[Terje A. bergesen]

[stubenkastl] “The menus you can create are pretty basic.”

Just out of curiosity, what menus would you like that you can not create with DVDA?

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

[Jeffrey F. Krepner] “Once they own the Mac, they will never get to use Vegas”

Very trur, and this probably doesn’t change even if they get to chose Vegas. Even if Sony managed to get a tiny percentage of the Mac market, the cost of putting Vegas on Apple would probably be prohibitive, which means less money for Sony, and a more expensive Vegas. Which could mean less market share on the PC.

As I was saying before, the fact that Apple now runs on Intel has no impact on how easy it is to port Vegas to Apple. It is exactly as hard now as it was when apple ran on PowerPC.

at least with Avid and Adobe … and then make the switch from FCP

Not with Adobe, with the small marked share they had, they realized that there was absolutely no point for them in staying on Apple, and they have discontinued their video editing software for the Mac. Sony would be in a worse position, despite the fact that Vegas is a far superior product to Premiere (was on Apple).

I think Vegas and Mac would make a great pairing.

I think so too, in fact I think Vegas on Solaris and Linux would also be a good pairing. There is no way Sony could justify the financial loss they would incur in doing either though.

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

Any FX at all lower the frame rate considerably, which I understand, is normal. But the CPU is only working at 50% during those times. Hmmm. During renders the CPU is doing 100%

I am not quite sure I understand the above. When is it that the CPU is only at 50%? Is it during preview? You say it is at 100% at rendering.

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

Indeed, settle down and go to work. If you want a Mac on the other hand, get FCP. These days, who doesn’t want a Mac? 🙂

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

What kind of work benefits from RAID-0… It really depends. On a lot. The problem with ATA (even the SATA version) is that it engages the CPU when it writes to disk. Some times it takes quite a bit of CPU in fact. In such cases, almost no applications at all will benefit from RAID. Only an application with a huge amount of disk access and very little CPU access. Some Database stuff perhaps. For this reason, I’d recommend RAID for safety, but not for performance.

If you RAID better disk technologies, such as SCSI, where most of the intelligence is on the SCSI board and on the drive it self, you will see significant benefit from RAID in disk-bound applications such as heavy database work. This is the fact of SCSI most lost on people. SCSI in and of it self may not be much better or faster than ATA/SATA, but since there is more intelligence in the board/disk combo, it doesn’t tax your CPU each time you access the disk. This can, in multitasking and mulitiuser environments, translate into significant performance gains.

For video work, unless you are working with uncompressed or only lightly compressed high-resolution footage (is not such), your disk concerns are more in size than in speed.

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

First things first. What type of speed-up are you expecting? If you RAID your disks you will probably see a little bit of speed-up, but depending on what you do, it will probably be somewhere between marginal and not noticeable. Rendering times will probably not be affected by RAID at all.

As you probably knows, RAID comes in a few variations. Some increase speed, some increase reliability and some do both. To do both you need a minimum of three (preferrably identical) harddrives. Three, for example, 250G harddrives will give you a 500G of reliable, and slightly faster RAID.

Since you posted on a video forum I assume you are doing this on a video editing system. There isn’t many parts of a video editing system that is slowed down by your harddrives though, which leads me to think that you may get disappointed by going to RAID, since you will most likely not notice any real speed-up.

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

The fact that the Macs now have an Intil processor would not have any real effect on porting Vegas to Apple. Whether the Mac runs on Intel or on the power platform has no effect on the effort needed by Sony. If they wanted to port to Apple, they could have dones so with no more effort when Apple run on the Power platform only. Unless a significant amount of the application is written in assembly, and I assume about 0% of Vegas Video is written in assembly, what hardware a particular OS runs on has no effect on the porting effort.

So, considering the relatively large porting effort, why would Sony port Vegas to Apple? It may increase their market marginally, but not a lot. I have no idea why the Sony laptop would have any impact on this decision. Sony has no problems releasing on non-Sony hardware, for example Vegas runs quite fine on a Dell 🙂

Another matter would be running Vegas on an Intel Mac. Assume Sony managed a perfect port to Mac OSX, Vegas on a Mac would probably be significantly slower than if you booted Windows on the same hardware and run Vegas.

In other words, why on earth would Sony make Vegas available on Apple hardware, and why would it matter to them what CPU Apple is using?

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

You’ll probably have more success in a forum dedicated to stand alone video recorders or similar. Try: This one: https://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=103379.

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

Actually, the reason I chose that was that Vegas/Main Concept chose that for me. You may have seen that my footage is 16×9, and apparently Vegas/MC figures H.264 is for computer displays and wants to render with square pixels. So, no, I didn’t chose it, it was the default size chosen from my project.

—
Terje A. Bergesen

[Terje A. bergesen]

Of course I can.

For Main Concept I chose the following from Vegas:

• Video rendering quality: Best
• Video

• Frame Size: Custom 736×416
• Frame Rate: NTSC
• Field order: None
• Variable Bit Rate Max 2M, Average 1.5M, Two Pass