Also, there are a lot more women directors out there who aspire to break into the industry than most people here realise. I've done short films with 4 women directors in the last 6 months alone. They just don't get the same opportunities due to the reasons I stated in my original post.
Interesting to read these perspectives from people who are not in the film industry, trying to apply "real world" perspectives on why there aren't more female directors. Hollywoood is its own beast. It does not adhere to the same rules as the corporate world that people are trying to compare it to, especially when it comes to "equal opportunity". Most of the power is held and the decision-making made by a select few powerful white men - Weinstein is just one of them.
Someone made a very good observation that women filmmakers, beyond the short film level, have a much harder time finding funding for their film and they are not wrong. I have first-hand knowledge of these things happening. I think what most of the commentators here need to realise is that movies are a product, and should also do some research on how movies get funded. Bottom line is, movies need to be able to sell, otherwise you will not get investors and/or distribution deals. And unfortunately, there is a perception within the powerbrokers (such as the people who fund these films) is that the product that women directors come up with will not sell. It's not because they're less talented, or less able to helm the movie than a male director. It's a real glass ceiling. Sure, the average moviegoer won't care if it's a man or woman directing it, but they're not the ones making decisions when it comes to spending $150+ million worth of investor money. It's always a gamble producing a film, and producers want to minimize the amount of risk when producing a movie. The more money involved, the greater the risk, so it's "safer" to choose a man. Also the same applies to minorities. Have a look at the number of non-white directors leading Hollywood blockbuster films. Taika Waititi (Thor: Ragnarok) and Ryan Coogler (Black Panther) are the only ones who come to mind right now.
As much as I hate it, money is the bottom line in this industry. It's not talent. Before Wonder Woman, Patty Jenkins had a league of doubters. The director of Harley Quinn will also be facing the same scrutiny. And they get that extra scrutiny because they're women. Men don't have to go through that.
Although, for the bottom end - movies that are $5-$20 million range - I see there's a general move away from traditional studios, and towards being funded and distributed by streaming companies such as Netflix and Amazon. Those types of films do provide more opportunities for women because there are a lot less commercial factors at play there. If you look at the 14% of women directors out there working on narrative films, you'll see the majority of them are directing indies, not Hollywood blockbusters.
Also, someone else mentioned that more women need to be encouraged to take up directing. I agree with that as well. A lot of women don't want to get into directing because they believe it's too difficult, hence less female directors, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Anyways, that's just my 2 cents. It's not a liberal/SJW agenda trying to get more women directors. There are real sexist forces at play here that a lot of people here don't have visibility into.
Yes, that's true, but in a world of shrinking deadlines, increased competition and a dying music industry, you still have to be competitive. These tools do enhance workflow and they enable you to be more productive. As the parent would very well know, when you work in professional audio, even a couple of hours of computer downtime (be it configuration issues or restarting things or whatever) is disastrous.
Oh, and the cost of hardware/software is only a small factor when you're actually doing this for a living.
I've done a bit of session work here in Los Angeles (drums) and I can assure you that pretty much all of the professional studios here use a Mac and a version of Pro Tools HD.
I use Logic 9 at home, but as someone who works in the business, the consensus is, if you're a serious musician, you go Mac.
I'm just curious to know what sort of PCI interface you got there. AFAIK, the latest Macbook Pro laptops can go down to 32 and 64 samples with higher-end firewire interfaces like the Apogees, Metric Halos and RME Firefaces, it's basically impossible to notice the latency at those buffer sizes. Heck, I can record guitar at 128 with hardly any noticeable latency. Also, the audio card is not the biggest limiting factor with regards to how many audio/midi tracks and effects you can run (for playback and mixing - recording is a different matter), it's your processor speed, HD speed and RAM size.
Unless you're running a Pro Tools TDM or HD rig, in which case, carry on good sir.
i saw the pronounciation in the definition of what a FAQ is. but:
It is an acronym. That means you pronounce it. You don't spell it. It's Just like NASA (Nae-Sa, not En, Ei, Es, Ei). Get it right. oh man, you are stating here that because it is an acronym, you pronounce it. what a stupid generalisation. my point is that there are acronyms there that you cannot pronounce and you have to spell it out. so, how do you pronounce JFK? oh yeah, you spell it because it sounds ridiculous when you try to pronounce phonetically.
but then again you seem to like to troll "mac fanbois". so yeah. righto. okay. whatever.
abbreviation is the shortening of words (such as etcetera to etc.), not taking the first letters of the word, which is an acronym. there are some instances where you do pronounce the acronym, such as NASA, but there are others which are impossible to pronounce, such as TBA or MTBF, hence you do explicitly say every letter in those cases.
You bring up some good points, but I'm not sure I agree with a few of them.
Are not in the same ballpark as far as polish, consistency, printed manuals and a general sense of finishedness goes... But they are well on par (if not superior) in terms of functions. They are all miles ahead in terms of expandability compared to the existing big name applications.
I would disagree with that. None of those programs would compete with huge behemoth DAWs like Cubase or Logic or Pro Tools in terms of features. Do any of them come with Beat Detective (Pro Tools)? What about Space Designer, or a Hammond B3 emulation or Ultrabeat (Logic)?
Ok, let me give an example of Logic Pro, because that's what I use and most familiar with. Do any of those programs listed match up in terms of functions? specs effects instruments sound library
And for me, expandability is the ability to use the widest range of plugins that would affect my mixing and recording work. Linux does not yet have that for me.
one minor area where open source audio apps absolutely kills the big name commercial apps is the online community - the users, experienced musos, and the developers are all one and the same people.
The online community for the big name programs is much much larger, simply because more people use those programs. I get plenty of help with whatever question I have at those forums. I post at bigbluelounge.com (which is even listed on the Apple website), but I also lurk at the DUC and logicprohelp.com. Look at some of the forum topics, some have well over 30,000 posts.
some of the audio tools are actually good enough and stable enough right now for live performance in front of real paying audiences.
I agree, but that's still very limited usage compared to what a big-name DAW is capable of doing.
open source audio is not better or worse than commercial audio apps - but it is different enough in a worthwhile way.
I'm sorry to say this, but right now it is definitely worse and it's going to be like that until Linux DAWs are used professionally at the highest levels of the music industry. One indicator of the lack of popularity of Linux DAWs is the coverage in music production magazines, such as Future Music, Computer Music, Sound on Sound, MIX, EQ and Virtual Instruments, although this is changing. CM has a dedicated Linux section, albeit only two pages worth. This is at the moment though, so who knows what will happen in the future. But even in 2007, many mixing and mastering engineers still refuse to use Pro Tools or anything computer based. Most of the others who do use DAWs don't solely mix in the box and use a buttload of outboard hardware.
AFAIK, unfortunately, native plugin support is virtually zero on Linux. Yes, there is the Linux VST standard, but that still requires companies to recompile their plugins for that, as a Linux VST plugin does not use the same binary as a Windows VST. You can run Windows VSTs under Linux, but that involves a lot of playing around with WINE and JACK and other things which most musicians don't have the time, and more importantly, the technical ability to set up. I mean, it's hard enough
are you an idiot, or don't you know how to speak english? how do you say TV? "tee-vee" or "tuv"? speaking of TV, what about TV stations? CBS? NBC? what about LA? SF? NY? oh yeah, and i don't think JFK has ever been pronounced "jufk" by anyone. FU buddy.
See this is another Myth that gets a lot of play from people that don't know better.
If you were talking about the GP's last two sentences, then no it is not a myth.
In terms of Audio, Vista's fidelity is several times XP and OS X just based on how audio is processed at what bit rate, how multi sounds are mixed in the OS so there is no downsampling, etc.
Oh, well then I expect everyone who's using a $10k+ Pro Tools HD rig (on Mac or PC) to switch over to a DAW that supports Vista's new features because their mixes will sound several times better then? You would NOT be able to tell a several time improvement in fidelity in ANYTHING audio-wise anyway, unless it was a stupid comparison like something recorded in 24-bit vs. 4-bit. Heck, most people can't tell the improvement between a 192kbps and 320kbps MP3. Or even 128 to 192.
Go look up Sonar/Cakewalk, they produce some very popular sound software, and they also swear by Vista's new audio features bringing audio quality to new professional level beyond what XP had or what OS X can produce. (Not just mix or edit, but actually play in realtime with realtime multi-channel output.)
As for why you should move to Vista, there are tons of articles that go into more depth than I could provide here. But since Audio seems to be important to you, Vista is the best consumer level OS for Audio/Video, as it implements the most robust Audio stack with realtime sync features that have only been seen in BeOS to date.
For recording musicians, XP and OS X already do what you claim through ASIO, CoreAudio and also Digidesign's DAE. All play in realtime, low latency with multi-channel input and output.
I would like to see those Cakewalk and Steinberg quotes. Audio quality will be the same whether its done on OS X, Vista, XP or even Linux. It has NOTHING to do with the OS and all to do with the DAW, plugins, hardware (compressors, EQ, converters, mixing desk etc.) you are using. However, the quality of your workflow (latency issues, performance issues etc.)...well that's a totally different matter and nothing to do with outright audio quality.
And I would like to call BS on audio drivers for Vista. Most of the audio interfaces out there only have a 32-bit driver for their hardware, which is basically an XP driver, which means that you cannot yet run 64-bit Windows with them. And the only software at the moment that supports 64-bit memory addressing (which is completely unrelated to 64-bit internal processing within a DAW) is Cakewalk Sonar on Windows (and it's claimed Logic Pro 8 will also support 64-bit when Leopard comes out). AFAIK, no drivers yet support WaveRT and WASAPI yet.
Also, unless you run a Pro Tools HD rig, at the moment for the best low latency performance on Windows you still have to use ASIO (which is not a Vista native API, it's also used in previous versions of Windows) which basically bypasses all of Vista's new audio features - WASAPI and WaveRT. Native Instruments have stated that they won't support WaveRT (you can google that one) and the advantages of WASAPI/WaveRT/etc. over ASIO and OS X's CoreAudio (if there are any) are still unclear at this point. Since ASIO originated from Steinberg, it's also unlikely that Cubase/Nuendo will be supporting anything else. CoreAudio is now stable, proven low-latency performer and well-supported. Most crucially, however, Digidesign are always going to use their own drivers for Pro Tools, bypassing the OS.
I'd advise anyone who's interested in running a DAW on Vista to check out the July 2007 issue of Sound On Sound as they have a "Vista for Musicians" feature with a roundtable of music hardware and software developers. Here's a forum thread relating to it:
Sound On Sound thread
i double checked newegg.com. so yes, ONE 2.66ghz woodcrest xeon is $713.00. soooo... multiply that by two and we have $1426.00 already and that doesn't include the motherboard, FB-DIMM RAM, hard drive, case, cooling, etc. etc. etc. even with just the processors alone it is not a $1500 difference.
you admitted the motherboard isn't dual CPU...i don't think you noticed that ALL mac pros have _dual_ xeons. and also mac pros use FB-DIMMS which also add to the price.
and considering the target market the mac pro is aimed at - it is aimed at professionals...not hobbyists. these people don't have the time or the inclination to build their own systems and spec everything part-by-part. for these people...time is money. the time that they save by not speccing, building, testing, installing software on the system is worth the extra few hundred dollars. i know it's such a cliche, but they want something that just works.
Re:Just a few problems in your post...
on
Leopard Vs. Vista
·
· Score: 1
You're good at throwing buzzwords out I'll tell you that...I'll try and hit the major points here...
"Comic life - if you haven't tried it (and by your comment, it seems you haven't), then you're just uninformed. Comic life isn't the most essential app I've ever used, but it's more like "DTP for comics" than "add a few speech bubbles"... And it's interface is gorgeously intuitive. It's sort of in a class of its own, but it's *really* nicely done, to the extent that it was a showcase app at one of Apple's events." Bottom line is that it's still a near useless app that can be replaced by freeware on any platform.
"Grid computing - lots of (linux) systems can be configured, but I doubt any of them are quite so easy to configure as a Mac:
Control Panel -> Sharing -> hit the 'XGrid' checkbox. Done. I guess that qualifies as "best in class"." So it just randomly selects clients to connect to, network interfaces to use, and every other parameter? I call bullshit...
"iLife - um, either you don't know what you're talking about, or you're just wrong. Show me the gentoo program that can create a DVD menu by dragging photos, adding transitions and behaviours (akin to "Motion") to make them move/interact, drag/dropping movies for both menus and content, allowing layout of all this and interaction-scripts to be written. Now show me a program that does all that with an intuitive well-designed interface. I could do the same for pretty much all the iLife apps (not just iDvd) - they're textbook examples of "best in class" apps." That's a girly way to say it makes pretty menus...sounds to me like it does everything any other DVD authoring program does only with that pretty mac theme that every program on those pieces of shit use.
"Shake is not a plugin. I was privileged to know and work with the Shake team, and it's a truly awesome (in the traditional, rather than Californian sense) piece of software. The coders are demi-gods - yes I mean you Christophe and Arnaud. Shake is a compositing application that is used to create entire movies - just about every movie in recent times will have been through either Discreet Logic or Shake (probably both). I used to work in the post-production business, I know of what I speak - a licence for Shake was ~$10k. A "plugin" it is not. Sadly it's been discontinued, however the original team are hard at work on (presumably) its successor." From http://www.apple.com/shake/
Shake 4.1. The perfect ==extension== for Final Cut Studio.
Also from Apple's site:
"Is Shake still available on Linux?
Yes, Shake 4.1 for Linux is available through shake-sales@apple.com. Pricing has not changed for Linux."
"Logic, Logic Express, FCP - I've lumped these together because your ignorance is showing here. These are all standout-applications. Go to the BBC, or CNN, or just about any post-production house and you'll see FCP being used. Really used, as in workhorse-used. These are flagship applications for Apple, and it shows. I have a friend in ops at CNN - almost every journalist there will use a Macbook (Pro) in the field, with FCP to do rough-edits and provide EDLs back to the studios. The BBC are the same. When the two largest news organisations on the planet swear by your software, you're doing something right..." Yeah and the president uses a PC...feel free to state your sources in a way that can be proven.
"Core-data is not "old technology" just catching up. It's a full object-relational model, built into the OS that can use a SQL (or other) back-end as storage. You get full undo/redo functionality "for free" because of its comprehensive object model. It's essentially "Enterprise Objects" scaled down for the desktop. There's nothing (that I know of) like it bundled with any other OS. "Best in class" I guess" The undo/redo functionality here is old news, and readily available with any other
I don't see anything in that group that I don't enjoy a better version of on both my XP and Gentoo install... like? you have an equivalent to garageband? imovie? idvd? and free? where is it so i can download it for all my friends to use.
This is a plugin for a proprietary piece of movie software, not a program itself...and nothing unique or innovative. funny that, i seem to recall that shake is currently being sold as a STANDALONE program without final cut pro (or any other program) required.
The only thing I can see different from this and MY music software is you have to shell out 300 dollars for it... wow...now you are really showing your ignorance here. have you actually USED logic pro? or for that matter ANY form of professional DAW (i.e. cubase, pro tools, sonar)? well, there are reasons why you pay all that money for logic pro et al. logic pro is professional-quality music software used by professional musicians hence the so-called "high" initial cost (including the mac), which, in the long run (providing you're using the software to earn money) is actually insignificant as you repay the investment many times over. but logic pro/express is also great for the amateur home studio as it includes everything that you need out of the box.
so does your music software have this? - almost unlimited audio and midi counts, multi-channel recording, powerful scoring functions, a huge array of high-quality plugins, unrivalled midi features, almost unlimited flexibility via the environment and screensets and industry-wide hardware and plug-in software support? actually if i had to buy each of the bundled plugins separately, it would cost me thousands, especially the big ones such as evb3, sculpture, ultrabeat and space designer which would be outrageous for a typical home/project studio. actually, i read a comparo (i think it was in future music UK or sound on sound) in which space designer was pretty competitive wtih altiverb and waves ir-1 both of which cost _hundreds_. and the evb3 is one of the best hammond emulations out there.
just so you'd know, i'd advise that you visit: http://www.apple.com/logicexpress/comparison.html. let's see if your free music software measures up to _even_ logic express (the cut down version). hopefully by now it should be clear to you that there is no PC equivalent of logic. and don't even bother mentioning the other DAWs, they are just catching up in many respects. just letting you know that pro tools and logic pro are the two most widely used DAWs in the industry. it's no wonder macs dominate the music studio scene - in recording and mixing especially.
logic pro "just" a music program? so high-profile logic pro users like depeche mode and nine inch nails and radiohead are "just" musicians, right? or do they use logic because they are "mac fanbois"? musicians don't give a stuff about whether it's a pc or a mac - just whether it gets the job done or not. and macs get the job done more often in the music biz.
and yes, i use both logic and pro tools le to compose, record and mix as i'm a music major (drums) and have a bit of experience recording myself and other people in studios.
Dude, just answer his question. How will this benefit Apple?
There is nothing wrong with acting out of self-interest. In fact, calling for Apple to let you run OS X on non-Apple machines is acting out of self-interest yourself, no?
right. and you also expect everyone to know how to use computers is like expecting everyone to know how to perform brain surgery or being experts in tort law.
look, some people are good at certain things, some good at others. just because some people don't know how to use (or even want to know) computers does not make them ignorant. you don't see quantum physicists going around calling you ignorant because you don't know the mathematics behind determining the spin of a quanta.
oh wait, this is slashdot. us geeks are the elite because we know how to use computers, the rest of the population are all ignoramuses. riiiiiight.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, there are a lot more women directors out there who aspire to break into the industry than most people here realise. I've done short films with 4 women directors in the last 6 months alone. They just don't get the same opportunities due to the reasons I stated in my original post.
Interesting to read these perspectives from people who are not in the film industry, trying to apply "real world" perspectives on why there aren't more female directors. Hollywoood is its own beast. It does not adhere to the same rules as the corporate world that people are trying to compare it to, especially when it comes to "equal opportunity". Most of the power is held and the decision-making made by a select few powerful white men - Weinstein is just one of them.
Someone made a very good observation that women filmmakers, beyond the short film level, have a much harder time finding funding for their film and they are not wrong. I have first-hand knowledge of these things happening. I think what most of the commentators here need to realise is that movies are a product, and should also do some research on how movies get funded. Bottom line is, movies need to be able to sell, otherwise you will not get investors and/or distribution deals. And unfortunately, there is a perception within the powerbrokers (such as the people who fund these films) is that the product that women directors come up with will not sell. It's not because they're less talented, or less able to helm the movie than a male director. It's a real glass ceiling. Sure, the average moviegoer won't care if it's a man or woman directing it, but they're not the ones making decisions when it comes to spending $150+ million worth of investor money. It's always a gamble producing a film, and producers want to minimize the amount of risk when producing a movie. The more money involved, the greater the risk, so it's "safer" to choose a man. Also the same applies to minorities. Have a look at the number of non-white directors leading Hollywood blockbuster films. Taika Waititi (Thor: Ragnarok) and Ryan Coogler (Black Panther) are the only ones who come to mind right now.
As much as I hate it, money is the bottom line in this industry. It's not talent. Before Wonder Woman, Patty Jenkins had a league of doubters. The director of Harley Quinn will also be facing the same scrutiny. And they get that extra scrutiny because they're women. Men don't have to go through that.
Although, for the bottom end - movies that are $5-$20 million range - I see there's a general move away from traditional studios, and towards being funded and distributed by streaming companies such as Netflix and Amazon. Those types of films do provide more opportunities for women because there are a lot less commercial factors at play there. If you look at the 14% of women directors out there working on narrative films, you'll see the majority of them are directing indies, not Hollywood blockbusters.
Also, someone else mentioned that more women need to be encouraged to take up directing. I agree with that as well. A lot of women don't want to get into directing because they believe it's too difficult, hence less female directors, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Anyways, that's just my 2 cents. It's not a liberal/SJW agenda trying to get more women directors. There are real sexist forces at play here that a lot of people here don't have visibility into.
I wonder if anyone realises that you CAN distribute FOSS through the _Mac_ App Store... remember, Lion contains GPL/LGPL code...
Aaaaand to those equating Ubuntu or any Linux desktop with iOS rather than OS X in regards to installing any app you want - hahahaha comparison FAIL.
Yes, that's true, but in a world of shrinking deadlines, increased competition and a dying music industry, you still have to be competitive. These tools do enhance workflow and they enable you to be more productive. As the parent would very well know, when you work in professional audio, even a couple of hours of computer downtime (be it configuration issues or restarting things or whatever) is disastrous.
Oh, and the cost of hardware/software is only a small factor when you're actually doing this for a living.
But for $79/free with a new Mac? And regarding the free Linux alternatives - without any setup or configuration hassles?
I've done a bit of session work here in Los Angeles (drums) and I can assure you that pretty much all of the professional studios here use a Mac and a version of Pro Tools HD.
I use Logic 9 at home, but as someone who works in the business, the consensus is, if you're a serious musician, you go Mac.
I'm just curious to know what sort of PCI interface you got there. AFAIK, the latest Macbook Pro laptops can go down to 32 and 64 samples with higher-end firewire interfaces like the Apogees, Metric Halos and RME Firefaces, it's basically impossible to notice the latency at those buffer sizes. Heck, I can record guitar at 128 with hardly any noticeable latency. Also, the audio card is not the biggest limiting factor with regards to how many audio/midi tracks and effects you can run (for playback and mixing - recording is a different matter), it's your processor speed, HD speed and RAM size.
Unless you're running a Pro Tools TDM or HD rig, in which case, carry on good sir.
It is an acronym. That means you pronounce it. You don't spell it. It's Just like NASA (Nae-Sa, not En, Ei, Es, Ei). Get it right. oh man, you are stating here that because it is an acronym, you pronounce it. what a stupid generalisation. my point is that there are acronyms there that you cannot pronounce and you have to spell it out. so, how do you pronounce JFK? oh yeah, you spell it because it sounds ridiculous when you try to pronounce phonetically.
but then again you seem to like to troll "mac fanbois". so yeah. righto. okay. whatever.
abbreviation is the shortening of words (such as etcetera to etc.), not taking the first letters of the word, which is an acronym. there are some instances where you do pronounce the acronym, such as NASA, but there are others which are impossible to pronounce, such as TBA or MTBF, hence you do explicitly say every letter in those cases.
Are not in the same ballpark as far as polish, consistency, printed manuals and a general sense of finishedness goes ... But they are well on par (if not superior) in terms of functions. They are all miles ahead in terms of expandability compared to the existing big name applications.
I would disagree with that. None of those programs would compete with huge behemoth DAWs like Cubase or Logic or Pro Tools in terms of features. Do any of them come with Beat Detective (Pro Tools)? What about Space Designer, or a Hammond B3 emulation or Ultrabeat (Logic)?
Ok, let me give an example of Logic Pro, because that's what I use and most familiar with. Do any of those programs listed match up in terms of functions?
specs
effects
instruments
sound library
And for me, expandability is the ability to use the widest range of plugins that would affect my mixing and recording work. Linux does not yet have that for me.
one minor area where open source audio apps absolutely kills the big name commercial apps is the online community - the users, experienced musos, and the developers are all one and the same people.
The online community for the big name programs is much much larger, simply because more people use those programs. I get plenty of help with whatever question I have at those forums. I post at bigbluelounge.com (which is even listed on the Apple website), but I also lurk at the DUC and logicprohelp.com. Look at some of the forum topics, some have well over 30,000 posts.
Big Blue Lounge
Logic Pro help
the DUC - Digidesign Pro Tools forum
the LUG (Logic Users Group)
Cubase forum
Sonar forum
Ableton Live forum
just to name a few.
some of the audio tools are actually good enough and stable enough right now for live performance in front of real paying audiences.
I agree, but that's still very limited usage compared to what a big-name DAW is capable of doing.
open source audio is not better or worse than commercial audio apps - but it is different enough in a worthwhile way.
I'm sorry to say this, but right now it is definitely worse and it's going to be like that until Linux DAWs are used professionally at the highest levels of the music industry. One indicator of the lack of popularity of Linux DAWs is the coverage in music production magazines, such as Future Music, Computer Music, Sound on Sound, MIX, EQ and Virtual Instruments, although this is changing. CM has a dedicated Linux section, albeit only two pages worth. This is at the moment though, so who knows what will happen in the future. But even in 2007, many mixing and mastering engineers still refuse to use Pro Tools or anything computer based. Most of the others who do use DAWs don't solely mix in the box and use a buttload of outboard hardware.
AFAIK, unfortunately, native plugin support is virtually zero on Linux. Yes, there is the Linux VST standard, but that still requires companies to recompile their plugins for that, as a Linux VST plugin does not use the same binary as a Windows VST. You can run Windows VSTs under Linux, but that involves a lot of playing around with WINE and JACK and other things which most musicians don't have the time, and more importantly, the technical ability to set up. I mean, it's hard enough
are you an idiot, or don't you know how to speak english? how do you say TV? "tee-vee" or "tuv"? speaking of TV, what about TV stations? CBS? NBC? what about LA? SF? NY? oh yeah, and i don't think JFK has ever been pronounced "jufk" by anyone. FU buddy.
pronounce it? oh, you mean, like OS X, XP, NT, WWDC, USA, BA, BS, SOB and FU?
See this is another Myth that gets a lot of play from people that don't know better.
If you were talking about the GP's last two sentences, then no it is not a myth.
In terms of Audio, Vista's fidelity is several times XP and OS X just based on how audio is processed at what bit rate, how multi sounds are mixed in the OS so there is no downsampling, etc.
Oh, well then I expect everyone who's using a $10k+ Pro Tools HD rig (on Mac or PC) to switch over to a DAW that supports Vista's new features because their mixes will sound several times better then? You would NOT be able to tell a several time improvement in fidelity in ANYTHING audio-wise anyway, unless it was a stupid comparison like something recorded in 24-bit vs. 4-bit. Heck, most people can't tell the improvement between a 192kbps and 320kbps MP3. Or even 128 to 192.
Go look up Sonar/Cakewalk, they produce some very popular sound software, and they also swear by Vista's new audio features bringing audio quality to new professional level beyond what XP had or what OS X can produce. (Not just mix or edit, but actually play in realtime with realtime multi-channel output.)
As for why you should move to Vista, there are tons of articles that go into more depth than I could provide here. But since Audio seems to be important to you, Vista is the best consumer level OS for Audio/Video, as it implements the most robust Audio stack with realtime sync features that have only been seen in BeOS to date.
For recording musicians, XP and OS X already do what you claim through ASIO, CoreAudio and also Digidesign's DAE. All play in realtime, low latency with multi-channel input and output.
I would like to see those Cakewalk and Steinberg quotes. Audio quality will be the same whether its done on OS X, Vista, XP or even Linux. It has NOTHING to do with the OS and all to do with the DAW, plugins, hardware (compressors, EQ, converters, mixing desk etc.) you are using. However, the quality of your workflow (latency issues, performance issues etc.)...well that's a totally different matter and nothing to do with outright audio quality.
And I would like to call BS on audio drivers for Vista. Most of the audio interfaces out there only have a 32-bit driver for their hardware, which is basically an XP driver, which means that you cannot yet run 64-bit Windows with them. And the only software at the moment that supports 64-bit memory addressing (which is completely unrelated to 64-bit internal processing within a DAW) is Cakewalk Sonar on Windows (and it's claimed Logic Pro 8 will also support 64-bit when Leopard comes out). AFAIK, no drivers yet support WaveRT and WASAPI yet.
Also, unless you run a Pro Tools HD rig, at the moment for the best low latency performance on Windows you still have to use ASIO (which is not a Vista native API, it's also used in previous versions of Windows) which basically bypasses all of Vista's new audio features - WASAPI and WaveRT. Native Instruments have stated that they won't support WaveRT (you can google that one) and the advantages of WASAPI/WaveRT/etc. over ASIO and OS X's CoreAudio (if there are any) are still unclear at this point. Since ASIO originated from Steinberg, it's also unlikely that Cubase/Nuendo will be supporting anything else. CoreAudio is now stable, proven low-latency performer and well-supported. Most crucially, however, Digidesign are always going to use their own drivers for Pro Tools, bypassing the OS.
I'd advise anyone who's interested in running a DAW on Vista to check out the July 2007 issue of Sound On Sound as they have a "Vista for Musicians" feature with a roundtable of music hardware and software developers. Here's a forum thread relating to it: Sound On Sound thread
A few points came out
now now, no need to resort to juvenile name-calling.
all mac pros ARE dual processor.
apple store
i double checked newegg.com. so yes, ONE 2.66ghz woodcrest xeon is $713.00. soooo... multiply that by two and we have $1426.00 already and that doesn't include the motherboard, FB-DIMM RAM, hard drive, case, cooling, etc. etc. etc. even with just the processors alone it is not a $1500 difference.
so, pray tell, how did you get $1000.43?
you admitted the motherboard isn't dual CPU...i don't think you noticed that ALL mac pros have _dual_ xeons. and also mac pros use FB-DIMMS which also add to the price. and considering the target market the mac pro is aimed at - it is aimed at professionals...not hobbyists. these people don't have the time or the inclination to build their own systems and spec everything part-by-part. for these people...time is money. the time that they save by not speccing, building, testing, installing software on the system is worth the extra few hundred dollars. i know it's such a cliche, but they want something that just works.
Well duh.
Isn't it obvious? If you'd rather spec out and then build the computer yourself, then the Mac Pro, rather, any Mac, is not for you.
Not everyone has the time, buddy.
oh yeah, here's an interview showing that radiohead was using logic back in the emagic days.
http://www.audiohead.net/interviews/radiohead
You're good at throwing buzzwords out I'll tell you that...I'll try and hit the major points here...
:
"Comic life - if you haven't tried it (and by your comment, it seems you haven't), then you're just uninformed. Comic life isn't the most essential app I've ever used, but it's more like "DTP for comics" than "add a few speech bubbles"... And it's interface is gorgeously intuitive. It's sort of in a class of its own, but it's *really* nicely done, to the extent that it was a showcase app at one of Apple's events."
Bottom line is that it's still a near useless app that can be replaced by freeware on any platform.
"Grid computing - lots of (linux) systems can be configured, but I doubt any of them are quite so easy to configure as a Mac: Control Panel -> Sharing -> hit the 'XGrid' checkbox. Done. I guess that qualifies as "best in class"."
So it just randomly selects clients to connect to, network interfaces to use, and every other parameter? I call bullshit...
"iLife - um, either you don't know what you're talking about, or you're just wrong. Show me the gentoo program that can create a DVD menu by dragging photos, adding transitions and behaviours (akin to "Motion") to make them move/interact, drag/dropping movies for both menus and content, allowing layout of all this and interaction-scripts to be written. Now show me a program that does all that with an intuitive well-designed interface. I could do the same for pretty much all the iLife apps (not just iDvd) - they're textbook examples of "best in class" apps."
That's a girly way to say it makes pretty menus...sounds to me like it does everything any other DVD authoring program does only with that pretty mac theme that every program on those pieces of shit use.
"Shake is not a plugin. I was privileged to know and work with the Shake team, and it's a truly awesome (in the traditional, rather than Californian sense) piece of software. The coders are demi-gods - yes I mean you Christophe and Arnaud. Shake is a compositing application that is used to create entire movies - just about every movie in recent times will have been through either Discreet Logic or Shake (probably both). I used to work in the post-production business, I know of what I speak - a licence for Shake was ~$10k. A "plugin" it is not. Sadly it's been discontinued, however the original team are hard at work on (presumably) its successor."
From http://www.apple.com/shake/ Shake 4.1. The perfect ==extension== for Final Cut Studio. Also from Apple's site
"Is Shake still available on Linux?
Yes, Shake 4.1 for Linux is available through shake-sales@apple.com. Pricing has not changed for Linux."
"Logic, Logic Express, FCP - I've lumped these together because your ignorance is showing here. These are all standout-applications. Go to the BBC, or CNN, or just about any post-production house and you'll see FCP being used. Really used, as in workhorse-used. These are flagship applications for Apple, and it shows. I have a friend in ops at CNN - almost every journalist there will use a Macbook (Pro) in the field, with FCP to do rough-edits and provide EDLs back to the studios. The BBC are the same. When the two largest news organisations on the planet swear by your software, you're doing something right..."
Yeah and the president uses a PC...feel free to state your sources in a way that can be proven.
"Core-data is not "old technology" just catching up. It's a full object-relational model, built into the OS that can use a SQL (or other) back-end as storage. You get full undo/redo functionality "for free" because of its comprehensive object model. It's essentially "Enterprise Objects" scaled down for the desktop. There's nothing (that I know of) like it bundled with any other OS. "Best in class" I guess"
The undo/redo functionality here is old news, and readily available with any other
ok. i'll bite.
. let's see if your free music software measures up to _even_ logic express (the cut down version). hopefully by now it should be clear to you that there is no PC equivalent of logic. and don't even bother mentioning the other DAWs, they are just catching up in many respects. just letting you know that pro tools and logic pro are the two most widely used DAWs in the industry. it's no wonder macs dominate the music studio scene - in recording and mixing especially.
I don't see anything in that group that I don't enjoy a better version of on both my XP and Gentoo install... like? you have an equivalent to garageband? imovie? idvd? and free? where is it so i can download it for all my friends to use.
This is a plugin for a proprietary piece of movie software, not a program itself...and nothing unique or innovative. funny that, i seem to recall that shake is currently being sold as a STANDALONE program without final cut pro (or any other program) required.
The only thing I can see different from this and MY music software is you have to shell out 300 dollars for it... wow...now you are really showing your ignorance here. have you actually USED logic pro? or for that matter ANY form of professional DAW (i.e. cubase, pro tools, sonar)? well, there are reasons why you pay all that money for logic pro et al. logic pro is professional-quality music software used by professional musicians hence the so-called "high" initial cost (including the mac), which, in the long run (providing you're using the software to earn money) is actually insignificant as you repay the investment many times over. but logic pro/express is also great for the amateur home studio as it includes everything that you need out of the box.
so does your music software have this? - almost unlimited audio and midi counts, multi-channel recording, powerful scoring functions, a huge array of high-quality plugins, unrivalled midi features, almost unlimited flexibility via the environment and screensets and industry-wide hardware and plug-in software support? actually if i had to buy each of the bundled plugins separately, it would cost me thousands, especially the big ones such as evb3, sculpture, ultrabeat and space designer which would be outrageous for a typical home/project studio. actually, i read a comparo (i think it was in future music UK or sound on sound) in which space designer was pretty competitive wtih altiverb and waves ir-1 both of which cost _hundreds_. and the evb3 is one of the best hammond emulations out there.
just so you'd know, i'd advise that you visit: http://www.apple.com/logicexpress/comparison.html
logic pro "just" a music program? so high-profile logic pro users like depeche mode and nine inch nails and radiohead are "just" musicians, right? or do they use logic because they are "mac fanbois"? musicians don't give a stuff about whether it's a pc or a mac - just whether it gets the job done or not. and macs get the job done more often in the music biz.
list of VIP logic pro users
and yes, i use both logic and pro tools le to compose, record and mix as i'm a music major (drums) and have a bit of experience recording myself and other people in studios.
most people don't seem to know the original joke:
there are three types of people: those who can count and those who can't.
Dude, just answer his question. How will this benefit Apple? There is nothing wrong with acting out of self-interest. In fact, calling for Apple to let you run OS X on non-Apple machines is acting out of self-interest yourself, no?
that was for the ac, not dogdude
right. and you also expect everyone to know how to use computers is like expecting everyone to know how to perform brain surgery or being experts in tort law.
look, some people are good at certain things, some good at others. just because some people don't know how to use (or even want to know) computers does not make them ignorant. you don't see quantum physicists going around calling you ignorant because you don't know the mathematics behind determining the spin of a quanta.
oh wait, this is slashdot. us geeks are the elite because we know how to use computers, the rest of the population are all ignoramuses. riiiiiight.