Jump to content

Apple's M1 Max Benchmarked in Adobe Premiere Pro

Lightwreather

Full disclaimer: Personally I fall in the category of the third point. I'm technically a long time *nix user since I was around 18/19 (I'm 40 now), originally dual booting between Linux and Windows on my Desktops, Linux for general productivity and self-teaching myself sysadmin / programmer roles while I was working on a helldesk.  I bypassed Hackintosh and bought a Core 2 Duo Mac Mini as a direct result of Microsoft announcing the minimum hardware requirements for the then soon-to-be-released Windows Vista.  The money I'd have to spend to get my rig up to spec was not very far away from a Mac Mini at the time, macOS was a fluid UI with all the productivity apps I wanted, and I had consoles for playing games on anyway. It was a no brainer for me.

 

Edit: Oh, and that original Mac Mini served as a HTPC with the optical toslink connection to my AV receiver once it was retired from being my main machine. That machine lasted a long long time until it eventually died a thermal death as a direct result of my being lazy and not maintaining it properly.

 

Linux is still great, I still love it for running headless servers. But I grew so so weary of using it as a daily driver.  "Linux is free if your time has no value".

 

Maybe one day Apple will do something in macOS that makes me re-evaluate, it was never really the hardware that I liked, it was the OS that brought me in to using macs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

I did, see the edit, 62%, and the revenue is still way more than enough to fund original content along with money from producers and sponsors. Can we please stop with the "Company's are willing to lose money" line, no, no they are not.

 

Maybe you should look up how much producing/licensing a brandnew blockbuster or TV show cost and 760 million or 2 billion just isn't cutting it for all that is on TV+.

Also why should a producer pay Apple money to put something on TV+??? Sure Apple does get a cut for shows it sells outside the TV+ subscription but that ain't the topic here.

 

The point is that Apple can afford(and has a history of) to burn tons of cash building up a service in the hope that it will either be profitable later one or helps selling more HW.

In that context it is absolutly plausible for them to buy big games to grow Arcade into either of those. Is that whats gonna happen? Dunno, but one can't rule it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Paul Thexton said:

Full disclaimer: Personally I fall in the category of the third point. I'm technically a long time *nix user since I was around 18/19 (I'm 40 now), originally dual booting between Linux and Windows on my Desktops

 

20 minutes ago, Paul Thexton said:

Linux is still great, I still love it for running headless servers. But I grew so so weary of using it as a daily driver.  "Linux is free if your time has no value".

 

Ooof, I feel you on this one. I was trying out Linux gaming and dual booting for it around 2006 I think, with an ATI X800 GTO (AGP, hell yea lol). To be honest back then Wine in a lot of ways had more successes than back when you were trying simply due to the prevalence of game launchers, DRM, Online Play etc and it was still rough.

 

Does sound like it's a lot better now though, not willing to try it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kronoton said:

Maybe you should look up how much producing/licensing a brandnew blockbuster or TV show cost and 760 million or 2 billion just isn't cutting it for all that is on TV+.

I have, anywhere from a little as 5 million to 200 million, with 200 being on the extreme end. Foundation was around 45 million.

 

And again, game developers and publishers actually have to want to do it, money up front is not enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, leadeater said:

Foundation was around 45 million.

 

So by your logic that should be about 10% of the value in TV+ content (running the service cost money, billing costs money and so).

 

Even if TV+ is breaking even today (which I don't see) that is after 2 years, 2 years that in no way made a profit, 2 years of burning money to build up a service.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Does sound like it's a lot better now though, not willing to try it though.

Honestly me neither. I'm prepared to re-evaluate, but only if I happen upon evidence that gives me a compelling reason to, be that a negative change in macOS or a positive change in Linux for Desktop.  I'm keeping a close eye on Valve's success with SteamDeck.  But even if they can make Linux a really great gaming experience, the investment in hardware I'd have to make would still need to be weighed against a latest gen Console in terms of effort / results should I decide I want to start doing more significant gaming again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kronoton said:

2 years of burning money to build up a service

If this weren't Apple we were discussing here and instead a startup, I'd say that's absolutely a viable (even if risky, any investment is risky) business practise. The value of any business model isn't necessarily in how much money it's bringing in subscriptions, it's the size of the userbase.  In reality YouTube only became valuable only when Google decided they wanted to buy it.  Same for Instagram with Facebook.

 

Build up a large user base. Sell it to a big company who wants to be in that market place. Ready made user base, ready made platform that can be monetized by using large capital available to get exclusivity on highly desirable content.

 

My first full time employer did exactly the same in the ISP world in the late 90s/early 2000s. Small independent ISP, built a decent sized user base who remained loyal because we put a lot of effort in to having a good customer support team. Owner sold us to a large US based capital firm who bought up some other small ISPs in the UK with the aims of making a large ISP to rival the likes of AOL at the time.  Of course, they stuffed it up because their focus was on "make money! reduce costs!" rather than "build a great service!", but that's a whole other story 🤦🏻‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Kronoton said:

So by your logic that should be about 10% of the value in TV+ content (running the service cost money, billing costs money and so).

I don't know what math you used but 45 million is not 10% of 760 million, using 2019 subscription numbers btw and 2021 survey results on who is actually paying. There is significant error in my numbers because Apple isn't totally open about this sort of thing, none of them are actually.

 

And while I can agree a streaming service in general will likely start on net loss this isn't going to last very long. If Apple is not breaking even on Apple TV+ now/this year then this is more than likely a key goal for next year. Looking at the 2021 original content is a really good indicator of that, this year is their single most expensive year in original content by a lot. Not saying it's make or break or anything like that but how the next 12 months goes will inform Apple how much they should spend on original content.

 

Also you are very much underestimating how much easier the TV and Movie market is compared to gaming, in terms of getting and retaining customers. Let alone the fact the gaming market is now significantly much larger than both of those combined now.

 

Apple simply has to have a viable platform large game studios and publishers can survive on and make money for them to want to be on it and spend that effort doing it. If money alone were enough then there would be more games on Mac OS, Mac devices have been more than capable of playing many high end games hardware wise for a long time.

 

I'm sure Apple is actually interested in a such a large market, how much so I am not sure, but I doubt they want to sink a lot of investment in to it at this time in a way you think they would be willing to do. Maybe in a few years, but I'd say no sooner than 2 years. And there is no way there will be any AAA studio games with their main feature games being Mac OS exclusive, no way at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Paul Thexton said:

If this weren't Apple we were discussing here and instead a startup, I'd say that's absolutely a viable (even if risky, any investment is risky) business practise.

 

Why shouldn't it be viable for Apple itself? If they think a tier 1 TV or Games services would either make billions in x years or help them sell millions of extra Macs and iPhone (bringing in billions of profits) that "loosing" money in the short term is non issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

45 million is not 10% of 760 million

Nope, but neither is 760miilon what they could have invested into the content without making a loss.....

 

Point is Apple can do business that way and with the cash they have at hand they can do it without anybody knowing for sure (except investors so big that have a seat on the board).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Kronoton said:

Nope, but neither is 760miilon what they could have invested into the content without making a loss.....

Yep but you are still assuming only Apple money pays for any of this which is wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Kronoton said:

 

Why shouldn't it be viable for Apple itself? If they think a tier 1 TV or Games services would either make billions in x years or help them sell millions of extra Macs and iPhone (bringing in billions of profits) that "loosing" money in the short term is non issue.

I think the difference for Apple here is it seems unlikely that they'll be intending to sell the Apple TV+ service (and it's userbase) to another entity. But otherwise, yeah you're right, build up a userbase and then keep them hooked in to subscribe by providing quality content.

 

To be honest, the only thing I've used Apple TV+ for so far is to watch "The Year Earth Changed" which was excellent, and half of series one of See, which while an interesting premise, just seemed to be getting sillier and sillier as it went on.  I might finish that season at some point soon before my free access expires.

 

I honestly haven't watched anything else on there, mainly because I haven't gone looking for something to watch.  I already have such a large library of things I want to watch but haven't gottten around to on other platforms.

 

Sometimes too much choice isn't great for consumers, we now have Amazon Prime, Google Play/YouTube, Apple TV, Netflix, Disney+ and others that I can't think of right now, all carrying their own exclusive content, in the worst case scenario if you're someone with a genuine interest in watching at least one thing from every service, that's a pretty sucky situation in terms of subscription costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Yep but you are still assuming only Apple money pays for any of this which is wrong

 

O.k. then tell me who other than Apple is paying for Foundation? No product placements and no chance you will see that show anywhere but TV+ (or torrent sites) anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Paul Thexton said:

Honestly me neither. I'm prepared to re-evaluate, but only if I happen upon evidence that gives me a compelling reason to, be that a negative change in macOS or a positive change in Linux for Desktop.  

Tested Steam on Linux a year or something ago. It was pretty nice, except for the fact that it didn't work on NTFS drivers, so I had to format an EXT4 drive, move my games, to be able to open them on steam.

 

I just don't recommend the snap/flatpack packages, figuring out how to expose the external drive wasn't super easy and required command line stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Paul Thexton said:

Sometimes too much choice isn't great for consumers, we now have Amazon Prime, Google Play/YouTube, Apple TV, Netflix, Disney+ and others that I can't think of right now, all carrying their own exclusive content, in the worst case scenario if you're someone with a genuine interest in watching at least one thing from every service, that's a pretty sucky situation in terms of subscription costs.

Very annoying, especially as you watch content remove from the one you are paying for to go on another new one you are not paying for.

 

And it's not like these streaming services actually own the content, the production company does (almost ways a production entity is created for each TV show/Movie). Only licenses are issued but the problem is exclusive licenses are currently more valuable and also seen as more lucrative to the buyer. Nothing stops the content being on multiple platforms, even if there has to be an exclusivity window but it's become such a rare thing now.

 

The Anime industry is even worse, content will be removed from streaming services by the content owner to force DVD/Blu0ray sales so you have no guarantee a particular show will stay on the service you pay for. For example A Silent Voice was removed from Netflix, it's not available on any streaming service now (legally). I did by the Blu-ray before this happened but still, argh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The Anime industry is even worse

Oh god yes. Me and my siblings used to love watching Anime back in the 90s, ever since Channel 4 aired Akira which absolutely blew everyone away at the time. My sister subscribed to Manga UK magazine and would often buy new VHS (oh man) releases through mail order. It was great. But these days honestly I don't know where to start with trying to watch Anime on streaming services. There's so much around, and then sometimes I'll find something that looks interesting but they'll be titled along the lines of "Franchise: Storyline", and I'm thinking "Wait, do I need to have watched something else before I see this one? Is this jumping in to the middle of a story arc? No character introductions?"

 

That's especially true on Netflix whenever I've looked in the past. I think the UI of most streaming services is absolutely appalling, there's no way to drill down in to things to find an actual required/recommended viewing order for those kind of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, this could just indicate that I'm approaching "lol, old man doesn't 'get' modern tech" territory at a much more rapid pace than I'd prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Kronoton said:

No product placements

How do you know there are no product placements? Also because one show may or may not have any brand deals none of them do? What logic is this? Typical brand deals just to have a product on screen can be millions.

 

It's also not like Apple would have to be seeking them out either, that's not really how it works. TV shows and movies are made under production companies, usually one is created for each project, and someone is employed to get these. Also some companies will approach a project and ask to be featured in it.

 

It's actually these production companies that own the show or movie and Apple is only buying the streaming rights to it. For example Phantom Four and Skydance Television own Foundation not Apple. Foundation is on Apple TV+ because they offered the most for it, it could have been on any of the others.

 

Original content, from any of the streaming services, is not actually "their original content".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Paul Thexton said:

Of course, this could just indicate that I'm approaching "lol, old man doesn't 'get' modern tech" territory at a much more rapid pace than I'd prefer.

297.png

 

🙃

 

6 minutes ago, Paul Thexton said:

There's so much around, and then sometimes I'll find something that looks interesting but they'll be titled along the lines of "Franchise: Storyline", and I'm thinking "Wait, do I need to have watched something else before I see this one? Is this jumping in to the middle of a story arc? No character introductions?"

Anime naming is some of the worst around, "How a Realist Hero Rebuilt the Kingdom".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Anime naming is some of the worst around, "How a Realist Hero Rebuilt the Kingdom".

image.png.eb2d687614157c4e6ff7d4af6c6da1e6.png

"A high ideal missed by a little, is far better than low ideal that is achievable, yet less effective"

 

If you think I'm wrong, correct me. If I've offended you in some way tell me what it is and how I can correct it. I want to learn, and along the way one can make mistakes; Being wrong helps you learn what's right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, leadeater said:

How do you know there are no product placements?

 

Would beat the point of product placements if I missed them.....

 

In the end those are only worth real money if the a featured prominently, James Bond driving a certain car, every drink being a product of CocaCola company and such.

 

23 minutes ago, leadeater said:

For example Phantom Four and Skydance Television own Foundation not Apple. Foundation is on Apple TV+ because they offered the most for it, it could have been on any of the others.

 

So? Unless Phantom Four made a loss on the deal or somehow hops the show will be still worth big $ after the deal with Apple expires, Apple has paid for the show in full plus whatever profit the production company made on it (+ lawyer fees for sure).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Kronoton said:

So? Unless Phantom Four made a loss on the deal or somehow hops the show will be still worth big $ after the deal with Apple expires, Apple has paid for the show in full plus whatever profit the production company made on it (+ lawyer fees for sure).

Well yes but your thinking about this is is quite cart before the horse, Apple is nothing more than the purchaser of distribution rights. How a TV shows gets made and where all the revenue sources come from have little to do with Apple because of the way they are actually made, not how you've been presenting your arguments.

 

The simple fact is Apple, nor any of them own the content, and are not the sole funders of the projects, or even the original funders. Of course these productions do not lose money, unless nobody wants it or they get a terrible contract deal, however due to the production Apple/Netflix/Disney etc could. And that's all dependent on the type of contract as well, royalty shares, content view rates, all manor of things.

 

Regardless Apple is not operating Apple TV+ in any different way to the rest of them and if you think all the streaming services are losing money then my very simple question to you is, "Why do they still exist?". If there is no prospects of profitability then why stick around, why would Apple start such a service. There is clearly a lot of money involved here and very healthy profit prospects.  I would estimate Apple's current subscription count is around a quarter of that of Netflix, possibly more, and that's really not that bad for how new it is. That said Disney Plus has around 116 million, with a massive content advantage of course.

 

No matter what you seem to think Apple is not going to lose hundreds of millions to billions year on year just to gain market share, that might fly extreme short term, not any longer than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

and if you think all the streaming services are losing money

 

And what made you come to that insane conclusion??

 

The ratio of paying subscribers vs quantity/quality of offered content is just way worse (at the moment) than any other major streaming service.

4 minutes ago, leadeater said:

How a TV shows gets made and where all the revenue sources come

 

And back again, what (significant) other revenue sources are there when Apple holds an exclusive world wide licence for several years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Kronoton said:

And back again, what (significant) other revenue sources are there when Apple holds an exclusive world wide licence for several years?

Brand deals, other marketing rights, associated products and merchandise. Quite a lot, more than I could think of right now. Why is it you seem to think Apple is coming in as some blessed angel of money to allow things to happen that wouldn't otherwise? Did you think the same thing when Netflix Originals first came around?

 

25 minutes ago, Kronoton said:

The ratio of paying subscribers vs quantity/quality of offered content is just way worse (at the moment) than any other major streaming service.

And that's only your assumption and information based of of limited surveys. You really do have no idea how profitable or not Apple TV+ is for Apple. Neither do I.

 

What I can tell you however is that before and then after Apple TV+ Apple's 'Services' division revenue increased by around 50% or roughly 16 billion dollars to 'Nine Months End' (so 21 billion year on year). Apple TV+ is some portion of that ~21 billion, obviously not all, as there would be growth in other services like Apple Music, iCloud+ etc.

 

25 minutes ago, Kronoton said:

And what made you come to that insane conclusion??

You arguing that Apple is losing money on Apple TV+ with little to no evidence they actually are...

 

Maybe dial back the Apple support, they aren't special in any way at all. Apple didn't become as profitable or have the cash reserves operating in the way you are claiming they do. In the tech space I would label Apple as one of the most conservative and risk adverse companies, historically only backing sure winners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, leadeater said:

297.png

 

🙃

 

Anime naming is some of the worst around, "How a Realist Hero Rebuilt the Kingdom".

That's because the manga or visual novel they're based on is usually verbose SEO logic. That owing to most content originating in light-novel or web-novel format.

 

Which is something that Westerners just don't get. Westerners like short titles. Japanese (and also Korean and Chinese) like longer titles so they're not confused for another titles with the same keywords.

 

Usually popular anime is based on a manga or web-novel. This goes double for video games. There are anime based on visual novels that are usually "nerfed" in several ways for the anime because you lack any control over the narrative, and the "POV" character has to be invented for the TV anime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×