6 ms·

>But yeah, AVID Pro Tools works on Windows so it doesn't do anything for Apple. Before Apple bought it, Emagic's Logic ran on both Windows and Mac. After App

by jasode 6y ago

>But yeah, AVID Pro Tools works on Windows so it doesn't do anything for Apple. Before Apple bought it, Emagic's Logic ran on both Windows and Mac. After Apple acquired Logic, they immediately discontinued the Windows version. Can't Apple hypothetically run the same playbook and discontinue Pro Tools for Windows?

timthorn 6y ago
Not only that - the next version of Logic was due imminently, with the engineering work done. It was at that moment that I grew a strong dislike of Apple, having been a real cheerleader for most of the Macintosh's existence.
crazygringo 6y ago
Oh wow, I didn't know that. I mean, that seems like a pretty shitty thing to do to an existing userbase. I guess they could, but risk generating a lot of ill will. I'm curious how discontinuing Logic was received. Seems very risky.
- WalterSear 6y ago
  It was clear back then that they didn't want Logic in order to improve it, as being evidenced here by with this hodgepodge of 'catchup' features. Tbh, I'm surprised they hadn't dropped the product already.
- djaychela 6y ago
  Music Tech teacher here... when it was discontinued, I was working (part time) in a couple of schools who used Logic on PCs, as well as working for a few people who used it in their own studios. In the case of one of the schools and a number of the clients, I was the one who broke the news to them - generally greeted by disbelief initially, and then once they had checked up on it, absolute fury. If the intention was to get people to buy Macs so they could keep running Logic, in most cases it backfired spectacularly, and made life-long Apple enemies of those users - many of which either stuck with their old version of Logic for a number of years, or who jumped ship to Cubase (in the case of the schools, software cost would have been dwarfed by hardware cost when you have labs of 30+ computers, let alone trying to persuade a Windows-oriented ICT department to support Macs in any way, shape or form).
  - dfee 6y ago
    Tough (sincerely), and congrats on finding a gig that rewards you daily with passion and enthusiasm. But at the same time, I have little sympathy for people who hate Apple for a move like this - regardless of the optics and whether it was intentional. No one has to use a Mac, but frankly, there’s a reason why the creative crowd does. And, it’s beyond just brand image. They have a clear and complete vision for their software (which yes, breaks at the edges), but overall provides the best foundation for the markets they cater to. Apple doesn’t want to be hamstrung by people running Windows on shoddy devices for premium software and thus exited that market. They also don’t want to make software for shoddy Android devices, so are conservative where they do. It’s not an attack on users, but a refocus on the golden path.
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      Apple buying a company and axing their products for other platforms is all too common and has nothing to do with "people running Windows on shoddy devices". They kill all the projects for other platforms, strengthen theirs, and hurt users in the process. It's that simple.
      - wlesieutre 6y ago
        More recently, Dark Sky is in the process of being killed for Android
      - dfee 6y ago
        > has nothing to do with "people running Windows on shoddy devices". You don't really believe that. This is specifically the reason Microsoft introduce their flagship device: the Surface Pro... and Google introduce theirs: the Pixel. These companies don't suck, but their licensing model causes frustrations for even them!
      - ElFitz 6y ago
        It's more like... why would they support other platforms? They're moving to services now, but they've always mostly been a hardware shop. The software was "just" a "feature".
- smcphile 6y ago
  > I mean, that seems like a pretty shitty thing to do to an existing userbase. I understand, but realistically how could Apple have done otherwise without creating existential problems for itself? In a nutshell, the marketing stance of Apple has always been, "Our products are the best, and they're all designed to work well together, so use them exclusively and you'll be good." That's the basic value proposition of Apple (whether or not you agree). Supporting a Windows version of Logic would have undetermined the core value proposition and strategy of Apple. Apple, for better or worse, offers an integrated solution, using both hardware and software that it controls. One advantage of Apple's integrated, focused approach is that it potentially allows for better and less costly quality control and testing than supporting every OS and every piece of hardware on the market.
- hokumguru 6y ago
  > I mean, that seems like a pretty shitty thing to do to an existing userbase. So... DarkSky for Android?
pier25 6y ago
Apple could buy all DAW companies (Steinberg, Ableton, etc) for peanuts and destroy music production on Windows if they wanted. Heck they could even buy Adobe without much effort and make it mac exclusive too. They don't do it probably because that would be considered a below the belt move and not worth the trouble since the mac is only 10% of its revenue.
- giancarlostoro 6y ago
  They would probably be sued for being anti competitive if they bought out all the DAW companies and did that.
  - londons_explore 6y ago
    Apple is not in a monopoly position, so it's a perfectly legal move. As long as they didn't become a monopoly in any specific creative field, it would be fine too.
    - bashinator 6y ago
      Well, that's exactly what we're talking about, no? Buying out all the DAW software houses would give Apple a de facto monopoly in digital audio production.
    - philwelch 6y ago
      Acquiring all of your competitors is a good way to become a monopoly.
      - dvtrn 6y ago
        In what arena does Adobe compete with Apple though?
        philwelch 6y ago
        > Apple could buy all DAW companies (Steinberg, Ableton, etc) for peanuts and destroy music production on Windows if they wanted. That constitutes monopoly and anti-competitive business practices.

by jasode 6y ago

timthorn 6y ago

Not only that - the next version of Logic was due imminently, with the engineering work done. It was at that moment that I grew a strong dislike of Apple, having been a real cheerleader for most of the Macintosh's existence.

crazygringo 6y ago

Oh wow, I didn't know that. I mean, that seems like a pretty shitty thing to do to an existing userbase. I guess they could, but risk generating a lot of ill will. I'm curious how discontinuing Logic was received. Seems very risky.

WalterSear 6y ago
It was clear back then that they didn't want Logic in order to improve it, as being evidenced here by with this hodgepodge of 'catchup' features. Tbh, I'm surprised they hadn't dropped the product already.
djaychela 6y ago
Music Tech teacher here... when it was discontinued, I was working (part time) in a couple of schools who used Logic on PCs, as well as working for a few people who used it in their own studios. In the case of one of the schools and a number of the clients, I was the one who broke the news to them - generally greeted by disbelief initially, and then once they had checked up on it, absolute fury. If the intention was to get people to buy Macs so they could keep running Logic, in most cases it backfired spectacularly, and made life-long Apple enemies of those users - many of which either stuck with their old version of Logic for a number of years, or who jumped ship to Cubase (in the case of the schools, software cost would have been dwarfed by hardware cost when you have labs of 30+ computers, let alone trying to persuade a Windows-oriented ICT department to support Macs in any way, shape or form).
- dfee 6y ago
  Tough (sincerely), and congrats on finding a gig that rewards you daily with passion and enthusiasm. But at the same time, I have little sympathy for people who hate Apple for a move like this - regardless of the optics and whether it was intentional. No one has to use a Mac, but frankly, there’s a reason why the creative crowd does. And, it’s beyond just brand image. They have a clear and complete vision for their software (which yes, breaks at the edges), but overall provides the best foundation for the markets they cater to. Apple doesn’t want to be hamstrung by people running Windows on shoddy devices for premium software and thus exited that market. They also don’t want to make software for shoddy Android devices, so are conservative where they do. It’s not an attack on users, but a refocus on the golden path.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    Apple buying a company and axing their products for other platforms is all too common and has nothing to do with "people running Windows on shoddy devices". They kill all the projects for other platforms, strengthen theirs, and hurt users in the process. It's that simple.
    - wlesieutre 6y ago
      More recently, Dark Sky is in the process of being killed for Android
    - dfee 6y ago
      > has nothing to do with "people running Windows on shoddy devices". You don't really believe that. This is specifically the reason Microsoft introduce their flagship device: the Surface Pro... and Google introduce theirs: the Pixel. These companies don't suck, but their licensing model causes frustrations for even them!
    - ElFitz 6y ago
      It's more like... why would they support other platforms? They're moving to services now, but they've always mostly been a hardware shop. The software was "just" a "feature".
smcphile 6y ago
> I mean, that seems like a pretty shitty thing to do to an existing userbase. I understand, but realistically how could Apple have done otherwise without creating existential problems for itself? In a nutshell, the marketing stance of Apple has always been, "Our products are the best, and they're all designed to work well together, so use them exclusively and you'll be good." That's the basic value proposition of Apple (whether or not you agree). Supporting a Windows version of Logic would have undetermined the core value proposition and strategy of Apple. Apple, for better or worse, offers an integrated solution, using both hardware and software that it controls. One advantage of Apple's integrated, focused approach is that it potentially allows for better and less costly quality control and testing than supporting every OS and every piece of hardware on the market.
hokumguru 6y ago
> I mean, that seems like a pretty shitty thing to do to an existing userbase. So... DarkSky for Android?

pier25 6y ago

Apple could buy all DAW companies (Steinberg, Ableton, etc) for peanuts and destroy music production on Windows if they wanted. Heck they could even buy Adobe without much effort and make it mac exclusive too. They don't do it probably because that would be considered a below the belt move and not worth the trouble since the mac is only 10% of its revenue.

giancarlostoro 6y ago
They would probably be sued for being anti competitive if they bought out all the DAW companies and did that.
- londons_explore 6y ago
  Apple is not in a monopoly position, so it's a perfectly legal move. As long as they didn't become a monopoly in any specific creative field, it would be fine too.
  - bashinator 6y ago
    Well, that's exactly what we're talking about, no? Buying out all the DAW software houses would give Apple a de facto monopoly in digital audio production.
  - philwelch 6y ago
    Acquiring all of your competitors is a good way to become a monopoly.
    - dvtrn 6y ago
      In what arena does Adobe compete with Apple though?
      - philwelch 6y ago
        > Apple could buy all DAW companies (Steinberg, Ableton, etc) for peanuts and destroy music production on Windows if they wanted. That constitutes monopoly and anti-competitive business practices.