Return-Path: Received: from eatspam.slcc.edu ([144.35.15.69] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 4745853 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 20:56:16 +0200 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1339613937-0439c30fed1664b0001-edO5QZ Received: from vCAS2.slcc.int ([10.1.11.53]) by eatspam.slcc.edu with ESMTP id AGRKiFv3WNe1eqcD for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 12:58:57 -0600 (MDT) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: John.Morgan@slcc.edu Received: from EXCH.slcc.int ([127.0.0.1]) by vCAS2.slcc.int ([fe80::8031:551b:9a53:7716%11]) with mapi; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 12:58:57 -0600 From: John Morgan To: After Effects Mail List Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 12:58:56 -0600 Subject: RE: [AE] [OT] musings on the future of Mac "Pro" Thread-Topic: [AE] [OT] musings on the future of Mac "Pro" X-ASG-Orig-Subj: RE: [AE] [OT] musings on the future of Mac "Pro" Thread-Index: Ac1JkaHd0Me8DzByQFOAzK850nxlbAAAFZAw Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_EAE675A223415848A14AA69EBCDE9D0A64987463B2EXCHslccint_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Barracuda-Connect: UNKNOWN[10.1.11.53] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1339613937 X-Barracuda-URL: http://eatspam.slcc.edu:8000/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at slcc.edu X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=6.0 tests=BSF_SC5_SA210e, HTML_MESSAGE X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.2.99760 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.00 BSF_SC5_SA210e Custom Rule SA210e --_000_EAE675A223415848A14AA69EBCDE9D0A64987463B2EXCHslccint_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jim, Interesting thoughts indeed. Mind if I add a few more? As preface, I put my= self in the "corporate producer" category. Playing off your mention of Arri RAW and Red, it strikes me that some in th= is industry have gravitated to Arri and Red for the express purpose of bein= g able to call themselves "Pro". IMO, if they're not shooting for cinema-s= ized outputs, what's the point of all that resolution? I've always chuckled= at some in that crowd, anxious to call themselves indie film makers, who d= on't have the infrastructure, storage space or means to edit and handle 2k-= 4k material. I simply want to add my 2-bit opinion that in your excellent = analysis and search for new definitions to distinguish what "pro" is-as I c= onsider my own production kit which includes Panasonic P2 and Sony F3 camer= as-that the primary over-arching object that has contributed to my own sens= e of "pro" is the massive amount of (fiber channel) storage that I've been= lucky enough to acquire and have access to. Every Pr and Ae project, every edit, every P2 and SxS card's worth of video= since May 2006 (when I switched to tapeless and HD) is live and editable o= n my system. My strategy is and has been to keep all my data and keep movin= g it forward to larger storage systems, and so far I'm 2 generations deep i= nto that strategy. But to have everything live and editable has helped me b= ecome fast and efficient in ways that no other single object, camera or com= puter, could ever do. So I'd simply like to add to your analysis that "pro" also means you have a= data strategy that transcends camera or computer. I know....my point has = little to do with what Mac does with their MBP, but it caused me to think a= bout my own definitions and formula for success working within the same cor= porate entity for 26 years with the past 16 of those years being as video c= ontent creator. John From: After Effects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv] On Behalf Of= Jim Curtis Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 12:23 PM To: After Effects Mail List Subject: [AE] [OT] musings on the future of Mac "Pro" I've never understood power users need for "small and light". "Power users" doesn't mean what it used to. I saw an Apple ad on TV yesterday for the new MBP. They were running FCPX = on it. This tells me that their definition of what constitutes "pro" has m= orphed. It now means "anybody with a camera and laptop." Just as "broadca= st quality" and "HD" got hijacked by marketeers, so goes other once-meaning= ful terms. People who "need" a MacPro has been reduced to people who use ProRes4444, u= ncompressed HD, Arri RAW and RED. That's a small fraction of the "pro" mar= ket. I'd guess that the rest of the "pro" market, which includes corporate= producers, news gathering, marketing destined for the web, wedding and eve= nt videographers, and so on, is 90% of the total. For them, a laptop or iM= ac based equipment package will suffice. We're going to need a new word to distinguish between what used to be "pro,= " and what is now "pro." Pro HD? Ultra-super Pro? I digress. I'm starting to think that if you're in the desktop class, just forget abou= t Apple. That's a dead end. They're catering to the 90%, and doing a swel= l job. A three-year product cycle is not good enough. Fire them. If I were running Adobe, I'd consider dropping Mac support for the CS, exce= pt for maybe a dumbed down feature set line of iCrap apps. Clearly, there'= s money to be made there. I don't know. Maybe I'm succumbing to what Seinfeld called "The Preemptive= Breakup." Perhaps the companies that make Apple products worth having sho= uld dump Apple before Apple dumps them. That could be cutting off their no= se to spite their face. But, investing in development costs for a dead end= product could be a risk not worth taking. If there was justice in the wor= ld, Apple's intransigence communicating with their customers should cost th= em dearly. Seems to me that investing in Windows hardware is a much safer bet for the = Super Ultra Pro HD set. This message, and any attachments, is intended only for the use of the addr= essee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential or ot= herwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this= e-mail is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any una= uthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this message = is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please no= tify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail and any attachments= from your system.= --_000_EAE675A223415848A14AA69EBCDE9D0A64987463B2EXCHslccint_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jim,=

Interesting thoughts indeed. M= ind if I add a few more? As preface, I put myself in the “corporate p= roducer” category.

<= o:p> 

Playing off your men= tion of Arri RAW and Red, it strikes me that some in this industry have gra= vitated to Arri and Red for the express purpose of being able to call thems= elves “Pro”.  IMO, if they’re not shooting for cinem= a-sized outputs, what’s the point of all that resolution? I’ve = always chuckled at some in that crowd, anxious to call themselves indie fil= m makers, who don’t have the infrastructure, storage space or means t= o edit and handle 2k-4k material.  I simply want to add my 2-bit opini= on that in your excellent analysis and search for new definitions to distin= guish what “pro” is—as I consider my own production kit w= hich includes Panasonic P2 and Sony F3 cameras—that the primary over-= arching object that has contributed to my own sense of “pro” is= the massive amount of  (fiber channel) storage that I’ve been l= ucky enough to acquire and have access to.

 

Ev= ery Pr and Ae project, every edit, every P2 and SxS card’s worth of v= ideo since May 2006 (when I switched to tapeless and HD) is live and editab= le on my system. My strategy is and has been to keep all my data and keep m= oving it forward to larger storage systems, and so far I’m 2 generati= ons deep into that strategy. But to have everything live and editable has h= elped me become fast and efficient in ways that no other single object, cam= era or computer, could ever do.

<= span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F= 497D'> 

So I’d = simply like to add to your analysis that “pro” also means you h= ave a data strategy that transcends camera or computer.  I know…= .my point has little to do with what Mac does with their MBP, but it caused= me to think about my own definitions and formula for success working withi= n the same corporate entity for 26 years with the past 16 of those years be= ing as video content creator.

 

John=

 

 

 

From:= After E= ffects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv] On Behalf Of Jim C= urtis
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 12:23 PM
To: After= Effects Mail List
Subject: [AE] [OT] musings on the future of Ma= c "Pro"

 

I’ve never understo= od power users need for “small and light”. 

=  

"Power users" doe= sn't mean what it used to.

&nb= sp;

I saw an Apple ad on TV y= esterday for the new MBP.  They were running FCPX on it.  This te= lls me that their definition of what constitutes "pro" has morphe= d.  It now means "anybody with a camera and laptop."  J= ust as "broadcast quality" and "HD" got hijacked by mar= keteers, so goes other once-meaningful terms.

 

Peopl= e who "need" a MacPro has been reduced to people who use ProRes44= 44, uncompressed HD, Arri RAW and RED.  That's a small fraction of the= "pro" market.  I'd guess that the rest of the "pro&quo= t; market, which includes corporate producers, news gathering, marketing de= stined for the web, wedding and event videographers, and so on, is 90% of t= he total.  For them, a laptop or iMac based equipment package will suf= fice.

 =

We're going to need a new word to = distinguish between what used to be "pro," and what is now "= pro."  Pro HD?  Ultra-super Pro?  I digress.=

 

<= p class=3DMsoNormal>I'm starting to think that if you're in the desktop cla= ss, just forget about Apple.  That's a dead end.  They're caterin= g to the 90%, and doing a swell job.  A three-year product cycle is no= t good enough.  Fire them.

 

If I were running A= dobe, I'd consider dropping Mac support for the CS, except for maybe a dumb= ed down feature set line of iCrap apps.  Clearly, there's money to be = made there.

 =

I don't know.  Maybe I'm succumbin= g to what Seinfeld called "The Preemptive Breakup."  Perhaps= the companies that make Apple products worth having should dump Apple befo= re Apple dumps them.  That could be cutting off their nose to spite th= eir face.  But, investing in development costs for a dead end product = could be a risk not worth taking.  If there was justice in the world, = Apple's intransigence communicating with their customers should cost them d= early.

 

<= /div>

Seems to me that investing in Windows hardwa= re is a much safer bet for the Super Ultra Pro HD set.

=

 

 


This message, and any attach= ments, is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain inform= ation that is privileged and confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosu= re under applicable law. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended = recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use, dissemination= , distribution or reproduction of this message is prohibited. If you have = received this communication in error, please notify the sender by return e-= mail and delete this e-mail and any attachments from your system. &nbs= p;­­  = --_000_EAE675A223415848A14AA69EBCDE9D0A64987463B2EXCHslccint_--