Apple Announces the Fate of Shake

Rura Penthe writes "NothingReal, developer of Shake (a high-end video compositing application), was purchased by Apple in February. Until now the fate of Shake on Windows, Irix, and Linux was uncertain at best, but in an email sent out to Shake users, Apple has declared that Irix and Linux versions will be developed at least through 2003. However, the upcoming Windows version will be the last for that platform. Good news for Shake users with Linux render farms like Weta Digital, which used Shake for Lord of the Rings." (Reminder to Apple users: visit Slashdot's Apple section for more Apple-related news.)

Comments

What About After 2003?

[krmt]

So, does this mean that after 2003 they are planning on killing the product for Irix and Linux, or just that this is the time frame that they are committing to these platforms right now? Stupid question maybe, but I think it's an important one to ask.

...and we just ported our plug-ins to Shake too.

[SilentTristero]

Now nobody knows what will happen. OSX is pretty nice, and our Sapphire plug-ins run pretty nicely on Shake on a dual G4, but still, there are a lot of Windows users out there. Apple is not doing anybody a service by being so close-mouthed about things. People in the post-production business are used to preannouncements of upcoming products, and if Apple won't do that they'll lose out to other companies (Discreet, Quantel, Avid, Sony) who will.

-- SilentTristero

Re:Double standard?

[ckd]

Woah, now if Microsoft did something like that, Mac users would be screaming bloody murder!

You mean like Bungie's game Halo? The one that was presented in Macworld Expo keynotes? The one that was going to be out on Mac, PC, and PS2?

Because after MS bought Bungie, it wound up shipping for X-Box, and, so far, nothing else. (Though Bungie continues to assert "There WILL be Mac and PC versions of Halo." -- I'll believe it when it ships.)

Re:This is why Microsoft makes $$$ and Apple doesn

[PCM2]

Apple did the same with Spruce Tech. They had the best DVD authoring software for the PC, so Apple bought them and... killed their products. Result: did people with PCs start buying Macs to author their DVDs? No, they simply started buying Sonic's and Pinnacle's authoring programs instead.

Err... actually, I bought an Apple to do DVD authoring on. I admit I haven't used a lot of DVD authoring software, but Apple's DVD Studio Pro is pretty slick, indeed ... integrates well with Final Cut Pro, and the computer comes with a DVD-R burner! Pretty good solution compared to most PCs, if you ask me.

I really don't see how people who bash Microsoft can like Apple. They have the same kind of software monopoly that Microsoft does (so they don't bundle their browser, but they bundle video editing software, MP3 software, Quicktime, DVD authoring software, CD burning software, etc.), plus a hardware monopoly (even Mac's PCI 'thinks different' from PC PCI, so you can't use PC cards on a Mac and instead must pay three times as much for a card that's five times slower)

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

But It's Not

[krmt]

OF course, if this was the Evil Empire doing it we'd all cry 'monopolist'.

Ok... I'm tired of seeing this idea on this article thread. It's obviously not Microsoft doing this. It's Apple. Not Microsoft. Apple. Not a convicted monopolist.

Yes, these actions are anticompetitive, but because Apple does not hold any sort of monopoly power, either in the OS market or the 3d rendering market, this move is not the kind of thing that makes one scream "monopolist!" Are you going to be mad at them for not producing Appleworks for Windows? Are you going to be mad at them for not making the iPod, iMovie, etc. available for Windows? These are features added to their product to make it more competitive against a court-confirmed monopoly, and they have every right to do this.

Apple is, quite simply, not to be held to the same standards as Microsoft. Get over it.

Re:But It's Not

[bnenning]

yes I know you can plug a three button mouse into a MAC, try using right click to bring up context sensitive menus.

Just in case somebody takes this troll seriously, Mac OS X has full support for multiple mouse buttons and context menus. I'm using a Microsoft optical mouse; the extra buttons and scroll wheel work out of the box with no driver needed. Also for future reference, using "MAC" instead of "Mac" is a clear sign that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Re:Apple this apple that

[MoneyT]

Is it possible that Apple might actualy be doing things to the market again? Like it or not, Apple is here and they are influencing again. Unix as a viable OS, not just for servers but for everyone, external products that seamlessly integrate with the machine, pushing new and better products (USB, Firewire, even to an extent LCD). Yes, Apple is becoming a real company again, a computer that you are no longe afraid to say you own.

Re:Apple this apple that

[foobar104]

Sorry for going off on you man, but you have no idea what it's like being a Mac-using slashdotter. No idea.

Amen, brother. For instance, I can't understand why some people don't get the fact that OS X is a full-fledged, no-shit Unix operating system that makes the combination of Linux and KDE or Gnome look pretty damn pale in comparison. And then, inevitably, somebody trots out the PowerPC-versus-Pentium thing, as if it mattered which CPU were faster! Don't they get it?

I don't care how fast my computer is. I care how productive and happy I am when I use my computer. And I get more done on my Macs-- from graphic design to video editing to (what I was doing this week) writing Java servlet code-- than I could on any other platform. If I had a n.m GHz Pentium on my desk, it would just spend more time waiting on me.

You know what I think the problem is? I know I'm headed for flame (or flame-bait) country here, but I think it all revolves around territorial alpha-geeks not wanting to admit that they don't understand something.

If I had spent the past five years learning all about Linux-- by reading the source code itself, I guess, 'cause there ain't that much in the way of documentation-- I'd feel pretty good about myself. Pretty cool.

If I then started using OS X-- because it's a better desktop, or because somebody gave me a free Mac, or whatever-- I would have to put myself in a situation where I didn't know more than everybody else. I'd have to do things like reading again, and asking questions. It'd be a severe insult to my pride to have to admit, publicly and openly, that I am not the smartest guy in the world.

Therefore, I would actively avoid OS X, even to the point of publicly ridiculing it. I would continue to advocate using the stuff that I understand to do things that OS X can clearly do better. Because it's just too damaging to my self-esteem to swallow my pride and learn something new.