I hear a Gaelic version of Vegas is coming, should be easier to do than the Japanese version.

I heard they were doing a localization in American Sign Language.

Rob

There's no need for a MAC version of Vegas.
They now have 2 Bad @$$ Suites ( FCPS & Adobe).

I've said it before and I still feel the same... Vegas needs to be part of a Suite that can communicate the way FCP Studio & Adobe does. Until then... Vegas is not the best solution for those that need to collaborate with other Apps or other editors.

Vegas is the Top Dog if you're just comparing it to FCP or Premiere... but you can't. You have to compare the Suites.

IMHO Vegas is meant for Non-Collaborative environments.

>>>IMHO Vegas is meant for Non-Collaborative environments<<<

And that is the preferable environment.

Audio-wise, I like that Vegas has strong audio tools already in it. The FCP / soundtrack workflow is not as convenient.

2- How much time do you waste/spend moving between programs? In my experience (which of course will differ from yours), I never found huge time savings in suite integration with Final Cut (and I don't use Premiere) / it's only a few minutes of your time exporting/importing stuff to other programs.

The real time-suckers IMO are OMF (to dedicated audio apps), offline/online ingest.

3- Perhaps this is a moot point, since Sony doesn't have equivalent apps for particular things (i.e. a Motion or AE equivalent). Now you could make an argument for better integration between Vegas and some compositing/effects or titling package (such as Boris Red). Or perhaps it's not really integration you want?

That's what I was afraid of. I just find myself cringing when booting into Windows vs. OSX. Vegas & DV Rack are the only apps that I use that I need PC for since CS3 is Mac.

Yesterday I saw a Demonstration of a Mac running OSX, Bootcamp, MacDrive, XP, FCP, & Vegas.

I must say... I was VERY impressed. Vegas seemed to run super smooth (the project did NOT have lots of FX though)

He captured w/ FCP to a Mac Disk and was able to access & edit the files with Vegas using MacDrive. He then did the same thing Capturing w/Vegas and editing w/ FCP.

He said that if you Capture w/ Vegas with the intent of editing with FCP or going into any other Apple App. that you need to capture a QT with a CODEC that the Apple Apps will read without rendering. Otherwise you will have to render your timeline when you import the Clip(s). He was using QT NTSC DV/DVCPro.

After seeing that... I don't feel there's a need for a Mac version of Vegas... as long as you have an Intel Mac... you've already got a Mac version. (provided you have XP)

He said by using Parallels Desktop you can actually switch back & forth between OSX & XP, without re-booting, effectively using Vegas, FCP, Motion, and any combination of OSX & XP Apps.

- I have a Mac but NOT an Intel so I do NOT have a Mac version of Vegas.

What ever happened to the innovation that came out in the PowerPC Mac days when you could have MacOS and Windows applications running side by side simultaneously, both on the screen at the same time? Did that not survive the switch to Intel? Or was it only a pipedream? I do remember seeing it demonstrated at the time.

Here's one way to do it on an intel mac (not tried it myself yet).

http://www.vmware.com/beta/fusion/



i believe parrallels can do similar things.

Sony acts in pc world the same way mac acts in computer world.
Tryin' to keep everyting under the same hood, tryin' to create some kind of "way of living" (like comps and gizmos were the only thing :P).
So, now, with the question: a sony app on a mac?
I don't think so. They'd better die than "surrender", lol.
You'll have to use a workaround I guess...

MAC OSX+Bootcamp+Windows XP+Vegas works quite well. I have a client running vegas movie studio to digitize and do ruff cuts. He then brings the hard drive to me and I finish em up. Saves a lot of edit time.

JAB

As I said on an earlier thread, I now have a Mac Pro with Xeon chips running Boot Camp and Win XP SP2 for Vegas 7e. Not only does it render super-fast, but I can preview the feared Magic Bullet Film Look HD plugins at near realtime frame rates. At last!

I also run Boot Camp (and it works great) but my hope is one day to not have to boot into Windows at all (via Paralles or Boot Camp) to run Vegas. The best option would to have the software run natively on either Mac or PC...doesn't look like that is going to happen anytime soon though.

"I've said it before and I still feel the same... Vegas needs to be part of a Suite that can communicate the way FCP Studio & Adobe does"

I keep hearing this, but when I think about the details, it doesn't really make sense. Which components of a "suite," aside from an NLE, would you suggest that Sony develop?

A photo editor? There's probably two dozen offerings out there already (including some quite good free ones). What do any of them offer really, that Photoshop doesn't already have covered in spades?

A compositing program? Aside from the fact that Vegas itself already has some pretty sophisticated compositing features, it seems to me After Effects, Shake and Combustion pretty much have this market sewn up.

That basically leaves DVD Authoring and Audio software, of which I personally think DVDA, Sound Forge, Acid and Cinescore are the best of any of the competitors. Sure they could improve integration with Vegas a bit, but that's different than developing a whole new suite.

I'd much rather Sony focus on working with EVERYBODY than chaining themselves to their own offerings. It's this format-agnostic approach that helped make Vegas such a versatile tool. Work on expanding the import/export/EDL/XML functions, keep adding native codecs, maybe buy out Satish's frameserver and keep developing that, and add an "open in image editor" function, and you're most of the way there.

One "suite" application Sony could do that I still think would blow everyone out of the water would be to take the Media Manager, Capture, Project Media, Trimmer, XDCAM and Explorer functions out of Vegas and merge them into an integrated, standalone, completely searchable media management program. Like Adobe Bridge, but on serious steroids.

" I'd much rather Sony focus on working with EVERYBODY than chaining themselves to their own offerings. It's this format-agnostic approach that helped make Vegas such a versatile tool. Work on expanding the import/export/EDL/XML functions, keep adding native codecs, maybe buy out Satish's frameserver and keep developing that, and add an "open in image editor" function, and you're most of the way there."


Ta-daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Amen to that.

Perhaps weighting this towards bringing other applications projects into Vegas would be a priority. You need to go both ways, but you want people to be happier when they're using Vegas.

Round up the lawyers. Adobe and Macromedia sued the pants off each other for years and the Macromedia interface just kept getting worse. We know how that ended.

One very subtle thing about Windows that I thought was clever was how menus worked. On the Mac you click and hold to open a menu. In Windows you can click and release and the menu stays open but if you do this on the MAC the menu collapses and you're exasperated. Mac users wouldn't notice because they hold the mouse down in Windows and things work for them. Just an example of an interface feature being more friendly to mac users migrating to the PC than Windows users migrating to the Mac.

I'm not saying that everything worked that way with Windows, but maybe you can see the idea. You want the interface to encourage converts and discourage defectors.

Rob Mack

That has to be one of my chief complaints about the Mac. Sure, 15 years ago they had the premier UI and i did my fair share of touting and evangelizing. But whereas Windows' interface improvents over the years have been substantial in both looks and functionality, Mac's interface improvements have been almost entirely flashy, but still full of "endearing" quirks like the menu collapsing that make it exasperating for those of us who "know better" how a UI should be helpful.

The Mac's OS is very much in-your-face. It's hard to concentrate on the task at hand when the OS is always there, filling up the screen. On the other hand, Windows gracefully steps out of the way and lets you get the job done without interfering.