Jump to content


Photo

Fusion On Mac Osx?


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 yoni-cohen

yoni-cohen

    Member Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts

Posted 04 January 2014 - 06:10 PM

I was just wondering, Eyeon had a fusion for linux port and OSx should be a similiar OS, wouldn't it be easy to port it to OSx too?

#2 ChadCapeland

ChadCapeland

    Flying Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,975 posts

Posted 05 January 2014 - 06:51 PM

Not all that similar, no.

However the bigger issue is that the customer base for OSX isn't that big, and it's shrinking. OSX is like a dozen years old and has fewer active installs than Windows 8 does. What would be harder, Eyeon selling one copy of Fusion to 1% of OSX users or .1% of Windows users? Because the latter would require no more development effort, and would yield >25% higher gross income.

If Apple was serious about workstations or even x86 in general, it might be worth it, but it is being phased out.

#3 jolly_rodger

jolly_rodger

    Advanced Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 06 January 2014 - 03:11 AM

How to run Eyeon Fusion in Mac OS X



#4 PeKi7i

PeKi7i

    Flying Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 06 January 2014 - 05:00 AM

On Android ? :)

#5 leif3d

leif3d

    Flying Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 554 posts

Posted 06 January 2014 - 01:03 PM

Not all that similar, no.

However the bigger issue is that the customer base for OSX isn't that big, and it's shrinking. OSX is like a dozen years old and has fewer active installs than Windows 8 does. What would be harder, Eyeon selling one copy of Fusion to 1% of OSX users or .1% of Windows users? Because the latter would require no more development effort, and would yield >25% higher gross income.

If Apple was serious about workstations or even x86 in general, it might be worth it, but it is being phased out.


I've heard several people say this, but I've never understood it.
The only reason our company doesn't have more Fusion licenses is because there is no OSX version. Regular customer base numbers for OS's don't apply to our industry. You need to look at what studios are using, not the general public, unless Eyeon is trying to sell Fusion to the average person...

Every major successful software has multiple OS installs, but Eyeon's solution is to use Wine on Linux or parallels for OSX, neither of which is an option for us.
We have Linux, Windows and a heck of a lot of Macs...I would love to buy more licenses, but I can't. How is that for a number?

#6 ChadCapeland

ChadCapeland

    Flying Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,975 posts

Posted 06 January 2014 - 01:30 PM

What if it was inverted Shake pricing? $2000 on Windows, but $10000 on OSX. Would you buy then? Because the cost vs sales would require that the small number of OSX users who would buy it (and require support for it) would have to pay for all that work. I don't think an OSX port has been neglected, I think Eyeon did the math on the business case for it and it came up badly.

ADSK not too long ago (10.8 timeframe) pulled 3ds max for OSX for business reasons. I'm not privy to the exact reason, but I'm told it was because of conflicts with the Mac App Store, not because there was any technical issue (it was in beta). There simply isn't a lot of momentum from developers moving toward OSX, they're mostly just continuing to support existing users.

- Chad

#7 yoni-cohen

yoni-cohen

    Member Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts

Posted 06 January 2014 - 02:23 PM

Max is too heavily tied to windows from the ground up and would require too big of a change, my question was simply trying to understand the dificulties of this port since it was done to linux already and it would look great when compared to Nuke.

some of the questions are not about proftability and more towards marketing or who are you up against.

I love max, I started using mac a year ago and fell in love with it and I find a lot of benefits in it over windows but I can't move the studio to macs since 3dsmax and fusion can't handle it. we did however consider it for the compositing department.

#8 pingking

pingking

    Flying Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 893 posts

Posted 06 January 2014 - 02:59 PM

fusion is also very heavy connected to windows code and libaries. thats one reason you need for the linux version the special exeon version of WINE. the linux version is a native linux build and runs not in emulation, but it needs some of the windows functions coming through WINE.

#9 ChadCapeland

ChadCapeland

    Flying Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,975 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 08:10 PM

Max is too heavily tied to windows from the ground up and would require too big of a change, my question was simply trying to understand the dificulties of this port since it was done to linux already and it would look great when compared to Nuke.


Except that max WAS running on OSX. ADSK had a team doing the port and they had a huge amount of the work done. While the work

some of the questions are not about proftability and more towards marketing or who are you up against.


Wha? OF COURSE it's about profitability. That's the ONLY reason why a company, any company, would want to have an OSX port of their software. If they didn't care about profitability and only about marketing success, Eyeon would pay it's users to use their software.

I love max, I started using mac a year ago and fell in love with it and I find a lot of benefits in it over windows but I can't move the studio to macs since 3dsmax and fusion can't handle it. we did however consider it for the compositing department.


Considering the newest, greatest, top-of-the-linest mac only supports 64GB of RAM, I wouldn't want that as a platform for your compositing systems.

#10 leif3d

leif3d

    Flying Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 554 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 11:35 AM

What if it was inverted Shake pricing? $2000 on Windows, but $10000 on OSX. Would you buy then? Because the cost vs sales would require that the small number of OSX users who would buy it (and require support for it) would have to pay for all that work. I don't think an OSX port has been neglected, I think Eyeon did the math on the business case for it and it came up badly.

ADSK not too long ago (10.8 timeframe) pulled 3ds max for OSX for business reasons. I'm not privy to the exact reason, but I'm told it was because of conflicts with the Mac App Store, not because there was any technical issue (it was in beta). There simply isn't a lot of momentum from developers moving toward OSX, they're mostly just continuing to support existing users.

- Chad


I understand what you are saying Chad, but Fusion penetration in the US is extremely small. Assuming all logic is true, the results of market share are clear.
Apple has an increasing user base for OSX in the US and most motion graphic studios use OSX. Since Fusion is targeting a high-end compositor market but also has a great motion graphics toolkit, many studios would use it, especially when you consider that the other options are 4k (Nuke), 3.5k (Smoke) or 100k (Flame).

It's sad that such a powerful software has such limited marketability and in turn so little jobs out there for Fusion artists. The current formula can't be so great, you have to admit...

#11 Tilt

Tilt

    Flying Pig

  • Adv Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,137 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 02:17 PM

I think Generation being Windows-only is also detrimemtal. The company I'm working at has Hiero on Linux and it's unstable but there wasn't even the possibility to go with something else.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users