Apple Updates Professional Video Lineup

BlueGecko writes "Amid surprisingly little fanfare, Apple today updated their entire professional video lineup, including DVD Studio Pro 2 (including a greatly improved menu editor and improved compression abilities), Final Cut Pro 4 (enhanced real-time editing, more customizable workflow, and an improved titling interface), and Shake 3--the first version of Shake to be Mac OS X-only and now sporting enhanced rotoscoping tools and the ability to work directly with Photoshop layers. Combine this with Logic and you've got an entire professional movie studio on your Mac."

Comments

Not OS X Only

[Anonymous Coward]

Shake is NOT OS X only. There are still other versions for linux/irix... there ARE some Mac OS X only features however (Rendezvous enabled Distributed computing). also - the Mac OS X version is $5000 cheaper.

Re:Not OS X Only

[Ponty]

Why, you could buy a kickin' Mac with that price difference!

Go on, tell me Apple isn't a hardware company. Someone tell me that Apple is destined to release Mac OS X for beige x86 boxes! :-)

Re:Not OS X Only

[Dylan Zimmerman]

It seemed clear to me when I read the /. posting that they were saying that the Mac version was no longer designed for MacOS 9. Instead, it is OSX native.

Shake 3 NOT OSX-only

[Doktor Memory]

Per Apple's own page, Shake is available for the following platforms:

• MacOS X
• Linux
• Irix

Only Windows 2000/XP support has been dropped.

Re:Shake 3 NOT OSX-only

[olePigeon (Wik)]

I think they were referring to it being the first Macintosh version that will only run under Mac OS X, not carbonized or executable under Classic.

Re:Shake 3 NOT OSX-only

[Doktor Memory]

I think they were referring to it being the first Macintosh version that will only run under Mac OS X, not carbonized or executable under Classic.

No. There was never (and will never be) a Carbon or Classic version of Shake. It's been OSX-only from the get-go.

Re:Shake 3 NOT OSX-only

[sasha328]

From the page: To purchase Shake for Mac OS X, contact an Apple Authorized Professional Film Reseller. Shake 3 will be available for Mac OS X for a suggested retail price of $4,950 (US), and for Linux and IRIX for a suggested retail price of $9,900 (US) with an annual maintenance of $1485 (US)

A hefty price difference. Makes ditiching the Linux machine a more tempting proposal if you really need Shake!

Re:Shake 3 NOT OSX-only

[quantaman]

Shake is available for the following platforms:
* MacOS X

* Linux

* Irix

Only Windows 2000/XP support has been dropped.

Ahh the sweet smell of irony :-)

Hah!

[dirkdidit]

Who needs fancy smancy tools to do video editing on the Mac? Real men use iMovie! Right? Right? That's what the salesman told me!!! He wouldn't lie would he?!?!

Re:Hah!

[deadsaijinx*]

I know you're just joking, but you probably shouldn't knock to hard on iMovie. For a free video editor (how free is it when you pay $3000 for the machine? SHUT UP U!) it is suprisingly powerful. It handles a fair number of video effects, as well as a fairly powerful yet mind-numbingly easy to use Title Generator. It also sports a variety of transitions. But most importantly it is easy to use and can produce some really nice results without forking over thousands for software. Of course, you could knock on it for being some lame peice of shit with only one video track and two audio tracks, as well as its inability to slow down audio without horrible "shutter-voice," but let's just look at the competition. The most recent release of Windows movie maker finally added Transitions to its tool-box. Nuf sed.

Of course, real men edit movies using text editors under the command console!

Re:Hah!

[Stephen VanDahm]

"Of course, real men edit movies using text editors under the command console!"

Actually, real men edit movies the same way they write software -- by manipulating the bits directly with a hex editor. :-)

Steve

Re:Hah!

[sammy.lost-angel.com]

I know of some people that use iMovie for professional videos that sell tons of copies.... Simply because it's so fast and easy to use it clears up their time to do other things.

Re:Hah!

[inburito]

Real men edit movies with scissors and scotch-tape. Anything else is just fancy gimmicks.

Re:Hah!

[dhovis]

I remember reading somewhere that a lot of video production houses use iMovie for "video storyboards". Rather than drawing cartoon style storyboards, they go out with a cheap digial videocam and film the basic scenes they want and assemble them in iMovie to show customers what they have in mind.

When they film the final product, they use Final Cut Pro.

Re:Hah!

[Ryan Amos]

So you know people in the porn industry too? (if you've ever seen how badly porn is edited you'll get the joke.)

Re:Hah!

[Zakabog]

Real men don't edit movies, they film exactly what they want exactly the way they want it by drawing really fast on paper using paints made from crushed fruits and berries. All other things like a camera, crew, cast, special effects are all just fancy gimmicks.

It's sad

[thesadjester]

They are totally cutting out Logic users from the ability to use a PC in the near future. I have no idea how long they plan to keep logic for PC updated, but I absolutely love logic. Midi wise, it's far ahead of pro tools and it can utilize the VST plugins while pro tools forces you upon expensive RTAS or TDM (depending on whether you use LE or a MIX system). I'm happy with my digi 001 running with logic on a pc. Runs great...I am sad however. Oh well.

Anyone know the exact cutoff date?

Also, we need to get open support for the digidesign stuff, as well as the presonus firestation and the motu stuff.

Re:It's sad

[gig]

Doing music on Windows ... it's like asking to be hit in the mouth repeatedly by Bill Gates while you're singing. In my studio, we have about one crash per year that interrupts a take, and that's just an application crash. We haven't had a system crash in two years. You can't get that stability day-in day-out from MS Windows while moving dozens of audio, MIDI, and video tracks around. You are better off with a Fostex 4-track. Truly.

I have a friend who bought a PC last year and a copy of Logic Audio and it took him three months to admit he couldn't get the system to work. (Stress "system" ... in my studio there are at least 50 devices hooked into a central Power Mac G4 that does not crash.)

There simply is no reason to do music on Windows except for "well, uhh, I already had this PC" or "I can also play games on the PC" or the mind-numbing "the PC is cheaper (if I completely ignore productivity, downtime, tech support, and all the missing or lower-quality tools)".

I have talked to a lot of formerly-Windows-based fellow Logic users since the discontinuation of the Windows version, and it invariably goes like this: "I was pissed ... I was really pissed ... I got a Mac ... hey this fucking thing actually WORKS! ... holy shit this fucking thing actually WORKS! ... man, I am glad I'm using Mac OS X ... Logic is better than ever ... my tracks are always in sync, the audio always works, I don't get interrupted by crashes or error messages all day."

Just purely from a technical perspective, dropping Windows works. To me, you have to criticize Microsoft for simply NOT BUILDING IT. They said they would, and then they didn't. There is nothing in MS Windows to compare to QuickTime, CoreAudio, and CoreMIDI. It's just not there and Emagic would have to build it for Microsoft. It took them much, much more engineers to do the Windows version, and 65% of their users (almost all of their pro users) were on the Mac. Where is Microsoft's answer to Mac OS X for content creators? It's not there. They're after servers and game consoles and PDA's and whatnot now, but they have not done the work for our market. MS Windows is not a suitable platform for Logic 6. If you use a Logic 6 system running on Mac OS X you'll see what I'm talking about. It's not controversial; it's not rocket science ... close your eyes to the Microsoft bubble for a second and look at what's going on in the studios. Lots of us tried Windows out at some point in the last five years and then we went running and screaming back to the Mac and the new Mac OS X platform that was BUILT FOR US.

Final Cut Pro

[deadsaijinx*]

is by far my FAVORITE video editing software. in fact, that is the ONLY reason I use a mac (please don't hate me for that). However, I really don't think that these improvements warrant an upgrade (hey, it's an expensive product). In fact, I can hardly tell the difference between FCP2 and FCP3. Maybe I'm just ignorant, or retarded, but I can't actually tell the difference when using the product. Maybe that's a good thing though, Mac is all about streamlining their software for perfect integration. Anywayz ... kinda lost my train of thought ... oh, yeah. Anywayz, Their DVD software is only mediocre, nothing really superb about it. Nothing really wrong with it either. Ok, then we have shake. Looks a lot like combustion from Discreet (3dstudio max people) but i haven't used shake before (I'm on a budget, okay) so I really can't say too mush about it. But lets look at the bright side, it runs in OSX (first time i read that i thought it sed osex) and the slashdot crowd should probably appreciate that. Personally, I'm happy chugging along with OS9 and the dual 1ghz mac I use FCP on. Moral of the story, apple does ONE thing very well, and that thing is Video editing.... i wish FCP was released for winders (or at least linux. I mean, if it can run on OSX, then its only a jump, hop, and skip away from Linux, Right?)

Re:Final Cut Pro

[mikedaisey]

Thatr may be true of FCP2 and FCP3, but did you even read the list of what's included with FCP4?

I didn't think so, Mr. Lost-My-Train-Of-Thought-While-Rambling-Barely-Coh erently.

Re:Final Cut Pro

[ndpatel]

i know a few thousand ibook/powerbook owners who'd disagree with you.

the desktops might be lagging, but as far as portables go, apple products seem to set the standard.

Hmm, whats this?

[Curt]

"Screw you, Adobe (After Effects)"
-Apple

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/texteffects.htm l

three-button mouse

[mz001b]

It is amusing to see that a 3-button mouse is listed under the requirements for the Mac version of shake.

logic

[GoatPigSheep]

Yeah it should also be noted that there is no longer a version of logic available for PC thanks to Apple buying out the company.

Basically that means that lots of home studio people who can't afford proprietary MAC hardware are out of luck if they want to get any updates for logic audio.

It seems apple's strategy might be to FORCE us to switch... Sounds almost like something MS would do.

Re:logic

[cheshiremackat]

Hmmm... I'm still waiting for Microsoft to port their games portfolio to mac.... Now ALOT of home games users are FORCED to buy expensive Wintel hardware to play games... seems like something Apple would do in their strong suite...

C'mon, Apple bought the company, if they force you to use a mac, so be it... I have to use Windows for stuff that microsoft doesn't port (cough cough... Access)...

As long as Apple adds value and develops the software, then users are better off upgrading anyway... just because a new ver is out doesn't mean the old stops working... if the Apple added value isn't worth it; then keep using the old... simple as that...

_CMK

Re:logic

[doce]

Basically that means that lots of home studio people who can't afford proprietary MAC hardware are out of luck if they want to get any updates for logic audio.

oh please. people who are running audio studios, whether at home or at work, are spending serious jack on their systems. audio hardware is inherently expensive. you don't run a studio on a $500 Dell. MOTU cards, high-bandwidth HD arrays, the actual audio hardware... these things are not exactly cheap.

Re:logic

[Graymalkin]

Compared to their Mac user base Emagic's PC user base is extraordinarily small. It is unfortunate for them to have to either switch platforms or audio programs but like the Mac community has known for years, you can't expect the low volume (thus low revenue) product to remain in production indefinitely. A large percentage of those PC users will likely switch to Macs which is what Apple would like while others will stick with what they have and then switch applications. In the end you'll likely see only about 15-20% of Logic's users switch to other applications.

Re:logic

[DJ FirBee]

>and VST really isn't that bad.

VST works fine for crap reverbs and fx, but when you try to do some tight percussive parts on a virtual synth and then multiply that by the number of parts in your track then VST sucks. Latency sucks, VST Sucks.

If the hoary promise of cramming all of those old 80's synths and drum machines and virtual samplers into a laptop is ever going to be true then VST should go.

As expensive, proprietary as Macs you can do a bunch of mulimedia shit on them without replacing drivers and troubleshooting every hour. Multimedia on windows has developed despite microsoft.

$$$? Nevair!

[Linux-based-robots]

I noticed it says "from the break-out-your-wallet dept."

Well, not for me! My friends Blackbeard, Long John, and Jean Lafite will see to that!

Fifteen men on a p2p node,
Yo ho ho, an illegal download!

Rendezvous Clustering

[dhovis]

The really cool feature Apple introduced with Shake 3 is automatic clustering with Rendezvous. From Apple's Shake page:

Because with the inclusion of unlimited network render licenses and render management software on Mac OS X, visual effects artists can now distribute rendering tasks across multiple PowerPC G4-based Macintosh computers.

...and from a press release...

New Shake Qmaster network render management software included with Shake for Mac OS X uses Apple's Rendezvous(TM) networking technology to automatically identify available render nodes and clusters on a network while load balancing optimizes usage across each machine in the workflow. If one Xserve or Power Mac G4 goes offline, built-in fault tolerance allows Shake Qmaster to re-route tasks to other render nodes in the cluster, so the project gets done on time. As Shake Qmaster is based on an open architecture, it can also provide distributed rendering support for many leading third-party applications, such as Alias/Wavefront's Maya.

Point and click clustering, courtesy of Apple. Looks like a good way to sell Apple's new XServe Cluster Node config.

Re:Rendezvous Clustering

[Hawthorne01]

Imagine a .... Nah, nevermind. It takes longer to post that than to make one now. ;-)

Re:Rendezvous Clustering

[mistermund]

Point and click clustering, courtesy of Apple.

Very worthy to point this out. I'm working on a new lab for a visual effects pipeline. In the arsenal are a handful of dual athlon linux workstations, a terabyte fileserver, and licenses for Maya Unlimited, Shake, and Renderman. We have a bucketload of licenses for the last two, and plans to use them on a 128-node athlon cluster (also running Linux) to experiment with real-time Renderman work, etc.

We are at the stage where the workstations are up and running and we are getting ready to tackle clustering. /me thinks Rendezvous enabled Renderman would come in handy! It seems like the best solution I've been able to find for using these types of apps across a cluster is OpenMosix. Anyone have experience with it?

Props to Apple for adding these features for their platform - Just like Final Cut Pro brought Avid-level power to the masses, Shake might be bringing this type of previously studio-tech level compositing to smaller effects houses as well.

Re:Rendezvous Clustering

[90XDoubleSide]

That audience is pretty damn massive compared to the audience that could afford to spend tens of thousands of dollars on an Avid. And FCP Express costs the same as Photoshop, which is certainly used by masses of people.

Re:Rendezvous Clustering

[VValdo]

I haven't seen anyone point out yet that Avid has responded to FCP by announcing a free version of their editing software for DVD, just as they already offer a free version of ProTools.

It should be fully functional (ie, not a "demo' version) although somewhat limited in terms of number of tracks. But no watermarks or anything. More info here.

As anyone who has used both Avid and FCP can attest, Avid's GUI is far superior. Or at least was, as I haven't used FCP since 2.0.

W

Re:Rendezvous Clustering

[gig]

When an article is posted on a PRO

PRO

P r o f e s s i o n a l

PROFESSIONAL audio/video tech, could you guys who are still running Linux on a 286 give us all a break? These are cheap, cheap, cheap everyday tools by every measurable standard in our industry, and they are top-quality and they actually work, and they work for a living. They pay for themselves very quickly.

I hardly ever rent out studio time anymore because my demo studio just got better and better until it turned into a project studio, primarily thanks to Apple and a handful of other brilliant companies in the pro audio market. We used to have to go to hundreds of dollars an hour to get the quality and utility I get now from two Macs and maybe $10,000 to $15,000 in additional instruments/hardware/software that I can even admin and run myself (I'm a singer for chrissakes), and we don't count the studio hours anymore except to say that it's Wednesday so we might want to take a break and sleep a bit.

"Masses" is very much appropriate, because this really is about the workers owning the means of production. Fuck the rhetoric and think about what that really means: the tools go away and there is just communication, art, culture, business, etc. I don't have to become an indentured servant in order to make art.

Others have talked and talked because our industry is sort of sexy, but decades later it is still Apple doing it for us in 1000 ways. The promises have only been fulfilled by Apple.

AND, if you are not a pro and would like to get your feet wet in media creation, you can get an iMac and you are DONE. And that is also from Apple. They are anything but the elitists that Bill Gates and Michael Dell would like you to believe that they are because they want to sell you something that looks like a Mac but is still really just a typewriter. Audio and video are full of people who glow when they get close to an Apple logo because they did their first album or movie 5 years earlier than they would have otherwise simply because Apple made it affordable for them to have their own systems.

If I sound emotional about it, it's because I am. I don't think I can stand to hear from another teenager about how their fucking MS Windows is crashing and how to we handle that in a real studio? "Get a Mac."

Re:Rendezvous Clustering

[gig]

All pro Macs have had Gigabit Ethernet for over two years now. Even the notebooks. There isn't a Titanium PowerBook anywhere in the world that doesn't have Gigabit Ether. There are only a handful of very early Power Mac G4's that don't have it. So, your network of Macs IS a big disk array with like 12 Altivec units per CPU. And, you're not going to send uncompressed video ... even plain DV has built-in compression ... it is ALWAYS compressed.

If I had a penny for every time some bullshit PC Magazine nerd reviewed a Mac and dismissed Gigabit Ethernet as an irrelevant feature (along with FireWire) and then proceeded to compare with some Dell that's good for MS Office (maybe) and has probably long-since been retired ... sheesh. These aren't throw-away machines like many other PC's ... they are actually built with an eye on the future and obviously Rendezvous and Gigabit Ethernet and Mac OS X just fucking love each other.

I have an old Power Mac G3 from early 1999 that is now an iTunes jukebox in my house. It is 4.5 years old but it has a flat-panel display, FireWire, 1.5GB RAM, and runs iTunes/Mac OS X like a champ. Even the Mac OS X was free because we had an extra license in a multiple pack. Every day we use this Power Mac G3 (people LOVE it at parties) is all gravy ... it paid for itself so long ago but after 3 years the warranty is up and we consider them retired and we either repurpose them or sell them and this one always found some use due to having a complete feature set that was forward-looking and media-oriented. It's got 300GB of disk space or something and it plays DVD's, too, and it still updates its own software automatically and there are no known viruses for it or any of its software.

Performer 4

[ericdano]

It will be interesting to see how well Digital Performer 4 works with Final Cut Pro 4. If those two could be work together well, things would be grand!

SGI CXFS (SAN XFS) coming soon for OS X

[green pizza]

While browsing around, I ran across this press release:

http://www.sgi.com/newsroom/press_releases/2003/ap ril/prod_san.html

Re:What?

[Phroggy]

Am I seeing double, or is this a dupe of the *previous story*.

You're seeing double, it's not a dupe.
You're seeing double, it's not a dupe.

Re:Where's the pro OSS bent, people?

[Jay Maynard]

The people this stuff is aimed at are ones who aren't computer geeks. They want to use the stuff to make video, not hack around with computers.

You can get a Mac and the software, plug it in, install the programs, and be making video in two hours. Try that with OSS.

Intelligent minds aren't opposed to spending money if the result is making them more productive. If the goal is to be a computer geek, use Linux and open source software. If the goal is to make serious video, then even $10K for a set of tools tou can plug in and run right away with no hacking needed is well worth it.

An Honest Comparison

[coolmacdude]

Anyone naive enough to flame Apple because they think their hardware is too expensive should stop for a minute and take an honest look at what they actually offer. I decided to perform a quick comparison between a Powerbook and a Dell laptop to see which was the better buy. Note: this is a comparison between the 17" Powerbook and the best Dell laptop I saw configured up to the Powerbooks specs the best I could.

Processor:
Apple - 1 Ghz G4
Dell - 2 Ghz P4
Winner = debatable but I'll give it to Dell

RAM: Apple and Dell both 512 MB, tie

Hard Drive: 60 GB for both, tie

CD/DVD Drive:
Apple - CD-R/DVD-R
Dell - CD-R/DVD
Winner: Apple

Wired Networking:
Apple - 10/100/1000
Dell - 10/100
Winner: Apple

Wireless Networking:
Apple - builtin card and antennas
Dell - PC card can be added for extra
Winner: Apple

Graphics Card:
Apple - 64 MB Nvidia GeForce 4 440 Go
Dell - 64 MB Nvidia Geforce 4 4200
About the same performance = tie

Screen:
Apple - 17 in. widescreen
Dell - 15.4 in widescreen
Winner: Apple

Battery: Apple claims 4 hours, Dell claims 3
Winner: Performance is probably close but Apple might have a marginal lead

Warranty: both one year = tie

Software:
Apple - Mac OS X, iTunes, iMovie, iDVD, iPhoto, Image Capture, iCal, iChat, Mail, IE 5,
Dell - Windows XP Pro, Dell Jukebox Premium, Dell Picture Studio, Dell Movie Studio Essentials, Outlook Express, IE 6
Winner: most definitely Apple

Thickness and weight:
Apple - 1 in. 6.8 lbs.
Dell: 1.52 in. 6.9 lbs
Winner: Apple

Looks: Apple again, obviously

Price:
Apple - $3299
Dell - $2640
Winner: Dell

In summary, while the PC is a little bit cheaper and the processor a little faster, in virtually every other area the Mac comes out ahead. With a Mac, you get what you pay for. Sure the processor may be a little bit slower, but it isn't a dramatic difference and the overall value of the product is just as good as a PC.

Re:An Honest Comparison

[NeuroKoan]

Don't forget the fact that the P4 runs at or about 1/2 speed when not plugged into a wall.

Re:An Honest Comparison

[WasterDave]

A 440 and a 4200 are completely different chips. However, accelerator or not, only OSX uses it properly (games excluded).

Dave

Re:An Honest Comparison

[dhamsaic]

You do realise that practically nowhere offers gigabit ethernet plugin at the wall, not even at work? It's mostly for wiring up server farms etc. I seriously doubt your computer can consistantly give a gigabit of throughput anyway...

Even if you could only do 2x the throughput of standard 100Mbit, it's still 2x faster. For those of us that have enough machines with gigabit ethernet to warrant having a 10/100/1000 switch, well... that extra speed is pretty fucking sweet.

Choice of hardware: Dell: everything Apple: little

Put your money where your mouth is and back that up. I doubt you can find many external devices (scanner, USB/FW hard drive, camera, etc) that don't work on a Mac, and the internal stuff (video cards, etc) are negligible since we're talking about laptops.

Comparing a decidedly middle of the road Intel processor with the high-end Mac CPU is hardly fair is it.

Fastest G4 CPU: 1.42 GHz Fastest P4 CPU: 3.06 GHz for a ratio of ~2.16 Referenced G4 CPU: 1 GHz Referenced P4 CPU: 2 GHz for a ratio of ~2.00 (In other words, his comparison was relatively fair and accurate with regards to CPU.)

Re:An Honest Comparison

[jo_ham]

Choice of hardware:
Dell: everything
Apple: little

Err, what are you saying here? That I can't go out and buy a hard drive and hook it up to my Mac? I can - an IDE one that would also (last time I looked) work with a PC too.

Anything with a USB connector - works on both Mac and PC

Anything with a firewire (1394/iLink) connector - works with Mac out of the box, might need firewire card on a PC, but will work.

Anything that conforms to memory standards (DDR, PC133 etc, depending on motherboard) - will work on both PC and Mac - I have swapped PC133 modules from my PC over to the Mac since I don't use the PC any more.

I can take the IDE-equipped drive (HD, CDRW, DVD etc) drive out of my PC and connect it in my Mac and it will work.

Hell, I can even use floppies if I buy a usb equipped floppy drive (I'll admit that the Mac lacks an internal floppy connector, but big deal!)

Monitors - anything with a VGA connector will attach to a Mac or a PC with a VGA port. Anything with a DVI port will connect to a DVI-equipped Mac or PC (you might need an adapter if the Mac has an ADC port instead of a DVI port)

Again, I have used my 17" Sony Trinitron with both my PC and my Mac with no special connectors needed.

Mice - any usb mouse will work on the Mac, so if you reallyreallyreally want two buttons on your mouse, rather than bitching about it on /. for karma you can buy one and connect it to the usb port. The Apple keyborad has two usb ports on the side to allow you to do this without using up an extra usb port on the back.

Printers, Scanners - ok, some don't work, but most do now. Nearly all Canon, Epson, HP and Lexmark printers work, along with a host of others. Also, no drivers need to be installed, they're already there (but you can delete them if you need the space).

Gee, I'm running out of common hardware to compare.

I bought a 2.5" laptop hard drive the other day - a 40Gb IBM Travelstar 40GNX. A bog standard 2.5" IDE laptop hard drive, bought from a PC-centric online store. I installed it in my iBook and put OS X 10.2.4 on it and I now have 20Gb more space than I did last week.

The old 20Gb drive that I took out is in an external firewire enclosure - guess what, I connect it to my PC and use it to keep large files I need backed up for short periods.

Pray tell, where does this "almost none" come from in my choice of hardware for the Mac?

Oh, I see! Processors! You have a choice of Intel or AMD (and minor others). We have a choice of Apple (Motorola/IBM, depending on G3/G4), and we only have one motherboard manufacturer.

Well, to be honest, that doesn't bother me all that much.

Re:An Honest Comparison

[tshak]

Because Laptops are more proprietary in nature, Apple can compete a little better on price as opposed to desktop "boxes". The ~$600 price difference is not bad considering the quality of software, screen size, and clean hardware design of the Powerbook. I would like to correct you with your "debateable" processor analysis. This is a problem with many Mac only users - they believe the mhz myth inversly ("G4's are always faster no matter how fast the AMD/Intel counterpart). I would also like to point out that price/performance differences are usually smaller on the highest tier of the product segment. Compare medium range laptops (and esp. desktops) and the gap is much wider.

But back to my biggest gripe - your comparion of CPU's. There are many applications where even a P3 can beat a G4 Clock-for-Clock. G4 excels in areas like Photoshop where Altivec makes a huge difference. Remember though, that Intel's SSE2 marginalizes the differences in speed gains that Altivec receives. Although P4's leave a lot to be desired (I'm an AMD fan), based on what I've seen I think it's more accurate to compare a ~1.5Ghz P4 to a 1Ghz G4.

I'm not saying that this extra performance makes the Dell a better computer. My point is that it's not definitely not a marginal or arguable difference in speed, and many people run applications that will easily tax a 1Ghz G4 such as myself. I just bought Sony w/an Athlon XP2000+ and 512MB RAM for ~$1500. And yes, I have firewire and 10/100 (I don't need 1000, so why pay for it?) and USB2.0 and a CDRW/DVD combo (no DVD-R). Sony makes very clean an elegant laptopts - they don't quite match Apple's hardware design, however.

So no, the processer is not a little slower on the G4, it's significantly slower. If you don't need that extra speed and have an extra $1K+ to spend, then the Apple is great from an overall value. For me, the value just isn't there because some of my software simply won't run properly on such slow hardware. And for half the price, I have a machine that has the power I need.

Re:FCP3 = 5uX0R, I think not...

[melorama]

Just what were the problems with FCP3?

Lemme tell you...

1. Horrible Media Management

The FCP2/3 Media Manager works ok with simple projects (i.e. no nested timelines), but once you get even a tiny bit more complex than that, the thing just stupids out and completely disregards references to subclips, nests, etc. This basically makes it worthless for media consolidation, which sucks ass when you need to free up a large chunk of diskspace for more clips or projects. Another annoying thing is that once you drop a clip from the bin into the timeline, it totally loses all relationship with the master clip in the bin. This problem is ostensibly because FCP3 lacks any sort of internal clip database system, as is standard on Avid systems. The FCP4 feature list on the Apple site appears to give no indication that these problems have been resolved, but the addition of XML interchange is a nice touch. Although the damn thing should support the Advanced Authoring Format (AAF) natively, it appears that it didn't make this release :(

2. "RealTime" performance was a joke

All my smug Apple-fanatic friends sent me countless emails regarding FCP3's supposed software-only "realtime" support back when it was first released. Well, anyone who uses FCP3 professionally knows very well that the its "realtime" capabilities are nothing more than PR hype. Realtime dissolves work nicely, but do anything more complex than that, and it's "Command-R time" (i.e. Render....Render...Render).

It's even more irritating how the most insignificant change to an effected clip's attributes will force you to rerender the whole damned clip, even if the change only affects a few frames of it.

It must have been very embarrassing for Apple when just a few months after the release of FCP3, Avid released XpressDV 3.0, which completely blew away FCP away as far as native realtime effects were concerned. Seeing XDV 3.0 perform a chroma-key with titles, color-correction and a superimposed 2nd clip--all simultaneously in realtime gave me an extremely large erection when I demo'ed it.

FCP3 also did not have the ability to perform realtime effects output to NTSC through the Firewire port, unlike Sonic Foundry Vegas, on Windows. Then again, to be fair, almost nobody's products except for Sonic Foundry offered this ability either.

3. 8 bit-per-channel color processing

Simply put, color correction and compositing in 8-bpc sucks ass. 10-bpc is quickly becoming a required feature in all professional video and compositing apps. In very happy that FCP4 now supports float space...this will definitely expand the product's acceptance in high-end circles.

4. Extremely poor audio features

FCP4's new 24-channel output is great fucking news. Up until now, people using FCP had to lay off multi-channel audio masters in multiple passes...that is so 1990's.

5. Lame-ola MPEG2 export

FCP3's MPEG-2 export used the native Quicktime MPEG-2 plugin, which works okay for simple stuff, but offered hardly any control over compression parameters at all. The new FCP4 export features will hopefully obviate the need for annoying and slow compression sessions using Cleaner6

6. No clip-context in the 3-way color corrector tool

The 3-way color correction in FCP3 was a great addition, but it still lacked the clip context features that are standard in the color-correction tools found in systems like Avid XpressDV 3.5 and Symphony. It's really difficult to color match a show from shot to shot without a side-by-side reference.

7. No time-remapping

Creating that annoying, herky jerky stop-start, MTV "Cribs" speedramp effect is a pain in the ass in FCP3. There's no builtin feature for remapping time, like in Adobe AfterEffects.

8. No user-definable keyboard shortcuts

Self explanatory. Some of FCP3's keyboard shortcuts are really dumb (the shortcuts for

Re:Hey, I just bought a Mac, let me tell ya...

[MasterVidBoi]

And a wheel mouse is extremely nice. (Had to load osx drivers off m$ site to get it to work, yes osx drivers...) Not all features are supported or work right from app to app. Some standards would be nice. (Most programs are dumbed down to 1 mouse it seems also.)

Almost every app provides context menu support for commonly used commands, as well as wheel support (even though they don't ship 2button+wheel mice). Third buttons and beyond have no defined purpose, and are available for customization (which is what MS's mouse drivers do). The 2buttons+wheel should Just Work for every app for any USB mouse. I'm unsure about how the microsoft mice work, but if you needed drivers to get that basic functionality (and I would be suprised if you do), then that would be the fault of Microsoft rather than Apple, because that would imply their mouse doesn't conform to the defined USB mouse protocol.

Cut/paste/select all is annoying as hell, no standard like windows, or even KDE/Icewm/CDE.\

No standard for cut/paste/select all? Um, perhaps you should check the logo on that box and make sure it's a mac. It's cmd+c/cmd+x/cmd+v/cmd+a for copy/cut/paste/selectall, and it's been that way at least since I've been using macs (~1992). I can't recall using an app that didn't conform to these.

This is in contrast to the Linux box (running gome) I was using this afternoon and ran into no less than 3 different keyboard shortcuts for copy in various apps.

Cant even hit home/end to move the cursor on some apps command line.

home/end on the mac goes to the top or bottom of the file. To go to the begining or end of the line, cmd+left arrow or cmd+right arrow. About the only app I know of that doens't follow this is Terminal, which falls back to the unix standard of control-a and control-e

Alt-tab doesnt work, grabbed a 3rd party app to fix that.

You're right, it doesn't work. If you're pressing alt. To switch between apps, you use cmd+tab. This brings every window of a particular app forward. Then, to switch between individual windows, cmd+~. It seems you would prefer to have to work your way through x many windows in one app before even getting to work your way through the next app's windows. And to find software: versiontracker.com

yes, apple's default terminal app sucks

[espilce]

That's why there's iTerm. Has most everything you would expect from a real terminal emulator, including tabs (yay!)

I was impressed with some aspects of OS X, but overall it doesn't offer much to me over linux, aside from a new UNIX to learn. Some things just plain irked me, like the fact that chsh is included with the OS, yet it does nothing. This is because apple decided all user information should be controlled by NetInfo Manager. Glad they told me. Anyway, despite minor problems (which are present in every OS, some more than others) using OS X was a fairly pleasant experience. However, purchasing a computer from Apple was not. After receiving an extremely defective powerbook and waiting 4 weeks for them to say "well gee, looks like we can't fix it. We'll give you a new one" which is the exact same thing I asked for 4 frickin' weeks ago. Hmm.. I think I'll take a refund and spend my money on something other than an overpriced, broken toy, thank you.

Re:Hey, I just bought a Mac, let me tell ya...

[Tokerat]

No standard for cut/paste/select all? Um, perhaps you should check the logo on that box and make sure it's a mac. It's cmd+c/cmd+x/cmd+v/cmd+a for copy/cut/paste/selectall, and it's been that way at least since I've been using macs (~1992).

Been that way since 1984. Where do you think the idea for Ctrl-X, Ctrl-C, and Ctrl-V in Windows came from?

That was fast!!

[olrs]

I mean, the story just before this one was about apple releasing new versions of Final Cut, Shake and DVD Studio. Now another release?! Their turn around is like 30 min!! Amazing!!

You know, sometimes they're nice...

[FredFnord]

I've called up Apple when something like this happened to me. If you talk to the right people and have a serious issue, they'll frequently do something about your problem.

Now, I'm not sure that 'I bought this software that will work fine for me just before it was upgraded and I want the new version for free' is a serious issue. After all, what exactly is it about the new versions that you *have* to have, and why did you buy the old versions if they wouldn't do what you needed them to?

-fred

Shake 3 GUI

[Erik K. Veland]

I'm surprised they didn't change the user interface of Shake to better match Final Cut Pro. Just lightening the grey and changing the tabs to match FCP4s would do a world of difference.

Yes, this is probably not a priority in a production tool like this, but Shake looks really out of place on a Mac OS X system.

Bzzzzzt! Do you research.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry but you are just wrong. You obviously haven't done your research. You are off on so many counts that you should be embarrased.

"Processor:
Apple - 1 Ghz G4
Dell - 2 Ghz P4
Winner = debatable but I'll give it to Dell"

Bzzzzt! You're joking right? Debatable? No, it is not in any way debatable. A 2Ghz P4 smokes a 1Ghz G4. You are two years behind the times if you still buy into the myth propagated by Apple that Mhz don't matter.

"Wired Networking:
Apple - 10/100/1000
Dell - 10/100
Winner: Apple"

If you are one of a minority of people who need this, then you can also get it with a pcmcia card for the Dell. Yes, Apple here, but this is hardly a primary concern.

"Wireless Networking:
Apple - builtin card and antennas
Dell - PC card can be added for extra
Winner: Apple"

Bzzzzt! If you choose to configure the Dell yourself an internal wireless card/antenna can be included.

"Graphics Card:
Apple - 64 MB Nvidia GeForce 4 440 Go
Dell - 64 MB Nvidia Geforce 4 4200
About the same performance = tie"

Bzzzzt! The 440 Go doesn't support programmable pixel shaders - that is a major issue.

"Screen:
Apple - 17 in. widescreen
Dell - 15.4 in widescreen
Winner: Apple"

Bzzzzt! We aren't comparing desktops here - we are comparing latops. Either Apple loses here or Apple loses in dimensions/weight.

"Battery: Apple claims 4 hours, Dell claims 3
Winner: Performance is probably close but Apple might have a marginal lead"

Bzzzzt! The Dell has a free expansion port for a second battery (identical to the first). It in fact does double battery time.

"Warranty: both one year = tie"

Bzzzzt! For a small amount if you choose to configure your Dell you can get a 3 year warranty that provides on site service and will optionally cover even ACCIDENTAL damage INCLUDING to the SCREEN.

"Thickness and weight:
Apple - 1 in. 6.8 lbs.
Dell: 1.52 in. 6.9 lbs
Winner: Apple"

Bzzzzt! Again, either Apple loses here or Apple loses in the screen department.

You are either lying through your teeth or you are absolutely ignorant. Your claims are laughable.

You have been DEBUNKED.

Re:Bzzzzzt! Do you research.

[Arcady13]

A 2ghz P4 might smoke a 1ghz G4, but at least the G4 still runs at full speed while on battery power. There's none of that "speedstep" nonsense on Macs...

Re:Bzzzzzt! Do you research.

[Halo1]

Screen: Apple - 17 in. widescreen Dell - 15.4 in widescreen Winner: Apple" Bzzzzt! We aren't comparing desktops here - we are comparing latops. Either Apple loses here or Apple loses in dimensions/weight.

Actually, the PBG4 weighs slightly less with its 17" screen than the Dell with its 15.4" screen. Of course, it is still wider (not higher though, it's a widescreen model with the same height as a 15" screen). If you then have to add an extra battery to the Dell to be able to surpass the Powerbook's battery life, I don't want to be the one that has to lug that stuff around...

FWIW, you can also get a 3 year warranty (+ 3 years telephone support) on the Powerbook. That doesn't cost a small amount however, though I don't know how the cost compares to that from Dell.

Re:Bzzzzzt! Do you research.

[coolmacdude]

"Bzzzzt! You're joking right? Debatable? No, it is not in any way debatable. A 2Ghz P4 smokes a 1Ghz G4. You are two years behind the times if you still buy into the myth propagated by Apple that Mhz don't matter." It most certainly is debateable. I agree that in most cases that the P4 is faster. However, with apps optimized for Altivec the performance is about the same if not better with the G4. And as others have said, when on battery power the P4 is unable to run at full speed.

New Apps....

[Brat Food]

Just a note so people know where these apps fit in to workflows: (feel free to correct any innacuracies)

FINAL CUT PRO 4

Non Linear Editor. Now works with DV, DV-Pro(more bandwidth, better resolution/quality), film, and aparently anything in between. Other things to note are a new Title generator, audio mixer, and lots of tools (color correction, various video analizers). If you dont work in video production, the reasons for choosing an Avid over FCP might not seem readily apparent, especially considering the potential cost difference, but it mostly has to do with what you can do in real time(rendering effects and dissolves in software can get tedius with hi rez footage)

SHAKE 3

Compositing software. NOT a direct competitor to combustion or after effects. They all have their place in the workflow, and it would do a potential buyer well to know which tool will fulfill the requirements of their project. It is not for special effects so much (by itself, though you would composite them in on it), and dos not have the 3d support of combustion. It does however work very well for film resolutions, and has a very powerfull workflow.

DVD STUDIO 2

DVD Studio offered the most accessable way to profession DVD authoring I had found (compared to the products for windows, which had potentially more power, but were messy at best to work with). Looks as though ver.2 will up the flexibility while improving the workflow. Also, big tools that were missing from ver.1 are better compressors with more granular control, timline for integrating various video, audio, and subtitles, and better integration with final cut pro.

All in all, Apple is offering a very compelling set of tools for a wide subset of motion media production. Ugg dont want to sound like an ad, but do yourself a favor and look in to an apple solution if your going to buy tools to work in video.

Tie?

[king-manic]

RAM: Apple and Dell both 512 MB, tie

You didn't mention what type of memory it is. If the Dell had DDR and the Apple had SD 133 I'm pretty sure they advantage goes to dell.

Software:
Apple - Mac OS X, iTunes, iMovie, iDVD, iPhoto, Image Capture, iCal, iChat, Mail, IE 5,
Dell - Windows XP Pro, Dell Jukebox Premium, Dell Picture Studio, Dell Movie Studio Essentials, Outlook Express, IE 6
Winner: most definitely Apple

For most desktop users only the IE and iTunes/Jukebox would be used very much. IE 5 is nothing to brag about and neither is Safari so far. As for Ichat, The dell likly has or can download MSN/ICQ. And both of those would find a greater chance of having friends on that system than Ichat.

Graphics Card:
Apple - 64 MB Nvidia GeForce 4 440 Go
Dell - 64 MB Nvidia Geforce 4 4200
About the same performance = tie

I hope this is a typo, else your going to start claiming that your G3 will out perform A P4 3gzh.

Price:
Apple - $3299
Dell - $2640
Winner: Dell

In summary, while the PC is a little bit cheaper and the processor a little faster, in virtually every other area the Mac comes out ahead. With a Mac, you get what you pay for. Sure the processor may be a little bit slower, but it isn't a dramatic difference and the overall value of the product is just as good as a PC.

A bit cheaper? With 600$ you could buy another computer, or upgrade that version of the dell. For 600 hundred dollars you could make that dell come out ahead in non-virtually every other area. As for Value, Value is defined as

Value:An amount, as of goods, services, or money, considered to be a fair and suitable equivalent for something else; a fair price or return.

now if it's just as good as you say, how is it also good value at 25% greater cost than the PC? If it was 25% better over all, then they would be equivilent values, but the only real edge the Mac has is in some of it's software and few bits of the hardware it offers.

MX vs. 4200

[X_Caffeine]

A couple other people have already pointed out, but I really have to restate: the GF4 440 Go is nowhere near the same class a chip as the GF4 4200. The "440 Go" is a low-power version of the GF4MX, which in turn is just a souped-up GF2. The GF4 4200 is MASSIVELY better.

The GF4MX series (including the Go) play today's 3D software fine, but are mostly useless for tomorrow's stuff (like Doom3). The GF4 series is almost absurdly overpowered for today's software, and is ready for tomorrow's. (and this doesn't even touch on the new ATI and GF-FX cards...)

In most of the other comparisons (except for the processor speed, which I find largely irrelevent), I tend to agree with your assessments, however.

Re:OSS has its place, even when productivity count

[gig]

I already replied, but I have to say one more thing ...

> In some ways this is a good thing - there is nothing
> wrong with high schoolers coming away with a little
> technical knowledge.

By technical here, you mean CS-technical, computer-technical.

Video is a technical field, but students who want to make movies or TV have their own universe of technical details to master. Like cameras, lenses, light, colors, composition, DV, MPEG-4, audio sampling rates and bit depths, color depths, narrative, storytelling, dialogue, theme. Go to an Apple Store and just look at Final Cut and imagine that all the things you don't understand about its dials and buttons and meters and functions were a penalty you had to pay just to program a computer.

The attitude that it's "good" for students, in addition to the subject their studying, to also get a castor-oil like lump of computer science medicine is really, really educationally damaging. When a kid who lives and breathes MOVIES shows up at a VIDEO LAB, do not teach them CS. Do not require them to jump CS hurdles. You didn't start programming by being force-fed movie-making so why should they know UNIX to make movies. iMovie is free and it runs on a UNIX that doesn't require any admin.

There is a ridiculous bigotry amongst CS-types that somehow the computer is the only technical thing in the world and everyone has to get a taste of it. It completely ignores that a doctor or lawyer or architect or movie maker has their own technical world to master. Just because a computer is general purpose and can be used to instantiate a video-editing system at will, that doesn't mean that video editors will want to learn to work a command line. Maybe they will, maybe they won't ... don't make it a hurdle when a used iMac with iMovie and a FireWire port can be had for paper route money. Seriously. Easy desktop video on the cheap is news in 2000, maybe. It's 2003 and we expect a cheap system to also have iDVD and a DVD burner, because you can get those systems for $50/month assuming a three-year working life and they don't even need IT staff.