Slashdot Mirror


Pixar Switching to Mac OS X

DavidRavenMoon writes "MacCentral reports that Pixar technologist Dr. Michael Johnson says Linux, Sun and Windows-based systems are being replaced by Mac OS X. 'The studio's entire team uses Mac OS X not only for creative work, but for workflow and custom application development.'"

10 of 65 comments (clear)

  1. Is this really a surprise? by EddydaSquige · · Score: 2, Insightful

    well is it? If you owned a computer company, and you owned a company that uses a whole lot of computers, wouldn't you want your own company useing your own products?

    1. Re:Is this really a surprise? by arson1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Depends on if the computers improved the productivity or quality of work. Maybe Mac OS X can do that. It's pretty obvious Mac OS 9 could not, or they would have always been on Macs.

      BTW, Jobs doesn't own Apple or Pixar, he's just the CEO. Hell, he was even fired form Apple once.

      --


      --
      Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things.
    2. Re:Is this really a surprise? by Surlyboi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Depends on if the computers improved the productivity or quality of work. Maybe Mac OS X can do that.

      Well considering its NeXT heritage, OS X's got a bit
      going for it. Despite the high price for NeXT boxen,
      the development environment itself was pretty damn
      good. If they're going to be doing a lot of in-house
      app development, (and the article says that's one of
      the things they plan to do) X is a great way to get
      things done quickly.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
  2. The new rack-mounted servers.... by h0tblack · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At least Steve is backing his own products now. Real question is how long have Pixar being using clusters of the new rack-mounted systems? Or testing any other nice hardware. With many render farms being linux (or other nix) based, OS X does seem like an ideal solution given powerful enough hardware. You can create a solid workflow of machine on a common platform that just about everyone in the team can use. OS X does after all have a friendly GUI as well as the powerfull backend.
    Guess renderman is on Darwin/OS X now too then :)

  3. Predictable - really? by SpamJunkie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes this does seem all fine and predictable given that Steve Jobs is CEO/iCEO of both. But really the interesting part is how long it took.

    I hate to keep bringing up Microsoft, I really do, but remember when hotmail was bought by MS? Right away MS forced them to convert their Sun servers to NT. And, remember all the problems that resulted?

    What is really impressive then about Pixar switching to Mac OS X is that Steve J let them wait until OS X could do everything Pixar needed.

  4. Re:Misleading headline? by usr122122121 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The distinct implication (can you actually say "distinct implication"?) here was that while pixar is currently just programming storyboard programs in cocoa, that they would be making the move over to using OS X for more serious stuff in the future.

    I can't imagine that it would be too difficult for pixar to port their current rendering software over to OS X... plus it would be a great advantage for pixar (having the connection through steve jobs to apple), as they would almost be guaranteed apple's top notch technology. (or is this a false assumption?).

    While the depth to which pixar will be using macs is unclear, I'm just glad that they're starting to make the transition: OS X has great potential, and I think we'll see the hardware catch up sometime soon. (holding my breath...) This would yield a very powerful OS on top of a very strong hardware setup.

    --

    -braxton
  5. Doo doo doo! by Amiasian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sorry, but in defense of the Mac, I've seen real world examples where many of the best programmers in the world were Mac users. And Tim Berners Lee, inventor of the Web, used NeXT, which is basically Mac OS X today. Okay, there are differences, but the concepts are the same.
    Sorry, but the rumor about Mac-heads/artists not being technical simply isn't true. Heck, if it was, there wouldn't be an "Apple" section on one of the most technical discussion boards [apple.slashdot.org] around, would there?

    Just wanted to dispel rumors that really are *hack-cough-wheeze* unfounded, in many cases. But, don't worry, rumors are that way: unfounded.

  6. Re:Misleading headline? by Snowfox · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I can't imagine that it would be too difficult for pixar to port their current rendering software over to OS X... plus it would be a great advantage for pixar (having the connection through steve jobs to apple), as they would almost be guaranteed apple's top notch technology. (or is this a false assumption?)
    To play devil's advocate:

    Apple's top notch technology wouldn't be good for the renderfarms. Those are all about speed, and the fastest Mac is about half as fast as the fastest PC. And Macs really fall short on memory-intensive tasks in dual processor configurations, owing to the slower bus speed. (The fastest Mac memory bus is 133MHz. The fastest PC bus is effectively over 1GHz.)

    Even if Pixar got the Macs for free and had to pay market price for the PC racks, it's likely that the cost of electricity from the additional machines needed would take away the Apple benefit in under two years. This is to say nothing of extra maintenance when there are twice as many machines, the value of the extra space used, and the cost of porting the render farm software over to the new system architecture.

  7. Re:Misleading headline? by macwhiz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Macintosh G4 computers may have half the processor clock speed of Intel-based computers. However, due to their more efficient RISC architecture, and the "Velocity Engine" vector-math unit, they are capable of performing complex graphic operations much faster than equivalently priced Intel-based computers -- two to three times as fast in some cases.

    The computing needs of Pixar undoubtedly rely heavily on vector math. Therefore, using a computer architecture that is expressly optimized for vector math is probably a good idea for them.

    Don't fall into the fallacy of equating clock speed with performance.

  8. Jobs isn't that stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, he may be arrogant, but Pixar's bot the kind of thing you just monkey around with on a whim. It's a huge moneymaker, and they're extremely well-respected in the industry. Jobs isn't going to just order them to switch to OS X unless it's viable.

    Undoubtedly, the upcoming rackmount servers probably play a role, although I'd be surprised if they plan on using Macs for rendering.

    Chances are Jobs worked out a deal with Pixar where they'd get assistance porting their current software to OS X (since their software is Linux based, I'm guessing it's a bit easier to port to OS X than the old Windows code), and get to play with new hardware and such, in exchange for the great PR Apple gets in announcing that Pixar is using OS X. And of course, buckets of money are undoubtedly involved. Aren't they always?