Apple Logic Pro /LogicExpress Discussion

>> Everybody goes out and buys the cheapest, or the smallest, or the 
>> cheapest smallest computer they can afford and then through the magic 
>> of selective memory the minute they plug the thing in the fact that 
>> they were making a compromise when they purchased their system in the 
>> first place s;ips  is instantly replaced with the expectation that 
>> their new super computer will enable them to leap tall buildings and 
>> screw Hillary Duff.
>>
>
>
>  I think most of us buy good macs - which become more and more out of 
> date as time goes on. If you bought a $2500 mid level mac every two 
> years and sold it used and bought a new one, I guess it would cost 
> about a grand a year to keep up with the jobs (when you consider 
> upgrading ram and maybe other stuff too).

I don't.  I think a lot of people buy used or low end stuff and try to 
get by as cheap as they can, but yes for the ones who don't it is a sad 
simple fact of life that computers have the approximate working life 
spans of laboratory rats before they become obsolete and the industry 
passes them by.

It has been that way for 20 years.

Maybe after 50 more years that wont be the case but by that time 
musical hallmark cards will have the equivalent of a 5ghz G5 on them 
playing the Vienna Waltz though Garritan personal orchestra.

>> Personally I think there should be a high end no compromises "this is 
>> as good as we know how to make it" Apple system that a pro can 
>> purchase even if it has a serious pro price tag, and then they can 
>> say this is the recommended Pro system for logic, it will run on 
>> everything else we make but in one way or another the other systems 
>> will be a compromise.  This will both give the top end users a system 
>> that they can expect to work and will give Apple a retort when people 
>> with lesser systems bitch at them.
>
>
>
>  Interesting. But I think a better strategy would be to get rid of the 
> bugs for all.

Yes, thats true they should, and while they are at it they should 
develop a pill that makes all women beautiful, stops their aging at the 
age of 27 and gives them the libidos of asian porn stars.

That does not mean that I think that either one of those things is more 
feasible than the other.

Systems change, hardware changes, hardware has bugs, firmware has bugs, 
GPUs get updated, OSs change, Competitors add breakthrough 
technologies, shit conflict with other shit.  Meanwhile time marches 
on, and does not stand still while opcode perfects the ultimate bug 
free version of Studio Vision for the Mac plus.

>>  I have a feeling that the problem is there is a "marketing dickhead" 
>> contingent at apple that looks at their demographic and says "our 
>> figures show us that 0.5% of the people who actually buy logic are 
>> making their livings with it, therefore the big bucks are in focusing 
>> on pleasing the amateurs.  What the Dickhead Contingent forgets is 
>> that #1. While it may be true that the 99.5% majority out there do 
>> not make their livings with logic they also are probably getting 
>> their opinion  about logic from the 0.5% minority who is so in fact 
>> even though the only account for a miniscule fraction of the 
>> purchasers that small minority at the top are still the ones to 
>> please if they want Logic to stay in the Biz.
>
>
>  Evidently there is a group of beeta testers whom are able to demand 
> specialized features.

Having participated in several beta programs I can assure you this is 
an utterly bizarre contention.

The idea that beta testers are calling the shots is just so far from 
the reality of any of 9 or 10 beta programs I have had the privilege of 
participating it would make me laugh till my abs swelled up and popped 
if it weren't for the crying.

If you know of some beta program where the testers get to wag the dog 
do tell, I want to sign up right away.


> I don't think the ease of use for beginning to moderate level users is 
> much addressed at all.

Again this is 180 degrees from the reality of what beta testers in any 
group I have participated in always shout for, they want things to be 
easy just like everybody else.

It is also a nonsensical notion that by "professional" people mean 
"hard to figure out" that is again exactly the opposite of what 
professionals want out of hardware or software.  They have less 
patience for confusing interfaces and clumsy implementations than 
anyone.  Hi end stuff is almost always extremely simple bullet proof 
and to the point.  And that is true in any business not just music.  It 
is when you go *down* the hierarchy and get into mid level stuff that 
things start getting ugly and complicated.  If that were not the case, 
and the low end stuff was just as easy to use as the high end stuff, 
the pros would not buy the high end stuff.  But that is not the way it 
works, what you pay for when you pay for the best is simplification not 
complication.