Andrew Richards
Forum Replies Created
-
[Kevin Patrick] “Are they running some standard Windows NVIDIA cards (as in not For Mac) with just the correct NVIDIA driver?”
They are flashing standard third party Windows/Linux NVIDIA cards with a custom ROM that is EFI-friendly. Macs use EFI instead of BIOS to initialize hardware, and almost all third-party GPUs will only initialize with BIOS. That is why you can’t just buy any old GPU for a Mac Pro (that and drivers, but more about that below).
[Kevin Patrick] “One of the posters refers to using a GTX 570, nothing modded. “
The NVIDIA GeForce drivers recently released for Lion 10.7.3 reportedly will work with GTX5XX cards without any mods, though they do not show the grey Apple boot screen- they only start to work once OS X loads the drivers (login window). Then as noted in the thread I linked, they apparently don’t use all the available PCIe bandwidth. Getting an EFI-flashed card and installing the NVIDIA drivers gets you complete (if unofficial) GTX5XX support. At least according to the guys in that thread I linked.
Best,
Andy -
Ironically (perhaps?), that campaign, or at least part of it, was produced by FCPX adopter @radical.media.
Best,
Andy -
[Kevin Patrick] “In the three days I was there, I’d say the Adobe seats were almost always filled up. When one presentation ended, seats that were vacated were quickly taken up. Often times there were people standing around all three sides. It was always fairly full. “
That is how Apple’s booths were back in 2004-2007. The Apple Demo Theater was always mobbed, with the standing-room-only crowd spilling into the thoroughfare. It bodes well for Adobe that they had the same level of interest this year that Apple commanded during the ascent of FCP.
Best,
Andy -
[Jeremy Garchow] “It doesn’t work like fcp, it works like AE.”
Yep. Different. For some, different is only bad if it is Apple’s different.
Best,
Andy -
[Andrew Kimery] “For better or for worse Avid and Adobe need higher-end users so, as long as there is competition, those companies will cater to those higher-end users.”
I agree Avid needs the high-end customers, since they buy the big iron that makes Avid its real money. Adobe? They make money by selling as many copies of CS6 as they can (among their other product lines, which are actually a much larger portion of their overall business), and they sell more CS6 if they target the broad middle as much or more than the very high end. Courting the high end is good for Adobe’s marketing and mind-share, but it doesn’t make them proportionally more money since they aren’t in the hardware game. A seat of CS6 sold to a wedding videographer makes Adobe the same amount of money as a seat sold to a Hollywood editor. There are a lot more of the former than the latter out there.
Best,
Andy -
[Greg Andonian] “It appears that not many people asked Adobe to remove the source viewer and put in a magnetic timeline with no tracks.”
I’ve heard people asking for the ability to open more than one project at a time. Is Adobe listening?
Best,
Andy -
[Herb Sevush] “Walter Biscardi dropped FCP within 6 months of the release. Bunim/Murray also switched within the year.”
I know, I guess I worded that badly. I meant they weren’t the ones proselytizing in the weeks following June 21 insisting that Apple had clearly signaled its intent and that anyone not throwing their Macs and iPhones on the bonfire was a fool. They just made business decisions and told us all about it.
Best,
Andy -
[Shane Ross] “I too think it has come a long way, and if Apple released FCX 10.0.3…the features that it has in 10.0.3, the reaction would have been a lot different. I wouldn’t have thought they didn’t care about the pro market. But now it is too late…”
This sentiment puzzles me. Had they waited to release FCP X in January, 2012 instead of in June, 2011, it would mean they care about professionals? Either way, they did the development and the features are there now. Why are those features any less for the pro market just because they were added in increments over the course of six months? Why is Apple’s development work on those features any less an effort to support the pro market because it shipped them after the initial release? As Mr. Soyka is keen to point out- it is very unlikely the features of 10.0.3 were all developed up from nothing after 10.0.0 shipped.
Best,
Andy -
[Chris Kenny] “If I were building a new facility today for in-house create editorial (i.e. not suites rented to outside editors, where you have just offer what they want), the ‘standard’ editing machine would absolutely be iMac + Thunderbolt RAID & video I/O + FCP X.”
iMac + Thunderbolt SANlink & video I/O + FCP X + Xsan/StorNext
Fixed that for you. We are talking about a facility, right? 🙂
Best,
Andy -
[Jason J Rodriguez] “At the moment, Adobe is listening, Apple is not, so it’s really not a difficult decision on our part.”
I think it is unfair to say Apple isn’t listening. They aren’t talking (much), but they insist they are listening. They have also now released in essence three consecutive near-term feature roadmaps, which is more than they ever did before. They delivered the first two with the features they promised in the timeframe they promised them in.
I can’t argue they aren’t needlessly secretive when it comes to certain product lines, and I sympathize with you vis a vis their long history of one-way customer communication.
But not talking and not listening are two very different things. One-way customer communication is very frustrating though, I get that.
Best,
Andy