-
AE and a Universal Binary
I was going to write a tome on my feelings about Mac AE and a Universal Binary but, how about some bullet points.
-
5 Replies
-
I doubt Adobe will change their timetable, however an alternative is possible, I’ve posted a possible solution before and have also sent this to Adobe.
Maybe we can petition Adobe to investigate this avenue.As a user of After Effects, and an owner of a Macbook, My main machine is a dual 2.5 G5 I have run AE tryout on XP via Bootcamp. The same comp ran almost 50% faster on the Macbook through XP.
Now after seeing that I would be inclined to purchase a license to use AE on this and only this machine ( you could use the MAC address to lock it to a specific machine that would expire after a certain date) through XP til the UB version comes out. But I am not about to cough up $1000 for a full version.
I have no desire to use XP on an ongoing basis ( I love the way OSX works)
So why can’t Adobe put together a licensing program that would help out current customers? Make them happy and keep them? we just want to get our work done.
The alternatives are using other programs and piracy. please don’t push us in that direction.
I am not suggesting that piracy is the answer, I am only putting forth a possible road less ethical types might take.
Thanks for your understanding
mdr -
Agreed. I don’t have a bunch of money sitting around doing nothing and so buying a new Windows license is not a going to happen (even if I was willing to work on windows).
Motion I have already and Shake is $499, but more then the cost is the time I have invested in AE and the time it would take to get up to speed in these other programs.
I guess what I’m saying is I’m getting very close to the point were it IS worth the TIME and money to change.
I know the situation is what it is, just wondering how many others are at that point.
TonyTony
-
While I understand your frustrations, it is somewhat pointless to discuss Adobe’s business and development policies here on this forum. I agree that their behavior certainly gives the impression of them being a complacent monopolist, but please consider that for them it may not make much sense to rush things only because people complain, as harsh as that may sound. I believe the simple truth of the matter is that their entire product portfolio is so intertwined with each other, that code is shared between different apps and if you are converting even only one of those apps to UB, you are automatically commited to having to convert all other apps as well. Considering the sheer number of apps they have to rtake care of, it is quite an undertaking. I’m sure they are working hard on it and at some point suddenly all of their apps will be UB (if you remember, Adobe likes to publish its products as “suites” these days), but since even the best programmer in the world can only work X hours a day, they may not be able to push the release date any closer.
As for you switching packages, I would only add a few thoughts:
– Shake is outdated, and the discontinuation of development proves it. So even if you get it cheap, you are buying old software with limited support. At latest when third-party plugins are discontinued as well, you may feel the pain.
– Apple promises a new app at the beginning of 2008. Whether they can hold that date, is mere speculation at this point. So in all fairness, I look forward to hearing your complaints about Apple being late then if they can’t deliver on time.
– It is also mere speculation what this new app will be like. Will it be a fusion of FCP, Motion and Shake? will it be completely different? Nobody knows. You may find you don’t like it and have to look for other options again.
– When a completely new app is being developed, will Motion survive or will it have to go, too?
– With all the above being said, make sure you can say to yourself with confidence that it is worth to learn an app that is gone in about 1.5 years when you know that it takes half a year to get proficient in it.I’m not trying to bash Apple or Shake, but I believe that you may be looking in the wrong direction. I know it’s a completely different class and I also know that you have no inclination to work on Windows, but were I in your place, I would look into Fusion or Nuke. Both apps at least have a future and already do so much more than Shake.
Mylenium
[Pour Myl
-
My point was not to rush Adobe (it will take as long as it takes) but to suggest a compromise, where Adobe would be able to make Mac users with Intel macs happy that they can run at full speed in XP til the UB version comes out. I mean ya just bought a new Quad and the only part of your workflow that takes a hit is AE and Photoshop.
mdr -
Nuke – $5000
Fusion – $5000 (and windows)
Toxik – $5000
And these prices don’t include maintenance fees.
Outdated doesn’t necessarily mean useless. Shake is certainly not as outdate as Windows itself.I expect that elements from Shake will be rolled into Motion and be apart of the FCP studio package.
Apple’s next stand alone compositing software maybe in that same 5K price range as well and so it won’t be for me but if Shake/Motion run with the power available on the ProMac and Adobe doesn’t keep pace I don’t want to just wait on them getting around to it in their next development cycle.
Try this thought exercise on for fun:
1) Adobe releases new product updates in spring ’07.
2) Microsoft release Vistas in spring ’07.
3) Adobe keeps to their 18 to 24 month development cycle.
The result = you wouldn’t be able to use Vista and the new hardware that is build to utilize it until spring of 2009.btw, discussion is never pointless.
TonyTony
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up