Sorry to start what could ostensibly become another "mine's better than your's" thread but I was curious as to whether or not anyone has any opinions on which platform Avid will be "better"?
I have a PD-150 & am leaning towards Avid on either sys. over FCP 3 on Mac. I'm interested in shooting short films in the beginning & full length features sometime in the next decade or so;-)
Thanks for the help in advance,
Erik

whatever you decide will be irrelevant in two years. Technology and NLE software is on the edge of major changes. In a year, all currently relevant technology will already be outdated. Go for what you want/need right now, don't consider something as far away as the next 10 years!!

For my own money, PC's got MAC's beat on speed, hands down. If you want reliability go MAC. In either case, go dual CPU.

At the risk of starting a war, how are PC's faster than Macs? Just curious. I don't plan on rebutting the argument, just curious how you come to that conclusion.

Hi Joe...

In the interest of info only.....

Macs have what's known as RISC chips....somewhat different than an INTEL chip. RISC chips can't be compared to INTEL chips in CPU clock cycles because of the difference in the way the chip functions. RISC chips execute many more instructions per cycle than an Intel type PC chip. So, I can't really argue that PC chips are up to 2+ GHz, while MAC chips are only at 800 MHz. But, the way Mac's achieve the reliability they have is by having a very large OS instruction set. The system overhead in a MAC is substantially more than for a PC. At any rate, I wish I had some conclusive evidence for my claim....;-)
The general industry consensus is that PC's are faster.

I think it would be very interesting to put the best MAC up against the best PC (whatever "best" may mean) both processing the same video clip. As it turns out, different apps have different processing requirements, so a test of rendering, transcoding and graphic editting would be needed. Wouldn't it be great to see some mag like DV run a test like this?

Regards

You could wait for months for DV Magazine to do such a test -- it's okay for me to say that since I know the editor and most of the writers personally -- how about if we set up *our own* head-to-head tests instead?

My take on Mac vs PC is...

Macs are ready to go right out of the box, have a cleaner, more attractive and friendlier user interface, and are just the right kind of tool for certain people.

PCs are more powerful but require more tinkering under the hood and are best suited for editing when properly set up by a system integrator who knows what they're doing. They are just the right kind of tool for certain people.

A dual-CPU Windows PC with a Canopus DVStorm card can do something that a Mac can't -- send DV out over FireWire in real-time, no rendering, playing straight from the timeline. In that sense alone, it's "faster." There's basically no rendering involved at all, and MPEG encoding through hardware is nearly real-time itself (1.1 times real-time).

However, a Mac with Final Cut Pro 3 provides an extremely powerful, out-of-the-box complete editing facility with excellent media management, an intuitive interface and an array of post-production tools. Put it in a G4 Titanium notebook, and it's also completely portable.

I don't think Avid Xpress DV is going to operate differently between a Mac or PC platform to any significant degree, no more than Photoshop runs any different or Office runs any different.

Basically, Avid Xpress DV on the Mac is intended for Mac people and Avid Xpress DV on the PC is intended for PC people.

If you don't know whether or not you're a Mac person or a PC person, my advice is, just like with the camcorders, to "try each before you buy" and choose the one that's *right for you.* Hope this helps,

Also purely in the interest of observation.

Bill's remarks are correct. The clock speed of Reduced Instruction Set (RISC) processors such as the G4 are not directly comparable to that of Compound (or Complex) Instruction Set (CISC) chips mainly because the operations performed by each chip differs with each stroke of the chip's clock.

All that gobbledygook aside, however, current PC's -do- have both an -apparent- and a real processing speed edge for most practical purposes. By "apparent" I mean how snappy the computer feels during use. My Dell Precision 610 with dual 500MHz P3's feels at least as snappy as my Mac dual 1GHz G4 and, for all practical observations, performs tasks just as quickly.

But when it comes to imaging and video the Mac wins hands-down on two fronts. First, the Mac's system and software architecture is designed for such tasks from the ground up. Running Premiere 6 on my Dell is a relatively sluggish un-fun process. Second, IEEE 1394 is built into the Mac's very backbone making capture and export a relatively stress-free process.

Certainly today you can assemble the components required to make a first-rate video editing system on a PC platform. And many people do. But, even so, the Windows OS architecture can make some of the requisite settings fragile. So installing other types of software (i.e. games, etc) on that PC can be a risky proposition with costly consequences. Not really so on the Mac.

After 20 years as a PC-only user I still have an affinity for Windows-based systems and cannot forsee giving my PC's up. But the Mac is my choice for image processing and video. After 18 months as a Mac user I'm absolutely sold on this platform.

My 3 cents.

Just wanted to thank everyone for their input it's really appreciated.

I've got what I consider to be a pretty quick AMD duallie setup. I don't have the latest processors, tho'....my 1.2 GHz seems plenty fast to me. Anyway, if someone wants to provide a "standard" video clip, I'll run it thru my VV3 for a render, record the time and report it back to this forum. VV3 renders are reported to be slower than AVID or STORM. Still I'd be interested in benchmarking my system. Someone else can do the same with their MAC or with DV STORM, etc. We would need to be very specific about what we did for this test so that we get apples and apples. Like DV in and avi out, DV in and MPEG2 at a pre-specified bitrate out, or DV in and QT out.

Actually, I guess a true test of MAC vs PC would require AVID on each computer, or else we risk software differences playing a part.

I think that both computers should have the same amount of physical main RAM as well as the same hard drive speed, both defragmented. Both would have to be brand new disks writing on the SAME area of the drive, since it DOES matter if it is writing on the inside or outside of the drive. It really is hard to do a completely fair and impartial test since there is always going to be one thing or another on one of the machines that shouldn't be that way for the super-fair test, like virtual memory. In Windows it is not recommended to turn VM off, but Macs generally run faster with it off AND you can adjust how much VM you want to use (you can't turn it off in OS X but OS X is still half as fast as OS 9 so it wouldn't be fair to use OS X or Windows XP for the test). Then there is the OS. On the Mac you'd use OS 9, but what would you use on Windows? I prefer 2000 any day of the week over anything that Microsoft has ever put out bar none, but would W98 be more akin to OS 9? W98 is definitely faster than W2K on the same machine.

Oh I have pointed this out to Chris before but I don't think he read my post... Final Cut Pro 3 does do real time rendering if your computer is fast enough. Canopus does it all in the hardware, I believe. But you can't really say that a Mac can't do dat. :) And ALL DV plays straight from the timeline in ANY program on ANY firewire capable Mac. Only stuff like titles, dissolves, and effects have to be rendered.

Hi,

Speed is only one factor. You can't win any races sitting in the pits. I've edited AVID on early Macs, PC's since 1997 and since last year FCP on Macs again. I get more done on a Mac because I'm not restarting it all the time. FCP on OS X has crashed 2 maybe 3 times in the last 5 months. My clients aren't about to have a stroke because of a too close deadline. i was an advisor on a project and in the course of an hour the editors PC must have crashed 4 or 5 times. The client was about to have stroke. Needless to say his company doesn't edit with that company anymore. Why put my clients through that kind of stress?

I've been a certified AVID editor for 7 almost 8 years and my preferred set of tools is FCP on OS X. I love it and my clients love it. Clients don't care what box you have or how many cycles your processor clocks. They want their projects done on time, on budget and with as little stress as possible. FCP is the right set of tools (for me) today and tomorrow. But, 5 years from now who can say.

Jeff Donald

Hey Jeff-

FCP crashed on you in OS X? I've never had FCP crash on me in OS 9. Is it less stable in OS X? Or are you just using it 24/7 and something is bound to happen sometime? I have heard that, for now, FCP is better in OS 9 but I've never used it in X so I really can't say.

Hi Joe,

It was more like force quit 2 or 3 times and a Rom kernel panic attack once or twice. The great thing about OS X is that force quit really works. You just quit the program and then restart it. i generally work with 2, 3 or 4 programs open at the same time. I'll have After Effects, Peak DV, Photoshop and FCP all running at the same time. I'll jump into FCP and it won't respond. So, I just force quit and open FCP again. No blue screen of death. I think some people find FCP faster in 9. But i've been using X since September and I've gottin used to it. X is the future of Computing and FCP is the future of NLE.

Jeff

jtdonald...

apparently you haven't tried the latest hardware and software meant for the PC. My Tyan duallie running Vegas Video 3 NEVER...and I mean never crashes. I think these tests should be run in whatever configuration is most common for video editting or what's the point? No special "speed" tweaks allowed on either side if they adversely affect rendering or transcoding. Along these lines, Windoze 98 or even Windoze XP is totally worthless for stability. Windoze XP is coming along, but, not there yet. '98' is just a lost cause. Windoze 2000 is the only viable OS for PC's currently.

Must agree with Bill, my Canopus DVRex RT never crashes... but then, it was built by a professional integrator (one of the largest in the U.S.) and is used only for post production and nothing else. Also agree that Win2000 is the only real choice of OS right now.

For Joe, I do read everything you write; I should have qualified my "real-time output to DV" statement as referring to the entire timeline, multiple title tracks, layers of filters, complex transitions, etc. I think it's an important capability that the Mac doesn't have, but definitely not a make-or-break feature by any means.

Are you running After Effects, Pro Tools, Photoshop and Vegas Video at the same time? Read the article on Apple's site about "Full Frontal" and the work flow. Speed is in the total package not just how fast this transistion or that filter renders. I have yet to see a PC run AVID, and all the rest without having to quit one program, open another then go back to AVID and open it and wait for the timeline to load. Your system may be able to do it, but it sounds pretty custom built to me. i don't think the majority of the people on here are looking for hi-end, professionally integrated NLE's. I may be wrong.

The original post was AVID on PC or Mac and probably not FCP. My intent is to point out to beginning editors the advantages of an off the self Mac with FCP. Did either Chris or Bill start editing with their rather custom NLE's? I'm guessing but i imagine you worked your way up to your current systems. given the choice between AVID on PC or Mac I'd pick the Mac because of the better work flow in OS X. But ultimatly I'd pick FCP because it's the future of editing. In my opinion.

Jeff

Here's a link to a pretty "scary" article. Apparently, Apple is considering the X86 platform for future growth. The Motorola chip used on the G4 is out of room for growth....
http://www.viahardware.com/x86apple.shtm

BTW, with VV3 I don't need to run AE at the same time as my NLE. VV3 has built in compositing. I do run Photoshop 6 at the same time tho', as well as TMPGENc for transcoding to DVD.

For Jeff and others...

I'll be the first to admit than an out-of-the-box Mac is a better editing solution than any out-of-the-box PC. The thing is, when you're talking about beginners, a lot of them are either on a Mac or on a PC with *no desire* to switch platforms. And we all know that the PC for some reason has a larger market share over the Mac in terms of normal, everyday computer users. I can verify this myself at the tradeshows... I always ask, "are you Mac or PC" and the fat majority is PC.

So I agree about extolling the obvious virtues of Macs over plain-jane PC's but it must be remembered that many people are either unwilling or unable to change horses midstream and switch to a new platform. Therefore, PC-based DV editing must not be overlooked.

My NLE is indeed a high-end (relative to the prosumer DV world) professionally built system. I believe in matching costs between acquisition and editing. My camera set-up is close to $5K therefore my editing system is about $5K. Just like with all other gear I've owned, I did work my way up to it and researched it carefully.

At the time (mid 1998), Canopus was the *only* way you could reliably edit on a PC. That's changed now, of course, but the advantages are still significant.

Rather than trying to steer newbies toward one platform or another, I would much rather present a thorough examination of the pro's and con's associated with each platform, their various OS's and various NLE hardware and software. It would be important to note both the advantages and *disadvantages* of each. I'm all for anybody who is happy with their system, but occasionally some folks tend to cheerlead their particular tools while ignoring some obvious limitations (nobody here is doing that, of course).

So I guess it would be great if a core sampling of our community members here might be interested in working together on a buyer's guide to NLE systems, *evenly balanced* between Mac and PC. Anybody?

You can sign me up, I'd be happy to help any way I can.

Jeff

sure, be glad to help any way I can.

...Bill

I personally own a Dual 1Ghz Pentium3 and a Dual 500 G4. Both are running a multi processor aware OS (Win2K Pro and OS X, also 9.2). Terran Cleaner 5 is multi threaded on both platforms but in real world tests, where I took the exact footage and compressed it with the exact settings (mpeg1 NTSC) on both computers. The Mac is always TWICE as fast as the PC and sometimes even faster. The machines both have 1 GIG of RAM and 7200 RPM drives. I wish it weren't so because I would like to have SOMETHING to do with that PC besides take up space.
I also have a Media 100 with iFinish for the PC. The break out box is THE BEST! The encoding is realtime, it has deck control and lots of bells and whistles that are wonderful but...(you knew it was coming) the program is a stability nightmare at best, the captured clips are worthless for anything BUT iFinish and the workflow just doesn't have anywhere near the ease or customization that FCP does.
So with that in mind I choose to use FCP3. It's the SOFTWARE that should decide the HARDWARE. With the new Athlon Processors I would love to build a killer system but I just hate Windows so much I don't know what to do. I believe the reason Cleaner is so much faster on the Mac is because of this (at least that is what Terran has told me) the Windows OS doesn't use the extra processors in any efficient manner. Don't believe me, launch the task manager while you are running a Dual aware app and you will see that not only is it barely using the onboard memory (compared to virtual memory) it is barely using the processors in any even capacity.
If anybody knows of some configuration hacks or work arounds I would LOVE to hear about them...PLEASE. But in defense of my Mac, I just take it out of the box, plug it in and go to work.

rhett121....

this is the kind of story that just makes me want to go right out and get a mac....LOL. jtdonald is right, too....these days I can build up a system that works right away, but, it took me a few years to learn how to tweak win 2k. Turn-key reliability AND performance...doh!!!

You're right, SMP on the PC is poorly done. The latest XEONS with hyperthreading are supposed to fix this "problem".

Anybody out there in computerland using LINUX?....just kidding

I am serious about looking for tweaks. It took me 2 weeks just to get the machine stable with my software installed. From the numbers I have seen on the DUAL Athlon XP's, I would wet my pants to have one but what I dare say is...could it run MAC OSX? Why oh why can't it be? I really love FCP but there is something to be said for building your very own CUSTOM rig for whatever amount of money you want to spend. I would love to have a nice Milled Aluminum case with 4 USB, 4Firewire, gigabit nic, 2 Wildcat Graphics Cards, a CD burner and a DVD/CD-RW burner (on seperate IDE channels) and a single 40Gig boot drive and a 4 disk (ATA133 IBMGXP120) striped Array with about 4Gig of Rambus RAM and a DUAL or QUAD AthlonXP setup. All inside one case. I'll pay for it but what the heck OS am I gonna run? I want something that can keep up with my hyper-active imagination and work habits, but doesn't require me to become a PROGRAMMER (no offense to programmers). I have even looked into buying an SGI or SUN but where is the software support?
Notice I haven't bought a Dual1Ghz Mac yet? I am keeping an eye out for what is next. In the mean time I'll live with what I have and spend my disposable income elswhere (like my new Roland Fantom).
I am obviously a MAC fan (atic) but the only thing keeping me there is the OS, especially with OS X.

Ya, where are the Linux people? I've never even tried it out but I would be willing to if I could get some apps on it.

Hi,

The Darwin kernel of OS X is unix and you can run Linux on OS X. Any application written for Unix or Linux can run under OS X. There are lots of applications but I don't know of any for video editing.

Jeff