[tallscot]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Again, I question the cost for developing a Universal application versus an Intel-only application. Xcode outputs the Universal and automatically optimizes it for the G5.

---

I sincerely hope you're joking.

---

Explain.

[tallscot]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

. . .You know, it's always dangerous to imply there really isn't any more improvement that can be had. Motion shows us that even an old application like After Effects can instantly become lame (IMHO). When I first learned Motion, I kept saying, "Wow, why hasn't anyone thought of/done this before?"
Adobe did get stale a while back. Photoshop didn't have layers for way too long and it also had that dumb text dialog for way too long.

---

Hey, quit putting words in my mouth! I did NOT say or imply any such thing. I simply said that, short of dramatic innovation, that incremental improvements (a number at a time) are valid reasons for updates. I'd be among the first to welcome amazing/dramatic/impressive innovation. But a company can't be expected to produce such every time they put out an update.

---

OK, sorry.
Incremental improvements are sometimes valid reasons. After Effects 7 should be 6.5, IMHO, and not worth $199. Sometimes the number of improvements is lacking. Sometimes they aren't really improvements at all. IMHO, the quality of the update is reflected by how much competition the company has. Quark was a stellar example of that.

[peterkirn]

No need to get philosophical when there are (as a couple of people have just pointed out) technical reasons for whether a port is practical or not. I'm disappointed that Macworld missed the second post that came from personal Adobe blogs, by audio app product manager Hart Shafer, because it gets into more of the technical reasons for the decision:
http://blogs.adobe.c...6/10/soundbooth[u]and.html

More commentary here on my site, including Chris Randall from Audio Damage (an audio developer) -- the programmers in the bunch, you'll notice, aren't surprised at all by Adobe's decision:

http://createdigital...for-soundbooth/
Basically, Soundbooth is an app full of exactly the kind of code that's hard to port between Intel and PowerPC processors. Just because Xcode can compile for multiple platforms doesn't mean the code will run without adjustment, or (in many cases) run well. Part of Adobe's decision was based on performance, which is a good thing.
I understand the reaction of Mac users who didn't initially understand the decision, as I understand Adobe's reaction to getting slammed by hotheaded users. Ultimately, though, this whole discussion is largely a non-issue. This is Adobe's first home-grown audio app for the Mac platform (excluding Macromedia), and that's a good thing.
Also, note how open this discussion is. If this were Apple, we'd have no contact with the product managers and developers, and no Adobe Labs website with pre-release software, and no opportunity to give our opinions publicly on software long before a ship date. That means Adobe can respond to feedback about Soundbooth and what you think of it -- actual features, beyond decisions on porting to platforms. I'd love to have Apple occasionally open their process in the same way.

[minderbinder]

Quote:

---

This is nonsense. We're still talking about 10 times more sales potential for a Universal app than an intel only one.

---

That might be true assuming they started selling it now. But they're not, it's a beta now, and the shipping version is months away. As time passes, there will be more intel users and fewer PPC. They'd probably get some sales from PPC users, but there will be fewer and fewer as time goes on. If they're expecting this to start slow and build a following as newer versions come out, I think it makes perfect sense not to bother with a PPC version, especially if it would mean getting complaints years from now from PPC holdouts.

Quote:

---

I don't know anyone using a PowerPC-based Mac for audio or video work anymore.

---

I don't know anyone using exclusively intel yet. It's hard to believe that a majority of audio guys have already switched to intel considering there are still so many major plugins and apps that aren't universal yet. I anticipate it may be another six months before everything I use is native. And I suspect the same may be true for video guys (after effects? is Maya native yet?).

[tallscot]

Basically, Soundbooth is an app full of exactly the kind of code that's hard to port between Intel and PowerPC processors. Just because Xcode can compile for multiple platforms doesn't mean the code will run without adjustment, or (in many cases) run well. Part of Adobe's decision was based on performance, which is a good thing.
Thanks for the links!
Also, note how open this discussion is. If this were Apple, we'd have no contact with the product managers and developers, and no Adobe Labs website with pre-release software, and no opportunity to give our opinions publicly on software long before a ship date. That means Adobe can respond to feedback about Soundbooth and what you think of it -- actual features, beyond decisions on porting to platforms. I'd love to have Apple occasionally open their process in the same way.
Apple does have a process -- they put out version 1.0 software that is beta quality and then get feedback and complaints and then updates it. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[minderbinder]

Quote:

---

Apple does have a process -- they put out version 1.0 software that is beta quality and then get feedback and complaints and then updates it. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

---

Or in the case of Soundtrack Pro they put out version 1.0 software that is beta quality and then get feedback and complaints and then NOT update it.
I don't mind Adobe going with one chipset, I'm much more bothered when the end result is a turd (STP).