Specialist computers for video editing

[flatwood]

We are PC based (six of them) here at flatwood for no other reason than thats the platform I started with many years ago. Well, actually I think it was an Amiga based system but I think that was loooong before the internet.

Windows XP has really made the PC very easy to use finally. I had stability problems running premiere 4.0 on Win95 but Premiere Pro 2.0 is rock solid (must knock on wood for uttering this) on my new XP system which I really like.

I dont see how it makes much difference really. If it works for you thats the key and it all looks the same on tv.

[johnnhud]

I think I pretty much summed it all up with this statement.

"If the computer is your paintbrush then the project is your canvas. Do you want to spend all your time figuring out why your paintbrush isn't working? Or would you rather be painting?"

Face the facts Roger, the "average" PC user doesn't know anything about antispyware or antivirus ware. As well, they probably don't even know that you have to keep it updated. I use to be a total PC guy, I liked the fact that it was so customizable and programmable. But now I'm past that. I just want a computer that works every time I use it. I've used 100's of PC's, even built them, and my Mac is the only one that just works.

Odd that you say Mac's have no viruses because most people don't use them... if 10% of the market share is mac, then shouldn't 10% of the viruses be mac? The real reason is because Apple does not have a open source code that is made available to every Tom Dick or Harry that thinks they know how to program.....It's called "Quality Control" and Billy Gates ignores it for the almighty $

Lastly, the reason we Mac guys push them onto PC guys is because we see them struggling with the same things that made us switch. I guess the main thing we struggle with is why you haven't switched already?

[MovieStuff]

I think I pretty much summed it all up with this statement.

"If the computer is your paintbrush then the project is your canvas. Do you want to spend all your time figuring out why your paintbrush isn't working? Or would you rather be painting?"

I'm sure that applies to a lot of people. But, as I say, all our PCs work fine. The one Mac we had never worked right ever. As it stands, my PC canvases are very productive, as are most people with PCs that I know.

Face the facts Roger, the "average" PC user doesn't know anything about antispyware or antivirus ware. As well, they probably don't even know that you have to keep it updated.

Even if true (which I disagree with) you're describing a problem with the user, not the computer. That is like saying a particular car is no good because the driver doesn't know how to shift gears. I don't see the connection, unless you are suggesting that the majority of Mac converts did so because they couldn't handle the technology and shift gears. :lol:

I use to be a total PC guy, I liked the fact that it was so customizable and programmable. But now I'm past that. I just want a computer that works every time I use it. I've used 100's of PC's, even built them, and my Mac is the only one that just works.

No doubt. But your assumption that dependability on a PC is impossible flies in the face of the fact that the govenment and the public overwhelmingly prefer PCs. There must be a reason.

Odd that you say Mac's have no viruses because most people don't use them... if 10% of the market share is mac, then shouldn't 10% of the viruses be mac?

Not really. The assholes that write viruses do so to disrupt the lives and businesses of the people using what ever box is the most popular because the goal of a virus is to affect as many people as possible. Right now that's PCs. If Macs take the market share and the public and government start using Macs, then the viruses will be written for Mac OS.

The real reason is because Apple does not have a open source code that is made available to every Tom Dick or Harry that thinks they know how to program.....It's called "Quality Control" and Billy Gates ignores it for the almighty $

I can give you a list of over 100 Mac Hacks. The lack of open source code on a Mac is a joke. The protection you assume is a myth. No one bothers screwing with the Mac population via viruses simply because it would be a meaningless statement that would not affect enough people.

Lastly, the reason we Mac guys push them onto PC guys is because we see them struggling with the same things that made us switch.

I'm not struggling. I know of no one on a properly built PC that struggles.

I guess the main thing we struggle with is why you haven't switched already?

Just doing our part to protect the Mac users of the world from internet viruses. ;)

Roger

[johnnhud]

...you're describing a problem with the user, not the computer. That is like saying a particular car is no good because the driver doesn't know how to shift gears. I don't see the connection, unless you are suggesting that the majority of Mac converts did so because they couldn't handle the technology and shift gears. :lol:

Yes, maybe the problem is with the user. Maybe the user doesn't WANT to have to grab for the stick shifter and hit the clutch every time he wants to speed up. The connection is in the fact that your able to spend more time working WITH your tools and not ON your tools. Maybe I just want to drive and eat a ham sandwich at the same time without endangering the population by driving with my knees...

...your assumption that dependability on a PC is impossible flies in the face of the fact that the govenment and the public overwhelmingly prefer PCs.

Never said that the PC wasn't "Dependable" I just insuinuated that it is more complicated. I use to work IT in a large advertising company in Dallas (The Richards Group) they had 300 PC's and about 300 macs. Oddley, I was one of 4 PC tech's and there was only 2 mac techs there. The PC's just took more manpower to support.... I equate it to jumping though hoops. How many hoops are you gonna have to jump through till you get to your finished product? It would seem, that with the mac, there's less.

There must be a reason.

The reason is in in the 1980's, microsoft beat apple to the punch and released a cheaper version of their reverse engineered OS, windows, on the public. Windows was buggy and almost incomplete but we ate it up anyway. Not every better format wins. (VHS vs Beta)

I'm not struggling. I know of no one on a properly built PC that struggles.

What is a properly built PC? Can I buy one from Dell? Gateway? HP or Sony? That's where most people get theirs from. God forbid, if your saying that the average person is going to have to build their own computer in order to have a properly built one, that sounds like trouble.

Just doing our part to protect the Mac users of the world from internet viruses. ;)

'prechieate that!

[MovieStuff]

What is a properly built PC?

One that is built as carefully as a Mac. I would never buy a Dell or the like. I find a reputable computer shop and they build it. My point is that if you put a numbnut on the Mac assembly line, then you're going to get a piece of crap Mac. Likewise, if you if hire someone that is concerned with building a quality unit, then there is no reason that a PC can not be as dependable or as uncomplicated to use. In the end, I have not seen anything that a Mac can do that can not be done as well on a PC. They're just magic boxes. Besides, this whole computer thing is just a fad.

Roger

[idrawthings]

Roger - I find a mac runs final cut pro much better than a pc.

[MovieStuff]

Roger - I find a mac runs final cut pro much better than a pc.

Hah, very good!

(that probably explains why my Matrox suite won't work on a Mac, either) 8O

Roger

[super8man]

I was waiting for this argument to disintegrate into a he said she said one...mac vs pc...ugh.

For what its worth, if you buy retail, you are in trouble. No one who is worth their salt in video editing uses a precanned computer. If you do, you are simply a hobbierst and that's fine. But in production land, building your own PC is a requirement. No matter what you use a computer for, if you don'd design it with your specific task in mind, you are simply looking for a reason to fail. Heck, if Dell sold Macs, they'd be as crappy as the PCs they sell so it is not a fair argument.

I do not run antivirus software and never will. Waste of time. Using your pc to surf the net AND edit movies is asking for trouble. Would you let your Lotus, Ferrari, Porsche be used to deliver the morning newspaper and then wonder why it runs like crap at the track. Nope.

Bottom line - buiild a PC and use it like like you would treat a special paintbrush. Do you let your kids use your art paintbrushes to paint the house?

[johnnhud]

I was waiting for this argument to disintegrate into a he said she said one...mac vs pc...ugh. Bottom line - buiild a PC and use it like like you would treat a special paintbrush.

But......but.....but....Mac!

[Evan Kubota]

But in production land, building your own PC is a requirement.

Actually, in 'real' production land (that still uses desktop computers and not a turnkey system) people who use PCs at all are in a minority. I primarily associate the use of PCs for paid editing/video jobs with wedding/event videographers.

After all this I realized that Roger is right in that I personally don't care whether anyone changes their mind here. It's natural to want to recommend and proselytize about something excellent that exceeds your expectations, but obviously you are happy in PC land. Fine. But the reason why several people are recommending Macs is not because they are slower, more problem-prone, or lacking in performance and capabilities.

[idrawthings]

As for the professional split on PC/Mac, PC's are the market share. Just between the giants of Avid and FCP, Avid's got something around 800,000-900,000 licensed seats to FCP's 200,000. The majority of those Avids are run on PC. This is all on the authority of a few avid techs and developers.

From my own experience, I've cut on both, but then, LA is an island of macs. Most other markets are PC, and internationally it's not even close. That's why Avid doesn't shutter when people talk about FCPExtreme as an Avid killer.

But to the original question, I again recommend going mac. The simplicity of hardware and intuitive workflow of the FCP Suite make it tops for any prosumer user.

[super8man]

Agreed

[gianni1]

How about a Sony ES-3 Editstation? Never used one of them jobs, I saw some group chatter it's based on a FAST (or Pinnacle) Movie Machine or something like that.... This one on Ebay UK (below) looks good, but without PCI interface card, software, manual, my guess it's only a deal if you already have one...

Ebay id: 330045350424

a review

Gianni

[MovieStuff]

...obviously you are happy in PC land. Fine. But the reason why several people are recommending Macs is not because they are slower, more problem-prone, or lacking in performance and capabilities.

No one suggested that Macs were problematic at all. I had one that had problems but I'm sure that does not represent the majority of Macs. Likewise, making sweeping statements that PCs are problematic is just as inaccurate. I just find it funny when hardcore Mac advocates go on and on about the obvious expensive of PCs compared to Macs, how obviously unreliable PCs are, how obviously superior the Mac software is, yet ignore that the majority of preference in the computer world is obviously not Mac. Go figure....

Roger

[flatwood]

Does anyone here (besides me) read Post Magazine regularly??? It looks like most of the post industry (not just hobbiests and wedding videographers) uses PC based systems.

Just skimming the current issue this morning I see that PostWorks, a NY based full service post house recently added ONE Mac FCP system to go along with its over 100 PC based Avid systems.

Again, I dont think it really matters what you use as long as the results are good.