Logic Users Group - Forums - LUG - Thread #58479: [GEN] Apple aquires emagic

Hi, it´s very funny that everybody talks as if every copy of LAW would deny service at midnight september 30!!! Ok, dropping WIN support is a major thing, but - anyone with a working system can continue working, being creative and earning money as long as there is electricity avaiable. See: I use a non-usb-Mac, so I can´t upgrade to LA 5. What´s the problem? LA 4 is working, and it won´t stop to do so just because there´s a version 5. There is only a minority who *needs* to upgrade for some reason, just because LA 4 is a full-fledged, grown-up system. I know many pro´s don´t let them be fooled with that continuous upgrade hassle - a working system is a working system, and often new features are simply unneccesary for that work. Or does anyone´s existance depend on new features? Then he´s in the wrong business. So cool down and enjoy working with your existing system - and in some time it will be much clearer what to invest in, when you really have to. (Don´t get me wrong - of course I see the potential problems appearing, and many statements during the last hours were right.) Yours, Tobias

--- In logic-users@y..., Tobias Seyb <tobias.seyb@g...> wrote: > Hi, > > it´s very funny that everybody talks as if every copy of LAW would deny > service at midnight september 30!!! > > Ok, dropping WIN support is a major thing, but - anyone with a working > system can continue working, being creative and earning money as long as > there is electricity avaiable. > > See: I use a non-usb-Mac, so I can´t upgrade to LA 5. What´s the problem? > LA 4 is working, and it won´t stop to do so just because there´s a version > 5. There is only a minority who *needs* to upgrade for some reason, just > because LA 4 is a full-fledged, grown-up system. I know many pro´s don´t > let them be fooled with that continuous upgrade hassle - a working system > is a working system, and often new features are simply unneccesary for that > work. Or does anyone´s existance depend on new features? Then he´s in the > wrong business. > So cool down and enjoy working with your existing system - and in some time > it will be much clearer what to invest in, when you really have to. > (Don´t get me wrong - of course I see the potential problems appearing, and > many statements during the last hours were right.) > > Yours, > > Tobias I'm sorry but I don't buy that argument. As an IT professional I'm also very late in upgrading, it makes sense to stick to a working version unless you need an upgrade. But you absolutely want to be on hardware and software with a future. Which I believed PC/Logic was given the major new releases they have recently finished. Otherwise no matter how you address your future needs your current investment is down the drain. And not only the money but also the time invested in learning to work with it and getting it to function in your environment. Sidegrade, crossgrade, platform switch, no matter what you do it will cost you bigtime, in money and time...

> The problem is that we paid for an upgrade to LA5 expecting that > we'd have access to certain features (i.e. VSTi multi-out). I was > prepared to be patient and wait for an update, but now it looks > like that will never happen. > I wasn't going to say anything, but several months ago one of the moderators considered my message indicating not to invest in "vaporware" to be hostile largely because of that term and therefore blocked it. I left the list right after that. As it turns out unfortunately I was right, though I very much wish I weren't - since I was still planning to purchase the upgrade myself! I am very sorry for those who bought v5 in the last few months. I am checking back in because of the news and wondered what many of the old familiar people would be posting. I have mentioned on the SD board and will add on here I hope that E- magic/Apple will do the ETHICAL (I don't care if it's required by law) and do some recompense for those individuals who bought Windows- based stuff in just the last <x> months. I do believe Apple should offer something in terms of Mac upgrades although unless they get the price down to about $200 I won't be investing in a Mac just to run Logic in the future and to be fair I suppose $200 is of course way too much a drop - except for those people who spent several hundred/one-two thousand dollars in the last 12 months.

--- In logic-users@y..., "zornwil" <wilson.zorn@a...> wrote: > I wasn't going to say anything, but several months ago one of the > moderators considered my message indicating not to invest > in "vaporware" to be hostile largely because of that term and > therefore blocked it. I left the list right after that. As it turns > out unfortunately I was right, though I very much wish I weren't - > since I was still planning to purchase the upgrade myself! I am very > sorry for those who bought v5 in the last few months. LOL, I forgot about that.. how ironic. Still, it's not technically vaporware, as 5.2 will hopefully be out by the end of July and there ought to be time for at least one more bugfix/pointrelease after that. Emagic is still going to continue providing tech support for LAW users, it's just seems that any *new* developments will be made for the Mac only. Jeremy "LUG Moderator" http://www.ixks.com/~sadus

I remember when Apple bought Pearl Lisp, which was my favorite programming environment at the time. Shortly thereafter, free support evaporated, and Apple started asking me for $650 per year to be a "certified developer" in order to obtain support. It was the beginning of my shift from Apple evangelist to PC only user. It took absolutely FOREVER for pro Music apps to really work on the PC, so the music part of my life was the last to make the Mac-to-PC leap. But pro quality audio is definitely here on the PC, and the disappearance of Logic will not put an end to that. There is no way that I will invest in a platform that has a tiny and ever shrinking market share. And I'm not talking about just the monetary investment. I can't live without a PC in today's market. But I can live without a Mac, and now that they've really pissed me off, my thoughts of giving OSX a try - for the hell of it - are fading fast. This is really good news for Steinberg and Cakewalk. It is really bad news for MOTU. There is one thing I don't get, though. Didn't MS just get their ass sued for pulling this sort of shit? Wouldn't they get doubly reamed if they decided that they would no longer support Word on the Mac. What is the difference when Apple does the same thing? I'm confused. Andy Voelkel 310 399 2289 andy@...

> There is one thing I don't get, though. Didn't MS just get their ass sued > for pulling this sort of shit? Wouldn't they get doubly reamed if they > decided that they would no longer support Word on the Mac. What is the > difference when Apple does the same thing? I'm confused. > > Andy Voelkel 310 399 2289 andy@... I hardly think you can compare this with MS practices. Apple isn't forcing you to buy Logic (I doubt they will bundle it with the OS) like with IE, Outlook, Media player, and Messanger. In these situations the customers are made to pay for them with the OS, thus making it more costly for people to have to pay twice for an alternate web browser of e-mail client. I think the fact that Eudora and Netscape are pretty much defunct (arguably so, I know) proves that. Office would be a better comparison. It's a decent product that MS has put out, doesn't bundle with the OS so it competes fairly with other similar porduct. Same with Logic Titanium. Apple isn't depriving anyone of any software. Or at least not yet :-) Colin Miller

> LOL, I forgot about that.. how ironic. Still, it's not technically > vaporware, as 5.2 will hopefully be out by the end of July Well, actually "technically" it still is vaporware - it is unreleased software that at this point can only be speculated about and if purchased with the intent that it will do that, you have purchased vapor. However, I hope you are right and it will make the transition to actual software. I certainly would not make a purchase until it actually comes out. And of course OTOH I wouldn't make a purchase anyway now or then since there's no future in the Windows version. Still, for those folks who intend to switch to Mac, then they should by all means purchase it as soon as their desired functionality is available.

i've seen plenty of posts today from people defending the apple/emagic coup; claiming that mac users have been receiving treatment like this for x number of years.. indeed, you're right-- but you seem to be overlooking the fact that YOU'VE bought into a company that has a 4% market share! YOU'VE paid for the "boutique" mentality. thusly, you must expect that kind of treatment. pc's have been and always will be the market leader; and with new operating systems, such as winxp, and 2000, audio on the pc side has FAR surpassed macs in terms of performance (check the digitalnaturalsound archives for real world figures..as opposed to crappy PS shootouts), so this kind of treatment today by emagic and apple is mystifying and silly. us pc users aren't expecting your sympathy, or your condolances. we're worried that our investment (in both software and ESPECIALLY emagic hardware) will be for naught. from what i've read today, emagic and apple have been in talks since MUSICMENSSE (sp?). they've known for quite some time that something was shaking... but no one bothered to inform pc users. this is the crux of our gripes, and is justified-- no matter if it were the other way around or not. as an aside to my fellow PC users-- i've had the chance to check out cubase sx recently. it's an extremely nice app, tho the workflow is not quite as fluid as logic. i'm sure that we'll survive, should we make the switch. if not, just wait a year and when apple STILL can't deliver the g5, maybe jobs will get his head out of his ass and switch to AMD processors and x86 compatibility, thereby allowing a REAL choice in os and applications ds. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Colin Miller" <snoopy@...> To: <logic-users@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [LUG] [GEN] Bye Bye Logic > I hardly think you can compare this with MS practices. Apple isn't forcing you > to buy Logic (I doubt they will bundle it with the OS) like with IE, Outlook, > Media player, and Messanger. In these situations the customers are made to > pay for them with the OS, thus making it more costly for people to have to > pay twice for an alternate web browser of e-mail client. I think the fact > that Eudora and Netscape are pretty much defunct (arguably so, I know) proves > that. > > Office would be a better comparison. It's a decent product that MS has put > out, doesn't bundle with the OS so it competes fairly with other similar > porduct. Same with Logic Titanium. Apple isn't depriving anyone of any > software. >

andy@... writes: >There is one thing I don't get, though. Didn't MS just get their >ass sued for pulling this sort of shit? No, it's nothing like what Microsloth did. The situation is more akin to Apple coming out with Final Cut Pro. In that situation, Apple just has an amazing application and lets it stand on its own merits. They don't bundle it for free with any Mac. It costs US$999 (actually more money than Adobe Premiere, so you can't even say they're undercutting everybody). Any other company is still free to make a killer application better than Final Cut Pro. So, Apple being a fantastically innovative company is about the only thing stopping lesser companies from usurping them. What Microsoft did was actually force out Netscape by not even allowing the choice. People sometimes get confused because Explorer is in fact a great product - many people welcome the fact that it's installed and Netscape is not. But in the grand overall scheme Microsoft violated antitrust laws bigtime. Without real competition, Explorer could have been even better (that's the one big disadvantage for the user). Microsoft had no fear that people would like Explorer (on the contrary, like I said it's a great product). However, they save lots of money when there is no competition and they don't NEED to develop it much further. Research and Development costs TONS of money - MS's anti-competition violations have nothing to do with making sure their products are still popular. But rather, they have to do with saving the mega-money on further development. Q: How many Microsoft engineers does it take to screw in a light bulb? A: None. They just declare darkness as an industry standard. f-erenc szabo, smarty pants (Tastes awful, but it works) Z+E+R+O+B+E+A+T "NOW POWERED BY THE MIRACLE OF THE TRANSISTOR!"

--- In logic-users@y..., "f-erenc szabo" <zerobeat@g...> wrote: > What Microsoft did was actually force out Netscape by not > even allowing the choice. Isn't this what Apple/Emagic is doing here? Forcing out PC users - not allowing them the choice of platform?

> Isn't this what Apple/Emagic is doing here? Forcing out PC users - > not allowing them the choice of platform? > No, it's actually nothing like it. No company is being forced out of business by this. And no one is being denied use of the software, just use under a speific platform. While certianly a detriment to some, it's not denying complete access. Thus not even close to illegal. The thing about MS most people don't understand is that comapnies like Netscape made their money off of OEM and bundle deals (like when a computer manufacturer includes it or your ISP includes it). When MS built IE into the OS, this meant that any OEM that wanted to include Netscape had to charge extra to include it, wheras their competition could undercut them by just using IE which the customers had to pay for in the cost of the OS anyways. Thus MS unfairly used their ownership of the Operating system unfairly against Netscape and others. The only way Apple would be comparable would be if they included Logic with Mac OS so everyone had to pay for it in the cost of the OS and made it so OEMs couldn't even remove it. Then who would want to buy Performer or Cubase or anything else if they were alreadypaying for Logic. I honestly would find it hard to believe that they would drop 35% of its paying users without a plan like releasing OSX for x86. I don't know, but I doubt they would simply make a rash decision like that, it wouldn't make much sense. Apple would love nothing more than to have a popular PC application, it would mean more revinue. Colin Miller

--- In logic-users@y..., Colin Miller <snoopy@m...> wrote: > > Isn't this what Apple/Emagic is doing here? Forcing out PC users - > > not allowing them the choice of platform? > > > No, it's actually nothing like it. No company is being forced out of > business by this. And no one is being denied use of the software, just > use under a speific platform. While certianly a detriment to some, it's > not denying complete access. Thus not even close to illegal. What they're doing is not too far off IMO. But you are right, Logic PC users do have a choice in the matter - either buy new hardware or buy new software. Either way it will most certainly 'injure' the PC user. Yes, obviously Apple has no monopoly, considering the many Audio sequencing options available. So my hypothetical question is this, if Logic was the only Audio Sequencing option available then it would make what they did illegal? I think your argument seriously under-estimates the injuries that may have been sustained by this community as a result of this move by Emagic. No they haven't cornered the market, but they HAVE cornered the user. Regards, Jason

jason_72969 wrote: >--- In logic-users@y..., "f-erenc szabo" <zerobeat@g...> wrote: > >>What Microsoft did was actually force out Netscape by not >>even allowing the choice. >> > >Isn't this what Apple/Emagic is doing here? Forcing out PC users - >not allowing them the choice of platform? > No. There are several other sequencers you can buy on PC and Apple porting Logic exclusively to Mac does not prevent you from using those other sequencers. Take care Jesse Widener

> The thing about MS most people don't understand is that comapnies like > Netscape made their money off of OEM and bundle deals (like when a computer > manufacturer includes it or your ISP includes it). When MS built IE into the > OS, this meant that any OEM that wanted to include Netscape had to charge > extra to include it, wheras their competition could undercut them by just > using IE which the customers had to pay for in the cost of the OS anyways. > Thus MS unfairly used their ownership of the Operating system unfairly > against Netscape and others. That wasn't my understanding. I think that both Netscape and MS wanted the benefit of the "portal". Simply, when you get Netscape, "home" is the Netscape site, with all the advertising and hookins that implies. Similiarly with MS and their portal. That is what both companies were after. And MS gave IE away for free in order to get that advantage. Hence the (valid) lawsuit. At least that was my understanding.

[note from admin - please reply to Logic-OT@yahoogroups.com or privately] > That wasn't my understanding. I think that both Netscape and MS wanted the > benefit of the "portal". Simply, when you get Netscape, "home" is the > Netscape site, with all the advertising and hookins that implies. > Similiarly with MS and their portal. That is what both companies were > after. And MS gave IE away for free in order to get that advantage. Hence > the (valid) lawsuit. At least that was my understanding. Well, I am sure there were many facits, the one I made was the main one since it was a big part of Netscapes income. I don't recall any ISPs who didn't make the software default to their own web page. There's no denying that the portal wasnt a big issue though. In my early days I worked for an ISP which faught to feep Netscape. But it was not financially possible once MS built IE into the OS. That ISP along with every other one droped netscape in order to compete with each other. That ISP alone dropped 3 million netscape sales because of IE, and that was just one of many ISPs. This is not to mention threats from MS that the ISP recieved. Things like raising prices in other areas if the ISP didn't swicth its default browser to IE (the ISP has to pay for MS products to run its business, MS take advantage of this). This is also a common tactic taken with OEM vendors where a vendor has to pay higher fees if they use Netscape, thus making it harder for them to compete with their competitors. That same ISP was about to buy out MSN, but MS would only do the deal if the ISP agreed to replace all servers (gernally Digital Unix machines) with Window NT servers. Needless to say the ISP was already familliar with NTs inability to handle such large tasks (remember when MS bought Hotmail and swicthed to NT. It was down for over a week until they switched back I believe) and dropped the deal like a hotcake. Having been on the inside track of the computer/internet for a couple years I could go on and on for days about some of the MS scandals, which I never believed until then. But this is getting really OT and I apologize for that to everyone! :-) Colin Miller

> Yes, obviously Apple has no monopoly, considering the many Audio > sequencing options available. So my hypothetical question is this, if > Logic was the only Audio Sequencing option available then it would > make what they did illegal? Would it be illegal? Technically I am not sure. But it would certianly be unfair and probably something the Justice department woul want to investigate. Though if it was the case, it would be an opterunity for some company to make a lot fo money by developing a PC sequencer since there would be a hole. I doubt anyone would debate that this is a big blow to windows users. Mac users (or netscape/eudora) can probably be the most sympathetic from having to deal with the experience often. Colin Miller

jason_72969 wrote: >Yes, obviously Apple has no monopoly, considering the many Audio >sequencing options available. So my hypothetical question is this, if >Logic was the only Audio Sequencing option available then it would >make what they did illegal? > Then Emagic would have had a monopoly. If Logic was the only audio sequencing software out there they would have far too high a market share, too much invested, and be far to valuable for Apple to acquire. It would also be a severe stretch to hypothesize that Logic could somehow even be the only sequencing software without anyone else trying to make a competetive product. The only way that could happen would have been if Emagic flexed their monopoly to prevent competetition....which would be illegal. Take care Jesse Widener

> Would it be illegal? Technically I am not sure. But it would > certianly be unfair and probably something the Justice department > would want to investigate. Huh??!??! They absolutely would not! Apple has no legal obligation to develop software for multiple platforms, even if the app in question is the only one of it's kind... I don't understand why so many people seem to feel that Apple (now) or Emagic (then/now?) is under any sort of obligation to write software for Windows, just like Microsoft is under no legal obligation to develop for the Mac or Linux or whatever. I'm not necessarily defending what they've done, just being a realist. As a PC user of Logic I agree that this decision is a very dumb one that Apple will likely regret if it proves to be the final word for Logic under Windows. However, nothing is stopping us from using the products we've bought as-is, and there were never any guarantees of future versions - people are taking it for granted that Logic 6 would eventually arrive for them, and that was never a given only a very very likely scenario. ~Brian

> Huh??!??! They absolutely would not! Apple has no legal obligation to > develop software for multiple platforms, even if the app in question > is the only one of it's kind... I don't understand why so many people > seem to feel that Apple (now) or Emagic (then/now?) is under any sort > of obligation to write software for Windows, just like Microsoft is > under no legal obligation to develop for the Mac or Linux or whatever. This was under the hypothetical situation that Logic was the *only* DAW in existance. And then to be bought by one of the two bigger OS makers, only to drop support for its competitors. That would certianly raise a big stink for sure! Being that in the real situation there is plenty competition all around and this will unlikely interfere, it's not a legal issue at all. Colin Miller

> This was under the hypothetical situation that Logic was the *only* DAW in > existance. And then to be bought by one of the two bigger OS makers, only to > drop support for its competitors. That would certianly raise a big stink for > sure! Perhaps with consumers, but not with the Justice Department - again, there is no legal binding requiring any company to develop software (or continue to develop software) for any particular platform; if there were then all apps would be available for all platforms all the time, and - unfortunately! - that ain't so. ~Brian