Maya for Mac
 

Hello all

I've been asked by my boss to check the option of moving all post production department to Apple computers.
For now we are using PC for editing, 3D (Maya) and AE.
My question to the forum is how different Maya on Mac and on PC platform, is there any different at all ?
We're doing basic+ modeling and a bit of Glass/Metal textures, as 3D elements for promos on AE.
Is there any problems we need to consider ?

Thanx a lot
Erez

As far as I am aware now that Mac has gone Intel, there will be no reasons for any difference.

I think even prior to that the PC, MAC and Linux versions are all completely the same. Same file types and they can be opened by each version. IF I am wrong tell me, I have been reliably informed that they are all the same

For the most part, they function the same. There are only a couple of things to keep in mind:

1) Maya plug-ins are platform-specific. If you use any 3rd party and/or custom plug-ins, they must be compiled specifically to work in the Mac version of Maya.

2) A universal binary version of Maya has not been released for the current Intel Macs. The current version will run ok on the Intel Macs, but it won't be as fast as it could be. Rumors have it that the next release of Maya will be Universal. No confirmation yet.

Other than that, Maya is the same on all platforms. Sounds like for what you want to do, you should have no problems switching to the Mac version of Maya.

yes that it true, all macs have gone to intel... dont know why though. About maya on macs, from what i know there isnt really a difference at all. id rather have maya on a mac personally, the icons look better :P and most animators which i know really love maya on mac rather than pc ... hope that helped abit =]

cheers, marlon

thanx all
 

We checked Maya and after effect and we're ready to move to Mac



Thanx again
Erez

cool, i reckon you made the right move buddy. :)

cheers

Cos they fell out with the company making the Power PC processors as they were more interested in making new ones for the Next gen consoles rarther than for apple... Thats what I heard

That is exactly right gster, and the Company was...

http://cs.bc.edu/files/IBMlogo.jpg

LOL, I couldent remember the name of the company, I knew it was a big "PC" company

hey guys, what do you mean by that? can you explain to me in better terms... sorry i cant understand that, ived got a migrane at the moment and its really kicking in.

Well from what I can gather, As PC processors were getting faster with dual core etc etc, the Power PC processors in the G4's (or whatever the ones were prior to going to intel) were getting a bit outdated in speed terms compared to the new processors avialable on a PC platform, so apple put pressure on IBM to make a better RISC chips for the next gen Macs, but IBM were putting more research into Next Gen console (Xbox 360, PS3 etc) as it would generate them more money as they would be more demand for these than for Mac's, so they had a falling out over it as it wasnt in the best intrest of apple (as they would have to wait longer for a new chip to compete against PC chips).

So Apple went to intel (or visa versa) as there was a gap in the market for a new chip supplier for apple and as intel didnt have the rights to the power PC chip format they went with PC platform (think its X86) for the new mac's, with apple changing their opertating system to run on the X86 platform, hence why they can run windows too (via bootcamp), I even saw on the web a Dell laptop running Apple OSX (with some tinkering) so that basicly shows that they are the same now. You could say windows won as they supported X86 and apple went down the RISC route right at the start of the company, but then again Microsoft might be worried as Apple could release a version of OSX that can run on any PC and use PC software....

Only time will tell whats going to happen

I could not agree more gster, I for one am a big fan of MS and Windows, but I would jump ship to Mac OSX if I knew all my software would work and I didnt need to upgrade/change any hardware. Mac is hust more simlified with less running in the back end. This is the main reason I would not go to Vista. Its too heavy and requires too much RAM to run off of and a really decent graphics card. IMHO its not worth it and I have been supporting MS apps n os's for 11 yrs.

I remember that the whole thing about Apple going x86 was about IBM's inability to make the PowerPC 970 (G5 in Apple's designation) run at cool tempretures nessacary for use in notebooks.

Which was due to IBM not putting enough reaseach into the thing that apple wanted in the first place.

Me too, I aint gonna go Vista, I dont want to share my vid's pic's etc in a million ways, for the expence of hardware, I just want a OS to do the job, same as you mate.

I would jump to a mac os IF i knew that all my software would work, maybe this it where apple have the key????

Pull microsofts rug from under them?