[zubro]

Hi all,

I would like to use Motion on my iBook G4 that I plan to upgrade with 1BG of RAM.
Just want to know what is your set up guys so I can have an idea of how it will feel...

[Catfish_Man]

Motion's not gonna like the graphics card in an iBook...

[Cadaver]

Motion's minimum graphics card requirement is an ATI Radeon Mobility 9600 or nvidia GeForce 5200 Go. The iBook does not qualify (Radeon Mobility 9200).

The current 12" PowerBook, on the other hand, meets the minimum requirement.

Edit: Motion's specs are here.
Apple has a small downloadable app that checks your computer to see if its capable of running Motion. Download here.

[zubro]

heff*ckit!!!
Slave of thechnology! I don t have $ 10.000 to put in a new machine!
fck them!!! Damn I got some HAINE gaintz zee apple!!!....

They could have considered "old" machines!....

Damn f*ckerz!!! >

.
.
.

... had to get it out... sorry.

[Nodnarb]

It's not that they aren't considering old machines. Motion is a professional program, not meant for people who have iBooks, eMacs, iMacs, etc. It is for powerbooks and powermacs, as is final cut pro, logic, etc. I'm not sure if those programs can or cannot run on an iBook, but all the PRO applications are meant for PRO users and PRO machines.

[zubro]

I am a bloody "Pro" user, and I have an iBook because of it s good specs.
1GHz G4 and over a Gig of RAM, if this can t do the job!
I started editing video on some of the first Quadra, and, I would like Apple to consider that they will fail badly if they do not adapt their softs to a broader scale of machines.
The way they work with the Edit sounds like they work only for Hollywood studios!
FCP is extremely popular and runs perfectly on "old" machines (First G4), OK, render is slow, but it works!...

I will definitely "test" Motion before I buy it.
Back with some news soonish..

[version]

That's the problem with pple, they decide what can run on what, not the user. For example, try to install FCP on some G4s, or G3s, it won't install. Apple have a little checker program to see if your machine is up to scratch. Now, when Apple mention the minimum requirements to run any Pro app, they don't mean that it wil run best on those machines; they mean that it won't even install on any anything but the required hardware.

Now that is pretty lame, since I managed to get FCP to install on one of those non-supported machines and tit runs as good as I expected. Yeah you can hack the installer program to make it install, but you shouldn't have to. Do I expect FCP to run less than perfect on a slow machine? Of course I do, but I at least like to have the choice to try.

I don't know many companies that put such limits on software like Apple does, and I guess some would say it's clever tactics to get people to upgrade, but who knows.

[moodymonster]

These are pro apps, they aren't designed for the lowest common denominator. They use cutting edge stuff. They offer massive capability for a very small price compared to the alternatives. For about £4000 (ish) you can get some serious capability that previously you'd have pay 10 times that to get. Eventually these capabilities will filter down, but the mo' it requires some horsepower to perform that doesn't exist in lower end machines.

For people doing this kind of stuff these apps are great.

Sorry if this rubs people up the wrong way, but you have to look at things in context.

[version]

Originally posted by moodymonster:
These are pro apps, they aren't designed for the lowest common denominator. They use cutting edge stuff. They offer massive capability for a very small price compared to the alternatives. For about £4000 (ish) you can get some serious capability that previously you'd have pay 10 times that to get. Eventually these capabilities will filter down, but the mo' it requires some horsepower to perform that doesn't exist in lower end machines.

For people doing this kind of stuff these apps are great.

Sorry if this rubs people up the wrong way, but you have to look at things in context.

It's not a question of whether tyhey wil function properly on lower spec machines, the problem is the fact they won't even install on them. Virtually no other company does that, it's up to the user to decide if they think performance is acceptable, not Apple.

I'm not questioning the faxt that they are pro software, but to hinder people from installing them on certain, fairly new machines, is nonsense.

FCP works fine for what I do on a non-supported machine, yet I had to go hack the installer to even get it installed, that's crazy.

Take a lok at Photoshop, Maya, or anytyhing else, they all have min. specs to be usable according to the companies, yet, you can still install them easily on realy basic machines.

That's my beef.

[melman101]

I have the first 12" Powerbook (Rev A), and motion doesnt work on my book. THAT sucks. Especially considering how the Rev A was the most expensive out of all 12"'s. lol

Mel

[Synotic]

I may be wrong, but doesn't Motion absolutely require features of the newer video cards?

[moodymonster]

Originally posted by version:
It's not a question of whether tyhey wil function properly on lower spec machines, the problem is the fact they won't even install on them. Virtually no other company does that, it's up to the user to decide if they think performance is acceptable, not Apple.

I'm not questioning the faxt that they are pro software, but to hinder people from installing them on certain, fairly new machines, is nonsense.

FCP works fine for what I do on a non-supported machine, yet I had to go hack the installer to even get it installed, that's crazy.

Take a lok at Photoshop, Maya, or anytyhing else, they all have min. specs to be usable according to the companies, yet, you can still install them easily on realy basic machines.

That's my beef.

If the software works on your machine you should be able to use it without hacking the installer, I'd agree with you. Maybe Apple have a vested interest in people upgrading

From what I can tell, Motion uses the Core Graphics/Video from Tiger and needs to have access to particular video cards to do its stuff. So in the case of Motion it probably isn't just down to the installer but a program requirement to have a video card that can process Motions stuff, without the card the program wouldn't be able to work. I'm sure someone will try it and we'll all know for sure what happens.

[Catfish_Man]

Motion requires support for ARB_VERTEX_PROGRAM and ARB_FRAGMENT_PROGRAM iirc, and without those it won't work at all. I would guess it wouldn't work even if you could get it to install. I can imagine this changing though, since CoreImage has the same requirements but has a software fallback for some (all?) of it. It would be damned slow though. My Powerbook lags on 160x120 content in motion if I add more than a few fancy effects (1GHz/768MB/R9600M).

[zubro]

Originally posted by Catfish_Man:
Motion requires support for ARB_VERTEX_PROGRAM and ARB_FRAGMENT_PROGRAM iirc, and without those it won't work at all. I would guess it wouldn't work even if you could get it to install. I can imagine this changing though, since CoreImage has the same requirements but has a software fallback for some (all?) of it. It would be damned slow though. My Powerbook lags on 160x120 content in motion if I add more than a few fancy effects (1GHz/768MB/R9600M).

So you did install Motion.
How is it running?
Should I prostitute myself to find the $ 60.000 I need to buy a "computer" to buy it?
(and YES I know that 60 large is bargain for an edit station, but I do not make 10 a day! (yet!)

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by zubro:
So you did install Motion.
How is it running?
Should I prostitute myself to find the $ 60.000 I need to buy a "computer" to buy it?
(and YES I know that 60 large is bargain for an edit station, but I do not make 10 a day! (yet!)

ehe... 1GHz PowerBook/768MB ram/Radeon 9600 Mobility, <5 frames per second @ 320x240 for anything at all complex. Even my friend's dual 2GHz G5 with 1GB of ram can't handle 800x600 at full frame rate.

<edit> but damn is it fun </edit>

[zubro]

Originally posted by Catfish_Man:
ehe... 1GHz PowerBook/768MB ram/Radeon 9600 Mobility, <5 frames per second @ 320x240 for anything at all complex. Even my friend's dual 2GHz G5 with 1GB of ram can't handle 800x600 at full frame rate.

<edit> but damn is it fun </edit>

Well, there is no way Motion would do realtime anyway, the data is still the same after all!
But I am curious about the "ease" of use, is the interface a killer?
Wich Apps are you used to?
Linear editing or not?
I prefer linear... more visual to me!

[Truepop]

I imagine that motion makes use of technology like core video and core image do in Tiger only it's not system wide when you install it on 10.3

I have dual 1GHz G4 machine with 1.5GB of RAM and 160GB of hard drive space yet I only have a GeForce 4 Ti graphics card with 128MB.

Because of the card I can't install Motion.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by zubro:
Well, there is no way Motion would do realtime anyway, the data is still the same after all!
But I am curious about the "ease" of use, is the interface a killer?
Wich Apps are you used to?
Linear editing or not?
I prefer linear... more visual to me!

Well, I'm pretty much a total amateur (I'm just trying out a friend's copy, which I suppose is technically illegal, but it's getting uninstalled shortly both for that reason and because I have no use for it), but I found the interface very easy to use, aside from attaching behaviors to particle emitters. I didn't find the way that worked intuitive at all (I'd attach a throw expecting the emitter to move, and nothing would happen). Still not sure what I was doing wrong.

Truepop: Motion and CoreImage/CoreVideo do seem to be quite related. I'd love to know exactly how that works, since it almost seems as though the tech was developed for motion and then refined and included in 10.4

[mitchell_pgh]

I think Apple knows that they need to be designing applications for hardware that doesn't exist to keep ahead.

I hear it's Motion is amazing... can't wait to stop in to my local Applestore.

[t_hah]

There are always ways around installing apps on an unsupported hardware. Whoever got Motion to install on an unsupported machine, could they point me in the right direction so that I could give it a try as well.

Thanks.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by t_hah:
There are always ways around installing apps on an unsupported hardware. Whoever got Motion to install on an unsupported machine, could they point me in the right direction so that I could give it a try as well.

Thanks.

Not gonna happen (unless you're talking about installing on unsupported processors, not unsupported graphics cards). The difference in the graphics card is qualitative not quantitative, either it supports the features motion uses or it doesn't. Running it on an older CPU should be possible, although it'll have to be a G4 and the performance will really suck.

[Synotic]

Originally posted by Catfish_Man:
aside from attaching behaviors to particle emitters. I didn't find the way that worked intuitive at all (I'd attach a throw expecting the emitter to move, and nothing would happen). Still not sure what I was doing wrong.

From all the videos I saw, it seemed pretty straightforward... you attached a "throw" and then the dashboard appears and then you use it to control the throw speed and direction.

[york28]

Originally posted by t_hah:
There are always ways around installing apps on an unsupported hardware. Whoever got Motion to install on an unsupported machine, could they point me in the right direction so that I could give it a try as well.

Thanks.

Motion directly depends on the hardware in the graphics card to function. No advanced GPU functions = not possible to run.

If someone could install it on his iBook he'd probably complain about how badly it ran. Which would be not at all.

I'm not apoligizing for Apple's behavior in this respect, but I have an iBook and I don't expect high end software to run that great on it, particularly when it's designed to run on dual processor workstations with high end graphics cards.

As for the iBook - compared to other notebooks, its specs are not so bad. But compared to a PowerMac, its specs suck.

Take a lok at Photoshop, Maya, or anytyhing else, they all have min. specs to be usable according to the companies, yet, you can still install them easily on realy basic machines.

I've never used Maya, but there is a big difference between Photoshop and apps that use video. Photoshop runs ok on an old G3, but wait until you have 20 or 30 layers, then add a layer effect or two to half of them. Then try turning layers on and off. Enjoy the blocks being redrawn before your eyes.

Apple has done this before, for example, you couldn't run DVD Studio Pro on a machine that didn't have a Superdrive, but that was addressed in the most recent version.

[GENERAL_SMILEY]

Back to the point, if you need to use any sort of interesting text, and you always wondered why Livetype was so clunky and unintuitive then motion will blow you away.

If you need to create textures, or custom graphics quickly, then motion will blow you away.

Does it run on my 17 AL rev A, no, am I pissed off - yes.

[mikellanes]

Just got it a few days ago, running it on a DP 2.5 G5 and a 9800 pro

Great program, the text composition alone blows me away, we run FCP and for $299 this program rocks. Not a stutter or hiccup so far on this setup.

Will let you know more as I do... am bracing for a hurricane today...

[GENERAL_SMILEY]

Fsck man, good luck, batten down the hatches, hope Frances treats you nice.

[ajshades]

Ya so I am pissed as hell and I know everyone is going to say you should have double check before I bought it but whatever.

BRAND new ibook g4 1.3 768ram just like everyone says it does not run.

Here is what gets me....

If apple intended for this to a "pro" program they should have said POWER MAC AND POWER BOOK ONLY or specified EXACTLY what computers can use it. I didn't not think to check my graphics card and you wanna know why? because I run final cut pro and dvd studio pro WITHOUT A PROBLEM.

I have been a loyal mac user for years but this really tans my hide. RAR

*****
So if anyone is interested I am selling Motion 2 for a significantly reduced price (purchased with educational discount). So pm and we will work out a price

*****

GARG

[loren s]

PRo sshome
Motion is Slooooooooooow... And it goes beyod Apple fourcing you to ONLY use a powermac but you have to get an even BETTER gpu card Ugh,,, And Even then it is still slower than the developer tools Fun House or Quartz Composer....
Save youyr money, go back to after effects no matter how bad it is it is not worth the time to wait for layers to render in real time on motion...

But Play with QC if you get a chance It is sad that motion is so slow. And it's NOT a pro app. It's so easy to use it could be given to school kids and they could make stuff out of it is seconds. I mean it, it is that fast to use BUT if renders like crap if you put to much on it at a time.

It could replace imovie easily if it was faster