[HN Gopher] Apple brings Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro to iPad
___________________________________________________________________
Apple brings Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro to iPad
Author : isomorph
Score : 602 points
Date : 2023-05-09 13:04 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| evo_9 wrote:
| Hey Ableton you paying attention? Now would be a good time to
| bring Live to the iPad and include a virtual Push 2.
| trollied wrote:
| QT is available for iOS, so I guess it's doable...
| jrajav wrote:
| They just released Ableton Note for iOS, which is absolutely
| nothing like Live and clearly shares no code nor is meant to
| grow into it, so I wouldn't hold my breath that they plan
| anything else in that space soon.
| WillAdams wrote:
| I wish Apple would just cut to the chase and make a tablet Mac
| --- not really loving Windows 11 on my Samsung Galaxy Book 3 Pro
| 360.
| clint wrote:
| Prediction: Cynical try-hards in this thread will grouse about
| subscriptions and device-lock-in while _actual_ creative
| professionals will more than willingly pay $5/mo and love every
| minute of it.
| throw_m239339 wrote:
| > while _actual_ creative professionals will more than
| willingly pay $5/mo and love every minute of it.
|
| I doubt that:
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/30/23662000/waves-audio-engi...
|
| > Music producers revolted against an app's subscription scheme
| -- and won
|
| Actual Music producers hate subscription schemes.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Yes and Photoshop users revolted against subscriptions. How
| long did that last?
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| Yes, but one of these was a plugin for $25/mo and the other
| is the whole damn tool to do your job for $5 a month on a
| device you couldn't run it on in the past. I expect it to not
| actually be bashed.
| archerx wrote:
| At first I was excited to see Logic pro on the Ipad but as
| soon as I saw subscription my excitement instantly died.
| I'll just stick with Garageband on the Ipad for my basic
| music needs.
|
| Same thing happened with Adobe, I was a die hard Premiere
| pro fan and now I haven't used it in years since I moved to
| Davinci Resolve all because Adobe went all in on subs.
| kstrauser wrote:
| $5/mo is waaaayyyy less than I've paid for Ableton Live on
| average. It's not in quite the same space as Logic Pro, but
| you can credibly lump them in as "professional music
| production software".
| mejutoco wrote:
| What happens when the subscription increases in price and
| your workflow depends on it?
| archagon wrote:
| Well, I'm glad you've found a way to preemptively feel superior
| to these "try-hards".
| croes wrote:
| All is fine until they raise the price and you depend on their
| software.
| IAmGraydon wrote:
| I've been writing and recording music for 25 years. I wouldn't
| do it on an iPad if the app paid me. If there was ever a job
| that requires a mouse and multiple screens even more than
| coding and design, it's audio engineering. Try editing a piano
| roll with thousands of MIDI notes, adjusting thousands of
| automation points and fine tuning EQ settings on a touchscreen.
| The experience is terrible, and no software can fix that. A
| tablet is just the wrong tool for the job.
| KerrAvon wrote:
| But you're not limited to the touchscreen. The iPad has
| excellent external mouse support. I'm using Apple's folio
| keyboard/trackpad combo to type this right now, but any USB
| or Bluetooth mouse will work. Even gaming mice work.
|
| If you don't need a traditional cursor, you can just also use
| an Apple Pencil for precise pointing needs such as piano roll
| editing.
| goblin89 wrote:
| As a long time electronic music producer, I make sure once
| installed my primary software is never updated as a rule[0].
| My flow doesn't make bouncing everything to audio feasible
| and there is nothing worse than opening a project you have
| worked on for a few months to find that it sounds...
| different. Counter-intuitively, learning to predict and deal
| with crashes and working around known bugs on the fly is way
| easier than stopping everything and spending days debugging
| what exactly messed up your sound--you have a few hundred of
| interwired devices, and if it turns out that a small change
| in some arpeggiator timing algorithm or macro wiring,
| intentional or inadvertently caused by some improvement, is
| impossible to completely revert, lost inspiration aside you
| may feel some pretty dark emotions because the thing as you
| knew it is basically gone.
|
| So while the App Store model of forced updates was barely
| acceptable in case of toys for sketching ideas like Figure,
| Reason Compact, iKaossilator, etc., with my primary DAW? and
| I have to pay for these updates, too? For as long as App
| Store offers no requisite controls, proper desktop software
| (and of course all hardware) will rule, and I know I'm not
| alone with such a flow.
|
| [0] The only exception is if all tracks I started in this
| version were finished, and that never happens. Otherwise the
| new version gets installed on a new machine, I'm not in rush.
| KerrAvon wrote:
| This is a reasonable concern; this would be worth raising
| to Apple if you have a channel to do so. Being able to pin
| apps to specific versions may indeed be a requirement if
| your livelihood depends on their stability.
| southwesterly wrote:
| They'll probably do something similar to Xcode and have a
| version download stored somewhere.
| IAmGraydon wrote:
| Agree. What's your primary DAW? Ableton here.
| eclipxe wrote:
| You haven't used Logic pro on the iPad yet. Maybe reserve
| judgement until you've tried it?
|
| I would actually prefer to draw in automation with a
| touchscreen/apple pencil vs. mouse. And direct manipulation
| of effect/instrument knobs as well as mixers is good.
| [deleted]
| IAmGraydon wrote:
| You know how you already know that you don't want to eat
| chocolate pudding with chopsticks? It's kind of like that.
| Wrong tool for the job.
| desro wrote:
| I agree with you but also desire a hybrid approach. I've just
| spent the last ten months nearly full-time doing audio post
| production for an independent tv/web series in Logic. I can't
| tell you how often I've wanted to reach into the screen and
| touch/drag/edit clips in a comprehensive-multitouch-kinda
| way.
|
| You can take my mouse and keyboard from my cold dead hands,
| but a multitouch augmentation (beyond what the "magic
| trackpad" gets ya) could be insanely useful (hoping it's a
| part of the AR future).
| MentallyRetired wrote:
| ...but you can use a mouse and keyboard with the iPad. And an
| external display.
| dagmx wrote:
| Having a full DAW on the go is a killer feature imho.
|
| The promise has been there since stuff like 8tracks on the iPhone
| 3G, and various Audio Units already on iOS. But I've always found
| the workflow very limiting or clunky. (Edit: I'm a Logic Pro user
| on macOS so my comments reflect getting things into that
| specifically)
|
| The divide from putting down an idea when it hits, to working it
| into something, has always been really high.
|
| Having something where I can potentially work out an idea with
| just my iPad , and then take it to my desktop is really exciting
| to me.
|
| FCPX seems neat as well. I doubt it'll be something people use in
| touch mode, but I can see some folks using it for quick on the go
| edits for things like social media stings. Go to an event, shoot,
| edit and upload. I don't see it being used for more than that
| level of work.
|
| But also, as much as both the things I mentioned are very spur of
| the moment things, I think the real value here is having a step
| ladder through the ecosystem.
|
| A lot of people, especially youths, only need an iPad for more of
| their computing use. Having more pro apps on the iPad signals to
| them that they can shift more of their computer life to it. A lot
| may just even need to add a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse.
|
| Conversely, the people who do want to use it more seriously after
| whetting their teeth on the mobile platform, will then see the
| Mac as the next logical stepping point.
|
| It's a smart way imho to get people on either side of the fence
| to consider the other side.
| ROTMetro wrote:
| Yay more Apple users complaining that their VSTs don't work on
| Apple's XYZ variant that yet again broke something instead of
| actual talk about the VSTs in question. It already makes many
| discussion threads nearly useless, I look forward to more of
| it.
| quijoteuniv wrote:
| The idea that any piece of gear enables artist is one of the
| biggest lies we have been sold. True Artist will use any tool
| at their reach to do art. In terms of music the level is so
| high already that is irrelevant. Sound is not music.
| carlmr wrote:
| A DAW is near essential for making EDM. It's actually quite
| cheap compared to the instruments you need for other music
| styles.
|
| Sure you can make EDM with more limited means, but a DAW
| opens up basically everything.
| quijoteuniv wrote:
| And many think that for art more options is better, however
| the greatest works were done with huge limitations. Beatles
| 4 track, Bladerunner no CGI to name 2.
| cruano wrote:
| If by "everything" you mean better production quality,
| sure, but I doubt you'd do your best sound-design work
| laying down on your couch with your airpods.
|
| I think the only thing this enables is for you to "finish"
| your songs on the ipad itself, which is not the game
| changer the OP is saying it is.
| singingfish wrote:
| Saxophone player of adequate standard here ... yeah the gear
| shouldn't matter and you can get good stuff out of garbage
| with the right pre-existing skills and attitude. But on the
| other hand I've upgraded my two main instruments recently-ish
| from low/mid range instruments to high end, and in both cases
| my playing improved a lot instantly, as suddenly I didn't
| have to work so hard to get the instruments to cooperate[1].
| However having to work around the limitations of my old
| instruments also improved my skills too.
|
| [1] having a good soprano sax that basically plays itself
| feels like cheating, but one of the reasons for that is
| having developed the skills to keep crappy sopranos
| cooperating reasonably well for so long too.
| quijoteuniv wrote:
| Glad for you, is really nice to have a nice instrument,
| even inspiring, I play guitar many years and some guitars
| when you pick them up, they almost inspire/invite for
| music, while others they make you want to quit music
| altogether. So i am with you, i wish everyone could work
| themselves up to a nice instrument. I doubt an app in an
| ipad can have this meaning to someone.
| jc_811 wrote:
| Does a piano player relying on a piano not count as "gear
| enabling an artist"? If there's no piano does that true
| artist start playing a napkin instead because it's within
| their reach?
| quijoteuniv wrote:
| You will be surprised when you find out how many amazing
| piano players have practice in a piece of wood/cardboard
| with the keys drawn/carved
| mkaic wrote:
| As a piano player I definitely depend on the existence of
| a piano for me to play. Better tools absolutely enable
| artists to make better things faster -- Yo-Yo Ma _can_
| make a cheap cello sound amazing, but he can make an
| expensive cello sound _even more amazing_.
| quijoteuniv wrote:
| And he should get an amazing cello! But most people that
| buy gear they do not need it nor use it!
| cruano wrote:
| I mean, the OP was clearly referring to music composition:
|
| > The divide from putting down an idea when it hits, to
| working it into something, has always been really high.
|
| And in terms of music composition, you can probably get
| away with just humming out the tune and leave the rest for
| the producer to figure out.
| raincole wrote:
| If they relies on a piano of a very specific brand, and
| can't play a cheap alternative at all, then yes. But I
| don't think most pianists are like that.
| bartread wrote:
| GarageBand was always pretty decent on iPad back in the day, at
| least as a scratchpad for ideas. But yes, this is exciting. I'd
| quite like to see something like Ableton or Bitwig make its way
| onto iPad as well.
| dagmx wrote:
| Ableton on iPad would be such a great fit, especially the
| session clip view.
| Slow_Hand wrote:
| Have you tried Ableton Note? It's not a 1 to 1 version of
| Ableton, but it streamlines a lot of the features to make
| the equivalent of musical sketching app. You can then save
| your session and it opens perfectly in Ableton Live.
|
| I'm not a huge fan of music apps on iOS, but I played with
| it briefly and it's quite good. They've really done a great
| job to make it a very musical tool within the limitations
| of an iPhone (and presumably iPad).
| MuffinFlavored wrote:
| > DAW
|
| Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
| speg wrote:
| This captures my use case pretty well. I'm a hobby photographer
| and use Lightroom on iPad as my only software step.
|
| I'd like to dabble with video. Now I have an easy avenue to do
| that. If it goes well and I need more, I can move to the full
| experience on a Mac.
| meghan_rain wrote:
| > Having a full DAW on the go is a killer feature imho.
|
| Macbook?
| dagmx wrote:
| I guess I should expand why not a laptop, but it boils down
| to removing lots of little friction points that make
| ephemeral ideas harder to put down.
|
| 1. Touch first is important because your instruments are
| touch as well. Being able to record my live instruments and
| not have to switch to a trackpad to move between UI elements
| seems small, but it really keeps me in the zone.
|
| 2. Same point above, but basically being able to switch
| between my live instrument and an on screen virtual one is a
| big deal to layer up an idea. Can't do that easily with a
| trackpad or mouse.
|
| 3. There's something to be said for the mobile platforms
| single app as a focus model. I know you can full screen a Mac
| app, or split screen on an iPad, but having a singular focus
| helps reduce distractions.
|
| 4. Weight/portability are quite different. Maybe a MacBook
| Air would be better, but I take my iPad Pro to more places
| with me than I take my much heavier MacBook Pro . I'm already
| taking it to draw on the go, so this is just one more thing I
| can do without needing to buy a new device or take a heavier
| one.
|
| Edit: oh and number 5 is a big one. I can put my iPad Pro in
| my existing music stand that works for me at multiple heigh
| levels. There are laptop stands that might work too, but I
| already use my iPad for sheet music, so it's already a
| convenient setup.
| LegitShady wrote:
| I think there is a lot going for the music ecosystem on
| ipad - lots of affordable apps, cheap effects compared to
| desktop etc.
|
| At the same time I don't think the device itself is built
| with the connectivity for the kind of music making I think
| about. If all your synths and effects live on the iPad and
| you don't care about after touch maybe, but if you want to
| hook external gear up the iPad just isn't made for it.
|
| no headphone out. requires an external audio interface to
| connect to hardware synths. not an aftertouch capable
| control surface. Not really portable if I have to lug a
| bunch of supporting equipment to make it usable.
| giobox wrote:
| I agree to a large extent, but I've been pleasantly
| surprised just how much audio hardware works using a USB
| hub, especially now all iPads have USB-C ports with the
| exception of the 10.2 inch entry one.
|
| Given how many USB accessories now work with the iPad, I
| really really wish Apple would relent and at least give
| us two USB ports on the side like the MacBook Air.
| jachee wrote:
| I get a spare USB-C port from my Magic Keyboard. I
| generally plug the charger into it and something else
| into the on-board port, but I have the option to put
| devices into both ports.
| thewebcount wrote:
| Regarding aftertouch, it does support it in a way (and
| it's shown in the video). For many synths, after you
| press a key on the on-screen keyboard, if you hold it and
| move your finger up towards the back end of the key, it
| gets translated into aftertouch. GarageBand on iPad has
| supported this as long as I've been using it (a few
| years). I don't know if every synth supports it, but
| there are definitely some who do.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Even as a paying Bitwig subscriber, I don't get it. My
| instruments are velocity and aftertouch sensitive. Having a
| touchscreen interface for these instruments is no better
| than typing on your keyboard to play notes. _And then_ if
| you want to plug in hardware, you have to either settle for
| one thing and no charging or buy a dongle.
|
| > being able to switch between my live instrument and an on
| screen virtual one is a big deal to layer up an idea. Can't
| do that easily with a trackpad or mouse.
|
| Keyboard shortcuts exist. Failing that, it's one click on
| my trackpad to switch channels.
|
| > There's something to be said for the mobile platforms
| single app as a focus model.
|
| There's also something to be said for multitasking desktops
| that give you the flexibility of both.
|
| It's a neat option for people who already use Logic Pro,
| but touch-enabled DAWs have existed for over a decade (and
| they all kinda suck - ask me how I know). Besides the form-
| factor of the iPad being fairly convenient, there's no way
| I'd trade-in my laptop's IO and OS for a mobile one. The
| iPad doesn't offer enough flexibility to replace my DAW
| laptop.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _Even as a paying Bitwig subscriber, I don 't get it.
| My instruments are velocity and aftertouch sensitive_
|
| So what? You can get an idea down without either. It's
| not about making the final performance (though you can
| also program the DAW piano-roll this way just fine too).
|
| > _And then if you want to plug in hardware, you have to
| either settle for one thing and no charging or buy a
| dongle._
|
| God forbid you have to buy a $20 dongle, or like, just
| use the device without one, and enjoy merely 10 hours of
| use instead of 15.
| smoldesu wrote:
| I bring up Bitwig because it was originally made as a
| touch-enabled DAW. I daily-drive it on a laptop with a
| touchscreen, and used to even have it configured to run
| on my Surface Pro. Despite all this, the touchscreen was
| never really intended as a performance surface. If you
| look at how Bitwig (or even the new Logic) is designed,
| this is obvious: the portion of the screen reserved for
| performance is _minuscule_. Touchscreen devices are
| outclassed in expression by cheap XY pads with aftertouch
| sensitivity. Everyone, Apple included, knows people are
| not going to use this as a touchscreen MPC. _Akai 's
| touchscreen MPC_ does not rely on a touchscreen for
| expression.
|
| > God forbid you have to buy a $20 dongle
|
| God forbid the iPad ever exposes a second USB port worth
| of IO bandwidth.
|
| Actually, I take it back. Knowing Apple, I'll get my wish
| fulfilled with 2 Lightning ports and some MFi cable
| DRM...
| dagmx wrote:
| You don't need to get it. You do you.
|
| Every time you've replied to one of my comments in the
| past, it's been very binary in terms of workflows and the
| discussions always devolve.
|
| So this time I'm leaving it as: I explained why it's a
| big deal for me. If you have your own workflows or needs,
| so be it. But it's irrelevant to why I like it.
|
| I don't need velocity for a quick idea for example. I
| just need to get the idea out as quickly as possible.
| Besides, you can always connect an external midi keyboard
| or audio interface to an iPad as well.
| andybak wrote:
| Ah, I was going to join in with my own thoughts but this
| conversation seems to have gotten a little... personal...
|
| For the record, I find touchscreen interfaces rather
| underwhelming. I've tried to love my iPad for creative
| purposes but I just find trackpad/mouse + keyboard faster
| and more versatile.
|
| Of course - both pale in comparison to physical buttons.
| I dream of a touchscreen with really convincing haptics.
| That would be the best of both worlds.
| dagmx wrote:
| It should go without saying, but I'm not talking about
| absolute workflows because there are no such things.
|
| Workflows are subjective and contextual. I too use a Mac
| for a lot of audio work, and I'm not suggesting that one
| replaces the other in all forms.
|
| I'm simply saying why this is a big deal for that one
| part of my workflow that had a hole which a Mac doesn't
| cover.
|
| The whole "touch vs not" discussion doesn't add much
| because it's not a binary. It's only a subjective
| preference for me in my workflows in a specific context.
|
| I'm simply elaborating on why I prefer an iPad in this
| context. Rebuttals are pointless as a result because it's
| not a debate, it's an elaboration of choice.
|
| So again, I would say to people: "you do you" because my
| workflow doesn't impose or force other people's choices
| with their own trade offs.
| andybak wrote:
| I think there's a difference in conversation style here.
|
| If somebody says "I think x" I've always felt it was
| entirely reasonable to respond with "I disagree because
| y" - that's not being argumentative, it's just having a
| conversation.
|
| You're not the first person that seems to feel
| differently about whether or not it's impolite to respond
| in this way. It just always surprises me when I hit this
| particlar difference in communication preferences.
| dagmx wrote:
| That's fair, and perhaps an issue of tonality being lost
| in text or cultural differences in speech styles .
|
| though part of the issue is "I disagree because Y" is not
| relevant because it's an opinion with no negative effect
| on those who disagree (as opposed to say opinions on very
| factual science). So "I disagree because Y" is implicitly
| a rebuttal.
|
| Instead , the subtly different "I see where you're coming
| from however for me Y" is not a rebuttal. It's an
| acceptance that two views may exist simultaneously and be
| equally valid.
|
| If you look at the responses of the person I responded
| to, they're always in the form of "well I need this so it
| makes no sense"
|
| Note that they never acknowledge that others may not have
| the same needs or views. There's an absolute way in all
| the interactions I've had with them.
|
| The simple act of accepting another's perspective changes
| the post from a negation to something that builds upon
| it.
| andybak wrote:
| Yeah. I probably would have found smoldesu a little
| brusque if they were replying to me. But on the other
| hand I'm sure I'm a little too brusque for by other
| people's standards.
|
| What's the human version of Postel's Law?
| smoldesu wrote:
| Or 3D touch! Aftertouch and velocity are both possible on
| a touchscreen, the tech just never lived long enough to
| give it an earnest try. I'd be very curious to see how
| that works if someone had a POC up and running, doubly so
| with good haptics.
| smoldesu wrote:
| All that's well and good, I'm mostly just agreeing with
| the people who suggest a Macbook for this. The iPad runs
| iOS, it's gimped for _all kinds_ of creative
| applications. I won 't judge you if you've found a
| workflow to apply it to, but the status quo feels
| unchanged. Professional DAWs existed on iPad before, the
| world beneath our feet didn't crumble or anything.
|
| > Besides, you can always connect an external midi
| keyboard or audio interface to an iPad as well.
|
| Sure? Everyone can use class-compliant USB audio
| hardware. Android and Linux both support it, for whatever
| that's worth. Both of those OSes even support audio
| plugins, too.
|
| _Not_ everyone can install MPE drivers or get that
| Focusrite interface set up properly without software
| though. That 's why I still carry a laptop, it may not
| apply to everyone.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _The iPad runs iOS, it 's gimped for all kinds of
| creative applications._
|
| It's also a great form for many kinds of creative
| applications, and it's a very hassle-free, it just works
| experience for those.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| How hassle-free it is for a given workflow or user is
| highly subjective and relative to the task at hand. The
| file management on iOS is still a dumpster fire.
| rappr wrote:
| What's wrong with the file management on iOS?
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| Lacking plenty of common power user functionality to do
| things efficiently. It's fine for casuals, they don't
| know what's missing, but it's pretty poor versus a fully-
| fledged file manager on a desktop computer.
| drcongo wrote:
| I'm with you on every one of your preference points. My
| own extra one is that I spend all day every day at work
| on my Mac, when I want to relax and work on music I want
| to physically separate myself from the thing I do my work
| on. I embraced touch in the first place just for that,
| but now I'm infinitely more productive for music on my
| iPad than I am on desktop. I can reach a state of flow
| that's just not there when I use Logic on my Mac.
| woah wrote:
| Lots of electronic music devices don't have velocity.
| pdntspa wrote:
| There seems to be a divide between people who find the
| extra level of abstraction with a keyboard/mouse to be a
| problem. I don't understand it either, to the point where
| I see people try to flex with a room full of
| synthesizers, I just roll my eyes as I pull up my
| favorite VST
| thewebcount wrote:
| FWIW, the iPad is velocity sensitive. I haven't tried
| Logic Pro on it yet, but with Garage Band, it definitely
| plays louder if you hit it harder (for patches that
| support it). Some software synths in GB also have a
| pseudo-aftertouch where you slide your finger up after
| hitting the key to invoke aftertouch.
|
| That said, I don't like playing on a screen. I'm a long-
| time piano and keyboard player so I just hook up an
| external instrument. But I was pleasantly surprised by
| what I could do just on the iPad with GarageBand.
| glhaynes wrote:
| I wonder if this works by measuring the size of your
| touch (i.e., how much your finger "splats" when it
| touches) or using the accelerometers/gyroscope or what.
| c-hendricks wrote:
| It just uses the accelerometer, it's just as neat and
| inaccurate as you can guess.
| samstave wrote:
| have the UX such that you can have multiple screens that
| you swipe btwn... such that you can add screens for DRUM
| MACHINE 1 through N and you just swipe btwn them... and
| swipe up or down for media access and other screens.
|
| it would be cool to have both apps (final cut for vids and
| logic for trax) running at the same time with "integration"
| such that you can swipe btwn video and sound editing on the
| same final output...
| galleywest200 wrote:
| The 11-inch iPad (Pro) is much more compact, imo. You can
| also just mount it flat against some hardware in a rack, or
| against a wall in a small studio booth.
| robotresearcher wrote:
| It goes on the ubiquitous music stand, too. Lots of
| musicians use iPads already to show sheet music.
| squokko wrote:
| Personally, I feel like the iPad is very "flow" and the
| computer is very "precise." When I'm in the zone, just
| vibing, I'd much prefer to bust out musical ideas on an iPad
| (assuming no instruments available, of course). When I want
| to tweak the exact reverb parameters I'd rather have the
| computer.
| pdpi wrote:
| Current-gen 12" iPad Pro is 1.5 lbs to the MacBook Air's 2.7
| lbs. That's a considerable weight difference still.
| speedgoose wrote:
| 682g and 1240g.
| anotherman554 wrote:
| You aren't going to use a keyboard case?
| pwthornton wrote:
| I would assume more people using Final Cut Pro will use a
| keyboard case, but for mobile music production, it there
| may be more people willing to go without the keyboard
| case, particularly if you are mostly using it to noodle
| down ideas, use the on screen instruments, etc.
| pdpi wrote:
| for music production? I can see how you'd carry a midi
| keyboard but no keyboard for typing.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Real musicians type on a midi keyboard. I mean their text
| doesn't make sense because their alphabet has only seven
| letters, but still.
|
| (I jest!)
| jmmcd wrote:
| Well, you have 7 letters, but you can also use the black
| keys for keyboard shortcuts.
| jasomill wrote:
| And pedals! I've half-seriously considered experimenting
| with an expression pedal as a vertical scroll controller
| for desktop applications, using a second pedal to switch
| between relative (pedal position relative to center -
| scroll velocity, zero movement when pedal position is
| centered) and absolute (pedal position - page position,
| zero movement unless pedal position changes) modes.
|
| For wide multicolumn IDE/text-editor layouts, spatially-
| mapped fader banks and/or organ drawbars might also make
| useful scrollers.
| shams93 wrote:
| I'll be more excited when they finally can bring over xcode and
| I can use an ipad to write au plugins.
| toyg wrote:
| The iPad is not an entry point to the ecosystem; the difference
| with Macs in terms of modality of use is too stark.
|
| The Macs are simply meant to eventually go away. From the
| perspective of Apple, they are a legacy coccyx. For them the
| iPad, where nothing is replaceable and Apple is in full control
| of content distribution, is the superior form of computing.
| blowski wrote:
| Why would Apple only sell iPads when they can sell iPads +
| Macs?
| Toutouxc wrote:
| Developers have been begging for years to be able to code for
| iPad on iPad, wouldn't allowing this be an easy first step
| towards the iPad only dystopia? Do you have an explanation
| for why it's still almost impossible?
| toyg wrote:
| Apple will allow that when they have the means and
| inclination to lock you into coding only what they want you
| to code, and nothing more. At the moment this is not
| possible - developing an iOS app requires knowing about
| files and filesystems and utilities etc etc, which means
| you cannot stay in your little sandbox. Once they figure
| out how to build tools that do away with all of that and
| still work, then you'll be able to do it.
| fckgw wrote:
| They must be doing a terrible job since Apple is selling more
| Macs now than they ever have.
| NexRebular wrote:
| There already has been a DAW on the go for a while. It's even
| multiplatform with iOS and Android.
|
| https://www.steinberg.net/cubasis/
| dagmx wrote:
| True, I didn't mean to imply that there wasn't and I thought
| I'd alluded to that by mentioning the other recording apps on
| the iPhone.
|
| However I'm a Logic Pro user. Cubase is great but it just
| never clicked with me as much as Logic did. I've gone through
| a majority of the DAWs on macOS but Logic Pro and Live were
| the only ones that really stuck for me.
|
| Obviously purely subjective. I edited my comment above to
| reflect my DAW preference factors in.
| NexRebular wrote:
| Subjective indeed. I usually dabble in Nuendo and have
| pretty much all Steinberg workflow with Dorico in the mix
| too (also on iPad).
|
| I really should check out Logic too one of these days, but
| as it's a mixed environment in the "studio" with Mac OS and
| Windows these multiplatform apps make life a bit easier for
| now.
| jahnu wrote:
| As developers of professional audio plugins this is very
| exciting for us. The horsepower is there and the touch
| interface allows for some really cool possibilities. We already
| enjoy using AUM and Cubasis, but will be very interested to see
| if support for pro hardware improves now on iPad.
| jscheel wrote:
| I love Cubasis, but it definitely has some frustrating bugs.
| The team is pretty responsive, but I'd be quite interested to
| see if Logic is any better.
| jahnu wrote:
| Yep it's great overall but sometimes very confusing.
| drcongo wrote:
| I was a long time Cubasis user but had to ditch when the
| latest one was released so buggy and with a load of
| usability regressions that are still not fixed. I bought it
| on launch day and found about 15 showstopper bugs in the
| first half hour of trying to use it. At that point they'd
| lost me as a customer forever more and I switched to
| NanoStudio 2 which, in terms of touch interface design, is
| a work of art. Plus it never, ever crashes.
| nkozyra wrote:
| Logic has been the most intuitive DAW I've used, with
| Ableton up there but way too busy visually.
|
| Cubase/Cubasis has _always_ been riddled with bugs. It was
| my DAW for two different stints and I loved a lot about it
| but had to abandon because it wasn 't reliable.
| jscheel wrote:
| I absolutely _love_ Ableton for all my electronic work.
| Whenever I am composing with virtual instruments
| (Kontakt, etc) though, Cubase just works better for me
| (even though it is a beast).
| jahnu wrote:
| Big fan of Ableton for my own electronic music jamming
| too.
| jasonjayr wrote:
| It's an interesting consideration how frustrating and
| dangerous non-tactile interfaces can be in cars, and how
| versatile they can be when you can give them your full
| attention.
|
| I had always assumed pro-level DAW users would want lots of
| knobs and sliders to change as many parameters of the sound
| as easily and quickly as possible.
| andybak wrote:
| I've got a Steam Deck and I've been curious about using that
| as a music composition tool. The controls offer some
| interesting possibilities as performance inputs.
|
| The problem is that all Windows or Linux music apps tend to
| presume a large monitor and a mouse and keyboard. I've not
| found anything terribly usable.
| freedomben wrote:
| That's a really interesting idea! With the dual trackpads
| plus all standard controller inputs and the paddles on the
| back, the Deck is really uniquely positioned here.
|
| You could try plugging in a monitor via HDMI. If you don't
| have a dock (the JSAUX one is cheap and gets great reviews,
| but I personally have the official one) you can get a
| pretty cheap USBC to HDMI cable nearly anywhere. I found
| some in stock at a random walmart on a road trip. Was able
| to plug the deck into our van's built-in entertainment
| system (it still blows my mind that there are now vehicles
| with TV screens built in).
|
| If you do end up doing it, I'd love to see a video/blog
| post/whatever about it
| atomize wrote:
| I got the JSAUX dock while waiting for Valve to release
| the official dock. Never bought the official on release,
| the Gen 2 JSAUX with the extra USBs is awesome. Docked my
| deck to my TV and its both a media player as well as my
| console, almost never remove it except to dust :D. Also,
| the USB has recognized all peripherals I've thrown at it
| (I use desktop mode 98% of the time) and the ethernet
| works as expected.
| freedomben wrote:
| Nice! I've been amazed at what a great console it is. I
| love docking it and hooking up controllers and doing
| local co-op with my kids. Some of the best times we've
| had as a family in the last 6 months were playing
| Shredder's Revenge with the deck docked to the TV. that
| game and many others work wonderfully with these cheap
| XBox 360 controllers: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B
| 09WQGQ6D2/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b...
| dfxm12 wrote:
| Can steam deck run any Linux application? You might have
| fun designing creative abstractions in Pure Data meant to
| fit in the UI. Then, if you can hook it up to a keyboard,
| you might be able to take advantage of the user inputs on
| the steam deck & keyboard to make an ersatz OP-1.
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| > Can steam deck run any Linux application?
|
| Yes. It's amd64, so you probably don't even need to
| compile it, either.
| sgtnoodle wrote:
| On top of that, it's basically just Arch linux with a
| complicated filesystem scheme. Flatpaks are the
| recommended distribution mechanism, but you can do
| whatever you want. It comes with KDE and an X server out
| of the box.
| lynx23 wrote:
| If only we had taken the issue of accessibility seriously
| 30 years ago, and realise that it isn't about pesky blind
| people wanting to participate in the society, but actually
| about being able to run software with different interfaces
| seamlessly, this problem wouldn't even exist today ...
| andybak wrote:
| UI is hard and subtle and a touch interface for sighted
| people might be radically different from a touch
| interface for people with impaired vision.
| HerbMcM wrote:
| Bitwig and LMMS work in the Steam Deck although touch mode
| in bitwig is indeed a bit odd due to monitor size
| assumption.
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| The lack of AU on Windows, and the lack of VST on any mobile
| device, is done more to hold back DAW than anything else.
| dagmx wrote:
| Most plug-ins are available as multiple formats though. Is
| it really that much of a friction point?
|
| Pro Tools has seen huge success despite being the only
| major user of RTAS/AAX for example.
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| The part where they're not available on mobile?
| Incredibly so.
|
| The fact that there's no AU on Windows? Less so.
| shams93 wrote:
| Yeah on the apple its Au only but with the clap plugin
| format its open source so it may be possible to have clap
| plugins in an android daw, but on ios its au only and I
| doubt that will change.
| efields wrote:
| Do you have any insight on why bigger companies like Arturia
| don't bring more of their VSTs and plugins to iOS?
|
| I'm a hobbyist music maker and I vastly prefer AUM on my iPad
| to working in GarageBand (logic is far beyond my needs). I
| just want more of the desktop plugin ecosystem to trickle
| down.
| jahnu wrote:
| I can only guess but it can be a daunting prospect to get
| things portable. Could be their DAW abstraction or their
| graphics framework that causes them massive work. And let's
| get real here. It's not exactly a lucrative market. We
| charge much less on iOS than we do on desktop for several
| reasons (among them no method for resale). Yet when we
| launched on iOS people were shocked at our high prices
| (we're not making yet another compressor or 3 band eq we're
| doing complicated original stuff at the highest audio
| quality). We are just two people and want to make a modest
| income. (We would earn way way more in typical software
| jobs). So yeah I suspect it's just not worth it to these
| larger companies. Especially with the Apple cut.
| eurekin wrote:
| Please consider supporting multi touch, where it makes sense
| jahnu wrote:
| We absolutely do already :D
|
| https://gs-dsp.com/
| drcongo wrote:
| Big fan of your interfaces here, and MMM is an amazing
| utility - thanks.
| jahnu wrote:
| Thank you so much! More stuff coming all the time :)
| whiddershins wrote:
| Semi off topic but if I want to develop audio plugins for
| live performance iOS/osx what is a really good resource, in
| your estimation?
|
| When I look for books on Core Audio there's approximately one
| on Amazon and it isn't very recent.
|
| I don't really want to live on another layer, like developing
| in Max or Juce or AudioKit or whatever is out there.
|
| I'd rather code directly against Apple's APIs. Or I think
| that's what I want. Maybe I'm misguided.
|
| Do you have any suggestions?
| jahnu wrote:
| We develop on JUCE and I really would suggest anyone just
| getting into this should too or maybe iPlug2. Handling all
| the quirks of different formats and DAWs is an enormous
| time sink. Do you want to do that or do you want to spend
| time developing your idea for an effect or instrument?
|
| You don't need to use the GUI stuff from JUCE so if you
| have a preferred framework use that instead. We use none of
| their DSP. We concentrate on developing our own DSP
| algorithms and making them best in class.
| NewMountain wrote:
| I recently did a gig with a quad cortex and honestly I
| couldn't shake the feeling of just wishing I could have all
| my Plugins (FabFilter, SoundToys, NAM and NeuralDSP mostly)
| instead. iPad, good interface, some bluetooth
| switch/expression pedal and all the same plugins I have at
| home would be amazing for me.
|
| Just curious if anyone knows. Suppose a band of the future is
| just a few players who show up with iPads (guitar, bass,
| key/synth, drums) and, where relevant, a control surface
| (midi controller, edrums, etc). Does Logic have a "federated"
| mode? Can each iPad synchronize to a shared click track or
| other backing tracks for lights, etc or does the "brain" of a
| performance still need to be centralized?
|
| Edit: I'm wondering if that "federated" functionality could
| be used to reduce the amount of gear required for a band
| using IEMs. That would be a _killer_ use case.
|
| I'm super excited about this though and really looking
| forward to a major step forward at least in the guitar world.
| Slow_Hand wrote:
| While Logic doesn't feature this yet, the closest analog I
| know of is the Ableton Link protocol which allows users on
| a network to synchronize their master clock with other
| users across any app that supports it (Ableton, Pro Tools,
| Korg sequencers, etc).
|
| While simple and meant more of a collaborative feature,
| this is a tremendously helpful feature that allows people
| to jump right in to a music-making session and ensure that
| their rig is going to be synced up with others in a musical
| meaningful way.
| softfalcon wrote:
| How does this handle latency of data transfer? I have
| worked with professional musicians and the delay of even
| 10ms across the stage annoys them.
|
| I am trying to envision how syncing DAW's through the
| network could possibly avoid what easily amounts to more
| than 20ms of delay back and forth between devices.
|
| Is this just not an issue for digital music production?
| It's a massive issue for live music and in-ear-monitors
| on stage.
| philsnow wrote:
| I'm not claiming that it uses NTP, but:
|
| > NTP can usually maintain time to within tens of
| milliseconds over the public Internet, and can achieve
| better than one millisecond accuracy in local area
| networks under ideal conditions
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Time_Protocol#Clock
| _sy...
|
| The algorithm is more sensitive to variance than latency,
| but over a LAN variance is usually pretty okay. Wifi can
| be a lot worse, though, especially if there are a lot of
| clients.
| softfalcon wrote:
| Well that's cool, I definitely have some reading for
| today after the work day is over!
|
| Thank you kindly!
| gcr wrote:
| Ableton Link only synchronizes the clock, transport, and
| BPM. No data.
|
| It measures and accounts for latency between devices.
| softfalcon wrote:
| Well that's frigging cool! Thanks for enlightening me!
| comprev wrote:
| This is a multi-studio live collaboration project which
| had a MIDI sync over the internet.
|
| Amazing to see affordable connection speeds have risen to
| the point where this is possible.
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FE1sY4OY1D4
| klodolph wrote:
| The "federated" option you're talking about sounds like
| it's regular MIDI Sync with transport control. You hit
| play, everything plays in sync. Logic already supports
| this, you just have to wire things together.
| klipklop wrote:
| For live performances you can do a lot of this stuff with
| AUM. It's awesome for chaining plug-ins in novel ways. Has
| midi support as well. It's the main way I use plugins on
| iPad.
| pdntspa wrote:
| Wonder how Logic Pro ipad compares to FLStudio mobile?
| Maursault wrote:
| > Having a full DAW on the go is a killer feature imho.
|
| I think the problem here that most won't realize is that
| they'll have no idea what you're listening to and so will be
| mixing audio in the dark, so to speak. Professionals will check
| headphone mixes, but generally won't mix with headphones
| certainly not bluetooth headphones. I suppose there may exist
| such a thing as powered Bluetooth monitors, but again, the
| wireless Bluetooth, and what it does to audio, is the weak part
| in the chain. iPad built in speakers are not flat, so if you
| mix for them, the audio might only sound alright coming out of
| an iPad.
|
| There are probably audio docks for iPad which will include a
| DAC for converting stereo sound from the iPad USB-C port, and
| jacks for monitors, but I have never seen one that doesn't have
| the cheapest components available. Not sure of the current
| abilities of iPad and USB-C, but last I heard, iPad was only
| capable of stereo in and stereo out. There's a lot that can be
| done with just two tracks, but do not doubt that everything
| depends on the converters and preamps, so a professional
| quality USB-C ADC/DAC with decent pres (unless off-boarded) is
| paramount to creating half decent tracks, which is paramount to
| creating very good mixes.
|
| Not everyone is a professional audio engineer, and everyone
| here that is an expert at everything will likely be satisfied
| with terrible converters and the audio they produce. YMMV
| koiueo wrote:
| > abilities of iPad and USB-C
|
| I use iPad with RME ADI DAC-2 and I can't think of a single
| issue.
| Maursault wrote:
| > I use iPad with RME ADI DAC-2 and I can't think of a
| single issue.
|
| I hope I missed a joke. That is a high end DAC that retails
| for $1300, and could very well be the best DAC available
| for less $1500. That'll do nicely. I'd prefer Lavry
| Engineering's discontinued DA11 (and AD11), but it's
| somewhat of a judgement call at that level.
| B1FF_PSUVM wrote:
| > the wireless Bluetooth, and what it does to audio,
|
| It should do about the same as the "oxygen-free copper"
| cables, perhaps slower - moving bits from A to B.
|
| Is there any evidence otherwise?
| 0x457 wrote:
| Well, BT introduces additional delay and jitter. It's fine
| for listening to music because you can "cache" segments.
| That's totally not going to working real-time audio.
|
| Apple doesn't support aptX HD, aptX Lossless, LDAC for
| Bluetooth devices. IIRC they use AAC 256 kbps for their
| wireless audio.
|
| Once again, totally fine for listening Spotify and apply
| music, but I imagine suboptimal for DAW.
| recursive wrote:
| Evidence? It uses lossy audio codecs. Some are good, and
| some are less good, but they're all lossy. The quality loss
| happens before the bits hit the radio. That part is fine,
| as you note. "Oxygen-free copper", regardless of whether
| it's beneficial, is generally used for analog signals,
| which isn't moving bits at all.
|
| Bluetooth also introduces latency. It might be ok for
| mixing, but it's completely unusable for recording
| applications.
| aflag wrote:
| Can't the software correct for the iPad speaker so that it's
| effectively flat?
| mod50ack wrote:
| I'm fairly sure this isn't quite possible. It has to do
| with the physical properties of the space. Not that I'm an
| actual audio engineer. Not to mention that the iPad
| speakers are probably mostly designed to be compact and
| this probably places some limitations on what they can do.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| I'll pick up the app (I have it on my Mac), once I get an M1 iPad
| (which may be a while).
|
| Give them some time to work out the bugs.
| hn_throawlles wrote:
| now they can really shut down their other MacOS, the one with a
| BSD licensed kernel,....
|
| where is your open source support now? outbid by data-capitalists
| is where it is,
| nbzso wrote:
| I saw this "trend" long time ago. Switched to Resolve and Studio
| One. Call me an old head, but there is something in using
| multiple displays and knowing that your software is platform-
| agnostic. :)
| jonhohle wrote:
| Subscription! Even Apple has fallen. This is really
| disappointing.
| MuffinFlavored wrote:
| $5/mo for top of the line software that will continue to get
| updates + new features + bug fixes is "really disappointing"?
| l33tman wrote:
| Subscription models for creative software is the worst thing
| in the industry. 10 years down the line when you get a blast
| of nostalgia and you want to open a couple of songs you
| wrote, and you even have the laptop in a drawer. OH! None of
| my programs work anymore.
|
| It's a fine model if both models are available. You might
| spend some $ for some months to try it out, then you decide
| to buy it. But what they really want is for you to never ever
| stop paying, because you have a bunch of files and works you
| did that you "just might" have to open soon so you might as
| well keep the sub running...
| mattwad wrote:
| Who cares about top-of-the-line updates. Adobe Photoshop
| features from 10 years ago is all I need for my use case, and
| probably anyone who's not using it every day. That's why they
| force subscriptions now.
| MuffinFlavored wrote:
| > Adobe Photoshop features from 10 years ago is all I need
| for my use case
|
| Cool. Who cares? Are you Adobe's target customer base?
|
| https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/compare-plans.html
|
| No, you're not.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| OP argues for customer experience, you argue for someone
| else's business
| MuffinFlavored wrote:
| OP is misrepresenting fringe usecases that the market has
| evolved from/moved past
|
| I used to download 800mb Photoshop binaries
|
| Now you visit it in a browser.
|
| Which is better "customer experience"?
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| Offline native apps 100%
| thewataccount wrote:
| In my experience browser based apps are sooooo slow
| compared to native ones.
|
| Also no offline support at all.
|
| And they have access to all of my data because I have to
| upload it.
|
| I just want to use lightroom to edit my vacation photos,
| I don't want to upload all of my photos over my slow
| internet connection just to edit them in a high-latency
| browser app. Also I'm likely traveling in a vehicle
| without stable internet.
| 015a wrote:
| If there's anyone who may take issue with your assertion that
| the software will continue to get updates and new features
| and bug fixes, I think it would coincidentally be Logic MacOS
| users. FCPX still gets some good attention, but Logic; the
| good things you could say about it are that it still works
| how it has, and you don't have to pay a subscription fee.
|
| If a subscription fee is what it takes to get some attention
| then so be it; $5/mo is certainly reasonable. But I wouldn't
| assert it as a foregone conclusion.
| g105b wrote:
| Yes. The software will not receive updates forever. The Ipad
| will not receive updates forever. One day, this software will
| force the user to buy more Apple devices to continue using
| it.
| anaganisk wrote:
| Don't u just end the subscription at that point? What am I
| missing.
| EnigmaCurry wrote:
| Ownership.
| pohl wrote:
| Even without the subscription model, one never owns the
| software they buy. It's still just a license, at the end
| of the day.
| layer8 wrote:
| Depends on the country.
| EnigmaCurry wrote:
| irrevocable licenses are pretty different than
| subscriptions.
| dangus wrote:
| They're not much different, they just run on a different
| time scale.
|
| Even if your same application continues to work forever,
| one of the following will happen:
|
| - Complementary software evolves. E.g.: My old photo
| editor doesn't support new image compression formats
|
| - Alternatives become more attractive. E.g.: I paid for a
| copy of Sublime Text but now I prefer VSCode because of
| its additional functionality, my old copy of Photoshop
| CS2 works fine but the new one will save me time during
| XYZ workflow compared to the old version.
|
| - The utility of the application is exhausted. E.g.: I
| already played this single player game 10 times and it's
| not fun anymore, my copy of Final Cut Pro 6 can't produce
| 4K HDR movies that my customers demand.
| jonhohle wrote:
| I have versions of Paint Shop Pro from the 90s that can
| open JPEG, GIF, PNG, TIFF, etc. files.
|
| I have used versions of After Effects of similar vintage.
| Premier and AE were doing 4K back then because that's
| what Hollywood needed for their productions. Illustrator
| and Photoshop are mostly functional.
|
| Likewise, my Nikon camera from 2011 doesn't stop working
| just because it's old. The tools in my garage are no less
| effective because home additive manufacturing exists.
| dkdbejwi383 wrote:
| Well, I can still use my old polycarbonate MacBook from
| 2008 with the old version of Aperture I bought
| indefinitely, at least until the hardware breaks and is
| no longer repairable.
|
| If Apple decides to stop supporting the subscription
| based Logic Pro, I'd no longer be able to continue using
| it.
| dangus wrote:
| But why would Apple stop supporting a subscription
| product that brings in revenue?
|
| You've unintentionally alluded to the reason why single-
| purchase software is such a flawed business model. If I
| buy a piece of software from a company that's using a
| one-time purchase business model, I basically have to
| expect them to go out of business or constantly be on
| life support because their only revenue comes from new
| customers. Once their market is saturated, they're done.
|
| Persistent licenses are really still licenses, not truly
| buy it and keep it forever product. The time scale is
| just longer. Aperture was discontinued, so now it's a
| matter of "good luck finding a machine that still runs
| it." While it's great that you got to keep the software
| forever, that doesn't guarantee the software has value
| anymore.
|
| Almost all of the purchased objects in our life degrade
| in some way, whether it's fast or slow.
|
| Also, I think that Apple's persistent license
| professional suite was priced well below cost to attract
| users to the Mac platform. In contrast, these are
| applications that are intending to turn a profit on their
| own.
| mejutoco wrote:
| > now it's a matter of "good luck finding a machine that
| still runs it." While it's great that you got to keep the
| software forever, that doesn't guarantee the software has
| value anymore.
|
| On a system that can be virtualized the software may very
| well run forever.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| It's probably a bold assumption that you wouldn't be able
| to continue using it, Apple likely realizes that this
| would screw people who bought the device specifically for
| that purpose; should just be as simple as changing a sub
| expiry date to a thousand years from now if the shit does
| hit the fan.
|
| Furthermore, if it shares the same codebase as the macOS
| version, why would it cease development now that they
| share a common architecture? If anything, that would
| likely mean Apple had gone tits-up.
| mejutoco wrote:
| It is the simplest assumption, based on similar promises
| from software vendors, like life-subscription prices.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| I don't think Apple is comparable to any other corp,
| they're in a unique position of making the only hardware
| that officially runs the software they make and they also
| make industry leading software.
|
| I'm not even an Apple user. I'm just calling it as I see
| it.
| mejutoco wrote:
| All corporations have things in common, at the very least
| legally, and more.
|
| Nvidia, for example, meets the requirements too.
|
| Why you would trust a company not to increase prices
| because they make their own hardware I am not sure.
|
| I remember a bus company undercut by a new train service.
| The train was very affordable until the private bus
| service disappeared. Then, the price gouging started.
|
| If we can compare that service with a SaaS I don't see
| why apple would be any different.
| [deleted]
| eurekin wrote:
| Adobe subscriptions are nice examples of bad management, no
| long standing significant bug was fixed and they mostly
| seem to add toys around the fringes (cloud based neural
| filters for example)
| astrange wrote:
| Adobe can't ever change any of their old filters for
| compatibility reasons (or because they believe they're
| "not really broken".)
|
| Approximately all the math in Photoshop is wrong because
| it's not done in linear colorspace, the image resizing
| algorithms were bad for 1980, etc, but they can't change
| them.
|
| Lightroom introduced a new better ML demosaic for raw
| photos, but they can't just replace the old one, instead
| it's a different "enhance photo" option.
| fundad wrote:
| Yup the very first subscription offering from Apple was
| announced today
| southwesterly wrote:
| Apple TV is a subscription.
| Curzel wrote:
| I don't get it.
|
| People have been wondering when this would happen since the very
| first iPad Pro, so lots of people will be happy now...
|
| Even assuming all the required horse power is there, I still
| don't get it...
|
| Maybe I'm getting old.
| wilsonnb3 wrote:
| There are a few reasons that I am excited for this, none of
| which have to do with actually using logic pro or final cut on
| an ipad.
|
| 1. This is an excellent signal that iPads can get "real"
| software now, hopefully more companies start porting their
| desktop mac software to iPadOS
|
| 2. Apple will continute to keep MacOS and iPadOS separate
| rather than trying to combine them like a lot of people on the
| internet think they want, which is good.
|
| 3. WWDC is going to be an absolute banger this year if they are
| announcing something like this in a press release.
| eliseomartelli wrote:
| I'm really excited for point 3.
|
| I really wish iOS opens up to accept a _real_ terminal.
|
| I know iSH exists but it runs using usermode x86 emulation.
| adrusi wrote:
| You can sideload UTM if you sign it with your own developer
| key, and run VMs with JIT-based acceleration.
|
| It'll sometimes get killed by the OS without much you can
| do about it though.
| runlevel1 wrote:
| > Even assuming all the required horse power is there, I still
| don't get it...
|
| Looks like the latest generation of iPad Pro and MacBook Air
| have comparable CPU benchmarks.[^1][^2]
|
| I'm with you in not getting it, though. Editing video on an
| iPad seems like it'd be a frustratingly constrained affair due
| to the UI. But I might just be getting old too.
|
| [1]: https://browser.geekbench.com/macs/macbook-air-2022 [2]:
| https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/ipad14-5
| piperswe wrote:
| Not only that, but the latest generation iPad Pro and MacBook
| Air have the same CPU (and SoC as a whole)
| armchairhacker wrote:
| I was about to wish Apple had made Logic Pro free or cheap for
| students / hobbyists, and a $5/month subscription does that. I've
| want to get into sound design but not going to drop $1000s on
| software.
|
| Though I wish they'd do something like Kilohearts, where
| subscribing for enough time basically gives you a perpetual
| license (https://kilohearts.com/products/kilohearts_subscription#
| rewa...). It's good because if I pick up something and then drop
| it I can just cancel the subscription, but if I decide to keep
| using it until I reach the price point I get to keep it.
| lostgame wrote:
| To be fair - GarageBand is free, and while it's feature set is
| obviously lethargic in comparison to Logic's, I do like their
| philosophy of having kind of a free consumer and education
| version vs. a professional version.
|
| As a teenager I very successfully followed the path of using
| iMovie and GarageBand for a couple years until eventually I
| outgrew the feature set and wanted more.
|
| At the time; they sold what was called 'Final Cut Express' and
| 'Logic Express', which were essentially 95% feature complete
| versions of the software at a significantly reduced price aimed
| at the education and hobbyist market. It was a perfect little
| balance between affordability and power.
|
| Best of all, you could, and still can; open up iMovie projects
| in Final Cut and GarageBand projects in Logic - allowing you to
| actually flex more power if you need it in existing projects.
|
| This workflow was so fantastic, and I actually still use it
| sometimes when I've got musical ideas on the go and want to jot
| them down quickly with GarageBand on my iOS device.
| earthnail wrote:
| Holy f**... how on earth will any other DAW vendor compete with
| that price? Logic already was crazy cheap, but now the price
| really just seems to be to boost iPad sales.
|
| It's amazing what you get for $5/month here. But I'm a bit
| worried about innovation if everyone gets used to these prices.
| LegitShady wrote:
| Reaper already competes at that price, just not on iOS.
| ricokatayama wrote:
| I'm still a bit skeptical about Logic's ability to be a full-
| featured DAW on the iPad. The move is great, but we need to
| tackle several challenges to make it suitable for final editing
| rather than just a work support tool:
|
| - It needs to have open and comprehensive plugin support
|
| - The workflow for uploading and exporting content needs to be
| seamless, and the iPad OS is still limited in this regard
|
| - Screen size and real estate are still a concern
|
| - Ready-to-use ecosystems for operating with the iPad, such as
| interfaces, audio monitors, etc., need to be developed.
|
| I love the idea of being able to record, create, edit, and mix on
| the go, but I've kind of moved away from the DAW paradigm on
| tablets. Today, I focus my workflow on a Dawless idea, with the
| M8, Digitakt, Organelle, OP-1, and several other devices. More
| expensive? Definitely! But it fits my creative mode.
| tomduncalf wrote:
| > It needs to have open and comprehensive plugin support
|
| iOS has a thriving plugin scene, using the AUv3 (Audio Unit)
| format. Search the App Store for "AUv3" and check out the huge
| range of synths, effects, etc. In addition to smaller devs,
| there are some big players who have ported their flagship
| plugins (FabFilter, Eventide etc.)
|
| > The workflow for uploading and exporting content needs to be
| seamless, and the iPad OS is still limited in this regard
|
| It is much better since Files was added to iOS, though still a
| bit clunky. Their page (https://www.apple.com/logic-pro-for-
| ipad/) advertises "roundtrip compatibility" so hopefully
| they've made this easy
|
| > Screen size and real estate are still a concern
|
| Definitely a valid point, maybe this is the catalyst for a 15"
| iPad!
|
| > Ready-to-use ecosystems for operating with the iPad, such as
| interfaces, audio monitors, etc., need to be developed.
|
| Any class-compliant USB device will work with an iPad (or
| iPhone), so most audio interfaces, MIDI keyboards, etc. should
| be good to go. It only won't work if it requires a custom
| driver
| intrasight wrote:
| Plugin vendors should get on board pretty quickly.
|
| However, I expect them all to follow suit and use a
| subscription model. But this may be preferable than shelling
| out a couple hundred up front for each one. Vendors that have
| lots of virtual instruments will likely have attractive
| bundle subscription prices.
| intrasight wrote:
| > skeptical about Logic's ability to be a full-featured DAW
|
| It won't be full-featured - it doesn't have to be to make a
| huge impact. For example, as a new platform for live
| performances, it will be pretty awesome.
| silveira wrote:
| Subscription. I'm out. I already paid for these softwares on Mac
| and I don't get even a discount in the price. I was expecting
| some kind of upgrade option.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| Why would you want to use iPad version if you already using it
| for Mac? It's a big pain due to the file system and storage
| limitations. The ipad version is aimed more at non professional
| use but still giving them professional features. Would never
| touch ipad version, totally different use case. You won't see
| Hollywood types saying I'm gonna use this because, because it's
| touch screen
| _joel wrote:
| Why wouldn't you, very similar workflow and more portable.
| For sketching ideas you don't need multi terrabyte Kontakt
| plugins.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| If you just want to sketch ideas, garage band could be
| enough. I mean both a Mac and iPad are quite portable, but
| i do see if you just want to professionally develop music
| on the cheap, iPad it is, you will have a hard time with
| the screen size however if you want to anything with many
| instruments and tracks
| _joel wrote:
| Yea, granted. I don't have any issues carrying my m2 air
| about for writing but it's still a bit cumbersome vs.
| ipad and I'll be trying out the new version for sure.
| Just seems complimentary rather than binary.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| Sure.. who's gonna pay for updates?
|
| I don't understand how people on HN can devalue their own
| profession. By your reasoning, once an application has been
| released, you're out of a job.
|
| Oh hey.. isn't that the current market!
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Not all software requires babying and constant updates. These
| already work for most people and most use cases.
| ezfe wrote:
| Well in this case it's not the same software, it's a touch-
| optimized iPad version so the original comment demanding a
| discount for having purchased the Mac version is...well,
| yeah
| pjmlp wrote:
| I also don't get it, everyone likes to get paid while
| refusing to pay for the work of others.
| [deleted]
| Karunamon wrote:
| Let's ask the few decades of software developers/publishing
| houses who managed to make respectable incomes without
| requiring this subscription rent seeking nonsense.
|
| This is _Apple_ we are talking about, this is greed-based.
| archagon wrote:
| As a developer, I get it.
|
| As a user, fuck subscriptions. Subscriptions just cause me to
| move all my tooling to open source variants over time.
| Developer livelihood is not my concern.
|
| Maybe OSS with a Pateron-style model is the way forward?
| bdougherty wrote:
| Some people do not need the updates, some will pay a fair
| value for the updates. Nobody is asking for non-subscription
| software to be priced the same as the subscription.
|
| Bottom line is that the App Store not having upgrade pricing
| has forced everything to become a subscription.
| jrajav wrote:
| Maybe just release and sell a complete and polished product?
| And add significant value to that product again before asking
| for more money? What about the notion of having enough pride
| and confidence in your work that you can make a solid value
| proposition regularly, and not yoke your customers to you
| permanently with a nebulous agreement?
|
| Also, practically, consumers in the audio software market are
| more savvy and have higher expectations than those in other
| markets. In particular, they expect a fair ownership model
| (something provided by many plugin and DAW shops, big or
| small), and are wary of subscriptions and things like them.
| Perpetual licenses are the norm - in fact, even things
| uncommon in other software markets like the ability to resell
| your licenses are often provided due to market pressure.
| dbbk wrote:
| This is professional grade software and you won't pay $5 a
| month? Which you can cancel whenever you're not using it?
| tgv wrote:
| I don't think it's aimed at the same market. I mean: I can run
| large sample libraries on my MBP, but I don't see that happen
| any time soon on an iPad. There's not enough disk space, and I
| don't see the whole NI library eco-system adapt itself to iOS
| (let alone custom players like EastWest or Spitfire).
|
| But it's a great option for people who've outgrown GarageBand.
| Audiophilip wrote:
| Now I just wish iPads would have an audio jack so that I could
| plug in my headphone while using Logic.
| xattt wrote:
| Echoing other comments explaining why this release is a good
| development ... If you need headphones or a speaker to hear
| sounds you create, you are not the target demographic.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| ... surely most people will be using an audio interface
| _anyway_?
| JPws_Prntr_Fngr wrote:
| His point (that you and the other commenters are
| intentionally ignoring) is that he _could_ be the target
| demographic, if Apple had made their mobile platform a little
| more flexible /"pro".
| xattt wrote:
| I missed the /s tag. Of course any sane musician would want
| to _hear_ the sounds they are creating.
|
| Other comments in this thread saying that a specific
| concern is inappropriate because something something target
| demographic are snobbish.
| bannedbybros wrote:
| [dead]
| nekdknff wrote:
| Remember when you could just buy software?
| nchase wrote:
| This is exciting.
|
| I'd love it if they opened the iPad up to tools like Rogue
| Amoeba's Loopback[1], because a tool that allows audio capture
| from the device is critical for any sampling workflow.
|
| I'm not holding my breath, but that would complete the dream, for
| me.
|
| [1]: https://rogueamoeba.com/loopback/
| happytiger wrote:
| It really says a lot about the future of editing. Everyone doing
| it on their phones is growing up showing us what editing packages
| are going to look like... and it's something like this. Big
| screen, touch interface, more fluid work flow, definitely going
| to be ai assisted... it's interesting timing.
|
| I feel like Apple is going to do the magic they did for spell
| checking with the iPhone keyboard for professional video editing.
| Might take them a while but this fcp finally evolving to the iPad
| feels like the bellwhether.
|
| Anyone else see the trend? 3-4 generations down the line
| probably. But do you see it?
| sneak wrote:
| No doubt with surveillance features built in. This is dangerous
| in the journalism/media production pipeline.
| gehsty wrote:
| Can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not? Apple products
| have been used to write articles / produce videos for
| decades, not sure why this is different on an iPad?
| nxpnsv wrote:
| I guess my mac logic pro license won't cover the iPad version,
| right?
| drcongo wrote:
| Doesn't look like it, which is a shame. Extra annoying that
| this is a subscription too.
| samstave wrote:
| This has always bothered me, in general, take games for example
| ; if I pay $70 for a game on the PS5, why cant I run same game
| on my PC?
|
| I bought the game, not the platform.
|
| FU - I am paying for running the 'license' of the game on a
| given GPU/CPU?
|
| its Oracle Licensing policy, recall when Oracle tied your DB
| lic to a CPU? Fuck that.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| You didn't even buy a game, you but a license to a game. One
| that often can't even be resold like normal licensed wares.
|
| Luckily, piracy remains an option if you're willing to
| download patches manually.
| mwidell wrote:
| There is a great app for iPad called LumaFusion, which is very
| similar to Final Cut. I tried using an iPad Pro for a couple of
| weeks when it came out, to see if it can replace a laptop or
| desktop.
|
| Biggest problem was ergonomics. So incredibly bad ergonomics to
| work on an iPad, even with the pen. Impossible to work without
| strain in neck and arm.
|
| So I'm back to Macbook and I will never again attempt to edit
| video on an iPad.
| buildbuildbuild wrote:
| A fun toy. Until the long list of third party pro audio interface
| drivers and plug-ins work on iPad, this will only be useful for
| the (large) prosumer market.
|
| It would be killer if this supported Dante over Ethernet at
| 96khz.
| deofoo wrote:
| Where is the innovation? Such a disappointment.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| Well, what were you _expecting_? Can you describe what
| innovation looks like?
| tonetheman wrote:
| [dead]
| drexlspivey wrote:
| Do you get access to the mac version if you pay for a
| subscription?
| vrglvrglvrgl wrote:
| [dead]
| whywhywhywhy wrote:
| As the years go by, the entirely different OS for tablets vs
| laptops which at first seemed like the only route to get a
| quality experience seems like a huge misstep now the tablets all
| have keyboards and trackpads stuck to them when used for work.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| We made a worse laptop.
| tm-guimaraes wrote:
| More companies should just adopt Jetbrains model.
|
| Month subscription available, but by paying the annual
| subscription you get a perpetual license for the last release
| covered by your purchase, which makes an annual subscription
| pretty much the same as "buy with 1 year of updates".
| Someone1234 wrote:
| iOS devices don't support downloading specific versions of
| apps, and you cannot sideload. Apple has made this model
| impossible on iOS.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Actually it does.
|
| If you have a device that doesn't support the newest version
| of the app, you can choose to "download the last compatible
| version"
| ianlevesque wrote:
| That isn't enough to enable this business model.
| scarface74 wrote:
| It would be simple enough (yes I know I sound like a
| product manager" to add another rule to allow someone to
| download the last version they are eligible for. Apple
| keeps all of the previous versions of apps. They use to
| be available via a simple url.
| zamadatix wrote:
| The problem isn't the lack of possible way to do it well
| rather the lack of implemented way to do it well.
| threeseed wrote:
| There is a major update to iOS every single year and many
| older application simply wouldn't run.
|
| Bad experience for users, developers and Apple.
| emanuelez wrote:
| Loopy Pro manages to do this: https://loopypro.com/pricing/
| rtkwe wrote:
| You could approximate it with extensive feature flagging to
| disable/hide new features for people with old "versions" of
| the app.
| [deleted]
| asddubs wrote:
| sounds like a nightmare and a half given enough time.
| threeseed wrote:
| Major websites such as Airbnb have dozens to hundreds of
| feature flags which they use to run A/B experiments.
|
| And so there is plenty of software available e.g.
| LaunchDarkly to help simplify the process.
| rtkwe wrote:
| Oh yeah I didn't say it was a great option but it's AN
| option and could be managed so long as your features are
| relatively self contained modules.
| genmon wrote:
| Working Copy on iOS does this _brilliantly._
|
| > The features you unlock are permanently available and any
| other pro features added the next 12 months after purchase
| are also permanently available. After one year new pro
| features introduced will be locked until you purchase a
| upgrade. Even if you do not purchase a new unlock after 12
| months, the app will still be updated with improvements and
| bug-fixes.
|
| https://workingcopy.app/manual/purchase
| romeoblade wrote:
| Yes! I was going to comment the same, it's a very
| reasonable model from a developer who makes great
| software. I recently within the last year switched from
| the Blink shell to his app "Shellfish" as it's become a
| daily part of my workflow when using my iOS devices. I
| highly recommend it if you like workingcopy.
| oneplane wrote:
| That technical method isn't the only way to implement this
| business method, and a number of existing apps are doing this
| quite successfully already. So this both already exists, and
| works.
|
| As for 'side loading', it's somewhat possible, but even if it
| was available by default it would be messy for most customers
| -- they already have trouble with what's currently available.
| Perhaps some sort of in-app store would make that model
| feasible. The vendor gets to show and deploy whatever they
| want, and the end-user gets a very clear and very specific
| list of options for the app/vendor. That would even be better
| than the 'everyone in one store' model for some more
| specialised apps, especially when searching (which currently
| leads to a plethora of tangential ads and applications you
| actually don't want).
| threeseed wrote:
| What you've described is more complex than managing one app
| with feature flags.
|
| And it's still undetermined whether Apple would be required
| to host your app on their App Store once you've decided to
| run your own store. Which means you would be losing a major
| distribution channel.
| zamadatix wrote:
| The other two ways I've seen are committing to lifetime
| bugfixes but maintaining a feature lock based on last
| license renewal or releasing a separate app per release.
| The first is actually a different model but if you're
| alright with it from the developer side then it's very
| similar from the user's perspective. The second is either
| different or the same depending on how it's implemented. 2a
| is commit to upgrading these apps for life the same as the
| first method, at which point it largely turns into a worse
| option to both sides. 2b is to not commit to lifetime
| updates, at which point it's not really lifetime as much as
| "until Apple removes it from the App Store and you need to
| download it on a new device".
|
| Based on the wording comment it sounds like there may be
| additional ways I haven't seen but you didn't really say
| what they were as much as dismiss the point assuming
| everyone knew what apps or release models you are familiar
| with.
|
| I agree an in App Store solution like the one you describe
| would be the preferred answer for most users. Sideloading
| is more useful as a catch-all for anything Apple doesn't
| have a good first party answer for. Once non policy related
| use cases for the sideloading exist it's going to be easier
| for most to have a first party solution for those use
| cases.
| bazzargh wrote:
| Not sure how widespread it is, but TapBots and 1Password both
| released separate apps for their major version updates. The
| 1Password subscription carried across to the new app, the
| TapBots one was a new purchase for each app, so there's 2
| ways that model has been working on iOS.
| znpy wrote:
| > and you cannot sideload
|
| not yet, and most likely just not in the us
|
| but due to the european union digital markets act, apple will
| have to allow for side loading, and somebody was speculating
| it will only be in the EU.
| Shared404 wrote:
| just not in the US != only in the EU
| threeseed wrote:
| With good reason as it's unworkable.
|
| iOS and iPadOS are not stable systems like OSX where the
| fundamentals of the overall experience is clear and largely
| complete. There is still a lot of innovation and new concepts
| being introduced each year.
|
| To have a large percentage of users with older apps that
| won't properly support these changes would hurt the platform.
|
| As was mentioned feature flags are a much better option.
| charcircuit wrote:
| In the jetbrains you only get a perpetual license for the
| current version. You lose the year of updates.
|
| Also why should companies do that? They could be leaving money
| on the table as people can continue to gain value from the
| perpetual version without you getting any compensation for that
| value. Also you now have to deal wind a fragmented user base on
| different versions. And the user community has to dear with not
| everyone supporting the same features and menu navigation as
| everyone else.
| criddell wrote:
| > They could be leaving money on the table as people can
| continue to gain value from the perpetual version without you
| getting any compensation for that value.
|
| They were compensated when you bought the version you keep.
| If you get nothing from them after that, then what would they
| be compensated for? I could understand it if the application
| required server-side resources, but if it's all local, then
| no further compensation is due.
|
| If you buy Microsoft Word and make $10 million from a novel,
| you don't have to kick any of that back to Microsoft. The
| software company has no claim to the value created by their
| software beyond the licensing costs.
| chongli wrote:
| _In the jetbrains you only get a perpetual license for the
| current version. You lose the year of updates._
|
| Yeah, that model is infuriating. While your subscription is
| running you get the updates. Then they snatch them away if
| you cancel. It's a dark pattern.
| tm-guimaraes wrote:
| > In the jetbrains you only get a perpetual license for the
| current version. You lose the year of updates.
|
| False unless they changed it recently. It explicitly read
| last version on the subscription. I actually bought one a few
| years back and I got fallback to the last version of the
| subscription timeframe.
|
| Regarding the "why", it's simply the option that properly
| aligns interests. A long enough subscription (ie an year),
| should cover initial expenses and development during the
| period, if the company wants to keep a customer paying, it
| needs to keep making the software better.
|
| It's putting customer first, which is something companies
| tend to forget which tend to lead to a downfall if they have
| not secured a strong prison/moat for their rent seeking
| behaviors.
|
| Companies with proper alignment on incentives tend to
| make/maintain/develop better products over a larger
| timeframe. But ofc that was meaningless when money was
| "cheap" (negative interest rates), so VCs could just dump a
| huge amount of money on creating some competitor out of
| nowhere, put it out for free, operate under losses, and once
| they have "captured" a big enough userbase and fcked the rest
| of the competition, and have decent lock in, start the
| shitification of service for revenue, to make up for all the
| "investment", leaving customers with no proper alternative.
|
| A perpetual fallback license is showing customer that you
| care. And it's also putting a gun on yourself to keep
| improving the product instead of stagnating for "captured"
| revenue. Also, happy customers tend to give free publicity,
| look here at hackernews how their tools are mostly praised.
|
| Edit: it seems that indeed they changed the version to the
| initial plus bugfixes, or 12months old if using consecutive
| monthly billing
| specialist wrote:
| Humans aren't rational.
|
| Nordstrom's liberal return policy increased sales. Probably
| by mooting the fear of buyer's remorse. Their policy
| definitely wasn't motivated by altruism.
|
| Maybe something similar is happening with Jetbrains.
|
| I continue to pay yearly for Ultimate, even though I only use
| vanilla IntelliJ, and sometimes not for years. Why? I have no
| idea.
|
| I usually cancel subscriptions without hestitaion. Somehow
| the Jetbrains license doesn't piss me off and I'm content
| knowing I could cancel without too much inconvenience, should
| I choose.
|
| Whatever the case, I'm certain they validated their current
| license maximizes revenue.
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| So is this "you buy it, you can now use it on MacOS and iOS"? Or
| is this one of those stupid "you buy it, and then you have to buy
| the for-iOS version separately a second time"?
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| How does Logic compare with AUM?
| ricardobeat wrote:
| I'm positively surprised by the pricing. While I still prefer
| outright buying apps instead of subscriptions, last time I paid
| EUR230 for Logic on desktop (and it used to cost even more), this
| new sub would take four years to match that. This massively
| lowers the cost of entry especially for countries with devalued
| currency against the USD.
| tjr225 wrote:
| And 199$ is already an insanely good deal for what you get.
| mullen wrote:
| $49 a year is pretty damn cheap in IMHO. Also, when the new
| version comes out, you don't have to put another lump of cash
| up front to get it, you just upgrade your subscription and get
| the new version. Something better comes along? Just cancel the
| subscription and switch to the new software. The fear of "being
| too invested in a software package" basically goes away. I
| think this is a good move on Apples part and the customers part
| on several levels.
| basisword wrote:
| So many "I don't get it" comments in this thread. And complaints
| about the subscription pricing. The market for this seems pretty
| obvious - teenagers. iPad seems like the default computer for
| kids these days and kids like to create. When I was a teenager I
| had to build my own PC, struggle to pirate Cubase and some
| plugins and it was a nightmare. When I finally got a MacBook
| Logic being $200 was out of reach still. A subscription makes it
| affordable for the people who are going to use it on a tablet.
| The same thought applies for teenagers trying to make YouTube
| videos. Now they can legally and easily use the professional
| tools on hardware they already own.
| rchaud wrote:
| Kids aren't creating on iPads though. The only tools needed are
| TikTok/Snapchat + filters. Beyond that, it starts to feel like
| _work_.
|
| YouTubers making 'long form' video (> 5 mins) also aren't going
| to buy an iPad when their computer does the job just fine. And
| even then, Mac owners don't necessarily use Final Cut; Adobe
| Premiere and Davinci Resolve are enormously popular.
| charcircuit wrote:
| You are ignoring how big capcut is
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| Bold of you to assume that YouTubers are using full-fledged
| computers in the first place. Video editing on cellphones and
| tablets has been a thing for yonks.
|
| What about the people that will emerge as YouTubers because
| they can now run a channel without buying a computer?
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| EDIT: I misread: it's $5 per month not per day.
|
| The fact that the surrounding market sucks does not make this
| intrinsically better.
|
| It's the same situation as rent, except that a DAW is not the
| living necessity that a home is.
|
| If the best deal you can get is to buy someone lunch _every
| day_ , that's still prohibitive enough to price a lot of people
| out of the digital music scene. That's terrible for the market
| of creativity.
| hn_throawlles wrote:
| I do get it,
|
| time to say good bye to Darwin (BSD kernel) MacOS..
| rebolek wrote:
| People have different nightmares. My nightmare is yet another
| subscription.
| basisword wrote:
| Then you're probably not the target market. I would have
| loved this when I was younger and $5 a month was easy/$200
| one off was impossible.
| tombert wrote:
| I kind of wish they'd have an option for both. ToonBoom
| Harmony still lets you do that (though they kind of obscure
| that on their website). You have the option of paying
| $71/month for Harmony Advanced, or $1130 for a perpetual
| license.
|
| It would be nice for people to do something similar with
| Logic; you can pay for a subscription, or you can pay a
| flat rate to own something forever; I'm personally kind of
| turned off by products that do not offer perpetual
| licenses.
| mirkules wrote:
| It is usually not billed monthly. They SAY it's $5/month,
| but your actual price is $60 right now, for a whole year.
| That's a huge difference. You're paying a good portion of
| full price, with the "benefit" of having it stop working
| after a year.
| manicennui wrote:
| That is not at all the obvious market; people in the HN bubble
| are just ignorant of the creative world and love to shit on
| Apple. The iPad is already huge for content creation among
| professions. It has made a huge dent in the tablet market
| (think Wacom), and is heavily used by professional artists. The
| audio options are amazing and USB midi output on instruments is
| very common now and works with iPads. An actual computer will
| probably remain a key component in artists' workflows, but
| iPads and iPhones are increasing part of it.
| pdabbadabba wrote:
| Sure. But how many of those creative professionals are there
| v. teenagers who want to mess around with these tools--
| especially when it's priced at only $5/mo? Seems like Apple
| is continuing to make tools for creative professionals while
| also making them accessible to a wider audience of amateurs
| to broaden the revenue base.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| The $5 per month pricing is for skeptics to try the product
| without committing to a $299 purchase.
|
| And yes, it does bring in some revenue from non-
| professionals, but they have other alternatives on iPad.
| Including iMovie from Apple which is free, and others like
| CapCut, LumaFusion, etc.
| freedomben wrote:
| > _people in the HN bubble are just ignorant of the creative
| world and love to shit on Apple._
|
| defensive much? I didn't see anything even remotely
| resembling shit in GP's comment. You'd probably have a better
| time on the internet (HN at least) if you don't go around
| looking for things to be offended by whether they're intended
| or not.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| To be fair, nearly every Apple thread features several
| stubbornly out-of-touch programmers sneering at iOS devices
| as "consumption-only" or something similar, usually with a
| tone that makes you expect to see the word "sheeple" occur.
| If we had a bingo card for HN Apple threads, you could just
| go ahead and make that the free space, the effect would be
| practically the same.
| ggregoire wrote:
| Reminds me of every HN thread about front-
| end/JavaScript/React. We should make a bingo card for
| those threads too.
| slugiscool99 wrote:
| This is so true. When I was a kid I could have gotten my
| parents to pay $5 / mo for me to explore my creativity. $200
| not so much. I think this pricing is actually a really good
| thing for consumers.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| I get it: Money
|
| Apple thinks that they will make more money this way.
| carlosjobim wrote:
| Yes, getting more customers is a tried and tested way of
| making more money.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| There are cheaper and even free audio editors and video editors
| already on iPad.
|
| FCP isn't for teenagers.
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| I see you missed the whole "Logic Pro costs $499" era and the
| earth shattering news when Apple lowered the price to $199. And
| far too many DAW creators refuse to learn that lesson, instead
| going "you can have a DAW for $199 but you only get three and a
| half tracks, only one can be a plugin, and your audio files
| must be in 17 bit RIFF wave with the bytes in reverse order. If
| you want something better, pay us more".
| rocketbop wrote:
| Logic used to cost far more than that. When Logic 6 came out
| it sold for $999 and was a great deal because they'd finally
| bundled all the plugins and synths in to one package. To buy
| the whole package before than was thousands.
| basisword wrote:
| I remember when they dropped the price to $200. It's what
| finally got me to move from Garageband/pirating stuff. It's
| also what keeps me away from playing with a lot of other
| DAW's.
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| honestly the only way to get most of the other ones is to
| go "okay if I get a MIDI controller with a free copy of the
| entry level version, then I can bump that up to the REAL
| entry level version for cheap, and then when they release
| the next version I can bump that up to the intermediate
| version during a sale, and then a year later I can probably
| get the REAL version as a black Friday upgrade."
|
| Yay!
| gampleman wrote:
| Also if you want to do just one project (i.e. you don't produce
| music/video for a living, but you know enough to do your own
| stuff), then you can probably get away with paying $5 a month
| for just enough months to finish your project.
|
| That was a use case completely uncatered for with a $400 one-
| off license fee.
| filoleg wrote:
| Yep, I totally forgot about this use-case, but there were
| plenty of situations where it would've saved me. With one a
| couple a years ago that I vividly remember.
|
| I volunteered to edit a demo video for our internal hackathon
| project, and had both an M1 iPad and a new macbook. I wanted
| to go all out on the video just for the fun of it, and I
| still had some of the final cut pro muscle memory from many
| years before, even though it was a much older version. iMovie
| proved to be extremely inadequate even for some basics (on
| both macbook and ipad). iPad had some third party options,
| but they were all either unwieldy or expensive or various
| other issues. For macbook, there were various alternatives
| (davinci, etc), but they either had similarly high pricing or
| various other limitations or an insane learning curve (which
| i don't mind usually, but not in those circumstances). Final
| Cut was only available as a full-priced option. I would have
| easily been willing to pay $10-20 for one month worth of
| access for this project, but no way I am paying hundreds for
| that. Ended up using iMovie and making the video that i
| absolutely hated and that wasn't resembling anything I had in
| mind for it at all.
|
| P.S. I am genuinely baffled by how terrible iMovie is
| compared to its big sibling Final Cut Pro, given how amazing
| and well-rounded GarageBand is compared to its big sibling
| Logic Pro. GarageBand is obviously not competing with Logic
| Pro, I was just trying to illustrate that Apple has those
| hobby->pro creative app relationships (iMovie->Final Cut Pro,
| GarageBand->Logic Pro), and the GB->LP one is imo fantastic
| overall, and both products are shining in their respective
| tiers, and I get a good use out of both of them. But with
| iMovie->Final Cut Pro, I am pretty much fighting against
| iMovie even for some basic things and would rather deal with
| Final Cut only. And yes, for basic video editing, I still
| miss windows movie maker (the newer MSFT replacement for it,
| Clipchamp, is the worst out of major basic video editing
| software i've ever used).
| justinator wrote:
| iMovie for iPhone doesn't even let you author in 9:16,
| which is criminal.
|
| I find iMovie for Mac pretty useful, honestly.
| nehal3m wrote:
| I'll do you one better, I just started the App store on the
| Mac to check whether they've implemented the same model
| there. The only music I make is analog, but I'd have liked to
| try it out for a few bucks.
| non-nil wrote:
| They offer a 90-day trial. I suppose you should get it
| while it lasts!
| nehal3m wrote:
| Oh awesome! Thank you for letting me know, I'm gonna
| check it out.
| mirkules wrote:
| But you are not paying $5/month. That's a gimmick. You are
| pre-paying a full year's worth. It's like paying (almost)
| full price but for only a year's worth of use.
|
| For Adobe, at least, the actual monthly rate is way higher.
| alden5 wrote:
| nope, there's a $4.99/month option and a 49.99/year option
| ericzawo wrote:
| A subscription for Logic is nuts. It's already $300 software for
| the Mac. I would be fine paying another one-time fee if it meant
| I had it forever on my iPad. It really is stellar software, as
| evidenced by it's two-decade presence in the industry, but to
| move to subscription feels very... un-Apple (at least in this
| Professional Media Software context).
| jonhohle wrote:
| iPads have an archival problem already, and this just
| exacerbated it.
|
| If I'm a studio and want to throw a project into a vault
| somewhere with hopes of retrieving it in a decade, the
| iPadOS/iOS software model makes it impossible to get back to a
| specific configuration without freezing a specific device.
|
| Now throwing a subscriptionmm no on top of it, this is at best
| good for throw away projects that are done, pushed out, and
| never looked at again (from an editing perspective).
|
| This is really mind boggling.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| Film and TV scores in Logic from the early '00s regularly get
| opened for sequels, prequels, interquels, reboots, remasters
| et al. I don't use Logic anymore, but when I did, that's one
| of the things that impressed me.
|
| Logic on iOS? Could be an entirely different story as it
| relies on other apps as plugins that may change. Just to err
| on the side of caution, assume that if it isn't saved as
| audio or MIDI, you'll probably be screwed.
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| It's $199. It's only _ever_ been $499 until 2013, when the
| price suddently dropped to $199, and it has been that ever
| since.
|
| Logic Pro is _ridiculously_ cheap compared to most other DAW
| out there. There aren 't tiers, there's no upsell to unlock
| basic features like unlimited tracks, it's just a full featured
| DAW, the end. Heack, a license for the "full feature, but not
| bundle-padded, version of X" costs:
|
| - Reason: $60 (personal/limited commercial license)
|
| - Renoise: $75 (and is the only tracker-style DAW)
|
| - Tracktion Waveform: $149
|
| - FL Studio: $199 (thankfully)
|
| - Reaper: $225 (unlimited commercial license, by the time you
| need this, you already have seven other DAW already, too)
|
| - Cubase: $329
|
| - Studio One: $399
|
| - Bitwig Studio: $399
|
| - Ableton: $449
|
| - Reason: $499
|
| - Pro Tools: $499
|
| So it's a great deal!
|
| ...
|
| ...but...
|
| ...$199 is also _extreme expensive_ for people who bought a
| second hand mac, or have a hand-me-down ipad, and don 't have
| _two hundred dollars_ to casually spend on something they never
| played with because it 's been out of reach due to a sky-high
| price. A subscription for Logic is _the complete opposite of
| nuts_. At $5 a month, someone can use Logic for 40 months
| before it would have been cheaper to buy it up front. That 's
| more than three years, but which time you either know this is
| what you love, or you stopped using it already and moved on to
| another hobby. Heck, at $45 a year, that's four or even five
| years. Plenty of time to get your priorities straight and start
| saving if audio work brings you joy.
|
| The audio crowd got used to incredibly high prices for
| software, $100+ for an app or even plugin is considered
| "normal", and has made it completely impossible for kids or
| just people without disposable income to get into. Everyone
| knows this, which is why everyone who actually cares to get
| those folks into their ecosystem either dropped their prices,
| or now offers a subscription model in addition to buying a
| perpetual license for a specific version.
|
| And in an ecosystem where subscriptions are $9.99/mo (which
| they pretty much all are), $5/mo is a power move.
| faeriechangling wrote:
| I've been poor before and $200 one-time is WAY less expensive
| than $5/mo recurring. If I can't afford to save $200 I sure
| can't afford to pay $5 recurring. Recurring subscriptions are
| for the wealthy, not the poor, the poor can do just fine with
| freeware or some 10 year old version of whatever.
|
| Paying a recurring monthly subscription isn't the only way to
| get a trial.
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| Sounds like you're not a kid to me. I didn't have $200 to
| spend until I was halfway through college. But I sure as
| hell would have been able to afford $5 a month.
| faeriechangling wrote:
| I participated in the long and storied tradition of child
| labour to buy things I wanted.
|
| If you didn't have any money to spend until halfway
| though college other than a surplus of $5/month, than by
| saving for $200 you likely would have doubled your
| disposable income and you would have left school with a
| Final Cut Pro license on top of that. I'm sure kids will
| buy it, and they're going to be worse for it than when
| they paid $200 for a license.
|
| In any case, I can't emphasise enough how much paying a
| monthly subscription over a one time fee does not help
| the poor in general, at best it allows for you to shift
| expenses a few years down the road with low interest if
| you're some sort of temporarily embarrassed millionaire,
| which isn't the same thing as helping poor kids other
| than maybe some small niche. Being poor doesn't mean you
| should do more $5/month subscriptions, it means you can't
| get away with them nearly as much without getting
| punished by economic reality.
| nailer wrote:
| Do xcode next. I don't care how.
| retskrad wrote:
| I'm sorry but not even the actors in the promo video in this
| announcement can sell the idea that video editing on a touch
| device is a good idea. No professional video editor will use
| Final Cut on the iPad. It's horribly ineffcient.
|
| It feels like Apple has no idea what to do with the iPad Pro. The
| product hasn't evolved at all since 2018.
| Tagbert wrote:
| The iPad is no longer touch-only. Since Apple added support for
| pencil, mouse/trackpad and brought out more keyboards, the iPad
| is a multi-model input device.
| mattwad wrote:
| True but it's not very good as a laptop replacement. It's
| much more expensive than an Air and can't run the same apps.
| While doing my research it seemed a lot of people either
| already had a laptop or preferred to have a laptop if they
| had to pick one. This is coming from a Surface 5 user - I
| gave up eventually because it was never powerful enough, but
| it is a much better approach to multi-input laptop
| replacement since it can run anything.
| mvanbaak wrote:
| It is not a laptop replacement. And apple does not design
| it to be one. It's a very nice device to have next to your
| Mac Studio / Mac Pro to do your work while not at your
| desk. The creative possibilities of the iPad are
| spectacular. The ease of maintaining one is 100x bigger
| than a notebook.
|
| it's simply another type of device, not a replacement.
| smoldesu wrote:
| > It's a very nice device to have next to your Mac Studio
| / Mac Pro to do your work while not at your desk.
|
| I'm kinda curious - what does it do that my laptop can't?
| Am I missing out on anything by bringing a full computer
| with me when I have to work?
|
| I've got an iPad (an older one) and it's just about
| completely useless for me. It doesn't support my file
| syncing app, it insists on using it's own file formats,
| it doesn't trust me to install apps and doesn't have
| enough builtin IO to charge and use a mouse at the same
| time. Lugging around a second Mac seems like a much more
| seamless experience to me.
| mvanbaak wrote:
| I can only respond based on my experience.
|
| 1. Personally, an iPad for me is just another nice
| gadget. I'm a developer and I want my MacBook 2. The iPad
| has a lot of things less technical people prefer over a
| notebook: 2.1 - easy of / lack of - maintenance. It just
| works, you click the home button and it works, things are
| simply there 2.2 - battery life. iPad wins hands down
| from all other alternatives 2.3 - pencil. both for
| creative work as for boring office work and signing
| contracts 2.4 - games for the kids/pets. Roadtrip?
| waiting for the doctors appointment? anything? give them
| the iPad and have them kill time with $random thing 2.5 -
| support. No matter what the problem is, walk into an
| Apple Store and have it fixed. (I know some parts of the
| world have different service, but at least here in .nl
| its perfect)
| skydhash wrote:
| I don't really see the iPad as a laptop replacement. My
| laptop (MBA) is a mobile workstation. I have a Mac Mini as
| a work computer, and I view my laptop as the mobile
| equivalent. But if I only need to consume content or do
| tasks like writing, drawing, or quick editing in this case,
| it's a suitable device. The reduced multitasking is a plus
| in this case, and I wish that Space and Stage Manager on
| the laptop were not that clunky.
|
| N.B. I have the iPad Air 4, and it's quite light compared
| to the MBA. And I can use a smaller bag when going out.
| ancientworldnow wrote:
| No serious professional wants to use FCP in the first place.
| brookst wrote:
| Out of all of the people in the world who do at least a few
| hours of video editing a year, what percent do you think are
| Serious Professionals?
| mannyv wrote:
| From what I understand a large number of video people are
| wedding/event people...which makes sense, because there
| aren't that many TV shows. While I doubt they'll be editing
| on-site, now they can with their IPP instead of their MBP.
|
| People work where they want to and jow they want to. If the
| tool works for you, go for it.
| starkparker wrote:
| Aww, that's not true. Serious professionals want to use FCP
| 7.
| edude03 wrote:
| This is basically the "no true Scotsman" argument. Your
| definition of professional video editor seems to not include
| people like YouTube/TikTok/Instagram content creators who are
| already "professionally editing" videos on their phones and
| iPads and making good money I might add.
| mavhc wrote:
| Their idea is: add a mouse and keyboard option
| madeofpalk wrote:
| > No professional video editor will use Final Cut on the iPad
|
| Maybe it's for other people then?
| throw74774 wrote:
| Dunno - touch devices are already very popular for music
| editing and production. No reason they shouldn't be for video
| too.
| elliottkember wrote:
| Have you seen the magic keyboard accessory? With the trackpad
| and keyboard?
| Tepix wrote:
| At the ridiculous price they are charging for it, it might as
| well not exist.
| asutekku wrote:
| While the price might be ridiculous for you, the price is
| not ridiculous for the people in the market for it.
| vuln wrote:
| > It feels like Apple has no idea what to do with the iPad Pro.
|
| 100% this.
|
| I have an iPad Pro. If I want to plug it into a projector via
| USBC or a Dock I must ALSO connect a Bluetooth speaker device
| as the iPad will not allow use the internal speakers on the
| iPad while connected to an external _display_ fucking madness.
| mvanbaak wrote:
| yeah, because you want to use the internal speaker while
| watching the video on a projector screen ...
|
| I understand what you are saying, and it sucks indeed, but
| there are other systems that have exactly the same 'problem'
| and in real life this is a problem for the minority of
| people. apple sells to the masses, and they will do what the
| majority of the people want/need/use. Sure, it sux if you
| dont fit in that group, but that has been the thing with most
| big vendors of things.
| dbspin wrote:
| It's a problem for anyone trying to give a presentation in
| an educational or office environment - local sound
| solutions on projectors in small offices and small
| classrooms are often (probably 70% of the time in my
| experience) non functional.
| mvanbaak wrote:
| iPad speakers in a classroom is not going to cut it, they
| are nowhere near powerful enough. in an office
| environment you can use the tv audio, or the video
| conferencing unit (in my experience even a 10man shop has
| those). again, for the very small percentage of people
| that fall outside of the 'masses' it is a problem, and I
| totally understand that. But none of the big brands care
| about the use cases that are not the masses. So you can
| blame apple, but look around and blame all the others as
| well.
| freedomben wrote:
| Small and some medium-sized classrooms it absolutely
| _does_ cut it. If you 're playing for a theatre-sized
| college classroom of course it wouldn't.
|
| But also, why does that matter? If the speakers don't
| work (i.e. cannot be engaged while connected to a
| projector) but won't cut it for the classroom, why is
| that better than if they _can_ work but aren 't loud
| enough? At least in the latter situation the user has the
| option and can make a human judgment. The user is a hell
| of a lot more qualified in that situation than some
| dev/PM at Apple who thinks they always know better than
| the user.
| mvanbaak wrote:
| You are right, and like I said, it for sure is bad that
| it wont work for the common use case. Should it support
| your use case? YES! Does it? no. Is there some kind of
| fair explanation? also Yes. Wether you like it or not
| (and to be clear, I also dont like it, but at least I can
| understand why)
| vuln wrote:
| The iPad Pro has 4 speakers.
|
| You seem so matter of fact with your opinion.
|
| How big is the classroom in your mind?
|
| Video conferencing units like you bring up most of the
| time need separate drivers, or an app to connect.
|
| Should I have all these different teleconferencing apps
| on my iPad in case I show up to a client that uses xyz
| model?
|
| What happened to apple's "it just works"
| mvanbaak wrote:
| Yes, as I tried to make clear in my post I'm replying
| based on my experience, which is based on the area I live
| and work in. Almost all of the places I went have
| Logitech video conferencing gear, which dont need a
| single driver or minute of setup, as they simply JustWork
| (either with Mac, linux or windows)
| vuln wrote:
| > I'm replying based on my experience, which is based on
| the area I live and work in.
|
| Funny how you didn't explicitly state that when referring
| to the use case of "the masses".
|
| The masses are just the people in your local environment?
|
| Seems like you're backtracking.
| vuln wrote:
| The internal speakers on my iPad Pro blow away any small
| sized Bluetooth speaker I have laying around.
|
| What is the use case for an iPad Pro? To be used by
| professionals as a _portable laptop_. Presentations are
| probably one of the top use cases and Apple can't even get
| it right.
|
| If the iPad Pro is yet another consumption device then
| remove the bullshit pro moniker and just sell iPads.
| mvanbaak wrote:
| Where is it written that a tablet is the same as a
| portable laptop? iPad Pro not designed as portable
| presentation tool, it's designed to be a portable touch-
| enabled apple device that can be used for creative
| workflows.
|
| The presentation setup, in apple's view, is an appletv
| connected to a tv and one or more HomePods for the audio.
| and you can use an iPad or iPhone or MacBook to cast to
| the screen+audio.
|
| Like I said before, it sux if you dont fit into this
| group (which is the masses) but they are not alone in
| focussing just on the masses
| vuln wrote:
| > Where is it written that a tablet is the same as a
| portable laptop? iPad Pro not designed as portable
| presentation tool, it's designed to be a portable touch-
| enabled apple device that can be used for creative
| workflows.
|
| Now you're putting words in my mouth and appearing dense.
| I never said it was the _same_ as a laptop. I said it's
| used similarly.
|
| I have never once seen someone being "creative" on their
| iPad in a public setting. If you are correct and that is
| the use case for the masses we should see it being used
| as such everywhere. It is not.
| mvanbaak wrote:
| The only thing I can say is that we are in different
| parts of the world. Around me, a lot of people use the
| iPad to do drawings, animation, audio and video editing
| where a laptop or workstation is simply not possible
| because there's no desks / infrastructure to
| connect/power/store those products.
|
| The macbooks are indeed used more by developers, but as
| soon as you get into the more 'creative' areas, the iPad
| + pencil for those kind of things wins big time.
| vuln wrote:
| > Around me
|
| As I said in another reply if you were forthcoming with
| the fact that you are basing your opinion in a vacuum
| (your environment) we most likely would have not went in
| circles. Instead you claimed "the masses" when in fact
| your area is a tiny percentage of iPad users worldwide.
| tshaddox wrote:
| I'm looking forward to seeing the feature set. I recently tried
| out a few of the iPad DAWs and wasn't able to find anything that
| could even correctly record and edit MIDI and also automate tempo
| (like MacOS Logic Pro's tempo track).
| bookaway wrote:
| Am I the only one that finds the process of getting files of a
| decent size from non-Apple devices to Apple mobile devices
| incredibly frustrating, almost enough to be a deal breaker?
|
| What is the current best practice for the fastest way to get
| video files on an IPad as of now?
| JPws_Prntr_Fngr wrote:
| It is inexcusably obnoxious to do without iCloud, thanks to
| iOS' hamstrung file system & APIs, plus lightning being stuck
| on USB 2.0 speeds. But I think this is why the iPad Pro is on
| USB-C now: so you can hook up an external hard drive with all
| your bigass files.
| dbbk wrote:
| I'm surprised they haven't added support in Finder for the
| iPad to just show up with direct access to its file
| directory. Surely you must be able to directly move files
| between an iPad and a Mac that don't require going over
| Airdrop or iCloud?
| DamnInteresting wrote:
| It's not just non-Apple devices. I use my iPad to make music
| and sketches, and sometimes I need to move files between my
| iPad and MacBook. Airdrop almost never works, and transferring
| in the Files app is confusing--sometimes the file won't appear
| in the relevant app, or sometimes it appears twice, and it's
| not clear which is the newer version. I often resort to
| emailing the files back and forth to myself as attachments,
| which is not ideal.
|
| If anyone knows of a better way to move files to and from an
| iPad, I would be delighted to hear it.
| lostgame wrote:
| AirDrop is - by far and large, especially in the Apple
| ecosystem - the single most unreliable, almost guaranteed-
| not-to-work piece of software I've used.
|
| It works - for me - with any combination of Macs; old or new,
| desktop or laptop, on any given network configuration; in any
| location - about 3 or 4 out of ten times I give it a shot.
|
| It's honestly baffling to me how Apple has for more than a
| decade shipped a major feature that works easily less than
| half the time in my experience and my co-workers. Coworkers
| and I mostly completely avoid it at this point; and if we do
| actually give it a try, it feels more like praying to a God
| for rain than actually trying to use a piece of software.
|
| I _really_ have to wonder what has made it just so, brutally;
| unusably broken, for more than a decade.
|
| I just guess nobody at Apple cares?
| DamnInteresting wrote:
| Same experience here. I've been using Macs and iOS devices
| for over a decade, and while I cannot say that it _never_
| works, I could count the successes on one hand (granted, I
| don 't try very often after so much failure). I've even
| tried setting the "allow me to be discovered by" option to
| "everybody", and it still fails.
|
| Maybe the problem is me, but I'm good at computers. I can
| make them do almost anything else in the catalog. Airdrop
| is a glaring exception.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| Not been an Apple user since a little while after Steve Jobs
| passed away, but this is in stark contrast to what people
| usually say about Airdrop. What I usually hear is that it's
| the greatest thing since sliced bread and how everybody
| should be using it.
| knolan wrote:
| Airdrop was amazing when it first came out with MacOS. It
| really just worked. Our lab of mostly Mac users stopped
| using USB drives to share stuff.
|
| Then they released a new version of it to be compatible
| with iOS and enable all the continuity and handoff stuff.
| Then all the problems started. It simply wouldn't work.
| Devices couldn't be discovered, files couldn't be sent.
| Handoff would eat half written emails. The problem was due
| to the replacement of mDNSresponder with discoveryd which
| they eventually rolled back.
|
| In fairness it's been fixed for some time now and I've got
| no more problems with it.
| lostgame wrote:
| Wow. I've seriously actually never heard that once in 15+
| years of being a Mac developer and using them full time.
|
| I've never actually heard anyone, in real life; or offline,
| recommend, suggest; or even say one single positive thing
| about AirDrop essentially since its release.
|
| It's easily the most unreliable piece of software
| integrated into the MacOS/iOS platform, just a feature that
| has been so fundamentally broken since it's introduction
| that it makes me wonder why it exists at all.
|
| It's definitely below 50% on the times it actually works as
| intended - given any network configuration, combinations of
| Macs or OS versions...nothing really seems to even
| consistently affect its continual failure.
|
| AirDrop _not_ working, is the expected result of using the
| software. As of Ventura I've not noticed any improvement in
| the feature's functionality since it's introduction.
| HelloImSteven wrote:
| I've rarely, if ever, had issues with AirDrop, and I tend
| to use it for rather larger zip archives.
| selykg wrote:
| I use AirDrop all the time. It's great.
|
| I rarely run into issues as well. I actually can't even
| remember the last time I had an AirDrop issue.
| DonaldPShimoda wrote:
| I feel like you must have a specific use case for which
| AirDrop fails more often.
|
| I use AirDrop all the time for various things, and it
| mostly works as expected. It _almost always_ works
| correctly when it 's transferring between two of my own
| devices; the only issue I think I regularly encounter is
| when airdropping to another person's device. But I do not
| AirDrop particularly large files, so perhaps something
| goes wrong there.
|
| That said, among _average users_ , AirDrop is pretty
| consistently considered to be a great feature. I witness
| this occasionally in-person, but also in online
| discussions.
| lostgame wrote:
| It's certainly not been a specific use case over 10 or so
| years, I mean...in any given scenario; small files, big
| files, any given file type, on any given network
| configuration, with any combination of MacOS or
| iPadOS/iOS devices, I feel like I have a higher
| probability of making a dunk from a 3-pointer line than
| getting AirDrop to work; and that's been the general
| consensus I've gotten from any fellow developers I've
| actually discussed it with.
|
| If there was any consistent behaviour I could use to get
| it to either misfire or actually work; I'd love to have
| seen it, but every major MacOS revision I give it another
| try, only to inevitably just facepalm and use a USB key
| or something like DropBox.
|
| It's a shame, I honestly think it should be a fairly
| simple technology to implement and make work well, but
| it's clearly just...not.
| McAtNite wrote:
| I often use airdrop to transfer small, one off files like
| PDFs or images. For larger files I transfer through my
| NAS. I've never had any issues using airdrop. I wonder if
| it's because people are trying to transfer gigs of data
| using it.
| gehsty wrote:
| Thunderbolt port on latest iPad Pros? Aren't they 40gb/s?
| statictype wrote:
| It's gotten better in recent years.
|
| Airdrop.
|
| VLC on the iPad will expose a web server that you can connect
| to and upload.
|
| Safari on iOS has a download manager as well.
| filoleg wrote:
| Current best practice would depend on what you are trying to do
| exactly.
|
| But overall the fastest way to transfer files to/from iPad
| (both in terms of ease/speed of use, as well as the actual
| transfer speeds) is just hooking up an external drive (whether
| it is a flash drive or an ssd) and transferring files using
| Files app (aka the file browser app preinstalled on all
| iOS/iPadOS devices). Note: this relies on the assumption that
| you have an iPad with USB-C (aka pro models and some recent
| non-pro models).
| pud wrote:
| Last week my company launched an iOS app that gets music into
| Apple Music and Spotify.
|
| Timing unintentional but neato that musicians can now record,
| distribute & promote all from the device.
|
| (not mentioning name of app cuz promotion, also we're not the
| only app that does this)
| bravura wrote:
| I wanted to go iPad only for live music for a while, but found
| the supporting hardware to be lacking. (This was like five years
| ago.)
|
| I spent money on a dock that would allow me two audio inputs
| (microphone and guitar for example) and a USB jack for plugging
| in an external MIDI keyboard. The experience was somewhat janky
| and unreliable. I wonder if that has changed.
| apercu wrote:
| Hm.. I have had Logic (OSX) for a while. It wasn't cheap but it
| was fairly priced. And they supported all you can eat upgrades
| (admittedly, not very many major versions). Sort of a bummer that
| it's a subscription model on iOS.
|
| That said, it's totally worth $49/yr if it's part of your
| workflow.
|
| For me, I'll just continue use a MacBook, until I can't.
| NickC25 wrote:
| Neat....although sad that it's via a subscription model, rather
| than buying the program outright.
|
| That said, what's the point of this? Everyone works off laptops
| already, even people new to A/V production. Especially in the
| audio world, laptops are just so much more convenient because you
| can host 3rd party plugins and other stuff like sample libraries.
| Can't do that on an iPad, can you?
| dangus wrote:
| > Everyone works off laptops already
|
| I doubt the truth of this statement, especially for younger
| people. When you look at iPad revenue compared to Mac revenue
| it's plainly obvious that Apple sells more iPads than Macs.
|
| I subscribe to a YouTube vlog where the creator is seen editing
| their videos on an iPad, not a laptop or desktop computer.
|
| I learned how to get work done on a personal computer because
| my parents had a family personal computer. There were no
| tablets or smartphones.
|
| That's not how kids today are growing up: they're growing up
| with tablets and phones, and even their schools are mostly
| providing tablets for schoolwork.
| SilverBirch wrote:
| To a certain extent you have to ask what does a one-off
| purchase of an App mean any more. We got to a point on desktop
| where you could buy a windows XP application and it'd last
| forever, and that's fine. Or even a OS X application for
| several years. But mobile operating systems are still a
| treadmill. If you buy the app what are you getting? This
| version and no updates? That's not how iOS works. Will it
| support future iOS versions? Do you get the new features? Can
| you install it on a new device if you buy a new device? You
| bought it one off, if a new version of iOS comes out and the
| old app isn't supported what do you do?
| jrajav wrote:
| This is only an issue on one operating system. Purchasing an
| application on Windows still comes with absolutely none of
| this worry. You can still use applications that are decades
| old on Windows 11. It's very odd that this is now accepted as
| a norm that is inevitable, rather than an obvious and
| avoidable disadvantage of Apple's ecosystem.
| judge2020 wrote:
| This is only the norm on Windows 11 because Microsoft has
| dedicated themselves to backwards compatibility, something
| that very much hampers the rest of the OS - in that Windows
| 11 uses much fewer resources if you rip out WinSxS and 32
| bit application support
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34654649.
| huehehue wrote:
| I've seen a trend of recording studios using ancient
| computers with versions of Logic from like 2005, with big
| signs taped to the wall warning against connecting to the
| internet or installing any updates.
|
| In some ways, the lack of updates can be a feature. I'm sure
| we've all been frustrated by updates that break our
| workflows, deprecate useful functionality, or inadvertently
| degrade performance.
| trinix912 wrote:
| A lot of them are still on Final Cut Pro 7, Soundtrack Pro,
| Color which don't work on newer macOS's. That version of
| FCP was the last before the magnetic timeline redesign
| IIRC. Perhaps also the last to work with DV tapes?
| mortenjorck wrote:
| There is a whole audio plugin ecosystem on iOS (AUv3), but I
| think your point still stands.
|
| Anecdotally, I use my iPad for music production, but it's a
| very different kind of context and process from what I do on my
| Mac. On the laptop, I'm typically producing full tracks in
| Ableton Live, while on my iPad, it's more "jamming" in apps
| like Drambo or AUM, something closer in spirit to a "DAWless"
| hardware setup.
|
| Logic Pro on iOS doesn't hold any appeal for me as that's just
| not the kind of workflow I value the iPad for.
| tomduncalf wrote:
| I have the same workflow as you, using Drambo or AUM, but I
| do love the idea of being able to "finish" a track on the
| iPad. Granted the laptop will probably always be more
| powerful and perhaps a better interface for precision
| editing, but to be able to do it all on the go on one very
| portable device would be pretty cool IMO.
| NickC25 wrote:
| I use iMaschine, GarageBand and occasionally FL Studio Mobile
| on my iPhone. All great apps, but all are limited. Can't beat
| using Live on the desktop/laptop.
|
| Great for getting one's feet wet, or for ideas that spring to
| mind when you hear something cool on the street or on the
| train or whatever. Hear something, record it, manipulate it,
| and make a quick beat or riff on the spot.
|
| However, like you, that's just a small part of the process,
| and if one wants to do something more with the sound they
| recorded, it needs to be moved to a more powerful platform -
| in this case a laptop. A DAW on the iPad is neat, but kind of
| stuck between usecases.
| TheTon wrote:
| You can, actually. AUv3 plug-ins have been a thing on iOS for
| years. I have a few I use through GarageBand.
| 112233 wrote:
| Well, yes you can, and this move hopefully will relax whatever
| limits are on the AUv3 hosts now. You already have FabFilter,
| Klevgrand and many more, Modartt has anounced Pianoteq for iOS,
| so plugin situation is good (and prices are way lower than on
| desktop). AUv3s such as Pure Synth or AudioLayer already
| support streaming sample libraries from external SSDs. So that
| situation is not bad either. Of course there is no Kontakt,
| Serum, Melodyne or RX, but until now there was no serious DAW
| either (Cubasis and Auria Pro lack a lot compared to Logic or
| Bitwig)
|
| Actually having equivalent tools on iPad and Macbook, i'd pick
| ipad for two reasons: stability (newer MacOS versions are not
| fantastic) and touchscreen (can't map everything)
|
| Now, if only Apple would finally make iDAM full duplex, so that
| it would be possible to use either ipad or mac as a plugin
| host.
| thewebcount wrote:
| I work in the video world, and video editors have been asking
| for something like Final Cut Pro on the iPad for ages. They
| often used iMovie but wanted something more, so they'd start in
| iMovie on their iPad because they had it on them, then later
| when they hit something they couldn't do in iMovie, they'd move
| the project to their Mac and import it into FCP. It was a bit
| of a pain. And obviously Apple isn't the only one who thinks
| that. Davinci released an iPad app a few months ago. (Or
| announced it, anyway. Not sure if it's available yet.)
|
| For fun, I've used GarageBand on the iPad, and it's great! I
| use Logic on my Mac for actually writing and recording, but I
| do think it would be great to have something more powerful than
| GarageBand on my iPad. Sometimes I hit a wall on the iPad and
| have to move over to Logic on the computer. It would be nice to
| not have to switch like that right when I'm in the middle of
| working.
| fortylove wrote:
| Davinci Resolve is arguably a better program, and is already
| available for the iPad. It is largely the same program as the
| desktop version, with a few exclusions that are actually easy to
| enable with a little research.
| bjustin wrote:
| I am surprised to see these are subscriptions when the Mac
| versions are one-time purchases. I wonder if they will make the
| subscriptions work for both these new iPad versions as well as
| for the Mac versions of the apps.
| chillbill wrote:
| Apple can make it one-time fee and slightly lower than desktop
| software price. Sell custom addons and whatnot.
|
| Subscription model sucks.
| f0ld wrote:
| My dream come true! but.. can't afford that at the moment. I'll
| just use Garageband which works well. Just don't take that away.
| We'll get along alright.
| wilsonfiifi wrote:
| For anyone interested in how the iPad is actually used by
| professionals to make/produce music you can watch this video by
| youtuber Henny Tha Bizness.
|
| He has a great video on how he got started [0]
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z_1bRbC_lU
| epolanski wrote:
| Can't lie.
|
| I don't love Apple products much but the appeal of using Logic
| Pro on a tablet isn't small.
| shp0ngle wrote:
| I hope Apple Watch is next
| nkotov wrote:
| I'm pretty excited about FCP and subscription model. I pay for
| Adobe CC and for videos, FCP always felt out of reach (couldn't
| justify spending $299) for me to tinker with and move past using
| iMovie for quick family edits.
| [deleted]
| theodric wrote:
| "...will be available on the App Store as subscriptions..."
|
| That's a hard pass from me, dawg. I refuse to subscribe to an app
| for a hobby.
| rcarr wrote:
| I think next month's WWDC and the AR goggles/glasses are really
| going to define how this decade plays out for Apple. There's
| clearly some kind of unification strategy going on behind the
| scenes but whether it's going to be good enough to win out over
| competitors or not is up in the air. Combos like NReal Air and
| Samsung Dex/Steam Deck are going to become more and more common
| and unless they get a move on I can see them falling behind the
| competition like Intel did. Stuff like this is kind of in the
| right direction but I do tend to be in agreement now with the
| people who say that we need an iPad with MacOS, or at least
| something that's leaning more towards MacOS than iPhone OS,
| especially on the large screen models.
| freedomben wrote:
| IDK, Apple's brand loyalty is absolutely incredible. I know
| multiple people who will buy everything Apple makes, and if
| Apple doesn't make it they won't really consider it. Apple's
| strategy of letting other people validate markets and then
| coming in with a good product (like they did with the Apple
| watch for example) would likely not work for most companies,
| but it works great for Apple. They'd have to lose an insane
| amount of ground before they'd be at risk of being left behind.
| They also have enough cash that they could chase tail lights
| and do their not-original-but-better thing for decades.
|
| Fwiw I do hope you're right though. I think competition is
| badly needed.
| rcarr wrote:
| I probably fit into the Apple loyalist camp, I've currently
| got an Apple laptop, phone, tablet, smart speakers and TV and
| in the past I've also tried the watch, the AirPods and the
| iMac. I'm probably more tech orientated than the average
| consumer but, based on the products I've seen released
| outside of the Apple ecosystem the past year, it's the very
| first time in over a decade that I've been giving serious
| thought to switching. I'm thinking I can't be alone in this
| so I'm interested to see how this plays out.
| gehsty wrote:
| I think we've heard the exact same argument about phones with
| keyboards, large phones, tablets and web apps (that if apple
| doesn't do X they will get left behind, or if Apple doesn't do
| Y soon enough they will get left behind), apple has not been
| left behind.
|
| I don't think the goggles or 'pro iPad' will be any different.
| Apple will release when they are ready and likely they'll do
| very well.
| rcarr wrote:
| Maybe. But I've been buying Apple for over a decade and this
| is the first year I've considered migrating off the
| ecosystem. I think AR glasses (not goggles) are going to be
| the defining hardware tech of the decade and I can see them
| becoming ubiquitous. If they're planning on releasing the
| goggles at the rumoured price point ($1500 - $3000) I think
| people might be tempted to jump ship.
| gehsty wrote:
| Just feels like apple has to much going for them:
|
| - access to custom silicon and potentially display
| technology ahead of what is available to competitors
|
| - huge amount of money and resources to throw at this
| (buying up supply chain for key components etc)
|
| - initial devices being iPhone / iPad / Mac accessories
| will give them a route to market & access to developers
|
| I just don't see how anyone else gets a look in.
| rcarr wrote:
| You do make some very good points. We all thought Intel
| were going to dominate ten years ago though and they
| managed to fuck it so it's not unprecedented. Apple do
| seem to be a lot better managed though. I think there'll
| be more clarity after the headset reveal next month.
| vuln wrote:
| > I think people might be tempted to jump ship.
|
| Jump ship to where? Oculus?
| rcarr wrote:
| The replacements I'm contemplating atm are:
|
| MacBook -> steam deck and nreal air glasses
|
| iPhone -> any Samsung with Dex
|
| iPad -> a Boox Tab (I mostly use my tablet for reading
| pdfs and writing)
| paulpan wrote:
| 100%. Whereas in the prior decade there were hardware
| limitations to device convergence (e.g. lack of CPU power,
| RAM), this is a no longer an issue and software is the
| roadblock is most cases. Ironically Apple threw open the doors
| when they not only put the M1 chip into the iPad Pro, but also
| into the iPad Air.
|
| One reason for this slow transition is likely due to the legacy
| software support requirements. Microsoft seems to have vastly
| overestimated the complexity involved in porting Windows OS to
| ARM through its many attempts: first with Windows RT, followed
| by Windows 10S, and most recently tighter developer hardware
| tie-in with Project Volterra. Apple probably isn't too keen to
| follow this playbook - opting instead to just keep iOS and
| macOS separate and gradually drop x86 support entirely from
| macOS.
|
| As an occasional Samsung Dex user, the benefit of having "one
| device to rule them all" is obvious and overall experience has
| been good. But to play devil's advocate, Samsung's revenues is
| heavily hardware-based so they'd much prefer to sell you
| multiple devices.
| rcarr wrote:
| What Samsung device are you using? My initial thought when I
| saw the Fold was that it was a gimmick but I'm looking to do
| some long term travelling and I'm starting to come round to
| it, especially with Dex thrown in the mix. The RRP is
| absolutely eye watering though so if I was going to dip my
| toes in it would probably be with a second hand device.
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| This is great, but why not just have Garage Band work the same /
| be the same on both platforms?
|
| I'm a PC user; few years ago I realized how great iPad GarageBand
| was for playing around. Like an idiot, I literally purchased a
| used MacBook so I can edit my iPad travelling doodles at home
| with big screen as well, only to realize that they are different
| software with different capabilities and you cannot seamlessly
| copy projects from one to another.
|
| I openly admit I'm an idiot for jumping in like that, but for all
| the discussion on how user friendly and seamless Apple ecosystem
| is, I still don't think it was a _ridiculous_ assumption to make
| :- /
| mattl wrote:
| Is iPad GarageBand different from iPhone GarageBand? Or are
| they the same app?
| shp0ngle wrote:
| You cannot? Huh I am an Apple ecosystem guy and the assumption
| that GarageBand on iPadOS and GarageBand on macOS will be
| compatible is really a reasonable one; I would think it's the
| case!!
| lostgame wrote:
| It is not. You can open iOS/iPadOS GarageBand files in MacOS,
| but you cannot open MacOS GarageBand files on iOS/iPadOS.
| valgaze wrote:
| A VR analyst observed the port could also be related to future
| headset:
| https://twitter.com/SadlyItsBradley/status/16559348583074693...
|
| "This is notable because the Apple headset is supposed to support
| every iPad app on Day 1 of its launch
|
| If you want professionals to do things with it, you need the
| software to push it. With or without a connected PC"
| nottorp wrote:
| They're also bringing the subscription pricing model...
| brookst wrote:
| I'd much rather pay $50/year and get perpetual updates than the
| old price of $199 one time.
|
| Yes, I'd rather pay $5 one time and get free updates forever,
| but I just can't see complaining about $4/month for anything I
| get ongoing value from.
| nottorp wrote:
| You like losing access when you cancel the subscription?
|
| Or when an older device is cut off from the app store?
| zuppy wrote:
| what older device is cut off from the app store? you get to
| keep that version that you have and the subscription will
| go on.
| nottorp wrote:
| You can see into the future?
| Someone wrote:
| Or when Apple decides to completely cancel the product
| across all devices?
|
| I know Apple is growing towards being a service provider,
| but they have a long history of dropping support for older
| soft- and hardware.
|
| Staying at an older OS or old hardware or running
| unsupported software isn't ideal, but with a SaaS offering,
| the provider can cut access overnight.
| spacephysics wrote:
| As many readers here probably understand from first hand
| experience, software isn't a final product (typically).
|
| The majority of software requires maintenance and any
| ongoing feature updates have a continual cost on the
| company.
|
| If they asked for a subscription and said, no more updates
| after tomorrow, then sure that's Bs.
|
| But especially for something like Final Cut, you'll get
| continual updates and feature improvements, and you get
| recurring value.
|
| I'm all for FOSS, but there are many cases where the paid
| incentive version is far better than open offerings, and
| that's just how it is today.
| pantulis wrote:
| "As many readers here probably understand from first hand
| experience, software isn't a final product (typically)."
|
| But then Logic Pro for the mac has been a one time
| purchase for me since Logic Pro X and has been
| religiously updated every year with tons of new content
| and features. Probably to empower Mac sales, which is a
| boost that they feel the iPad does not need.
| dmreedy wrote:
| I don't think the concern is that the subscription
| doesn't bring value. Just that it builds no equity. Once
| the renting agreement ends, you lose all the access you
| once had, not just access to future things to come.
|
| (edit: I don't know if this is actually true of Final Cut
| Pro's model)
| crazygringo wrote:
| Right, but that's the tradeoff and it's a good tradeoff
| for many.
|
| If you only need Final Cut Pro for a 2-month project,
| it's amazing because you'll save so much money.
|
| And any time you need it again, you just resubscribe.
| You're never losing access permanently, it's just $5
| away.
|
| The point is that the flexibility and ongoing updates are
| a more beneficial tradeoff.
|
| A lot of people (like myself) simply don't care about
| owning equity in software, so we have eternal access.
| It's just a tool, and it loses value over time without
| updates anyways.
| nottorp wrote:
| > It's just a tool, and it loses value over time without
| updates anyways.
|
| Why? It will continue to do exactly the same thing. If
| that thing had no value to you why are you getting it?
|
| Edit:
|
| > Because the world moves forward. Something that might
| have worked well 5 years ago but has had no updates or
| improvements to keep up with competition is ultimately
| not as useful as it once was.
|
| Not everything is a javascript library though.
| massysett wrote:
| It will continue to do exactly the same thing...on
| exactly the same hardware and OS. Chances are that in
| several years, you'll be using newer hardware and a newer
| OS. So the old software might not work at all. Or, it
| might work, but not use new hardware capabilities. An
| example of this is old X11 software: it runs on a modern
| Mac, but is unaware of Retina displays so it looks
| horrible.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| Because the world moves forward. Something that might
| have worked well 5 years ago but has had no updates or
| improvements to keep up with competition is ultimately
| not as useful as it once was. Depending on how good other
| software has gotten, it very well could be a case of
| wasting money by not switching over depending on how much
| you value your time.
| jasode wrote:
| _> It will continue to do exactly the same thing. If that
| thing had no value_
|
| The parent poster you're replying to wrote _" loses
| value"_ not _" no value"_.
|
| As an example, I have the last version of Adobe Creative
| Suite CS6 ($2599) that had a _permanent license with CDs_
| instead of subscription download but that came out in
| 2012. Over the last 11 years, that old software has
| continually _lost value_.
|
| The old version cannot easily be installed on newer macOS
| versions after Catalina. I can't freeze my os version at
| Catalina to satisfy Adobe CS6 because other tools like
| the latest Xcode and Logic Pro forces you to upgrade to
| newer macOS versions. I can't freeze Xcode at an old
| version because Apple's App Store rejects apps built by
| old versions of Xcode. And then you have the lack of
| desirable new features. E.g. the old Premiere Pro in CS6
| can't open newer ProRes HDR HLG files.
|
| The rest of the world around a particular software
| changes which then affects its value.
|
| So "owning the software forever" doesn't necessarily
| translate into continually using it forever in a
| practical way.
| mattlutze wrote:
| It's generally better for your finances to not pay 100%
| of a committment today if interest on payments is below
| the immediate return of how you'd otherwise use the
| money.
|
| The way we use a platform over time changes, as does
| options in the market and the way a business treats that
| platform. If we can export and keep our IP that was
| developed through the platform, it's not a bad thing to
| have the option to cut and run without having sunk
| purchase costs.
|
| It also provides a signal for the business's product team
| to use with finance to argue for how to continue updating
| the product. Ongoing engagement metrics and new
| conversions are continually reviewed. How those change
| with the release of, or marketing of, different features
| directly drives the development of the platform--it
| should in the best case see a more useful product in our
| hands over time.
| criddell wrote:
| That's true but I think a lot of professional users
| prefer the service model for cash flow (and maybe tax?)
| reasons. For those users, maybe a monthly service fee is
| better than purchasing?
| Uehreka wrote:
| I feel like folks on HN (many of us developers ourselves)
| give this theory too much credance. Subscription pricing
| may be necessary to finance continuous development, but
| that doesn't mean it will. Many developers (particularly
| larger corporations like Adobe) have taken advantage of
| this perception to see how much money they can squeeze
| out of people while making... fewer updates than their
| users are paying for (to put it nicely). I'm sure there
| are indie developers who get away with this too (although
| I feel less bad about that).
|
| I'm not totally against this way of thinking, but I do
| think we need to start presenting it as the double-edged
| issue it currently is, not the fresh perspective it used
| to be.
| freedomben wrote:
| Agreed, and further I don't think I buy the premise that
| without updates it won't work. For SaaS that's definitely
| true. For _some_ desktop software that 's true too, but
| it's true far less than we make it out to be nowadays. I
| have a handful of Android apps that got updated in a
| direction I didn't like that I still run and still run
| fine (sometimes dropping server supported features like
| old PocketCasts before the NPR acquisition) even though
| they haven't been updated in years. For apps that don't
| rely on server support this is nearly always true.
| spacephysics wrote:
| I agree, and that's a good argument for an alternative
| icing model that includes a one time payment for a
| version, I think jetbrains does this (and a discount on
| subsequent update patches)
| jcpst wrote:
| Interesting- I'd much rather pay the perpetual fee.
|
| At home, I run a 13 year old Mac Mini in my studio.
| Everything DAW related on it still works, and it's all
| compatible with each other. This is quite common in many
| studios I've worked in. It's not unusual to be running 10-15+
| year old machines. Everything is updated as far as it's ever
| going to go on that hardware.
|
| I do like the Jetbrains model where there is a perpetual
| fallback license. It think that would be a good balance for
| software like DAWs.
| _joel wrote:
| Do you have an audio interface and is it the same one you
| started with? Does it still get driver updates ooi?
| jcpst wrote:
| That setup is using an Apogee Duet Firewire. I had an
| original digidesign mbox (USB 1!) hooked up to the Mini
| before that.
|
| The original Duet stopped getting driver updates a few
| years back. For a while, apogee had a trade-in deal if
| you sent them your old firewire interface, but then I
| would have had to update hardware + software to support
| it.
|
| The last update I did was OSX from 10.11 to 10.13, and
| this was partly to keep some of the project work
| synchronizing with dropbox.
|
| At this point I'm kind of just keeping this system alive
| to get through my latest project and observing the first
| few years of Apple Silicon before I build a new system.
| [deleted]
| throw_m239339 wrote:
| Yeah, subscription sucks. $200 bucks for Logic and Final cuts
| desktop is such a nice deal. Final Cut used to be like $1000+
| bucks and Logic $800+ or something.
| wslh wrote:
| Does this work with any iPad model? I understand the form factor
| is not the best in an iPad Mini but courious to know.
|
| I read that it works on >= M1 processor. It is at the end of [1]
| before the footer:
|
| "Final Cut Pro for iPad is available on the App Store. Requires
| an iPad with Apple M1 chip or later and iPadOS 16.4 or later.
| Downloading apps requires an Apple ID. To subscribe to Final Cut
| Pro for iPad you must have an internet connection."
|
| That is currently iPad Pro and iPad Air (10.9" display).
|
| [1] https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro-for-ipad/
| keyboard_smash wrote:
| According to the product pages[1][2], no for Final Cut but yes
| for Logic.
|
| > You can install Final Cut Pro for iPad on your 12.9-inch iPad
| Pro (5th or 6th generation), 11-inch iPad Pro (3rd or 4th
| generation), or iPad Air (5th generation) with iPadOS 16.4 or
| later.
|
| > You can install Logic Pro for iPad on any iPad with the A12
| Bionic chip or later and iPadOS 16.4 or later.
|
| [1]https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro-for-ipad/
| [2]https://www.apple.com/logic-pro-for-ipad/
| wslh wrote:
| BTW, what is a good online course to learn about video
| editing and music for using these apps? Not looking for being
| Mozart or Steven Spielberg though... just to play with some
| extra knowledge.
| recursive wrote:
| Allegedly this supports audio interfaces, so I presume it's
| supposed to able to be used for recording. What kind of latency
| can be achieved by ipad hardware? This announcement is
| mysteriously quiet about that.
| LegitShady wrote:
| iPad already supported class compliant audio interfaces.
| recursive wrote:
| Interesting fact, although it also doesn't provide any
| information about latency.
| CharlesW wrote:
| > _What kind of latency can be achieved by ipad hardware?_
|
| This is old, but ~11ms seems typical:
| https://onyx3.com/LatencyMeter/ios-audio-guitar-interfaces-l...
|
| This site also documents 11ms round-trip latency with an iRig
| on an iPad 2:
| http://www.michalkaszczyszyn.com/en/tutorials/latency.html
| makz wrote:
| Why do they insist on making everything worse?
| spankalee wrote:
| Logic will do for now, but I really want MainStage for the iPad.
| MainStage is one of the best collections of synths you can get,
| much less for $29, and being able to gig with it small touch-
| screen hardware like an iPad mini would be incredible. I'm all in
| on Android, but would but an iPad just for music.
| birdyrooster wrote:
| Just when I was thinking about selling my iPad
| yehia2amer wrote:
| Next --> Xcode
| oger wrote:
| Interesting: Apple is moving their apps to a subscription model.
|
| ,, Pricing and Availability Starting Tuesday, May 23, Final Cut
| Pro and Logic Pro for iPad will each be available on the App
| Store for $4.99 (US) per month or $49 (US) per year with a one-
| month free trial.8 Final Cut Pro is compatible with M1 chip iPad
| models or later, and Logic Pro will be available on A12 Bionic
| chip iPad models or later. Final Cut Pro for iPad and Logic Pro
| for iPad require iPadOS 16.4. For more information, visit
| apple.com/final-cut-pro-for-ipad and apple.com/logic-pro-for-
| ipad."
| carlosjobim wrote:
| People are broke and too undisciplined to save up even a little
| money, so normal software prices look huge in their eyes.
| That's why subscriptions and splitting a purchase is coming to
| everything now. It won't take long before the cashier in your
| local supermarket will ask you if you want to pay everything at
| once or divide after ringing up your stuff.
| anaganisk wrote:
| Aren't our supplies already a subscription? Like we don't
| purchase lifetime, and we already have credit cards/Monthly
| installments for any big purchases, at least in my country
| EMI(Easy monthly installments) is already huge.
| [deleted]
| carlosjobim wrote:
| Yes, in some countries this is already the norm. It will
| become the global norm and it will be for almost every
| purchase except the smallest for the majority of the
| population.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _People are broke and too undisciplined to save up even a
| little money, so normal software prices look huge in their
| eyes. That 's why subscriptions and splitting a purchase is
| coming to everything now._
|
| Or people don't want to have to continuously pay to have
| access to some latest version, and prefer to update when they
| feel like it and need some new feature, not always.
|
| Producers and video editors especially hate to have to
| upgrade.
|
| As for subscriptions, they have made the total yearly cost
| for getting a product much higher in many cases (doubled it
| in the case of some software), and made you lose your
| software any time you have to prioritize something else over
| its payment, like a medical emergency...
| carlosjobim wrote:
| > Or people don't want to have to continuously pay to have
| access to some latest version, and prefer to update when
| they feel like it and need some new feature, not always.
|
| These people are not the target group for subscriptions,
| nor are they the majority. For large swatches of potential
| customers there are only two options that they accept: 1)
| Free or pirated 2) Low monthly value subscription.
| rgoulter wrote:
| > These people are not the target group for
| subscriptions, nor are they the majority.
|
| The iPad app will only be available with a subscription.
|
| This majority which does not prefer subscriptions do not
| have the option for "high cost one-time purchase".
| carlosjobim wrote:
| I highly suspect Apple considered the market for one-time
| purchases too small to bother with, right or wrong.
| People think and behave different around purchases when
| it's on an ipad, even if they by now are powerful
| devices.
| coldtea wrote:
| I highly suspect Apple (like all these companies, Adobe
| first and foremost) merely consider the elasticity of
| demand when they force their customers to the
| subscription model.
|
| They also factor in heavily the securing of recurring
| income to impress their shareholders.
|
| The needs or desires of customers are never considered.
| Just whether enough of them suckers would yield to a
| subscription model.
| carlosjobim wrote:
| Of course they think about their profits and
| shareholders. But nobody is forced to get the software,
| they can go with a competitor or use Garage Band - for
| free.
|
| If you think somebody is a sucker for getting software as
| a subscription, then you are very unimaginative as to
| what are the needs and wants of other people. Many people
| are going to think it's great. Those who hate it can
| still buy Logic for their laptop for $200 something.
| George83728 wrote:
| > _As for subscriptions, they have made the total yearly
| cost for getting a product much higher in many cases
| (doubled it in the case of some software), and made you
| lose your software any time you have to prioritize
| something else over its payment, like a medical
| emergency..._
|
| That's how "rent-to-own" furniture works too. It exploits
| poor people for whom the price tag seems prohibitive but
| the monthly payments look deceptively cheap.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _It won 't take long before the cashier in your local
| supermarket will ask you if you want to pay everything at
| once or divide after ringing up your stuff._
|
| You mean like with a credit card?
| asadm wrote:
| or AfterPay?
| carlosjobim wrote:
| Yes, but more integrated with the store/merchant - and
| without interest.
| freedomben wrote:
| > _That 's why subscriptions and splitting a purchase is
| coming to everything now._
|
| Maybe that's a factor, and in this particular case a
| reasonably large one, but I'd guess it's because subscription
| revenue is the holy grail for modern software. People end up
| spending way, way more than they would have, often forgetting
| about the subscription and paying for it when they don't even
| use it, and the revenue is predictable and stable. There
| aren't any downsides for the company, and the question of
| ethics is irrelevant to them
| carlosjobim wrote:
| The downside is that the company has a responsibility for
| delivering software that is working as long as the
| subscription is being paid. Contrast that to pay-once
| software, where maybe you might not get much help if you
| can't get the product to work - depending on the seller.
| metaltyphoon wrote:
| That's what literally happens in Brazil, where you can even
| pay gas on a card and have it split into multiple payments.
| [deleted]
| cynicalsecurity wrote:
| Ok boomer.
| warning26 wrote:
| That's right, an _enlightened younger generation person_
| such as yourself understands that the subscription model is
| _vastly superior_. Glory to Adobe!
| carlosjobim wrote:
| What is so offensive in my comment? Split payments and
| subscriptions will continue to become more common, just
| wait and see.
| DrThunder wrote:
| You will own nothing and you will be happy.
| Kognito wrote:
| Interesting change, I do wonder if the Mac apps will follow
| suit.
| pier25 wrote:
| That was my thinking too.
|
| I don't know about Final Cut, but I do know lots of Logic
| users in the media composing world. Some will keep using it
| no matter what but plenty will leave for Cubase or Studio One
| if Apple forces a subscription on them. And Logic is probably
| the reason they buy Macs for producing music...
|
| It would be a terrible move by Apple.
| tigeroil wrote:
| My guess, based on the fact that Logic Pro and FCP, in the
| nicest way I can say this, haven't had any meaningful core
| upgrades in a while, is that they're planning some fairly
| major updates on macOS for both and the plan is to release
| them as new, subscription-only versions later this year.
| tailspin2019 wrote:
| Updates to Logic have always been a bit slow though...
|
| That said, if a paid subscription meant that Logic (macOS)
| got more love and more frequent updates, I'd happily pay
| for it.
| Applejinx wrote:
| Glad I moved to Reaper, then.
|
| Mind you, I'm still running Final Cut for video making.
| Hope I don't have to bail on that too. I'll keep running
| the version I have, but much like I don't use Adobe at all,
| I won't run such a program if I have to rent it.
|
| Exception, XCode :D most certainly have to pay yearly for
| that! But I view it as paying for authorization as an Apple
| dev, not so much as 'for the app itself'.
| freedomben wrote:
| That's super interesting. having to pay for
| "authorization as an Apple dev" to me is a much, much
| larger outrage than having to rent an editor.
| Applejinx wrote:
| Platforms are weird. I'm a Godot user, but have made a
| game on Unity and have downloaded the Unreal environment.
| There are circumstances where I have to give all those
| entities a cut of whatever I do (except Godot is MIT-
| licensed open source, so I'm not restricted by them very
| much at all).
|
| It's a bit like paying for access to Apple's Gatekeeper
| system? Without their involvement, I can't circumvent
| their code signing systems, so in some ways it seems to
| me like it's a given that if I code for their platform,
| I'm expected to pay for access to their security system
| that checks my submissions for malware. I could code
| stuff purely on the Unix layer to run in Terminal or
| something like that, but then I would clearly be an
| outsider with no association with Apple's 'walled
| garden'. The cost of entry to being considered inside the
| 'walled garden' and safe to use, is not just willingness
| to have my code audited and code-signed if it's safe to
| run, it's also paying for engagement with those systems.
|
| I feel like if Apple both did that and prohibited use of
| any other dev software, it would flip something for me
| and I would be adamantly against their practice. Since
| it's for access to a class of developer that's meant to
| be treated as privileged and Apple-approved, it doesn't
| bug me to pay $100 a year. I would be distressed if I had
| to cough up $1000, and if it was $10,000 a year I might
| not be able to continue the practice.
| robertoandred wrote:
| You don't have to pay for Xcode, only for if you want to
| submit to an app store
| freedomben wrote:
| don't you also have to pay if you want to load your app
| on your device? (aka side-load) So yeah you could dev
| with the emulator for free, but even if the app is by you
| and only for you, you have to pay
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| You can download XCode without a dev membership, so
| you're definitely not paying for it either way.
| monocularvision wrote:
| Being a full time iOS engineer means having to tell folks
| it is "Xcode" not "XCode" every time see it.
| Applejinx wrote:
| Damn if you're not right. I stand corrected. I wonder why
| I thought I needed to mentally camel-case it? Is that
| what it was? Was it ever capitalized this way or have I
| been making it up this whole time?
|
| I think it's Mandela Effect. I don't know of any other
| words that can have the letters 'Xc' in sequence in a
| capitalized word, so my brain must just reject the idea
| even though I've literally seen it over and over right in
| front of my eyes.
| tgv wrote:
| Are we talking about the same Logic Pro?
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203718 shows quite a lot
| of activity of the last 2 years. Idk what you consider a
| "meaningful core upgrade".
| coldtea wrote:
| Those are just releases that improve/change some small
| workflow stuff, fix bugs, or add minor or niche features
| like "Spatial Audio mixing with Dolby Atmos" that Apple
| cares about more than most producers do. The change lists
| look huge, but if you lose closer its all minor stuff.
|
| The last release with a meaningful core update was 10.5
| (May 2020) - the one that introduced Live Loops, major
| new devices like the new sampler, etc.
|
| If it was a regular company selling its software, 10.5
| would have been a paid update/major new version, and 10.6
| and 10.7 would have been point updates.
| duped wrote:
| > niche features like "Spatial Audio mixing with Dolby
| Atmos" that Apple cares about more than most producers do
|
| People do care about it and it's why Logic and Pro Tools
| are the only game in town for people who aren't making
| EDM.
| smoldesu wrote:
| It's nice, but I wouldn't go _that_ far. Professionals
| who mix for Dolby Atmos do it with a Dolby-approved
| system, not their Atmos-certified home theater or Airpods
| Pro. For the prosumer market, it 's mostly a gimmick to
| promote Apple Music.
|
| It's not necessarily a bad playback platform, but neither
| is an Xbox with 5.1 surround hooked up. Apple's
| commitment to surround sound is far from revolutionary.
| scarecrowbob wrote:
| Well, for a $200 app that was feature complete when I
| bought it, I am not at all sure what I'd want them to do
| with it. It'd be a really hard sell to go from almost a
| decade of "free and professional" to a subscription model-
| I'd much rather have them just keep maintaining the
| software exactly as is so I can use it when I buy my next
| MBP in 2026.
|
| So I am a bit skeptical that your prediction is accurate.
| But I can't tell the future and I don't know folks at Apple
| so maybe you know something I don't.
| mirkules wrote:
| You're probably going to be pushed into it over time.
| Whether it's because they will make it incompatible with
| newer plugins, or because they will make newer hardware
| incompatible with older Logic.
|
| FWIW, I'm in your boat too. Logic is a _PERFECT_ DAW for
| me the way it is. I would be so sad to have to switch to
| Reaper or something, and have to go hunt for plugins..
|
| Logic is the only thing tying me to the Mac, so I guess
| that's a plus.
| scarecrowbob wrote:
| That is a relatable worry.
|
| On one hand, I do enough work that the price of Abelton
| (which is what I'd move to if that happened) isn't a big
| deal so unless there simply is no non-subscription tool I
| can use I'll be okay.
|
| However, I remain hopeful. It's a 30 year old piece of
| software and my understanding of Apple's model for it is
| to drive hardware sales seems reasonable to me.
| kotaKat wrote:
| It'd be interesting to see them modify their Apple One tiers.
|
| Split out Premier to a "Premier home" tier (keeping News+ and
| Fitness+) and a "Pro" tier at the same price that gives you 4TB
| of iCloud Drive + Logic and Final Cut instead of the
| 2TB/News/Fitness option.
| Kerrick wrote:
| I'm not certain, but I think Apple including video editing
| software in a subscription called "Premier Pro" might anger
| Adobe's lawyers.
| chx wrote:
| It would be mighty entertaining see Adobe calling Apple
| out.
| hammyhavoc wrote:
| Some people just want to watch the world burn.
| TheKarateKid wrote:
| Apple needs to at least adjust their iCloud storage tiers to
| match their phones. The jump from 200GB to 2TB is ridiculous
| and feels like extortion. The 50GB -> 200GB is also
| ridiculous because it can't even support a full backup of
| their base 64GB iPhone.
| mkaic wrote:
| There's a certain humor to the idea of Final Cut Pro being
| relegated to the Premier Pro subscription lol.
| grishka wrote:
| Still strange that apps that work fully locally and thus don't
| entail any running costs are a subscription. Adobe did it first
| but they at least threw in some cloud stuff (that no one uses)
| to try to justify the subscription.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| How is that strange? What about maintenance and regular
| updates?
| Affric wrote:
| What is the difference between maintenance and regular
| updates? If I for software it should be complete, correct,
| and secure.
|
| No new features? Fair enough.
| grishka wrote:
| What happened with people using one single version of
| something for 10 years? If there's a major update, it's a
| separate product that's a paid upgrade. We've had that
| figured out since the 90s. And quality software doesn't
| need maintenance.
| TheKarateKid wrote:
| FCP and Logic are highly optimized for Apple's CPU and
| GPUs. They fully utilize all cores and operate in a way
| that won't bring the general OS to a grinding halt if
| you're encoding in the background. Additionally, Apple
| updates these to provide all the latest video and audio
| encoding available on their devices.
|
| Doing all of this requires significant engineering and
| licensing (Dolby) that comes at a cost.
| 76SlashDolphin wrote:
| Sure but none of that should fall under "maintenance".
| Apple makes a new SoC and needs to optimize Logic for it?
| Fine, issue a paid upgrade but make it optional since it
| has 0 impact on my M1 Mac. They add a new feature like
| Dolby support? Again, make the update optional if it's
| paid since a lot of people (me incl) don't care about it.
| The entire point is to not cut off access to one's
| offline workflow if money is tight which is absolutely
| possible for tools like Logic and FinalCut.
| deergomoo wrote:
| I'm generally okay with subscriptions for software without
| running costs _if_ I get to keep using the last version I
| paid for when I cancel.
|
| Paying hundreds of pounds and having nothing to show for it
| is fucking lame.
| conradfr wrote:
| It's interesting as they was a big uproar weeks ago when audio
| plugins developer Waves tried to move to a subscription only
| model (they caved in four days).
| dannyw wrote:
| $49 a year is pretty affordable for what you'd get.
| jrajav wrote:
| There's a big difference in earned trust. Waves has had
| scummy business practices for a long time - price gouging
| back in the day, and more recently, an "upgrade plan" that
| amounts to a barely optional subscription already. That is,
| unless you don't want bug fixes, M1 compatibility, etc.
|
| They also have perpetual sales cycles that only serve to
| trick new customers into thinking the sale price is actually
| a deal and not just the normal price (this is not exclusive
| to Waves but they do it more broadly and more often than
| anyone else except for Plugin Alliance).
|
| In other words, Waves is the used car salesman of the audio
| plugin world. Certainly not alone in that, but way less
| trustworthy than a big player like Apple. Who knows what
| they'd try to pull this time. THAT is the sentiment behind
| the recent uproar.
| smoldesu wrote:
| This seems like a silly comparison. Obviously the people
| buying Wavves plugins trust them enough to buy the
| software. Wavves has always been a little scummy, sure, but
| it's not like Apple is a guardian angel themselves. They
| saw an opportunity to make money, and Tim Cook made the
| predictable move of pushing the "service" button on a new
| software product.
|
| All of these companies are making the wrong decision, and
| refusing to stand by their products because their runtime
| is too fragile to stay put. Apple is complicit in this
| problem, and uses it as an excuse to sell you more services
| than products. They _could_ work to solve the issue of
| subscription software being required for perpetual update
| models - but they don 't. They are put in a position where
| perverse incentives (like the App Store monopoly) is their
| de-facto solution. This is bad for users. It's why I left
| the ecosystem and how Apple burned their "trust" with me.
|
| > trick new customers into thinking the sale price is
| actually a deal
|
| Wow, it's almost like you're describing Apple's "sale"
| model verbatim. Constantly offer 5-10% discounts at big-box
| stores to make people think they're getting good deals, and
| unload used models with upsell marketing like "factory
| refurbished" or some such language.
|
| Which one of them are you comparing to the car salesman
| again?
| H1Supreme wrote:
| You're not wrong about Waves. But, I'd argue that one of
| Logic's most appealing features is it's low one-time price.
| You could have bought Logic 10.0 ten years ago, and
| upgraded it all the way to 10.7.5 (current release), and
| paid $0.
|
| Otherwise, it's feature set is really nothing special
| relative to other DAW's. And, if you're into making
| electronic music, it's pretty lackluster compared to
| Ableton or Bitwig (imo, of course). Plus, the whole no
| VST's bit. Which is less of an issue these days, but still.
| squidsoup wrote:
| What makes logic lackluster in your opinion for
| electronic music?
| aydoubleyou wrote:
| Well that's a lot cheaper than Adobe Premiere at $20.99/mo. If
| this pricing plan came to macOS then I might consider
| switching.
| H1Supreme wrote:
| I wonder what the fallout will look like if they make Logic on
| the desktop subscription based. The DAW / audio plugin
| community at large have resisted subscriptions quite
| ferociously. And considering how competitive the space is, I
| could see a lot of people jumping ship based on this alone.
| bombcar wrote:
| They could offer both like Microsoft does with Office now -
| and eventually everyone will move over.
| o1y32 wrote:
| Office still offers a permanent license.
| st3fan wrote:
| Jump ship to what exactly? A product that costs less than one
| Frappuccino per month?
| H1Supreme wrote:
| One of the numerous other DAW's on the market? It's less
| about the cost, and more about the fact that it's a
| subscription.
|
| If I had a subscription for every company that I own audio
| plugins from, I'd pull my hair out.
| tomduncalf wrote:
| Wow, huge. Can't wait to try Logic Pro. The iPad is a fantastic
| device for music making in many ways with lots of amazing apps,
| but I've never been happy with any of the "full fat" DAW options.
| Hopefully Apple have nailed the usability and flexibility -
| $49/year is a reasonable price to pay in my mind if so.
| cpuguy83 wrote:
| Seriously amazing price assuming it is as capable as the
| desktop versions.
|
| I pay more for Fantasical than this costs.
| efields wrote:
| Now one of the hardware companies needs to make a 2+/in/out
| digital audio interface _and_ usb c hub. Who needs this? The pro
| amateurs like me. I have a MiniFuse2 attached to a dongle with a
| synth and sometimes drum machine in there and it's getting kind
| of wirey. It's not as backpack friendly as it could be.
| dan_pixelflow wrote:
| At $50 a year (equates to $4 a month if paid annually), this is -
| albeit a subscription model - so much better than Adobe's PS20 a
| month plan for _just_ Premiere (obviously to get you to go for
| the PS50 a month plan). It 's a much better plan and I hope
| things like this make Adobe consider their costs. It's a big ask
| and I know they won't... but you can hope.
| charcircuit wrote:
| Premiere is $31.49 per month on the month plan. The annual plan
| paid monthly is $20.99 per month.
|
| For all apps is $82.49 pel month on them monthly plan.
| ww520 wrote:
| I use the free version of Davinci Resolve to edit videos for a
| few occasions. It's amazingly good. Easy to learn and easy to
| use. Quite impressive with the feature sets.
| speedgoose wrote:
| The color editor using nodes is particularly powerful, and
| you can even export .cube LUT files. I now use it to edit my
| pictures too.
| jamiedumont wrote:
| I'd love to hear more about this! I'm a photographer but
| look on jealously at Davinci. Black Magic got so much right
| with the design (and business model) of their software. How
| does it work for images?
| joduplessis wrote:
| This is pretty awesome. Hopefully this can help motivate other
| DSP products go mobile. I would love Logic Pro + Neural DSP on an
| iPad.
| zorrobyte wrote:
| "Get 1 month free, then pay $4.99/month or $49 annually.*"
|
| WTF is this?
| aloer wrote:
| Slightly unrelated: is there a way or an app to shoot 4k on
| iPhone or iPad and store it directly on external ssd?
|
| Apple often advertises their new pro phones with ,,professional"
| level video production so I always assumed that is possible
| somehow
| sbussard wrote:
| You'll own nothing and be happy /s
| rantee wrote:
| Nice. Now do Xcode!
| rajbot wrote:
| Although I understand the reasoning, I'm sad to see the move to
| subscription pricing.
|
| I bought Final Cut and Logic a long time ago in the Mac App
| Store, and now my kids get to use them through Family Sharing.
| One of them has written hundreds of songs in Logic and published
| an album.
|
| The one-time purchase of Final Cut and Logic with Family Sharing
| and a lifetime of upgrades has been such an unbelievable value
| for such powerful software.
| rchaud wrote:
| I'm against subscriptions generally, but $50/yr is
| significantly cheaper than the $299 for Final Cut Pro X or
| whatever it is they offered previously.
| trinix912 wrote:
| At some point the Final Cut Studio package was like $1000.
| Still not as bad as AVID back then...
| jonhohle wrote:
| The cost may be cheaper over $time_period (debatable), but in
| one case you have fully functional software and in the other
| you have nothing.
|
| I know Adobe has "proven" pros will take subscription
| software and like it, but for every day users who like to
| mess around now and then, I have no interest in a perpetual
| subscription.
| rajbot wrote:
| It's not. I bought FCP X in 2011 for $299. If you are just
| counting my own usage, that is $25/yr over the last 12 years,
| but I get to keep using for many more years, and both my kids
| use it through family sharing as well, so we are down to
| $5/year per person or less, without having to mess with yet
| another subscription.
|
| I used to work on a competing product, and subscription
| pricing will work better for most people who are in this
| market, so my personal use case is an outlier I know.
|
| Edit: all that said, I'm excited to be the first person to
| subscribe to Logic on the iPad. I hope that subscription is
| Family Sharing enabled as well!
| lostgame wrote:
| You can share Apple-created iOS/iPadOS app subscriptions with
| other iCloud Family members. :) I can't see this being an
| exception.
|
| My hubby and I use it all the time. :)
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-05-09 23:01 UTC)