dirtynbl wrote on 11/16/2006, 10:11 AM
Vegas blows FCP out of the water.

That said, sell your Mac and get a PC.
Steve Mann wrote on 11/16/2006, 12:25 PM
"Apple is known for creative A/V customers"
Apple is known for user snobbery.

"Vegas would be a nice fit right between FCP and Imovie"
Bewteen?? Vegas blows past FCP in just about everything but text handling.

"If Sony ported over a Apple version of Vegas ..."
Then the price would have to go up for everyone else. Software on the Apple platform tends to be a non-profit effort for everyone who has tried. There's just not enough market there to justify the investment.
ibliss wrote on 11/16/2006, 12:45 PM
"That said, sell your Mac and get a PC."

That said, sell you PC, buy a Mac, use Boot Camp and have the best of both worlds. It's a pretty good way to get into Core 2 Duo land.
DavidSinger wrote on 11/16/2006, 1:14 PM
I read a report yesterday where a team ripped open a dual-cpu dual-cord Mac laptop, pulled out the two CPUs, put in QX6700 quads and *did nothing else* to get 8 cores running with a 50% or better improvement in the OS.

Of course, Vegas, if it ran on a Mac, could use 4 of those cores, but that means the op system still has 4 totally free cores to womp on.

It's getting to the point that the only thing Mac about the Mac is the OS, the disk format, and the single-shot bolt-loading device they call a mouse.

Relax, our sound studio is 100% Mac, and I use MacDrive on my W2K machine. I can poke fun if I'm part of the party.
newhope wrote on 11/16/2006, 8:19 PM
I'm running Vegas on a Mac Pro ... Dual Core Xeon "Woodecrest" 3Ghz under boot camp and it flies.

Bought the Mac because it was actually cheaper than buying an equivalent HP or Dell Dual Zeon plus I get the benefit of running some of my software in OSX. ProTools LE, which I also run, is much better under OSX than WinXP as I actually get video out my firewire... yeah Digidesign doesn't support that in XP because they won't port the video from Quicktime to AVI... still I now have the best of both worlds (or is that the problems of both platforms?)

BTW the new apple mouse does do left and right buttons as well as the side buttons.

Vegas under OSX though ... keep dreaming cause it won't happen.
Coursedesign wrote on 11/16/2006, 9:05 PM
You can argue all day long about which is the better NLE.

In the end, FCP has sold 500,000 copies and Vegas a fraction of that, and a strong contributing factor is the integration with Motion, LiveType, SoundTrack, DVDSP, etc.

For the #2 contributing factor, just pull down the menu list of supported codecs...

It is baffling to see the reticence of Madison to put in better titling in the core software. I suspect that would move more boxes than anything else they could do.

People want convenience.
DGates wrote on 11/17/2006, 1:07 AM
I'd expect FCP to offer more, considering it costs nearly 3x as much. But I agree, any attempt to say one NLE blows another out of the water is just silly. Vegas, FCP, Premiere or Avid all have their strengths and weaknesses.
dhill wrote on 11/17/2006, 1:27 AM
Well said DGates. It's kind of like the "Texas Shoot Out" (I think that's what it was called) in DV Magazine where they reviewed 4 of the top HDV cams. What I gathered from that article was, if you're really good, you can produce great results with any of the cameras...same is true with NLE's.

Any way, with bootcamp, we don't need an Apple version. My 17 inch Core 2 Duo lap top with 3 GB RAM just arrived today. Using the expresscard 34 slot and the SeriTek/2SM2-E (made by Firm Tek) I can connect to my 1 TB G-Tech ext G-SATA drive with a claimed 135 MB per second transfer rate. Much faster than firewire 800. That's my hi-tech goodness for the night. I'll run the render test when I'm all up and running. Derek
jkrepner wrote on 11/17/2006, 8:10 AM
This whole "apple snob" concept is outdated and retarded. I know it seems that apple people are snobs--well, because many of them are with their little square glasses and black turtle necks--but many businesses and production companies use Macs and many more are switching away from Avid and going to Mac and Final Cut Studio. (Of course there is NO money in porting to Mac, that's why Avid does it ;-p... Anyway, I just got a gig as a FCP editor, I even bought a Mac and FCP and I see what the "hype" is-- it's compatibility with the awesome titler; Live Type, the great effects program; Motion, the universally used DVD app; DVD Studio Pro, and a good sound editor; Soundtrack. You can't judge Vegas vs. Final Cut, it's Vegas vs. Final Cut Studio. In addition to the seamless transition between these products (and I do mean seamless and no more rendering with alpha channels and importing stuff nonsense), Final Cut offers another key benefit: Standardization.

In order for many mid- to large businesses to operate things need to be standardized. The company I'm working for uses Final Cut because they *know* they can hire a FCP editor in a relatively short amount of time if they need to. They settled on Final Cut because there are tons of plugins, capture cards, and support. I like Vegas's interface and time line way better than Final Cut. I do. But with that said, had this company gone with Vegas they'd be basically all alone. If they needed an editor, more than likely they'd have no Vegas experience and wouldn't be able to hit the ground running and would need at least a few weeks of training before they could accomplish more advanced editing. This company would also have to get a different stand alone titler, like Graphitti, and deal with training someone to use it. The company wouldn't have much support, wouldn't have much training material to work with (compared to FCP). This company has around 20 or 30 Macs all with the full Final Cut Studio so an ad director can open a project (most media is stored on the network) and tell the sound guy to fix something. The sound guy can open the project and bounce it over to the motion guy to add a cool lower third. You get the idea. Vegas can work like that, but it'd be tough to hire 10-20 people and expect them to know Vegas, Sound Forge, and DVD architect.

Deep breath... with that said, many of these people I'm meeting are very impressed with my stuff that I've done in Vegas and they've all "heard great things" about it. They have so much tied up in Mac and Xsan servers, they'd never even consider switching to PC so there is no chance that they'll buy 20 or 30 copies of Vegas. However, if Vegas could be ported over (and somehow integrated into Final Cut Studio) I'd personally buy them a copy to show them how much better Vegas is than Final Cut Pro. I bet they'd agree and then editors they hire could choose either or.

Make sense? It's not a question of can they afford to port Vegas to Mac, it's a question of whether they can afford not to. Businesses are moving to Final Cut Studio and smart companies like Avid realize this and port their software to Mac in an effort to avoid losing customers.
Former user wrote on 11/17/2006, 8:16 AM
Just a comment, AVID started on a MAC platform. That is why all of its video structures are Quicktime.

Dave T2
TLF wrote on 11/17/2006, 8:34 AM
I used to be a snobbish Mac User.

Now I am a derisive PC user.

Why? Three macs in three years. All of them dying just as the warranty expired. Cost of repair was marginally less than buying a new Mac... or marginally less than purchasing TWO PCs with similar spec.

Couple that with the incredible array of hardware that works with PCs but not Macs, likewise for software, the difficulty in finding someone to fix a Mac, and the economics just don't add up.

Windows my be sh*t, but if the Mac OS was so great, how come Apple dropped it in favour of a Unix variant?

Maybe when Apple gets rid of its ROM and truly opens up the software, maybe then I'll be tempted to use the Mac OS...

jkrepner wrote on 11/17/2006, 8:56 AM
That's why you get to have both a PC and a Mac.

PC for the cheap and almost endless varieties of software and hardware options, and a Mac as a stand alone video editor.

For what it's worth, I don't care for one second about how Mac does its OS. I don't care if it's Unix-based, Windows-based, or whatever. As long as I can edit pictures and sounds using a keyboard and a mouse it really doesn't matter what the OS is, does, or doesn't do.

Coursedesign wrote on 11/17/2006, 10:23 AM
Why? Three macs in three years. All of them dying just as the warranty expired. Cost of repair was marginally less than buying a new Mac... or marginally less than purchasing TWO PCs with similar spec.

That's why people buy Apple Care, so they don't have to worry about those things. Seems very reasonably priced actually.

Couple that with the incredible array of hardware that works with PCs but not Macs, likewise for software, the difficulty in finding someone to fix a Mac, and the economics just don't add up.

Just coming from the DV Expo, where there was a heck of a lot more hardware that was optimized for Macs than for PCs. It's just a matter of market size.

Again if you had Apple Care, you wouldn't have to worry about who fixes your Mac, and if you didn't, there are lots of indies who do a good job too, but of course rare outside urban areas.

Windows my be sh*t, but if the Mac OS was so great, how come Apple dropped it in favour of a Unix variant?

I don't think Windows XP sucks, I'm glad it's finally very stable after six years of continuous bug fixes (bracing myself for Vista bug reports delivered by a caravan of 75-foot semi-trailers), and I like OS X a lot except for the Finder (the "Windows Explorer" equivalent, only even worse, believe it or not) which I suspect most users are hoping will be discreetly let out a back door in Leopard (the next version of OS X).

Who cares what's under the hood as long as it's stable? Unix is a lot more stable than the primitive hash that was beneath OS9 and its predecessors.

Maybe when Apple gets rid of its ROM

They did get rid of its old junk and replaced it with EFI which is as modern as it gets.
vitalforce wrote on 11/17/2006, 11:15 AM
Uh-not sure how to search threads on this question but--

Is there a way to run FCP on a WinXP system?
Coursedesign wrote on 11/17/2006, 11:42 AM

If the Win XP system is a Mac Pro or MacBook running Bootcamp.

[r]Evolution wrote on 11/17/2006, 12:01 PM
jkrepner said it best:
You can't judge Vegas vs. Final Cut, it's Vegas vs. Final Cut Studio.

If Sony had apps that could communicate the way Final Cut Studio does... people would Embrace it whole heartedly. Until then... FCP Studio will totally win out when it comes to Production Companies that need to collaborate on different aspects of projects. Not to mention - if they have to go send their projects elsewhere. Where are you going to find a Studio that is compatible with Vegas? <-- They are VERY hard to find. Point me to one.

Small Production Companies may use Vegas... (because of its Price & small Learning Curve) but the Big Dogs are NOT going to. Once again... Point me to the VEGAS Studios. Seriously... Point me to them.

I LOVE Vegas. I prefer it over any/all NLE's... but the fact is... Apple/FCP Studio kicks Sony Media Suite's @$$! If Sony makes a Suite that can communicate the way FCP Studio does... then it would be a different story.

The same rings true for Adobe's Production Bundle. Although Vegas beats the pants of Premiere... Vegas can't stand up against Adobe Production Bundle's communication/Integration.
DGates wrote on 11/17/2006, 12:39 PM
I think Sony's aware of the market for Vegas. Maybe that's why they've had such a limited presence at various tradeshows. You've really got to look hard for the anything related to Vegas. In comparison, Apple and Adobe spend big bucks on elaborate booths, or even entire wings of the tradeshow buildings.
DrLumen wrote on 11/17/2006, 8:54 PM
Personally, I'd like Sony to port Vegas to Linux. I'd like to be able to get away from Windows without having to go to Apple.

I don't see anything wrong with Apple but Linux is more hardware agnostic than Apple ever will be. For that reason, Vegas would seem to be an easy (easier) port to Linux because of no hardware acceleration issues. Also, if Sony decided to start using any type of HW acceleration it would seem easier and more compatible across systems if they used OpenGL instead of DirectX.

intel i-4790k / Asus Z97 Pro / 32GB Crucial RAM / Nvidia GTX 560Ti / 500GB Samsung SSD / 256 GB Samsung SSD / 2-WDC 4TB Black HDD's / 2-WDC 1TB HDD's / 2-HP 23" Monitors / Various MIDI gear, controllers and audio interfaces

futura wrote on 11/17/2006, 9:40 PM
As a developer by trade, being cross-OS long-term will be the best strategy for applications.

I realize companies want to promote "data lock-in", but if consumers are demanding enough to get generic data - then it can be transported across platforms, and it doesn't matter what we use - but that the data just works.

The computer is a tool, and always will be. I understand it can also be a religious and emotional experience for a lot of us. Overall, however it is just about getting the job done. If you can get the right tool for the job and your data works - use it.

I just bought a Mac Book Pro - not necessarily for video editing - but I'm excited about the possibilities of Vegas on it - I bought it because I am ready to explore a new world. That is what got me into computers in the first place, and I love learning.

As I learn how to use each tool in the right way - I hope I can be effective in solving problems either in Mac OSX, or in Windows.

Linux is certainly a contender, yet their desktop experience isn't quite there. The advantage Mac has is Apple's consistent vision about how it should all work together. Linux is still a small, isolated club of developers who make all the decisions. If it could go more mainstream and evolve, it will continue to catch the traction it deserves to become a contender for the desktop.

At this point, I'm not proseltyzing for either Windows or Mac. It deserves to be used if it is the right tool to solving your problem.

If vendors could open their own minds to allowing their products to being used across platforms - that just benefits the entire user-base.

Free data forever!

GlennChan wrote on 11/17/2006, 11:12 PM
In my opinion, I'd rather see development effort go elsewhere. Having a program work on multiple OSes can be a pain in the butt, esp. if you want things like a common GUI (for the program, and for 3rd party filters and add-ons).

Windows is fine for an OS. You have some benefits such as a wide array of programs, codec support, big user base, etc.
farss wrote on 11/18/2006, 1:02 AM
Speaking of things Apple, anyone seen those Intel iMacs?
They have to be the most butt ugly thing I've ever seen. And the display, wow. I thought the Dell 24" had banding issues, the Apple display has multiple grey splotches due to uneven backlighting and very noticeable banding in any gradients.
Coursedesign wrote on 11/18/2006, 2:27 AM
Are you talking about the $2,000 24" Intel iMac all-in-one?

The iMacs have never been for the aesthetically sensitive, I would recommend double bagging with a minimum cutout for the LCD viewport :O).

Of course even this wouldn't help if the screen is sucky too. This is odd though, because I haven't heard the screams I would have expected to have heard, so what you have seen may be an anomaly.

I'm a bit surprised they would be using a different LCD than that used in the Cinema Display which is significantly better than the Dell 24" (specifically it is sharper in small detail such as small text, and my eyes find the Apple display more pleasant to work with).
farss wrote on 11/18/2006, 2:46 AM
That sounds like the beast!

The HUGE expanse of white plastic at the bottom of the display, I just cannot believe any company would market such a thing.
And the power cord with some custom Apple connector, loose that and I'd bet it wouldn't be easy to replace and why use it when the IEC connector is worldwide standard.
And the mouse, a mouse with a nipple it seems, that's really odd.

And yes the display, well we we're only getting it fired up, maybe it needs some tweaking but when even the Macolite who'd bought it had the display issues pointed out he was forced to admit it looks far from perfect.
Of course the thing is built to a pricepoint but so is the Dell 24" display. Put the two side by side and the iMac looks, well, vast, way too much bezel and so much white that always looks slightly dirty. The iMac doesn't seem to be height adjustable either so it's not very ergonomic. The Dell looks neat, trim and purposefull and yes the display has some issues but apart from the banding the Dell seems to have more even illumination, it's not perfect either but the issues are off to the side, not bang in the middle of the display. I doubt it's a bad iMac, this one was preconfigured by a big Apple dealer with extra RAM. Hm, maybe that's a clue, they've opened it, maybe they forgot to reconnect something.
TLF wrote on 11/18/2006, 8:40 AM
Apple Care... the UK is very different from the US in respect to Mac usage. Such insurance would be next to useless.

Here's a little story for you - 100% true. The battery in one of my Macs needed replacing. I called the Apple Store in Oxford Street, London, and asked if there were any replacements in stock and how much I would have to spend. The cost quoted was £17. But 20 minutes, when I arrive in the store, I'm told £34.

£34 for a battery!

I would spend 34 pence on a replacement battery for a PC...

Every experience I have had with Apple has been negative and I simply can't trust the company, no matter how 'great' the design of the hardware is.

If Vegas constantly crashed on you, and you continually had to pay out to get it to work, wouldn't you switch to a more reliable and better supported product?

But if Macs work for you then I am delighted the tool of your choice gets your work done. That's all that matters.