surface Pro. You will not see it playback at full resolution. That is why having a beefy system is still needed by a select few"

I can edit 4K on my MacBook Pro AND see it at full resolution. Plus I can connect USB3 and Tbolt external drives."


So can the Surface Pro if you opt for MJPEG. Are you editing Camera RAW 4K files or R3D files at full 4K? If so are you connect to a 4K monitor. If not you might as well watch 4K at draft quality as opposed to full resolution.


[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "You can use it as a tablet if you use the Metro GUI or you can use it a laptop if you have a keyboard connected. The iPad cannot function in two different modes and does not support a desktop OS. You do realize the Surface Pro uses Windows 10 64 bit don't you? "

I personally hate the Metro GUI and yes, I know it can run W10. In general, I'm not enamored with a touch GUI to start with, but it's functional on the iPad. Sony's Catalyst products and changes made to Premiere Pro to address touch interfaces in order to provide cross-platform support, have made parts of those interfaces worse when using these apps on standard high-resolution desktop and laptop screens. The UI design is needlessly "horsey" as a result. This is part of the justification for a macOS/iOS separation and I think Apple has been quite successful with it."


The fact that you hate the Metro GUI is of no importance. As I have stated the Surface Pro can run the Adobe CC software the iPad cannot. Sony's Catalyst is a none issue for an iPad user opting for the Surface Pro. Some parts of the GUI for audio and video can be useful when used with a thouch screen but not all parts are.

[Oliver Peters] "The UI design is needlessly "horsey" as a result. This is part of the justification for a macOS/iOS separation and I think Apple has been quite successful with it."

You don't have to use the Metro Mode on a MS 10 desktop, laptop or tablet. You can use the Metro GUI for certain programs and the Desktop GUI for other programs. What you don't have to do is buy two devices (iPad iMac). How is the iPad not being capable of running Illustrator a success? As I stated many CC users are finding the iPad Pro very limited for their needs because it uses iOS. As I have stated you can use all Windows 10 tablets like a tablet or a laptop/desktop by simply adding a keyboard. I can run Premiere Pro on the Surface Pro in Desktop mode. No need for a laptop and tablet both. See my point? Keep in mind IPads and Macbooks are not inexpensive. How is buying two devices and spending more money successful?

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "If you don't want to believe me you don't have to. I am just telling you like it is. Having said that please explain to me why an Apple iPad Pro would be a better option than a MS Surface Pro?"

It's not a question of belief. Show me the numbers.


I don't have numbers. I told you what Leo Leporte (Apple Loyalist) had stated. You can find Youtube videos of Apple users opting for the Surface Pro over the iPad and even stating the Surface Studio is better than their iMac for thier needs. I have friends that love Apple but admit the iOS/OS X paradigm is not a slick as the Windows 10 Metro Mode and Desktop Mode GUI paradigm.

[Oliver Peters] "As I've said all along, these two products are aimed at different objectives, which is something you aren't willing to accept."

I am willing to accept there are Apple loyalist that will use Apple products even if they are inferior. I am not saying the iPad will not work OK for some people's needs. What I am saying time and time again is that Apple is loosing customers because of the MS Surface Studio and Surface Pro. That is something you are not willing to admit. I don't doubt after the launch of the Surface Studio Apple wishes OS X had touch screen support.

[Oliver Peters] " Whether or not you or I might want Apple to produce a different product is not important. Apple is going to produce the best product for the market that it is trying to address - or in some cases - create."

I agree. Apple does what is best for Apple. That is what allows me to make my honest criticisms.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 3:08:02 pm

[andy patterson] "I know of several Apple users who still have an iMac but opted for the Surface Studio over the iPad Pro. Even Leo Laporte who once was a big Apple loyalist loved the Surface Studio and even stated there is no need to opt for an iPad over the MS Surface Pro. Many people have criticized Apple about the iPad still using a mobile OS. Leo even said Windows 10 is awesome. Many people think MS is doing a better job at giving graphic designers a more useful product than Apple. If you don't want to believe me you don't have to. I am just telling you like it is. Having said that please explain to me why an Apple iPad Pro would be a better option than a MS Surface Pro?"

I carry both a Surface Pro 3 and an iPad Air 2 -- and I got the iPad after I got the SP3. I used my Surface as a tablet for a while, but it's pretty chunky and heavy in comparison with an iPad. As Oliver mentions, the Surface is a fantastic small laptop, but I certainly understand why people would prefer the iPad form factor.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 4:14:36 pm

[Walter Soyka] "As Oliver mentions, the Surface is a fantastic small laptop, but I certainly understand why people would prefer the iPad form factor."

Yeah, I find my ipad pro to finally be what I had always wanted in a work tablet, largely because its about the size and feel of a pad of paper. Paired with the pen and Microsoft's OneNote, it works really well for me. OneNote is actually a pretty amazing piece of software.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 4:19:22 pm

[Chris Harlan] "OneNote is actually a pretty amazing piece of software."

Can you go into a bit more detail? I'm thinking about switching to OneNote from Evernote. I like Evernote's features, they have made some policy changes that I don't like so I'm thinking of migrating to OneNote.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 4:45:09 pm

Sure! Or at least I can tell you what I like about it. First, I'm old school and like to take meeting notes with a pen, which onenote makes easy. It doesn't translate them, but I'm not looking for that. It syncs those notes with the copy of onenote on my desktop. It clips and stores various objects quite well--images, files, spreadsheets, etc. Its got a browser plugin that lets me pluck any site and insert the content into my notes, either as a link or as a pasted version of the actual html. It also stores any kind of standard document file and allows you to open them in preview or the original program.

One of the best things, from my POV, is it allows pen and print to overlap. I use this all the time. I open a script and can use the pencil as either a multicolored highlighter or a pen to notate my work just like I used to on paper. So, quickly reviewing a script, I might mark out all sound cues with blue highlighter, all VO with green, specific tc call outs with yellow, etc. Then, as I work, I can use a pen to check off things I've done. Its great to work with notes this way too. And all of this will be backed up in cloud and on my desktop for further editing or reference.

There's more, of course. But that's how I use it. Its the easy mingling of pen and type, plus the fluidity of the notebook-like hierarchical organization that makes it work for me. Its very freeform, but very organized. And, with the ipad pro, its very responsive.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 5, 2017 at 2:41:25 pm

Cool, thanks for the info, Chris. How well does writing on the iPad Pro work?


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 6, 2017 at 12:41:11 am

With the "Pencil" and right applications, real well. My scrawl doesn't make for good character recognition, but I'm not looking for that, and, I am surprised at what some programs CAN do with it, though OneNote doesn't support it. Also, dictation is good too. The Pro's relatively fast processing chip works well with it.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 9:41:51 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I carry both a Surface Pro 3 and an iPad Air 2 -- and I got the iPad after I got the SP3. I used my Surface as a tablet for a while, but it's pretty chunky and heavy in comparison with an iPad. As Oliver mentions, the Surface is a fantastic small laptop, but I certainly understand why people would prefer the iPad form factor."

I never stated an iPad will not work for some people. I have always stated for those iPad users who use Adobe's Creative Cloud some have opted for the Surface Pro. Please address what I am saying (no strawmen please). Many iPad users have also bought the Surface Pro. If the iPad Pro ran all the CC products the Apple users I am talking about would never have bought the Surface Pro. Why would they? Apple is giving MS money by not meeting their customers needs. Also some iMac users have stated once the price of the Surface Studio drops they will replace their iMac with a Surface Studio. That is my main point. I am not saying the iPad will not work for a college student writing term papers and surfing the internet nor have I ever suggested that. Let me put it to you like this. Do you think people with the MS Surface Studio are thinking "next year I am going to get an iMac"? Do you see my point?

For some people the iPad Pro will work OK. If you want a tablet that can run the Adobe CC software in desktop mode by simply connecting a keyboard the iPad may not be a good choice. Would you agree with that?


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 5, 2017 at 5:10:15 pm

Andy, I agree with you that Microsoft is offering some really compelling products for creatives. That's why I use them. That said, I'm one of only a handful of Surface users in what seems like an ocean of iPads and MacBook Pros in the New York design market.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 8:10:37 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "By not making OS X touch screen compatible Apple is losing out. "

I'm not sure the numbers bear that out. Yes, iPad sales aren't increasing, but they still beat other tablets."


People are becoming hip to what the Surface Pro has to offer. Especially the Surface Studio. The Surface Studio will drop in price and get even better.

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Without an i7 and OS X the iPad cannot meet the needs of many creative professionals."

I don't see many creatives clamoring to use a tablet as their main computer. So it's really a non-issue."


I think you are kind of stuck on video editors. People that use Photoshop and Illustrator user the Surface Pro to draw on. The Surface Studio is even better. I remember when the iPad launched and they showed people using the iPad as a sketch pad. Many people do the same thing with the Surface Pro. That is why MS made the Surface Studio to make the interaction even better.

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "With the Surface Pro you only need one device."

Baloney. You're the guy arguing for a hot-rodded machine to do RED Raw at 8K natively in real-time. Not exactly in the Surface's wheelhouse. So a single machine doesn't actually serve all the needs."


You had stated at times you had to chose between your iPad and Macbook. You left that part out of the quote. With the Surface Pro you have one device that can work as a laptop or a tablet. No need to buy two products. You can edit 4K using the Surface Pro. You will not see it playback at full resolution. That is why having a beefy system is still needed by a select few. Keep in mind I stated for many people a laptop will work OK. You forgot to mention that. It should not be hard to comprehend that everyone will have different editing needs and Apple should offer solutions to meet those needs. I stand by that statement but I never stated everyone needs to edit 8K R3D files. Try to comprehend what I am actually saying instead of what you think I am saying.

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "You are actually proving my point. "


How do you figure that? I use the iPad when traveling in the case that I didn't need to edit on-site. It's a purpose-designed device and I use it accordingly."


Once again you left out the part about choosing between the iPad and Macbook. With the Surface Studio you only need one device. You can use it as a tablet if you use the Metro GUI or you can use it a laptop if you have a keyboard connected. The iPad cannot function in two different modes and does not support a desktop OS. You do realize the Surface Pro uses Windows 10 64 bit don't you?


[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Why would a PC user switch to an inferior product? "

Again, we're talking about iPads. So it just seems like you don't understand its market."


There is not a market for the iPad anymore other than loyal Apple customers buying it. As I stated people do use the Surface Studio as a sketch pad for Illustrator. Why would the creative professionals that use Adobe's CC opt for an iPad over the Surface Pro? Illustrator does not work on the iPad. Let me put it to you like this. What if the Surface Pro used a 32 bit Cellphone CPU from 3 years ago and also ran a 32 bit OS. Then you might have to say I use my Dell laptop for some things and my Surface Pro for other things. Don't get me wrong. In another two years Apple will either have iOS on all their devices or OS X on all their devices. Some Apple users talk about the great integration between iOS and OS X. Why bother? On the Windows side there is simply one OS that does it all. Does it kind of make sense now?

I know of several Apple users who still have an iMac but opted for the Surface Studio over the iPad Pro. Even Leo Laporte who once was a big Apple loyalist loved the Surface Studio and even stated there is no need to opt for an iPad over the MS Surface Pro. Many people have criticized Apple about the iPad still using a mobile OS. Leo even said Windows 10 is awesome. Many people think MS is doing a better job at giving graphic designers a more useful product than Apple. If you don't want to believe me you don't have to. I am just telling you like it is. Having said that please explain to me why an Apple iPad Pro would be a better option than a MS Surface Pro? Keep in mind the iPad/iOS incorporated things from the Windows Metro GUI.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 2:59:43 pm

[andy patterson] " I doubt a lot of Apple users know the difference between LGA 1151 and LGA 2011(not that all PC users do)."

I'm one of the biggest PC proponents on this forum, and I don't know the difference between an LGA 1151 and LGA 2011. In fact, it's been one of my contentions for almost 6 years now that you can buy a well-integrated PC from a reliable vendor, just as you'd buy a Mac Pro from Apple. You can have access to more options (some of which outperform Apple hardware at significantly greater expense), you can have access to great support (on-site repair beats a trip the mall in my book), and you never have to even think about things like "LGA whatever."

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 4:54:38 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I don't know the difference between an LGA 1151 and LGA 2011."

I believe its 860.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 9:48:06 pm

[Chris Harlan] "[Walter Soyka] "I don't know the difference between an LGA 1151 and LGA 2011."

I believe its 860."


Funny : )


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 9:47:09 pm

[Walter Soyka] "[andy patterson] " I doubt a lot of Apple users know the difference between LGA 1151 and LGA 2011(not that all PC users do)."

I'm one of the biggest PC proponents on this forum, and I don't know the difference between an LGA 1151 and LGA 2011. In fact, it's been one of my contentions for almost 6 years now that you can buy a well-integrated PC from a reliable vendor, just as you'd buy a Mac Pro from Apple. You can have access to more options (some of which outperform Apple hardware at significantly greater expense), you can have access to great support (on-site repair beats a trip the mall in my book), and you never have to even think about things like "LGA whatever.""


That proves my point. What I am saying is some people will buy Apple because of brand loyalty. Even though there might be a better options. You don't really see Dell brand loyalty do you?


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 5, 2017 at 5:29:25 pm

[andy patterson] "That proves my point. What I am saying is some people will buy Apple because of brand loyalty. Even though there might be a better options. You don't really see Dell brand loyalty do you?"

I see significant HP brand loyalty in production, and I have a good amount of it myself. I guess it depends where you look.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 5, 2017 at 6:38:37 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I see significant HP brand loyalty in production, and I have a good amount of it myself. I guess it depends where you look."

Yes, in the world of people who use PCs -- AND THERE ARE A LOT OF THEM -- there's a lot of brand loyalty to HP.

Dell not yet, but I can see it happening. The big issue is that their original raison d'etre was being cheap, not necessarily good or fast at all. It's only been a few years that there's been a move toward quality. My XPS 15 laptop is my favorite computer I've ever owned. I'll put it up against ANY Mac laptop, and I've owned a couple dozen of them, in at least one of every form factor up until the last 2, going all the way back to THIS thing in 1987, the Apple-licensed Walkmac:




I prefer everything about the Dell XPS 15 to every Mac laptop I've owned -- the speed, the rubberized deck, its solidity, the keyboard, and, yes, the gorgeous 4K touchscreen. It's absolutely hilarious to me to sit around with my all-Apple family, we're all just goofing around and talking while we're checking email (a very tech-y family at that, including a couple who worked in upper-level exec positions at Apple) and watch them start touching their own computer screens and being surprised and frustrated when nothing happens.

So, I vastly prefer it to any of couple dozen Mac laptops I've owned, but do I have brand loyalty to Dell yet? Not really, because I remember all the years that they were exploiting Moore's Law and just-in-time component sourcing to intentionally build computers that were only worth keeping around for a few months, if they actually lasted that long....which was by no means a given.

Nowadays, a different story, but I bought mine based on my wife's experience with HER XPS 15 from the year before, so this is where I'll start the search for my next one when the time comes....but to our communal observation here, mine's 2 years old, and still bouncing off the walls like a little puppy. It already has T3 of course (common on the Win side long before Mac of course), so I don't foresee shopping for a new computer for quite a while.

And Walter, to your earlier observation about iDevices and MacBooks in the NY design community -- I'll add my own observation as a developer for both Mac-only and multiplatform companies is that there's no more iDevoted people on earth. Much moreso than Hollywood, which has a reputation as a Mac-centric town that simply isn't warranted. TONS of Windows in Hollywood, especially in VFX, finishing, and animation, and far more than you'd think in creative editorial, too. NY design, otoh is still the Big Apple. 😎


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 5, 2017 at 11:01:17 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I see significant HP brand loyalty in production, and I have a good amount of it myself. I guess it depends where you look."

With HP I don't think it is brand loyalty as much as they are trying to market their products for professionals and offer good products. If HP did away with PCIe slots and ATX style work stations and only offered a 2013 Mac Pro clone I think you would agree many folks would jump ship to Dell. There is a difference between brand loyalty and a company having a good product for your workflow. If HP hypothetical did as I suggested am sure you would agree HP would get backlash beyond belief. Apple did get some backlash with the 2013 Mac Pro but many Apple users thought since it is Apple it has got to be good. I was not impressed myself. A workstation should offer the option for dual CPUs and PCIe expansion slots in my opinion. There are some Apple users who went Hackintosh because of the 2013 Mac Pro. I don't blame them.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 5, 2017 at 11:36:02 pm

[andy patterson] "If HP hypothetical did as I suggested am sure you would agree HP would get backlash beyond belief. Apple did get some backlash with the 2013 Mac Pro but many Apple users thought since it is Apple it has got to be good. I"

Moving from HP to Dell is a seamless move for the user though. Switching from Mac to PC (or PC to Mac) is much more of a hassle. If Dell or HP could make Apple clones I guarantee that they would've picked up a lot of business after Apple released the nMP. Scratch that, they would've picked up a lot of business around 2011-2012 when people were grumbling about the lack of updates to the cMP.

I'd say a lot of people moved away from the nMP (either staying with the cMP, buying an iMac, building a Hack or switching to Windows) because the fallout was enough to get Apple to publicly state they goofed and that they are working on a more flexible, upgradeable MP. How often has Apple done that?

Considering the hassle of switching platforms I think a more apt comparison is platform loyalty, not brand loyalty.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 6, 2017 at 1:33:12 am

[Andrew Kimery] "
Considering the hassle of switching platforms I think a more apt comparison is platform loyalty, not brand loyalty."


I think we may agree more than disagree. With Apple they control the hardware and OS. Keep in mind the Windows OS works just fine. PC users have several options. Brand loyalty to me is when you buy a product from a company based on bias rather than what it has to offer compared to the competition. I don't doubt if Apple did make a generic ATX computer system with a GTX 1080 Ti and 8 core CPU for $2200.00 it would out sell the 2013 Mac Pro. Not everyone needs that type of computer power but for those that do having options would be nice. If OS X was an option fromDell and HP computers then Apple users would have all the options they would need. I admit the iMac will work just fine for many users but Apple ignores that small 5%. The rest will stay loyal.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 6, 2017 at 2:41:08 pm

[andy patterson] "I think we may agree more than disagree. "

I think so too.


-Andrew


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 6, 2017 at 2:25:04 pm

[andy patterson] "With HP I don't think it is brand loyalty as much as they are trying to market their products for professionals and offer good products. If HP did away with PCIe slots and ATX style work stations and only offered a 2013 Mac Pro clone I think you would agree many folks would jump ship to Dell. There is a difference between brand loyalty and a company having a good product for your workflow. If HP hypothetical did as I suggested am sure you would agree HP would get backlash beyond belief. Apple did get some backlash with the 2013 Mac Pro but many Apple users thought since it is Apple it has got to be good."

Putting on my mad strategist hat, I'd define brand loyalty as a preference for buying from a particular brand, irrespective of specific actions of the competition or the category in general. Brand loyalty means I buy Coke, no matter what Pepsi does. It doesn't necessarily mean I buy New Coke.

That's not the same as buying from a particular brand, no matter what that brand itself does. We're off into semantics now, but I'd call what you're describing -- buying consistently from a particular brand, no matter what they do -- "brand fanaticism."

Pulling this somewhat back on-topic (ha!), HP's Z-series workstation brand promises something along the lines of "industrial-strength." It would have been a major betrayal of their brand values to drop the Z-series and clone the trashcan.

Apple's brand promises very different things than HP's: innovation and aesthetics. The 2013 nMP was perfectly consistent those promises. Apple buyers may not be acting against their interest as you describe; they may well be continuing to pursue the same values that attracted them to Apple in the first place.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 7:30:30 pm

No, I think this is why:

http://www.videoguys.com/blog/apple-plans-release-late-fall-osx-licensed-sy...


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 7:40:49 pm

And that post's date would be ...



- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 1, 2017 at 7:43:08 pm

Spoilsport!


Return to posts index

Tangier Clarke
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 4, 2017 at 6:44:29 pm
Last Edited By Tangier Clarke on Apr 4, 2017 at 6:49:19 pm

Well now that we know [today] the Mac Pro is being rethought/redesigned for a potential 2018 release, shall we consider this Mac Pro in the esteem of the Mac Cube? I still love the current Mac Pro by the way, but good for Apple for realizing it must pivot in a different direction.

Good read:

http://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 6, 2017 at 4:20:04 pm

This seems relevant to the topic at hand, "Microsoft Surface Beats iPad in Design, Productivity, and Accessory Use in New J.D. Power Study".
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/microsoft-surface-beats-ipad-j-d-power...


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 6, 2017 at 8:32:12 pm

And on another related note, Nvidia announced that drivers for their new 'pascal' line of GPUs are available for 10.11 and 10.12 which means all those creaky cMPs out there can keep on keepin' on!

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/nvidia-titan-xp-gpu-mac-support/


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 7, 2017 at 1:24:16 am

[Andrew Kimery] "This seems relevant to the topic at hand, "Microsoft Surface Beats iPad in Design, Productivity, and Accessory Use in New J.D. Power Study".
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/microsoft-surface-beats-ipad-j-d-power....."


Some of those customers giving the good reviews are ex-iPad users. Even the ex-iPad users have stated it is great that Windows 10 OS can work in tablet mode or desktop mode. The iPad cannot work in OS X mode.

Not all but some Apple users feel as though Apple is stuck in a rut. Keep in mind OS X is still using a Windows 95 paradigm in a world of mobile devices and touch screens. For the record Windows XP and even Windows 7 use a Windows 95 paradigm as well but Windows 8 changed everything. The are iMac users that realize Adobe's CC works just fine on Windows 10. The Surface Studio adds icing on the cake that the iMac cannot. Apple needs to start bringing it's A Game moving forward. Not offering touch screen support for OS X in the year 2017 is not wise unless iOS will be Apples flagship OS for the desktop environment moving forward. Perhaps it will.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 7, 2017 at 1:29:00 am

[andy patterson] "Keep in mind OS X is still using a Windows 95 paradigm in a world of mobile devices and touch screens. For the record Windows XP and even Windows 7 use a Windows 95 paradigm as well but Windows 8 changed everything."

Care to clarify what you mean by that?

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 7, 2017 at 2:15:47 am

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Keep in mind OS X is still using a Windows 95 paradigm in a world of mobile devices and touch screens. For the record Windows XP and even Windows 7 use a Windows 95 paradigm as well but Windows 8 changed everything."

Care to clarify what you mean by that?"


I thought it was obvious but I guess not. Windows 3.0 and the Mac OS 6 looked similar. One could say they had a similar paradigm. Windows 95 launched and introduced the Taskbar. Apple opted to leave the menubar and ad the Dock to keep up with the taskbar. That paradigm is still used by Apple today. It is a good paradigm for desktop computers with a keyboard and mouse. For small10" tablets it does not work that well. Apple has decide to keep OS X a Windows 95 type OS and allow iOS to operate on mobile touch screen devices. Microsoft was not going to make two operating system. MS designed Windows 8 to operate in two different modes. Keep in mind Windows had touch screen support prior to Windows 8 but not the Metro GUI. The Windows 95 desktop paradigm will work with touch screen monitors that 24" or bigger. The Dock and Taskbar can be cool but on an 11" touch screen tablet not so much. The Windows 95 paradigm still works great and the Taskbar can do some cool things. The video link below shows the Windows 7 taskbar does do a few things better than Windows 10 taskbar.







Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
on Apr 7, 2017 at 12:18:19 pm

[andy patterson] "I thought it was obvious but I guess not. Windows 3.0 and the Mac OS 6 looked similar. One could say they had a similar paradigm. Windows 95 launched and introduced the Taskbar. Apple opted to leave the menubar and ad the Dock to keep up with the taskbar. ..."

I thought that's what you were referring too, but wasn't sure. I thought you might have something deeper in mind other than just the UI. Thanks.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]