Allow me to take a WILD guess here: Before September 30 we'll see the release of Mac OSX for the pentium processor!! You'll be able to either boot your PC in OSX or in whatever version of windows you prefer, like with OSX/9.22 on today's macs. And Apple will continue to manufacture computers on top of being a software company – high end, super devices like we know them, but with pentiums inside of them instead of Motorolas. That way, Apple wins it all; they get access to every damned PC user in the world by sellling OSX for pentium, they can still make their funky boxes and sell them to a lot more people, cause they'll be able to run windows as well. And they won't loose the 35% Emagic users who are on PC right now, cause there wont be a battle between PC and Mac anymore. Makes sense? :-) Flemming Bloch Mindless Studio Aarhus, Denmark

From: "flemmingbloch" <flemming@...> > Allow me to take a WILD guess here: Before September 30 we'll > see the release of Mac OSX for the pentium processor!! > You'll be able to either boot your PC in OSX or in whatever > version of windows you prefer, like with OSX/9.22 on today's > macs. And Apple will continue to manufacture computers on top > of being a software company - high end, super devices like we > know them, but with pentiums inside of them instead of > Motorolas. That way, Apple wins it all; they get access to every > damned PC user in the world by sellling OSX for pentium, they > can still make their funky boxes and sell them to a lot more > people, cause they'll be able to run windows as well. And they > won't loose the 35% Emagic users who are on PC right now, > cause there wont be a battle between PC and Mac anymore. > Makes sense? :-) Who gives a f***. Do they really think that after this, any PC user will even dream of continuing to support Logic? I can only assume they don't mind sticking the finger up at PC users because they know that the damage has already been done, and we're already getting Cease'd up. The Steinberg site sure seems slow to load today.... :)

I rarely post here, but have to chime in. First off, if you think that Apple will switch over to the x86 platform of processors, you're on crack. Apple's financials are completely dependant on hardware sales, and going head to head against MS and Windows will rip open the (Bill) Gates of Hell and a whole new world of pain will be unleashed on Apple... Including a phase out of Office:Mac and the free internet Explorer. Plus, Apple would suffer such serious hits in hardware sales, as people could use any (way cheaper) x86 hardware, that Apple would be gone in five years. Even with implementing some sort of extreme encryption so that OS X would only boot on Apple x86 hardware, the hackers would be working on a crack night and day! Apple wouldn't stand a chance. As for Emagic, it's obvious they were hurting. The boys from Emagic spoke positively about Core Audio for months and I have to say that it all makes sense, now, doesn't it? This effort will really give Mac OS X a big kick in the ass for midi & audio. And boy, does it need it. Logic for X has been "coming soon" forever. Cubase XS for OS X has no firm date. Last I checked, there was NOTHING going on with MOTU, and I could be wrong about ProTools, but I've heard nothing from them. Sure, there's M Audio and Reason, but the Big Guns have been too late to the party. It's embarrassing that audio is not where I (and I'm sure many of us ) think it should be for audio. Here's hoping that Apple uses all of Emagics wares to set the pace for OS X adoption in the 3rd party world. Apple has just bought itself an impressive array of software and hardware -- not to mention the engineering talent that made it. If you look at Final Cut Pro, iMovie and iTunes, I believe that Apple will let the Emagic guys really make it happen. As others have said, Emagic will be at the table for OS planning. BUT! I'm sure this will result in few Windows guys switching. Even if they love Logic, there's really bad blood flowing around here, and frankly, I don't blame them, despite this all probably being perfectly legal. Another thing is that any trust Apple may have had with MOTU and Steinberg and the rest will probably be gone, now. I believe that Apple itself will do Logic justice, but I'm concerned about standards support in Logic. Finally, I fear that this type of all-encompassing move by Apple will contribute to the platform's isolation. I could be wrong. I hope I'm wrong. It's going to be an extremely interesting MacWorld convention in a couple of weeks! And to the Windows guys out there, you have my sympathies.

On Tuesday 02 July 2002 11:02 pm, Abby Normal wrote: > I rarely post here, but have to chime in. > > First off, if you think that Apple will switch over to the x86 platform of > processors, you're on crack. Apple's financials are completely dependant on > hardware sales, and going head to head against MS and Windows will rip open > the (Bill) Gates of Hell and a whole new world of pain will be unleashed on > Apple... Including a phase out of Office:Mac and the free internet > Explorer. Plus, Apple would suffer such serious hits in hardware sales, as > people could use any (way cheaper) x86 hardware, that Apple would be gone > in five years. No, actually it would give Apple users that it can't get because of the hardware dependancy. mac users will still use Mac, but in addition the PC world can begin using Mac OSX without the hardware restrictions. The problem the last time they tried 3rd party hardware vendors, those vendors tried to steal away Mac users instead of aiming at the PC market as they promised. Running on the AMD 64bit processor would be much different, a whole new breed of customers. I think this would be the biggest jump in revenue they would ever see. And of course you can ask most any Mac user and they will can tell you they will still stick with the Mac hardware. We don't use it just because we have to, we use it because we prefer it (the majority). The amount of new customers would surely far outweigh the few who would just switch hardware platforms. Apple is only dependant on hardware sales because the Mac market is too small to make much money off of just the OS. With the PC market open, this could change. MS would not be able to afford the loss of Mac sales on Office products, that's a given. I am sure they would pull some scandal just to keep up to par with themselves (like threatening OEM vendors and other mafia tactics), but they could also more easily sell their products on the Mac OSX platform. It's still a risk reguardless, but definitely not the problem many people may think. I think MS bullying hardware manufacturers would be the biggest setback. Heck, BeOS wasn't even allowed to put their OS for FREE with one OEM vendor, else MS would cut off the vendor from selling Windows at all. Colin Miller -sorry to fill up the mailing list. Next time I will re-send to the OT list.

I lurk (completely lurk) on the Apple Coreaudio API list. It doesn't seem to be a buzzing list to me, which doesn't feel too comforting. Anyway, I thought I would forward couple of posts regarding the Emaigc purchase. I have elimanated any full names and their email addresses, however, if you want to subscribe to the list, go here: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/coreaudio-api Message: 2 Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 12:48:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Emagic purchase From: XXXXXX@... To: CoreAudio API <coreaudio-api@...> Anyone care to speculate on this? http://www.emagic.de/english/news/index.html Thanks, XXXXXX. --__--__-- Message: 3 Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:52:32 -0500 (CDT) From: XXXXX@... To: CoreAudio API <coreaudio-api@...> Subject: Re: Emagic purchase I had actually planned on asking about if there was any unofficial line Apple would not step over, as they're already making a soft synth (okay so I haven't tried it), effects, an AudioUnit hosting app (which looks like a primordial version of Spark) and have a sequencer API. I didn't think it would do much good to ask, though, and I also didn't think Apple was going to buy a company like Emagic. I thought maybe they'd buy Bias, or just Peak, because it would give them a nice basis for both a consumer recording app and a professional editing app. It also wouldn't step on many toes - mainly just felttip software, whereas in buying Emagic they're going to anger many audio software and hardware makers (Avid's twice burned now). Even audio software manufacturers making different types of products should become nervous as Apple is showing that they're willing to pursue and overtake any product in the multimedia field. My guess is they'll be offering pro synthesis software sometime in the future, given the already-released audiounits and their hiring of James McCartney. They'll also probably be building up a large arsenal of free AudioUnits, taking away a lot of the consumer (and possibly pro) level plug-in market on the Mac platform. In one act Apple has managed to make audio development for OS X seem like a much less friendly market to companies outside of Apple. I've spent almost literally every spare moment in the last year and a half working on Cocoa audio applications. Just this past weekend I got multi-track multi-device multi-file (per device) playback and visualization working. I'm probably one of the ones getting burned the worst on this, having just formed an LLC around my software and planning to quit my day job within the year to work full time on it. I will continue following my current software and business plans for now, due to the time invested but I will now be considering switching to Linux and possibly Windows in the future. The CoreAudio APIs and OS X are great but no matter how much I modify my software - whether moving to a synthesis application, advanced audio modelling, professional plug-ins, or something completely original - I'll always be waiting to hear another announcement about new Apple audio software, waiting for whatever direction I pursue to be killed by a new Apple product. I'm wondering what other audio software and hardware makers' reactions are going to be, especially Avid/Digidesign's. I can't imagine this makes any of them feel good for their future on the Mac and I wonder whether this will lead some to kill development for OS X. This isn't necessarily an approved topic for the list but on the other hand you have to give me some credit for being fairly inoffensive considering how much this will screw me over and how it portends an Apple controlled audio software and hardware market for the Mac. I apologize for mailing this (it's reactionary, assuming and speculative) but I simply must to let off steam in a place where Apple employees frequent. I'd appreciate it if someone could give me some evidence contradictory to my fears. Thanks, Xxx --__--__-- Message: 4 Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 17:38:14 -0700 Subject: Re: Emagic purchase From: XXXXXXX <XXX@...> To: CoreAudio API <coreaudio-api@...> The above web page also states: > Emagic's Windows-based product offerings will be discontinued... One would hope this would not mean removing Windows support for eMagic's cross-platform hardware products, since that would reduce the value of that hardware, even to Macintosh owners who might for example want to resell their eMagic hardware some day, or who (hate to mention it but...) might even need to use the same gear with both platforms. Apple would be well-advised to clarify this point, IMHO. (I would rather my Apple stock didn't keep dropping!) -XXXX XXXXXX Message: 2 Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:10:44 +0200 From: xxxxxx <xxxxxx@...> To: coreaudio-api@... Subject: Re: [coreaudio] Re: Emagic purchase >They'll also probably be building up a large arsenal of free AudioUnits, >taking away a lot of the consumer (and possibly pro) level plug-in market >on the Mac platform. I wonder if Apple could, by flooding the market with (free or not) AudioUnits, do much harm to the huge VST plugin scene out there. I think VST still has many more advantages, the most important one (IMO) being platform independence. Removing VST support from Logic in favor of AudioUnits would be a Very Bad Thing :) >I will continue following my current software and business plans for now, >due to the time invested but I will now be considering switching to Linux >and possibly Windows in the future. >... >The CoreAudio APIs and OS X are great but no matter how much I modify >my software - whether moving to a synthesis application, advanced audio >modelling, professional plug-ins, or something completely original - I'll >always be waiting to hear another announcement about new Apple audio >software, waiting for whatever direction I pursue to be killed by a new >Apple product. Moving to another platform won't be changing this, I reckon; there can always be other companies moving into your turf. Granted, if you choose to start developing for Linux, you might have a chance at being one of the first doing professional audio for that OS, but expect much hassle. Not only are you not getting great API's like CoreAudio and CoreMIDI, but you're also gonna be faced with questions like "What distributions do I want to support?". Also, how many audio professionals want to be learning how to use Linux? And, an important question: what professional audio hardware is supported by Linux? xxxxxx --__--__-- Message: 3 Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 01:48:01 -0700 Subject: Re: Emagic purchase From: xxxxx xxxxxx <xxxxx@...> To: <coreaudio-api@...> Xxx, I have to say that I think that you're way off the mark on this one. Why would Apple owning Emagic as a wholly owned subsidiary kill off audio application development for OS X? Why should it cause you to alter your startup company development plans? Do you think it's possible that you might be overreacting? Emagic has been developing audio hardware and software products for years (focused primarily on mid to high-end users). On the software side Logic competes mostly with Digital Performer and Cubase. On the hardware side they've recently introduced some neat new USB audio I/O interfaces and control surfaces which I hope will give Tascam and MOTU a run for the money. As far as I know, Apple has no plans to give any of these products away or bundle them with their system hardware or software. I'm guessing that they will continue to sell Emagic products at roughly the same competitive price points at which they're currently available. So why should you care if the Emagic corporate profits ultimately go to current Emagic stockholders or Apple stockholders? Neither scenario changes the competitive landscape. FileMaker certainly didn't put any of the Apple database vendors out of business. AppleWorks hasn't put integrated office software developers out of business. I don't expect an Apple-branded Logic to kill off an important market niche either. Perhaps you should check your paranoia at the door and just let the Apple employees on this message list continue to do a great job supporting audio developers. If you need to vent, please find a suitably appropriate place to do so. Using this message list as your personal political sounding board is in poor taste. =Xxxx --------------

> > >They'll also probably be building up a large arsenal of free AudioUnits, >taking away a lot of the consumer (and possibly pro) level plug-in market >on the Mac platform. > And this in a nutshell is relative to much of this discussion (not just plug-ins). Sequencers already come with free plug-ins. Why is there a 3rd party plug-in market? Why would Apple giving away free plug-ins (or whatever else in their machines) kill 3rd party markets? Answers: If Apple offers free plug-ins which are truly better quality than 3rd party plug-ins.....what more is there to say? Who would complain about that? They aren't locking anyone out, just giving away great stuff. The reality is the plug-ins will probably be fair......like the free plug-ins already included with many applications. Many of us will think they are entirely adequade for our work and others will want something more from a 3rd party. It's called competition and who makes the best product. Take care Jesse Widener BTW there was a recent post containing highly erroneous information about Apple, Xerox and Microsoft. I would be happy to email the facts to anyone who wishes to drop me an email of the list.

> No, actually it would give Apple users that it can't get because of the > hardware dependancy. mac users will still use Mac, but in addition the PC > world can begin using Mac OSX without the hardware restrictions. The problem > the last time they tried 3rd party hardware vendors, those vendors tried to > steal away Mac users instead of aiming at the PC market as they promised. Can you elaborate? My understanding of the whole clone history is very different than what you are saying. I probably don't have all the facts. > Running on the AMD 64bit processor would be much different, a whole new breed > of customers. I think this would be the biggest jump in revenue they would > ever see. I'm not quite sure I follow this. How does this not cut into Apple HW sales? If I were wanting to run MacOS and save money on HW, wouldn't I buy an AMD instead of an Apple machine? > And of course you can ask most any Mac user and they will can tell you they > will still stick with the Mac hardware. We don't use it just because we have > to, we use it because we prefer it (the majority). The amount of new > customers would surely far outweigh the few who would just switch hardware > platforms. Apple is only dependant on hardware sales because the Mac market > is too small to make much money off of just the OS. With the PC market open, > this could change. And how would the PC market be more open? I guess I don't understand what is different about this than the old Mac clone thing, even if the CPU is different. > MS would not be able to afford the loss of Mac sales on Office products, > that's a given. Of course they could. But as you pointed out in a previous post, they have other good reasons not to terminate these sales, such as keeping out of court. Plus, they make money on them. >I am sure they would pull some scandal just to keep up to par > with themselves (like threatening OEM vendors and other mafia tactics), but > they could also more easily sell their products on the Mac OSX platform. Huh? I don't follow.

> If Apple offers free plug-ins which are truly better quality than 3rd > party plug-ins.....what more is there to say? Who would complain about > that? Third party plug in manufacturers. > They aren't locking anyone out, just giving away great stuff. Of course they would be. It is no different than MS giving away IE, other than the fact that Apple is far from being a monopoly.

Thanks for those quotes. It's far more interesting and enlightening than other uninformed [minor presonal attacked snipped by admin] complaints. Please update if anything develops. Regards - Colin

--- In logic-users@y..., reverie@p... wrote: > > > > > >They'll also probably be building up a large arsenal of free AudioUnits, > >taking away a lot of the consumer (and possibly pro) level plug-in market > >on the Mac platform. > > > And this in a nutshell is relative to much of this discussion (not just > plug-ins). > > Sequencers already come with free plug-ins. Why is there a 3rd party > plug-in market? Why would Apple giving away free plug-ins (or whatever > else in their machines) kill 3rd party markets? > Answers: One question, when was the last time Apple gave anything away - there whole marekting ethos is based on 'you get what you pay for', free pro level plug-ins - I serioulsly doubt it - very expensive ones more like!

> I think MS bullying hardware manufacturers would be the biggest > setback. Heck, BeOS wasn't even allowed to put their OS for FREE > with one OEM > vendor, else MS would cut off the vendor from selling Windows at all. Incorrect. BeOS was available as a dual-boot option with Win98 in Japan. I seem to remember it was Apple that held BeOS away from running on newer Macs. Apple certainly did not like the idea of BeOS at_all and wanted to strangle it. best regards, Adam P

On 7/3/02 2:13 AM, "Colin Miller" <snoopy@...> wrote: > On Tuesday 02 July 2002 11:02 pm, Abby Normal wrote: >> I rarely post here, but have to chime in. >> >> First off, if you think that Apple will switch over to the x86 platform of >> processors, you're on crack. Apple's financials are completely dependant on >> hardware sales, and going head to head against MS and Windows will rip open >> the (Bill) Gates of Hell and a whole new world of pain will be unleashed on >> Apple... Including a phase out of Office:Mac and the free internet >> Explorer. Plus, Apple would suffer such serious hits in hardware sales, as >> people could use any (way cheaper) x86 hardware, that Apple would be gone >> in five years. > > No, actually it would give Apple users that it can't get because of the > hardware dependancy. mac users will still use Mac, but in addition the PC > world can begin using Mac OSX without the hardware restrictions. The problem > the last time they tried 3rd party hardware vendors, those vendors tried to > steal away Mac users instead of aiming at the PC market as they promised. That was bungled up by the lot of them, including Apple. I think that they should have combined forces and promoted THE PLATFORM to the Wintel world as a whole. Their efforts were too fragmented. > And of course you can ask most any Mac user and they will can tell you they > will still stick with the Mac hardware. We don't use it just because we have > to, we use it because we prefer it (the majority). I don't completely buy that. I'm a Mac user, and if I had to choose between Apple's hardware and software, I would definitely choose the software. It's Mac OS that is "the thing", especially now with OS X. Now, if I was tempted by a Dual Athelon system (which is faster than a dual 1GHz G4 system), maybe a 500MHz system bus using RAMBUS memory, Mac users stuck at DDR Ram and a 266MHz bus would make the move... Especially if they could roll their own PC. It would kill Apple. > The amount of new > customers would surely far outweigh the few who would just switch hardware > platforms. No way, man. I disagree. > MS would not be able to afford the loss of Mac sales on Office products, > that's a given. I am sure they would pull some scandal just to keep up to par > with themselves (like threatening OEM vendors and other mafia tactics), but > they could also more easily sell their products on the Mac OSX platform. A lot of the x86 crowd that I have read posts on in many different forums lust after OS X and yet hate Apple's pricing and what they perceive as a "closed platform". There's little chance that guys currently using XP on their x86 system are going to run out and drop big coin on a Pro Tower system, hen they could just wipe Windows from their drives and install OS X. Like come on, buddy. As a matter of fact, I think I'll throw up a poll on it. You'll see :-) > It's still a risk reguardless, but definitely not the problem many people may > think. I think MS bullying hardware manufacturers would be the biggest > setback. Heck, BeOS wasn't even allowed to put their OS for FREE with one OEM > vendor, else MS would cut off the vendor from selling Windows at all. And that exactly the kind of crap Apple doesn't want or need.

On 7/3/02 4:10 AM, "Andrew Voelkel" <andy@...> wrote: >> If Apple offers free plug-ins which are truly better quality than 3rd >> party plug-ins.....what more is there to say? Who would complain about >> that? > > Third party plug in manufacturers. > >> They aren't locking anyone out, just giving away great stuff. > > Of course they would be. It is no different than MS giving away IE, other than > the fact that Apple is far from being a monopoly. Yes, but how many "free" plugins are bundled with Logic? Or Cubase? Or DP? How many does logic have... 30? The crux is, will Apple's Logic support these 3rd party formats in the first place? I sure hope the support VST, man.

> I'm not quite sure I follow this. How does this not cut into > Apple HW sales? If I were wanting to run MacOS and save money > on HW, wouldn't I buy an AMD > instead of an Apple machine? AMD is a processor manufactor, (Like Motorola), but unlike Motorola they're in direct competition with Intel, creating the MHz race we see on PC's (AMD does not make PC's, they make CPU's) I think Apple will get even more revenue out this, since they can buy processors at a much lower price than Motorola's. If the Apple/AMD collaboration (and hopefully NVidia at the MOBO side) will see the light, that can turn everything around for me. Making the Mac a lot more attractive computer. Regards from Graceland.

pentaren wrote: >One question, when was the last time Apple gave anything away - there >whole marekting ethos is based on 'you get what you pay for', free >pro level plug-ins - I serioulsly doubt it - very expensive ones more >like! > iTunes, iMovie, iDVD, iPhoto, Appleworks, etc.? .....and if they decide to charge for it, then it would be even sillier for 3rd parties to claim unfairness. Take care Jesse Widener

Andrew Voelkel wrote: >>If Apple offers free plug-ins which are truly better quality than 3rd >>party plug-ins.....what more is there to say? Who would complain about >>that? >> >Third party plug in manufacturers. > Make better plug-ins then. >>They aren't locking anyone out, just giving away great stuff. >> >Of course they would be. It is no different than MS giving away IE, other than the >fact that Apple is far from being a monopoly. > That is entirely the difference. First off, MS WAS locking other browsers out. Apple will not be locking plug-in manufacturer's out. Secondly, when MS locked other browsers out and pushed its own, they locked out virtually all browsers everywhere because they locked them out of 95% of computers out there. That monopoly is entirely the difference here. Take care Jesse Widener

> > I'm not quite sure I follow this. How does this not cut into > > Apple HW sales? If I were wanting to run MacOS and save money > > on HW, wouldn't I buy an AMD > > instead of an Apple machine? > > AMD is a processor manufactor, (Like Motorola), but unlike Motorola > they're in direct competition with Intel, creating the MHz race we see > on PC's (AMD does not make PC's, they make CPU's) > > I think Apple will get even more revenue out this, since they can buy > processors at a much lower price than Motorola's. If the Apple/AMD > collaboration (and hopefully NVidia at the MOBO side) will see the > light, that can turn everything around for me. Making the Mac a lot more > attractive computer. I don't think that the primary reason for expensive Apple HW is the price of the processor. So, to me, the rest of your logic does not follow. Otherwise, Apple would have not had to shut down the clone program, which used the same processors that Apple's machines used.

>One question, when was the last time Apple gave anything away - there >whole marekting ethos is based on 'you get what you pay for', free pro >level >plug-ins - I serioulsly doubt it - very expensive ones more >like! Uhhhh, iDVD, iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto, the ENTIRE core of OS X, except for maybe some specialized stuff they are working on. Free yes... totally professional? Maybe not. Completely Kick-ass for many people? Definitely. Someone mentioned that Apple is getting more and more "proprietary." If that person had a clue they'd realize that Apple is leading the charge in the Open Source world, which has recently been flipped on it's ear by Apple's port to Unix. Not only that but they're the first major developer to push MPEG-4, with Quicktime 6, which is the next major open standard for compressed audio and video. Meanwhile in Redmond, Wa, what is Microsoft doing? Pushing their proprietary video codec "Corona" up everyone's arse so they can control the next major movement in video delivery. Unfortunately, Hollywood just won't have that, as they wouldn't dare let one company control a world standard. The resaon I don't coment too much on the windows world it that I'm not entirely educated about what goes on with a platform that is as deep and complex as any, be it the ClassicOS, OSX, Unix or Linux. Alot of upset windows users may have shut their mouths, but unfortunately they've begun talking out their asses. Giotto

>The crux is, will Apple's Logic support these 3rd party formats in the first >place? I sure hope the support VST, man. Emagic = Apple ...why on earth wouldn't they support other formats ? Cheers -- Check out the web page for my band: Now solo works also: New home address : http://koti.welho.com/jpennane