[effgee]

I think what can be gathered from rezonate's post is quite simply that as your daily tasks become more and more specialized as well as extremely processor-intensive, raw power is far more relevant than OS related efficiency and ease-of-use.

While the average users (office) and the regular "pro users" (designers, etc.) usually don't have to wait ages for their tasks to complete (PS filters, saving files, printing etc.), they can easily make up a small lack in speed by means of working more efficiently with OS X (more consistent software interfaces, etc.).

Rezonate on the other hand can't benefit from that - he'd better spend a few minutes more modelling something using a piece of complex and rather un-intuitive software (e.g., SoftImage) and save a few hours in rendering time.

So, yes - he's absolutely right - Apple still has some ways to go in those highly specialized niche markets.

And imagine the possibilities for us "regular folk" if we had the ease-of-use advantage and blazingly fast machines ...

[rezonate]

Originally posted by The Placid Casual:
Thanks for the in-depth post, it explains a lot!! I thought that the reasoning behind your earlier comments would come down to the fact that you used the machines for pretty high end stuff... Cheers for the very interesting insight! It seems that the G5s are not cutting it in the industry as well as Apple portraying in the press!!

Cheers.

I think for me, I was holding up Apple to a higher standard than I would with MS. Doing that though brings a bigger disappontment with things start bombing out on you, like software support.

For example, OS X is, IMO, a wonderful OS, but when you're dealing with numerous networking issues in it, it puts a damper on things.

One major issue is OpenGL support, and one which affects 3D, and video work, greatly. There definitely seems to be some performance hit in OS X when running OpenGL applications. It's slightly true of Windows as well, but not as much. Linux however, is producing a 35% performance increase when running our own internal benchmarks, and this is seen when we run apps too.

I wouldn't be so vocal if this was just about 3D, I've never held any illusions as to Macs in the 3D animation world. But this is about seeing these issue arise in the video/film world, something which Apple is touting, and I guess why they are producing a ton of their own in-house video software now.

Also, it's because of me liking Macs that I came out with all this, not due to any dislike. But just seeing people who are building small companies for 3D/video work, and then getting stung when they invest in a purely Mac solution. It is about completely differing markets that don't really overlap at times though.

P.S. ILM, very cool indeed! Can I be really rude and ask if the feature in Australia is the one that a lot of people could guess, and are enthusing about around the net?

Aha! I've actually been working on that one for a while now, but the Australia thing will be something unrelated. I've had about 4 months so far in the UK, and then Ozzie land, then back to US later in the year. So it's really under a year, but too long at times.

[rezonate]

Originally posted by effgee:
I think what can be gathered from rezonate's post is quite simply that as your daily tasks become more and more specialized as well as extremely processor-intensive, raw power is far more relevant than OS related efficiency and ease-of-use.

While the average users (office) and the regular "pro users" (designers, etc.) usually don't have to wait ages for their tasks to complete (PS filters, saving files, printing etc.), they can easily make up a small lack in speed by means of working more efficiently with OS X (more consistent software interfaces, etc.).

Rezonate on the other hand can't benefit from that - he'd better spend a few minutes more modelling something using a piece of complex and rather un-intuitive software (e.g., SoftImage) and save a few hours in rendering time.

So, yes - he's absolutely right - Apple still has some ways to go in those highly specialized niche markets.

And imagine the possibilities for us "regular folk" if we had the ease-of-use advantage and blazingly fast machines ...

It's not so much pure rendering power, but that all areas of performance, especially interaction. The main problem is GFX board support, not CPU speed, and software support.

It's not even niche marets either, but the every day, small to mid range studios that produce video, film and 3D work. Those markets that Apple are heavily advertising in, and promoting just now. I might have used our company as an example, but what I was saying is the common feelings amongst most sectors in this field. It's a huge market, and certainly has a very public appearance.


Also, you can't say what I prefer to use in regrds to this. Software is first concern, hardware is second. That initial choice then falls to the PC side due to its far greater support of hardware and software.

I don't know where you get that Softimage is un-intuitive, that is something one doesn't hear all too often, it's probably the most intuitive software out there for people who animate, and although I can't give a comparison between the PC, and Mac version (there is no Mac version), I can use Maya as one.

For example, the Mac version is instantly crippled by means of the Unlimited version not being available. Then we have to deal with the performance issues, then the lack of hardware choice to run it on when using the Mac version. Then there's the program performance, the Mac version is the singelmost worst version of the lot.

So for the average user when buying a computer to run such applications, will probably be drawn to a cheaper, far better performing hardware platform, with a far higher degree of software choices, and support. It's the Mac which is a niche platform, depending on how you lok at it. Let's hold no illusions to as to this.

This is the 3D animation world though, and the lines are pretty defined at this time. And in no way is this a nche market, no matter what end you look at it. 3D is now being done by kids of 15, they're out there producing work that blows the socks of most people too.

[rezonate]

Originally posted by trancepriest:
Rezonate,

If software optimization is the problem then what would having a dual 3GHz G5 solve? Basically from your post I read that you can't look at the Apple platform at all for the type of work you do.. and even an implication that the platform itself is widely not pro.

It's not just the animation world, but video too. Apple are making very powerful video solutions right now, but the tv, and film industry still turn to Avid, and others. So when I see Apple putting out systems that on the surface seem to be offering lower performing components when compared to other manufacturers, it kinda puts a question mark over their investment, and knowledge of this field.

Have a look at the top end G5, they settle for 512MB ram, a lower end GFX board, lack of expansion slots, etc. These aren't things that can't be solved, yet they choose to give off the appearance that they aren't interested. I see many friends, and others who are putting together systems, they see Apple, they see OS X, and some wil even buy the machine, but then they are let down. The ybought it saying thewy knew they were paying that bit extra for the Apple brand, but then they start using it, and thgns become shaky. They overlooked the initial offer by Apple, and shoved in more ram, better GFX board, but still they had problems with performance. The software is just the icing though.

I'm probably ranting too much as though it really bothers me, but it doesn't.

[trancepriest]

"Some wonder how Linux will dislodge Windows on the desktop because leading desktop applications such as Microsoft Office (Word, Excel and Access) aren't there. But, if you are a motion picture animator most of your everyday tools are already available on Linux, and the number being ported or even produced specifically for Linux is increasing at a remarkable rate." --- quote from the Linux Journal Here's the link to the article: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=4803

Linux may be all good in a specialized world... database server, web server, etc. But for what I do Linux is not even functionable. If you could recommend a decent NLE on Linux let me know. At least I could use Linux to avoid Spyware.

[rezonate]

Yup, Linux is the heavyweight in the film industry, Windows in second place. The larger studios are old Unix shops with years of using SGI's, Sun, etc under their belts. Virtually all of the main 3D apps for film and tv are on Linux now, ILM made the jump a few years ago because of the cost of SGI, and lack of performance, we re-evaluated the situation and bought heavily into Linux. The bigger studios also rely on in-house software that compliments off-the-shelf stuff, so we really had to have Linux versions of things like Softimage, Maya, etc. The next big Linux push is in the editing/compositing field. Already Discreet have released 2 key environments for Linux, previously only available on SGI. Problem is, the hardware is still way behind SGI, but it'll change.

That's another thing, cost. Wr were already heavily involved in SGI, but when PC's running Linux, or Windows could be had for far cheaper, more powerful (3D, not compositing), and better expansion options, the time was just ripe for PCs to take over. That happened in the 90s when Softimage was ported to Windows, it made everyone stop and think. Then the software compamies slowly ported their stuff over to Windows and Linux. It's another reason why many people won;t buy into Macs, they are slightly tainted with the SGI philosophy, more expensive, difficult to upgrade, etc.

Linux is already the dominant force in the larger studios for 3D work, while others might choose between Windows or Linux. I don't se Linux replacing Windows on the desktop though, it's too scraggy just now, but in the film industry it's found a good holding. It basically replaced SGI.

[effgee]

Originally posted by rezonate:
It's not so much pure rendering power, but that all areas of performance, especially interaction. The main problem is GFX board support, not CPU speed, and software support.

The curse of forum posting - I meant overall hardware performance, naturally

Originally posted by rezonate:It's not even niche marets either, but the every day, small to mid range studios that produce video, film and 3D work. Those markets that Apple are heavily advertising in, and promoting just now. I might have used our company as an example, but what I was saying is the common feelings amongst most sectors in this field. It's a huge market, and certainly has a very public appearance.

Well, compared to the total number of users you folks certainly are a niche market - albeit a lucrative one (as in revenue-generating and opinion-making folks) That's probably also the crux of it - Apple trying to "cheat" its way into those markets by means of marketing/advertising without having an entirely appropriate line of hardware to back up their promises - 100% agreement from me.

Originally posted by rezonate:Also, you can't say what I prefer to use in regrds to this. Software is first concern, hardware is second. That initial choice then falls to the PC side due to its far greater support of hardware and software. I don't know where you get that Softimage is un-intuitive, that is something one doesn't hear all too often, it's probably the most intuitive software out there for people who animate, and although I can't give a comparison between the PC, and Mac version (there is no Mac version), I can use Maya as one.

He, he - as far as animation/3d is concerned you're of course right. I was referring to usability "ideals" where the tool adapts to the way you work and not the other way around. But since I was involved in the UI (re-)design of one of the larger 3d packages out there asome time ago, I'm well aware of the fact that sticking to these ideals becomes increasingly difficult the more complex the software gets. Just think about how long it took you to master Photoshop - while I love this app, it pretty much also the level of software packages where "intuitive" becomes less and less relevant because users of these products are willing to invest a lot more time in mastering the software. The more complex the functions and the smaller the target audience for a software package the less usable it will be (that's simplified for brevity's sake, of course).

Originally posted by rezonate:[B]For example, the Mac version is instantly crippled by means of the Unlimited version not being available. Then we have to deal with the performance issues, then the lack of hardware choice to run it on when using the Mac version. Then there's the program performance, the Mac version is the singelmost worst version of the lot. Originally posted by rezonate:So for the average user when buying a computer to run such applications, will probably be drawn to a cheaper, far better performing hardware platform, with a far higher degree of software choices, and support. It's the Mac which is a niche platform, depending on how you lok at it. Let's hold no illusions to as to this.

Nah - the average user has no clue about performance and software availibility - they follow the biggest marketing budget as well as the cheapest offering, nothing else. But yes, the Mac is a niche market - and as long as Apple can maintain a healthy market share (as in "interesting enough" for existing and potential software developers) that is exactly how I'd like to keep it. I'm sure Dodge sells a crapload of Neons every year and - as a company - may make a boatload more money than, let's say BMW. Does that mean I want to drive a Neon? F**k no.

Originally posted by rezonate:This is the 3D animation world though, and the lines are pretty defined at this time. And in no way is this a nche market, no matter what end you look at it. 3D is now being done by kids of 15, they're out there producing work that blows the socks of most people too.

Maybe you're getting "popular market segment" and "large market segment" confused? Don't get me wrong here, I have the greatest respect for anyone who does great work - be it architecture, product-, 2d-, 3d-design - whatever (even though some of the CGI work in MIB2 was really bad ). But as far as the percentage of us (= creative folk) among computer users is concerned we most definitely are a niche market. There's more money to be made selling MS Office, than Maya, SoftImage or Photoshop.

[rezonate]

Originally posted by effgee:
The curse of forum posting - I meant overall hardware performance, naturally

Well, compared to the total number of users you folks certainly are a niche market - albeit a lucrative one (as in revenue-generating and opinion-making folks) That's probably also the crux of it - Apple trying to "cheat" its way into those markets by means of marketing/advertising without having an entirely appropriate line of hardware to back up their promises - 100% agreement from me.

It's a market that Apple don't have much a presence in, but the video market they certianly do, and therein lies the problem. This is market which is also key to Apple, but yet they can't get the systems right.

He, he - as far as animation/3d is concerned you're of course right. I was referring to usability "ideals" where the tool adapts to the way you work and not the other way around. But since I was involved in the UI (re-)design of one of the larger 3d packages out there asome time ago, I'm well aware of the fact that sticking to these ideals becomes increasingly difficult the more complex the software gets. Just think about how long it took you to master Photoshop - while I love this app, it pretty much also the level of software packages where "intuitive" becomes less and less relevant because users of these products are willing to invest a lot more time in mastering the software. The more complex the functions and the smaller the target audience for a software package the less usable it will be (that's simplified for brevity's sake, of course).

That's the nature of computer software in general. The target audience won't change as long as they need the tools, which is of prime importance. In fact, you mentioned Softimage, but this is a company in which the tools have taken on a different approach to a complex task, and in whcich one need not be skilled up in all aspects of the tool at hand. A modeler won't need to kow what the animation tools do, and the need to remove extraneous tools to the user is apparent in SI.

Nah - the average user has no clue about performance and software availibility - they follow the biggest marketing budget as well as the cheapest offering, nothing else. But yes, the Mac is a niche market - and as long as Apple can maintain a healthy market share (as in "interesting enough" for existing and potential software developers) that is exactly how I'd like to keep it. I'm sure Dodge sells a crapload of Neons every year and - as a company - may make a boatload more money than, let's say BMW. Does that mean I want to drive a Neon? F**k no.

There is no average user when it comes to the Mac, their market is spread out over varying groups. But, we're not tlaking about average users here, and the Mac by its nature is not selling into those areas, we have Windows for that. So yes, a company in this industry is very clued up on the software/hardware, the users are, and they decide on the tools they need. Not just going for the cheapest offering.

Maybe you're getting "popular market segment" and "large market segment" confused? Don't get me wrong here, I have the greatest respect for anyone who does great work - be it architecture, product-, 2d-, 3d-design - whatever (even though some of the CGI work in MIB2 was really bad ). But as far as the percentage of us (= creative folk) among computer users is concerned we most definitely are a niche market. There's more money to be made selling MS Office, than Maya, SoftImage or Photoshop.

Oh, I know that this type of market is small, but the Mac market is small whilst fighting for a place in media production. MS can afford to have such things as a niche, but Apple rely on it as part of their revenue. So Apple's large market revenue is from the media industry, and not really home users, although this is changing, albeit slowly, with OS X.

[saltines17]

Originally posted by rezonate:

Linux is already the dominant force in the larger studios for 3D work, while others might choose between Windows or Linux.

I just have a quick question. I know nothing about Linux, so forgive me if this is really stupid:

There are some variants of Linux that run on PowerPCs, correct?

Software compatibility has to do with x86 versus PPC, not just that it's "Linux," right?

Thanks