Do you edit (if any) using a Mac, PC (Windows), or Turnkey Editing Appliance? Why?

Myself, i use Mac because, well, Final Cut of course.

Discuss.

Macintosh of course. theres only one way to go: FCE/P.

Macintosh of course. theres only one way to go: FCE/P.

In the interest of fairness... it can be illuminating to mention why you hold this position.

Oh, and :hi: Mr 3CCD, too.

Any reasons why a Mac might be better than a PC, other than a Mac has FCP?

I've always used a PC with Windows because I've never had the opportunity to try anything else (not counting my Commodore 64 and DOS years). I doubt I would switch to a new OS, if I did, though.

I dont know, i guess i've always used macs and worked my way up the editing ladder using iMovie, then Final Cut Express, and, eventually, FCP. Although, I've tried PCs. i guess my opinion of mac being better is kinda biased.

I've heard quite a bit about those editing appliances (you mean: i.e. Casablanca?), but im still not sure about how you would get mp3's or aac's onto the appliance. anyone know?

I edit with Macs, though just recently switched from Windows. i had heard a lot of good about Apple, not only the graphics or the ease of use, but also their final cut line. I had worked with sony vegas.

I am really starting to like how simple and easy to use they are. cuts much time off the editing process.

it's all about Macs. I love computers, Pcs are great. But there's somthing about a mac, that just makes life easier. I have never gotten a virus with my mac. Anything you plug into a mac works, and doesnt have to take you throught ten different menus to tell the computer oh hey you have a new mouse or printer. I know PCs have there goods, like cheap. But It's worth paying extra to have a work horse, oh ya Mac never die i swear. I have a powermac G3, and i just updated it with Os 10, and it still runs like I just bought it. Now I have a powerbook G4, and it's wireless internet, and printer i love it. Now for editing three words Final Cut Pro, by far the best editing system ever. Watch out PC's Mac is coming.

so true.

I've heard quite a bit about those editing appliances (you mean: i.e. Casablanca?)

The "turnkey editing appliance's" I'm talking about come from manufacturers such as Applied Magic (Sequel, Screenplay and Screenplay Plus), Edirol (DV-7DL), and, yes, Casablanca (Avio, Prestige, and Solitaire).

Watch out PC's Mac is coming. i am a mac man only and have been for most of my life. The sad thing is that mac were the first to make computers but were too excited about what they had created and gave the technology away to IBM, before microsoft was around. Correct me if im wrong but i believe thats the way it went. Maybe if mac didnt give the technology away it would be more popular and therefor have even better programs today. still i cant complain with fce, shake, studio pro etc. out of lack of experience with fcp, what is the main difference between fcp and fce? does fcp just have more effects, better colour correction, titles etc?

what is the main difference between fcp and fce?

There are many differences between FCE and FCP, too many to list actually, mostly the less obvious differences. Here's a more detailed list of the differences between iMovie, FCE, and FCP if your really interested.

http://www.apple.com/finalcut/

Wow, I said 'differences' a lot, didn't I?

i am a mac man only and have been for most of my life. The sad thing is that mac were the first to make computers but were too excited about what they had created and gave the technology away to IBM, before microsoft was around.

That's not really the way it happened. Believe me, Apple has never been one to give away much of anything. There are lot of reasons that Apple lost out to the PC market, but it's probably too long of story to get into here.

In my experience, both OSX and WXP are about the same in terms of reliability. They're both stable, powerful and easy to use. Obviously both have their advantages and disadvantages, but I think we've finally reached a point where you can buy the OS you for the particular needs you have and be comfortable with your decision.

On the editing side, you can either go with Avid (Mac/PC) or FCP (Mac only). Both are top of the line, industry-standard systems with heaps of advantages. Wide user base. Ubiquity. Avids are more stable than FCP in my experience, since Avids are more likely to run on turnkey systems, especially at the high end. Avids are also more expensive to get into if you want all the functionality that FCP offers.

All in all, I give the edge to FCP. It's only gaining in popularity and has become the defacto standard in the indie market.

There are lot of reasons that Apple lost out to the PC market, but it's probably too long of story to get into here.
"Lost out"? I don't quite think that Apple 'lost out' to PC's, or even windows for that matter. If anything, the 'better OS' title is slowly slipping out of Windows' grasp right into Apples hands. Some people (not all, evidentally), including Consumer Reports, know that Macintosh is typically the better computer, except for one thing: the price. But, with the technology market getting cheaper and cheaper, Apple has jumped on that quicker than Windows, and they are getting more affordable and more widely used. Whereas they used to just be the computers for the "wealthy", having been so expensive, their user range is growing to more customers.

So, as Sir VegasIndiesTV the great once said, "Watch out PC's Mac is coming." :)

"Lost out"? I don't quite think that Apple 'lost out' to PC's, or even windows for that matter.

Apple currently has less than 5% market share. Windows has over 90%. And it's not like Apple is aiming for the niche market like Lamborghini or Ferarri. They're the Honda to the PC Toyota. Both computers do roughly the same things, have the same reliability, and trade off on issues like security and price.

What's funny about your spin on this is that Apple currently OWNS the portable music market with about 60% market share. Most Mac devotees consider the competition "also-rans" who shouldn't even bother trying to compete with the Ipod.

But if dominating market share makes the competish an "also ran", what does that make Apple in the PC market?

Man, I really like Macs, but I fucking hate the cult of Mac. It's a real turn off.

Some people (not all, evidentally), including Consumer Reports, know that Macintosh is typically the better computer, except for one thing: the price.

And availability of software. And games. In addition to the aforementioned price.

Look, Macs are great, no question. But so are Wintel machines. In fact, the systems are so comparable that it's really ridiculous to award a "Better OS" title without first knowing what you need it for. If you're a hard core gamer, for example, it's difficult to say that OSX is "better" under ANY criteria. They're more expensive, titles are in short supply, and those that are available come out on the Mac months, sometimes years, after they come out for Windows.

For editing, OSX definitely has an edge because of FCP. But Avids run in Windows as well as they do on Macs. So again it depends on what you need it for.

I use both, and I'm happy with both systems.

But, with the technology market getting cheaper and cheaper, Apple has jumped on that quicker than Windows, and they are getting more affordable and more widely used.

It would incredibly difficult to make the case that Apple has jumped on the cheaper technology market faster than PCs. In fact, you JUST said that the expensive price is what has kept Macs from proliferating the way PCs have.

PCs have been affordable for years. Mac only just last month released anything even CLOSE to the hardware for the price. And it's STILL more expensive than a more powerful PC, especially once you upgrade the RAM and add a keyboard, mouse, and monitor.

Frankly, I'm GLAD to see Apple FINALLY release a system that doesn't cost a mint to buy. It's way underpowered for what I personally need it for, but it's a step in the right direction.

Alright Pc's Rock don't get me wrong. I love Technology, But one thing I'm going to say is Macs are not cheap, but you get what you pay for. I've already gone through two Pc's meaning died on like peace out. And I still have my Old G3 running like i just bought it yesterday. So Truthfully to me it equals out. And for me buddy it's not a cult, I just buy what I like. when it comes down to it there both great machines just buy what you want. So work that extra job if you wanna buy a Mac it's worth it. Love Peace Chicken Grease.

And for me buddy it's not a cult, I just buy what I like. when it comes down to it there both great machines just buy what you want.

Anyone who says "PCs rock" is definitely not part of the Mac cult, so no worries. ;)

And for what it's worth, I've owned two G3's running OS9 and they were steaming piles of crap. They crashed all the time, they were slow, and I had to buy my software twice to use it on both systems (not Apple's fault for sure, but still part of the cost of ownership). And when an app went down, it took the whole system with it (Windows has had protected memory since NT and W95, and Unix had it before that).

At the time I was running Windows NT and then 2000, both of which were rock solid. Now with OSX, Mac has a damn fine OS and with FCP, a damn fine editing system. I'm definitely not a switcher, but I am an "adder."

Apple currently has less than 5% market share. Windows has over 90%.
On one hand, that's quite surprising, but, on the other, that actually makes a lot of sense. Windows is much cheaper and way more consumers purchase and use that platform compared to the Apple OS. And, excuse the error, it isn't just because of the price. I shouldn't have said that. The availability of software and, well, dealers, also add to that statistic, you're right.

What's funny about your spin on this is that Apple currently OWNS the portable music market with about 60% market share. Most Mac devotees consider the competition "also-rans" who shouldn't even bother trying to compete with the Ipod.

But if dominating market share makes the competish an "also ran", what does that make Apple in the PC market?
That, though, I am going to have to disagree with. Although you have a good analogy going and that is a very good connection you have made, in my opinion that is not necessarily true.

I do not get too involved with the portable music player/mp3 player industry, but i do understand that the iPod is the cadillac of mp3 players. Apple, despite it's small percentage of users in the computer market (as you claim), is not, in my opinion, an "also-ran" next to PCs. Where PCs have their weaknesses, Macs excel. And where Macs have their weaknesses, PCs excel. Also, "PC" is a very general term, so your percentage is not completely unbiased. There are many, many different manufacturers of PCs, whereas There is only one manufacturer of Mac: Macintosh. So, saying that PCs have "90%" of market share is, well, unfair when you could be talking about 1 or 100.

In fact, the systems are so comparable that it's really ridiculous to award a "Better OS" title without first knowing what you need it for. If you're a hard core gamer, for example, it's difficult to say that OSX is "better" under ANY criteria.
I, and many others, would definitely have to agree with that. Just like the whole "90%-5%" it is not really fair to say that when one does not take into account all of the variables.

For editing, OSX definitely has an edge because of FCP.
Thank you. That's what i was trying to get at.

It would incredibly difficult to make the case that Apple has jumped on the cheaper technology market faster than PCs. In fact, you JUST said that the expensive price is what has kept Macs from proliferating the way PCs have.
All i meant by saying that was that, unlike Windows/PCs, Macs are now jumping on getting their machines cheaper and more widely used, hence, getting their act together. And you're right, "PCs have been affordable for years. Mac only just last month released anything even CLOSE to the hardware for the price."

And it's STILL more expensive than a more powerful PC, especially once you upgrade the RAM and add a keyboard, mouse, and monitor.
YES! I was outraged when i saw that (the Mac Mini). In an effort to try to get people to notice their computers, they dropped the price considerably by introducing just the computer. Not the monitor, not the keyboard, not the mouse... and with only 3 gigs of hard drive. How stupid do they think we are?

P.S. I am simply a Mac enthusiast who edits video using macs... Cult? Where did that come from? They're computers buddy. relax.

Whoa, guys.

Apple, despite it's small percentage of users in the computer market (as you claim), is not, in my opinion, an "also-ran" next to PCs.

I agree. I'm just saying that Mac "enthusiasts," if you prefer, make that claim about anyone who competes against Apple in other markets and fails (as in the aforementioned portable music market, and now editing). But if an also-ran is defined by market share, as they define it with portable music, then the Mac is definitely an also-ran in the PC market.

There are many, many different manufacturers of PCs, whereas There is only one manufacturer of Mac: Macintosh. So, saying that PCs have "90%" of market share is, well, unfair when you could be talking about 1 or 100.

There is only one maker of Windows and only one maker of OSX, so it's still a pretty fair comparison. And it's Windows that has that dominant market share, not any one particular PC maker.

Just like the whole "90%-5%" it is not really fair to say that when one does not take into account all of the variables.

That's the overall PC market. I'm sure among editors and graphics facilities, the percentage is a lot closer. But there's still a heavy, heavy advantage in Windows's favor in terms of market share.

All i meant by saying that was that, unlike Windows/PCs, Macs are now jumping on getting their machines cheaper and more widely used, hence, getting their act together.

You're still implying here that PCs are NOT making their computers cheaper or that somehow Apple is doing so faster than PCs, neither of which is the case.

Believe me, I wish that weren't true or I'd be running all Macs by now because of FCP. As it is, I'm begrudgingly setting up a G5 system to run FCP for editing. But I wouldn't do it if I didn't have to. OSX by itself just isn't worth the price difference.

In an effort to try to get people to notice their computers, they dropped the price considerably by introducing just the computer. Not the monitor, not the keyboard, not the mouse... and with only 3 gigs of hard drive. How stupid do they think we are?

IMO, Apple must not have too high of an opinion of their users. But that's probably a discussion for a different time.

So when it comes down to it, it's all about what you like better. And since we are all Movie buffs, sorry Macs just work better. On the editing side.

And Beeble you must of not taken care of your mac for it to crash like that. Or you got a bugged system. Cause mine is still kicking. So sorry but that makes no since. And everybody i know that has an old mac still has it in running order.


:huh:

And Beeble you must of not taken care of your mac for it to crash like that. Or you got a bugged system.

I might say the same thing about all these Mac users who seem to have an extremely unusual experience with Windows.

The fact is that I treated my Macs exactly the same as I treated my Windows systems. In fact, better since I didn't use it as much. I also used a suite of G3s with OS9 at my work (Disney) and guess what, they crashed all the time. But even under the best of circumstances with a perfectly running G3, it would be hard for the Mac to beat the stability of Windows NT or 2000, which rarely if ever crashed. It might be AS stable, but it would be a stretch to declare that it was absolutely much more stable, which is what Mac users were claiming at the time (and still do about OSX vs XP).

I think the problem here is that Mac users tend to ignore problems they have on their Macs and exaggerate problems in Windows. OS9 did not have protected memory. That's a technical reality, not my imagination. And in observing other users with OS9, it wasn't nearly as stable as Mac enthusiasts would have you believe. It certainly wasn't as stable as Windows 98, 2000 or NT, which is what I was using at the time.

Well Mac OS X Panther was given the operating system of the year award or whatever that award was called. . . over ms XP. I'd go with Mac, because their stuff is solid. I have a mac, works fine. I've had a mac since 1992 and it still works, hasn't gotten a virus. Good times. I also really like mac because the programs that come with it are all well integrated with eachother, I've never had a problem with "incompatible video cards" as some of my windows friends have gone through, my mac just works. That's my experience. There's a bunch of video stuff out for Mac, and it's made by Apple itself. They know their own system. With DVD Studio, and the click of a button you can export your menu to Motion, do all that fancy stuff, and it'll throw it right back into DVD studio, for example. And there's bunch of stuff, so for me and my workflow, I don't see myself using anything else. But of course this is because I've used a mac all my life, so it's just 2nd language to me, I'm sure that's true for windows people. Obviously both systems must work, because they're still around, so it's mostly preference really. But my pref is mac. ok there's my 2 cents (more like 10, hahaha) ;)

Director i couldn't agree with you more. Virus that right there should shut everyone up. Macs don't get viruses. That I love.

Director i couldn't agree with you more. Virus that right there should shut everyone up. Macs don't get viruses. That I love.

That's because so few people use them that it's not really worth the effort. If either Linux or OSX ever got into high double digit market share, you'd probably see a lot more of them.

But frankly, Windows aren't that difficult to maintain. I don't get viruses because I know what I'm doing, but my father is hardly a computer geek and has only gotten one spyware program and no viruses in a year and a half on his Gateway. And the spyware he actually installed himself through a menu bar plug in for IE. He just couldn't figure out how to uninstall it.

That's because so few people use them that it's not really worth the effort. If either Linux or OSX ever got into high double digit market share, you'd probably see a lot more of them.
Yeah, that actually makes a lot of sense. If it were the other way around and Mac had more customers than Windows, you'd probably see Mac having more problems than windows.

...also

I understand that but my mac works fine to me, and alot of people use Macs today, and i still have 0 viruses. Thats still better than 1 virus. Gee you guys hatge macs or what. I don't even dog PC's half the amount you guys dog Macs. It's a decent system you guys make it seem like it's the worth thing that hit the market. I Love PC's give Macs a chance. I just think people are scared of what they don't know how to use... :yes:

Gee you guys hatge macs or what.

Yes, obviously when I said "Macs are great" and that FCP gives Mac the edge in editing, what I really meant was "they suck." ;)

No, I'm not dogging Macs. I'm trying to correct a LOT of misconceptions about Mac vs Windows, including grossly inaccurate and unfair comparisons of the two.

funny that because i thought this forum is suposed to be about what is our prefered editing platform and why, not 'correct a LOT of misconceptions about Mac vs Windows'. Sure a little comparison is good but this has turned into a Mac vs windows debate which will continue for many years to come. I think we have got the idea so far that osx is generally the prefered os to edit on and we should leave it at that. Unless we want to take it to another thread and let war begin? :P

funny that because i thought this forum is suposed to be about what is our prefered editing platform and why, not 'correct a LOT of misconceptions about Mac vs Windows'.

Sure, but if I came on here and said that I prefer Windows because Macs were prone to catch on fire every five minutes or that they give you cancer, it would behoove someone to point out what is or isn't true about the comparison. Not only is that not off topic, I think it's very relevant to the discussion IF you want the person to get a fair and accurate comparison of the different systems.

I agree, thats why i said after that sentence that its ok to compare a little but not to the point that you are going back and forth about the same issue which has nothing to do with editing, but about who has the most shares etc. But im not going to argue as i feel the point of this thread has been taken.

I actually think market share and user base are important factors when deciding on a system. When you work with a computer as much as I do, your most important technical support comes from other users. So the quality and size of the user base is an important topic and very underrated when considering a system.

In terms of editing, FCP has a significant enough user base to handily beat Premiere. Avid is still used by more pros, but FCP is rapidly overtaking the indie market. And THAT, to me, is what gives a Mac the edge in editing, not the OS.

In terms of features, FCP and Premiere are virtually indentical. In my experience, FCP is not quite as stable as Premiere, but it does do other things a lot better, like 24p support in QT. I regard those things as trade offs, however, and am moving to FCP thanks to the ubiquity of FCP around me in the film industry and because I can't afford a "real" (ie. turnkey) Avid system.

That said, while FCP does have a significant user base, which I appreciate, I am really turned off by a lof of the Mac user base in general. It's one of the reasons I haven't and won't completely switch to Macs altogether. It's a real turn off for all the reasons mentioned earlier.

You guys crack me up. I'm done by the way.

Every time this comes up it ends the same...

What's the best editing platform? Depends on the editor.

For some it's the Mac, for some it's a PC, for some it's a flatbed film splicer... to each their own.

By the way lux, you were WAY off base about the origins of Apple and IBM. For a quick (and very enjoyable) history lesson, check out Pirates of Silicon Valley (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0168122/)

If you don't feel like watching it, here's the major error you had. Apple didn't give up anything to anyone. Xerox gave up their graphical interface and mouse technology to Apple who used it to develop the "Lisa" and eventually the Macintosh. When Bill Gates saw the Lisa, he got his people working on development of 'Windows'. IBM licensed DOS (and eventually windows) from Microsoft for their personal computers that were developed to compete with Apple's quickly growing grasp on the thus far untapped home market.

:D

Seriously though.. watch the movie.

I use Vegas, VirtualDub, Photoshop, DVDLab, and Nero to do everything atm.

I used VirtualDub ages ago and thought I was done with it when getting Vegas. Not so fast! Filter capabilities of Virtualdub are superior occasionally than for Vegas.

By the way lux, you were WAY off base about the origins of Apple and IBM. For a quick (and very enjoyable) history lesson, check out Pirates of Silicon Valley (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0168122/)

I also highly recommend Triumph Of The Nerds. It's a three hour documentary featuring interviews with all of the key players from the early days of the PC, including Gates, Jobs, Wazniack, Allen, and more.

ahhh virtualdub... I used that today. Alas, it still wasn't able to fix my problems quick enough... blast!

Time for a new PC me thinks... as soon as I pay off this Boston trip.. hmm maybe I should pay my tuition too.

thanx for correcting me, as i was wrong. I wil try and stick to talking about things i am sure of in future :P

Hey it's all good nobodys perfect. PLus he may be wrong too.

oh yea he just as well might be. but maybe your wrong too. Maybe there is no such thing as macintosh in the first place. one word or two- drug induced paranoia :o na its all kool

Apple didn't give up anything to anyone. Xerox gave up their graphical interface and mouse technology to Apple who used it to develop the "Lisa" and eventually the Macintosh. When Bill Gates saw the Lisa, he got his people working on development of 'Windows'. IBM licensed DOS (and eventually windows) from Microsoft for their personal computers that were developed to compete with Apple's quickly growing grasp on the thus far untapped home market.

To get even more specific:

The Apple II was essentially the first mass market PC. Computers up to that point were hobby kits. Although to be fair, Microsoft actually created the first language interpreter for the very first commercially available PC, the Altair. But the Apple II (which did not have a graphical interface, btw) was the first computer that actually came ready to use out of the box.

Seeing this demand for home computers, IBM entered the game with its home computer running Microsoft's MS-DOS. Keep in mind that MS was not an operating systems company at that point. They specialized in languages. So when IBM came to them wanting an OS to go along with MS BASIC, MS bought out a version of DOS from another company and started licensing it to IBM, and later IBM's competitors.

Around this time, Xerox PARC was creating several new innovations that Apple would "borrow" and change the way we use computers. Xerox PARC invented among other things a) object oriented programming, b) the modern LAN, and c) the GUI (complete with mouse). Apple used all these features and incorporated them into the Lisa and later the Macintosh (a project Steve Jobs initially opposed, btw). They also licensed laser printing from Adobe for WYSIWYG printing.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the GUI was going to be the future of computers. When Gates saw the Lisa and the Mac, he basically reacted the same way Jobs did and set his company immediately to work on their own.

Interestingly, MS was one of the early developers of software for the Mac. Apple wasn't in the software game at that point so it needed software to give people a reason to buy from Apple.

But for better or worse, Mac sales were lackluster and Apple became a niche product mostly for graphics. Consumers chose DOS and later Windows for a reasons of price and software availability.

What's really interesting to me in all this talk of innovation when it comes to Mac vs Windows is what some get credit for and what they don't, with Apple usually getting too much and Windows too little. Apple did not after all invent the GUI, but it did introduce it to the mass market. Windows didn't invent protected memory or pre-emptive mult-tasking, but it didn introduce it to the mass market. Apple didn't invent the portable Mp3 player, but it did make them ubiquitous. And Apple certainly didn't invent the internet browser, but I don't hear too many complaining that they "ripped off" the look and feel of the browser experience with Safari, which is what Apple actually sued MS for doing with Windows.

I'll give Apple one major kudo over PCs in general, and it's not stability or security. It's design. I think the slick white shiny motif is getting old, but for the most part Apple really knows how to put things together. Alienware has a style, but you'd probably describe it as more garish than stylish. And the portable Mp3 market could definitely be more stylish than it is. Of course, as the hardware AND software maker Apple has a luxury others don't, but there's nothing stopping Dell or Gateway from putting a little style into their hardware. They just don't.