He said, "We don't collaborate at Apple because of the (perceived) risk of leaks. None of our tools are built for collaboration". Apple is famously closed about information sharing, to the point where on some floors every office requires its own badge, and sometimes even the cabinets within.
So it doesn't surprise me that their video editing tools are designed for a single user at a time.
Edit: This happened about six years ago, they have since added some collaboration tools, however it's more about the attitude at Apple in general and why their own tools lag on collaboration.
Edit 2: After the replies I thought I was going crazy. I actually checked my message history and found the discussion. I knew this happened pre-COVID, but it was actually in 2013, 12 years ago. I didn't think it was that long ago.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.
I love reading articles that purport to tell the public how things at Apple work. They're almost always laughably full of shit.
That's the main issue. But also this happened about six years ago.
>
> A Mac with macOS 14.0 or later and Keynote 14.3 or later
>
> An iPhone with iOS 17.0 or later and Keynote 14.3 or later
>
> An iPad with iPadOS 17.0 or later and Keynote 14.3 or later
Those OSes were released around June of 2023, so a little over a year?
Back in the day Keynote files would just be passed around via a shared server so you and the people you were collaborating with could make and merge changes between them, eg I’d do one part of a presentation, Rick would do another part, and we’d copy our slides out of and paste them into each others’ decks to get a complete version for rehearsing with. If we had notes for each other, we’d give each other the notes out of hand rather than just directly change each others’ slides.
There’s a lot of mythology that people just make up about how secrecy works at Apple. It’s mostly sensible.
The severed floor.
That sentence, by itself, is more or less correct (from my 26 years at Apple). However, it suggests/implies things that are not correct.
1) In case you got the impression: Apple certainly does not design software to be non-collaborative simply because it would enable sharing/leaking when used within Apple. I would say that Apple has been focused since Day 1 on a mindset where one-computer equals one-user. The mindset was that way really until Jobs was fired, discovered UNIX, and then returned with Log In and Permissions. To this day though I think collaboration is often an afterthought.
So too do they seem to be focused on the singular creative. I suspect Google's push into Web-based (and collaborative) productivity apps (Google Docs, etc.) forced Apple's hand in that department — forced Apple to push collaborative features in their productivity suite.
2) Of course Apple collaborates internally. But to be sure it is based on need-to-know. No one on the hardware team is going to give an open preso in an Apple lunchroom on their hardware roadmap. But you can bet there are private meetings with leads from the Kernel Team on that very roadmap.
That internal secrecy, where engineers from different teams could no longer just hang out in the cafeteria and chat about what they were working on went away when Jobs came back. It probably goes without saying it was rigorously enforced when the iPhone was a twinkle in Apple's eye.
The internal secrecy was sold to employees as preserving the "surprise and delight" when a product is finally unveiled but at the same time, as Apple moved to the top of the S&P500, there were a lot of outsiders that very definitely wanted to know Apple's plans.
3) Lastly, yes, plenty of floors and wings of buildings are accessible only with those with the correct badge permissions. I could not, for example, as an engineer badge in to the Design floor.
Individual cabinets needing badge access? I have no idea about that. I am aware of employees hanging black curtains in their office windows when secret hardware would come out of their (key-locked) drawers. (On a floor that is locked down to only those disclosed, obviously the black curtains become unnecessary.)
My badge only worked where I had explicitly been given access, and desks were to be kept clear and all prototypes or hardware had to be locked in drawers and/or covered with black cloths. Almost every door was a blind door with a second door inside, so that if the outer one opened, it was not possible to see into the inner space.
Both are designed to replicate the same functionality as Concurrence and Quantrix (itself a clone of Lotus Improv) both by Lighthouse Design, who made lots of apps for NeXTSTEP and were purchased by Sun.
Steve Jobs used Concurrence on a ThinkPad and also a Toshiba laptop to make presentations prior to Keynote (which I believe was created internally for him at first) even while back at Apple.
Real-time collaboration was added in Keynote 7.0 released in Sept 2016.
https://www.macworld.com/article/228811/keynote-pages-and-nu...
The editors of Severance are actually using Avid. For music composition they're using Albeton. Neither are Apple products. The remote desktop product they're using is Jump Desktop.
While the show is an Apple TV+ show, and they happen to use to Macs in the process, this has shockingly little to do with Apple tools or products.
I know some people will say this is because of age. But I want to suggest I often thought of COVID years 2019 to 2023s as a single year / event. For reasons I cant quite fathom. So when I think of 2015 it would only be like a 2023-2019, 2018, 2017, 2016. So around 4-5 years ago.
Video is a harder game due to the processing and data requirements, but I know that there are a lot of startups trying to make it collaborative first. I’m really excited for that to be the default.
Keynote works just fine with multiple simultaneous users. I work at Apple (for now) and do it all the time with managers/EPMs etc.
You can even read any accounts of famous shipped products to back up that cross functional collaboration has been their culture for many decades. Jobs mentioned it many times, and many articles have been written about it.
Additionally keynote (and the entire iWorks suite) has had collaborative editing for years now.
I suspect your friend is likely misinformed or not reliable?
I’m reminded of my friend in grade school that had “an uncle that worked at Nintendo”.
Not saying he didn’t, but just because someone works there doesn’t mean they know what’s going on.
> We are seeking an experienced Software Architect specialized in source control systems to join our dynamic team. The ideal candidate will have expertise in designing, implementing, and managing systems like GitHub, GitLab, Perforce, Bitbucket, and Artifactory.
Many of which take time to be migrated into the mothership.
It was quite common to have remote desktop cards on high end machines so that you could hide them away somewhere quiet. The edit stations/Flame/Baselite machines all hada fucktonne of 15k sas drives in them, so were really noisy.
You couldn't invite a director to see what you were doing, when all you can hear is disk/fan whine.
They were quite expensive because they needed to be able to encode and send 2k video in decent bitdepth (ie not 420, but 444), and low latency. Worse still they needed to be calibrateable so that you could make sure that the colour you saw was the colour on the other end.
Alas, I can't remember what they are called, thankfully, because they are twats to manage.
Every time I've seen higher end workstations, the actual workstation itself was always in a separate room, and there's been some kind of remote KVM solution used. The workstation was always very noisy and generated a lot of heat. It's also just... a lot of money to shove under a desk where people kick it all afternoon.
https://www.rackmountsolutions.net/24u-ucoustic-soundproof-s...
Teradici came on the scene and started running everything over IP. Hardware at first (old EVGA pyramids were everywhere) where you had to route the video out into a custom card that then put out the signal via IP.
Now it's all software with the leaders being teradici (merged with HP anywhere which came from IBM), nicedcv (Amazon), parsec, and a few others.
The big advantage in content production over something like vcn/rdp was color fidelity, local cursor termination, and support for hardware like Wacom tablets. You can even do 7.1 audio and multiple monitors. Turns out when you are an artist having a local like feel is incredibly important. 60fps is 16ms per frame. So even with virtual workstations on AWS you want to deploy them in a region that is relatively close to the end user.
So there are a couple of options, depending on the hardware. If it kicked out HD-SDI you could just patch the display into the coax in the building and have done with it.
But that only worked if you were in the same building and your machine kicked out HD-SDI
Most machines either shat out dual-link DVI or worse, some custom shit. Getting a cable that can reliably transport dual-link DVI >10 meters was difficult and expensive. Worse still, it had a habit of dropping back to single link, or some other failure mode that was everso annoying to debug. More over, 10 meters often isn't far enough. Especially if the room had a projector (so might be >5m long throw.)
Now, thats the simple case. The hard case is multi-building. Say, you have an operator working in london, and the director in new york, you want to give them the highest quality picture possible. The only way to do that at the time was with one of these cards, or some nasty SDI-hardware h264 transcoder (hugely expensive at the time)
I really wish I could remember what they were called. They appear to have fallen out of favour.
Now, you'd just use cynesync, as you're laptop can encode video in real time now (https://www.backlight.co/product/cinesync) Also, rumour has it that the wolverene movie was leaked because a producer got coked up and left an unencypted laptop on a plane, rather than using cynesync to show an edit to someone important. Alas I can't verify that.
There are a slew of HDMI extension systems, some that even use ethernet with hardware encoding/decoding. Grandparent commenter hasn't worked in the industry in at least a decade if they're talking about DVI.
> Geoffrey Richman reviews season two finale footage. In his at-home edit bay (not pictured), he works on iMac, which remotes into a separate Mac mini that runs Avid from a post-production facility in Manhattan’s West Village.
Yeah. That would be a horrible experience.
Had sony bothered to follow it's own rules it wouldn't have been hacked and had all its data leaked in 2014.....
But to answer the question, we had a shit tonne of networking, so as far as I'm aware it was just on the vanilla network. Might have been a seperate VLAN though.
I wanted to be a compositor, but failed the rotoscoping test at the company I was working at. So I fell back on my technical skills, and became an infra engineer. I left VFX in about 2015, and sadly no matter how much I want to go back, I don't see much of a future in it. GenAI is really going to do a number on it.
I just wish it didn't require an internet connection for authentication
I'm kinda surprised you've managed to be on HN for 5 years and never come across the concept of a "LAN" or "VPN" before, but I guess you're one of today's lucky 10000. To the first, sometimes you have machines (or VMs) local to your own network but in another physical location that you'd like to be able to access from your own system. It's a fairly significant use case, and one where no internet connection is involved whatsoever. For example it's generally desirable to locate powerful (and in turn generally loud) servers and associated gear (including environmental control, redundant power etc) in physically isolated locations from where the humans are working for noise reasons if nothing else, though security and efficiency are important as well. While it's possible to pipe raw video over IP, a quality remote desktop solution will generally be more flexible/scalable and doesn't require special (expensive) extra hardware and potentially additional fiber.
And for systems located on other LANs remote from your own, you can use a VPN to link them securely as if they had a direct physical (though higher latency/more jittery) link, again avoiding any exposure to the public net. That then reduces to the above. In both cases it's desirable to have zero unnecessary 3rd party dependencies.
I also don't buy the author's rationale for remote editing; it's oddly archaic: "high-end video production is quite storage-intensive, which is why your favorite YouTuber constantly talks about their editing rigs and network-attached storage. By putting this stuff offsite, they can put all this data on a real server."
Storage is cheap now, and desktop computers are more than powerful enough for any video editing. Any supposed advantage of remote "real servers" is going to be squandered by having to send everything over the Internet. The primary benefit of remote editing (and the much-hyped "camera to cloud") is fast turnaround, which you need for stuff like reality TV and news. But a dramatic series like Severance?
It is pretty baffling that Apple would create a PR vehicle that impugns its products like this. It would be better to say nothing. After Apple acquired Shake, they splashed Lord of the Rings, King Kong, and other major tentpoles on the Apple homepage at every opportunity... of course not mentioning that Weta was rendering those movies on hundreds of Linux servers instead of Macs. But at least Shake was the same product across all platforms, and it really was the primary effects tool on all those movies.
"they do not mention the use of Jump Desktop, which seems like a missed opportunity to promote a small-scale Mac developer. C’mon Apple, do better.)
Oh boy, this is just a minor infraction in Apple's history of disrespect toward developers. They do this, and worse, to major development partners too. I'm not going to name names, but after one such partner funded the acquisition of material on its own equipment and that material was used in a major product keynote... Apple not only neglected to credit or even mention that partner, but proceeded to show the name of a totally uninvolved competitor in its first slide afterward. The level of betrayal there was shocking.
Even today it's not close to practical to have an entire episode's worth of raw footage (of which there'll be many many takes, many many angles) entirely on an editor's workstation.
The surprising aspect is that they don't use proxies for editing rather than remote desktop.
In my experience it is way easier to scale storage bandwidth than compute, atleast locally.
There has been times where I've been able to cut a shoot from the raw files, and this has beeen corroborated by other editors, beforr proxies were available.
So it took less time to cut and submit for review than to actually generate the proxy media.
Sure if your workflow had a decent gap between shooting and post then generating proxies is trivial but sometimes a little more storage and memory bandwidth goes a very long way.
Who says they're not using proxies and remote desktop?
Yes, attaching many terabytes of video is cheap now.
But scrubbing through that high res raw video isnt (just) size intensive. Its throughput intensive. Size : throughput :: energy density : power density. You can get pretty good all SSD NAS but using a 40Gbps (5GBps, minus overhead) Thunderbolt 4 is still gonna be ok but not stellar. A single desktop SSD can triple that!
I can fully see the desire to remote stream. Being able to AV1 on the fly encode to your local editing station, or even 265, at reduced quality, while still having the full bit depth available for editing sounds divine.
You're saying Thunderbolt 4 is going to struggle with something, and then touting a desktop SSD as "tripling" TB 4 throughput... but finally declaring that "remote streaming" is somehow better than both of those?
What an absolute crock.
The new FCP could have righted many wrongs, but Apple turned its development over to people who didn't even understand industry-standard terms... and who rejected input from experts Apple had hired years earlier. But that's Apple's standard behavior. They just don't learn.
I'm struggling to see any of this, frankly. Of course apple uses non-apple software. It'd be pretty weird if they didn't.
All this marketing bullshit reinforces the value of refusing to engage with marketing. What a massive waste of time and effort for all societies and cultures involved.
It's a clever way to have your media centralized and yet have access to editors all over the world.
And a modern AVID system does not struggle with a few editors accessing the same footage.
First of all it's usually a proxy format and Secondly the storage can deliver a combined 800MB pr box sustained for x number of editors at the same time.
Yes I avid feel free to ask.
AVID hasn't been at the forefront of video editing since the Avid/1 / ABVB days. They sell a reasonably usable program with horrible hardware (since Meridien hardware - it's good they finally let us use other hardware such as BlackMagic), but never truly fix large problems. People therefore stay on a specific version of the software for ages, because everyone is scared of new and different bugs.
AVID's shared media offerings are tenfold the cost of other storage options simply because they have a flag on the mounted volumes that tells Media Composer to allow project and media sharing. "800MB pr box sustained" means nothing because anyone can do that easily with commodity hardware.
In other words, AVID is milking their cash cow and they really don't innovate or even try to offer a good product.
Apple, on the other hand, destroyed their professional editing products, then replaced them with decent tools, but ones that are worlds different. Many people have mixed feelings about this. On the other hand, if you want to edit 8K ProRes, Final Cut Pro makes it simple on any ARM-based Mac.
It's their dependency on Blackmagic that's been there biggest problem the past 5 years.
Meridian was light years ahead of the competition. The firewire based adrenaline sucked.
And you won't find anyone complaining about their DX series just to bad they dropped that.
And your really not understanding the way avid nexis works if you think it's just a flag
The way you develop & manage the proxies appears to be the biggest part of the battle in making things go fast. There's no reason for editor workstations to be operating with the full res native material unless theres a targeted reason to do so.
And I mean that in a completely positive "it's awesome" way. Just... not the problems anyone else should be facing.
With Covid remote access became the norm and the online/proxy workflow more or less died. Avid still has a working version (better than the original) but it's widely used.
Proxies are used for several reasons, expensive storage, heavy codecs at high bitrates or multicams.
They are typically avoided whenever you can because the online part of a proxy based workflow can be a challenge. And especially if you have tight deadlines you want all the variables out of the way.
- Composer/Nexis all hosted on Cloud (AWS): fine, but pricy and the Nexis experience is meh
- Composer hosted Cloud/Nexis hosted on Prem: actually works well, but you need to have a direct-connect to AWS (the network can be pricey)
- Composer on on-premise VDI/Nexis hosted on Prem: works really well, and I have a bias towards this instead of fully in cloud for not only security reasons since the TCO is less
- Composer Cloud (or whatever they call it today - used to Composer Sphere): this is a setup where instead you stream real-time proxy to the Composer from MediaCentral. You can download hi-res media if you need to. It works ok, but it more suited for News workflows. Security is a thing with this solution.
- Adobe/OpenDrives on AWS: I mention this, because we do this too. This has all sorts of things to talk about, and is pretty good, but, again, you gotta know what you are doing.
For the on-premise ones, VMWare is our Hypervisor of choice, and, yup, we are looking for other options. And we have all the usual IT problems: domain management, updates, roaming desktops, etc.
If you are looking for 3rd-monitor image viewing (like in the old days with hardware), you can swing NDI or 2110. NDI is ok, and for 2110 you need a network and router to handle it.
If you have time to expand on the "bandwith and latency thing", I'd love to hear more. Even a "you need to be geographically within X miles of the instance" ballpark figure would be wonderful to know.
It worked.. Kind a
One of the main reasons it's used in larger post houses is the hardware and software support that is world wide with people on site if needed.
My home internet is a fiber gigabit 3g/3g up/down. Tucked away under the staircase is where my fiber ONT terminates and it is my server room. I have half a dozen boxes running various things. 4 symmetric 2012 i7 mac minis running linux KVM, and hosting various critical services - pihole, home automation, Homekit Secure Video etc.
Then there a giant former gaming PC with 7 HDD bays running the entire storage backend for a whole load of GoPro/Osmo/Insta360 videos I capture. Rclone to Google Photos for back-up. I don't edit any videos. Just there to capture memories so I can at some point when AI tools get good enough just have it generate clips. Same box runs my plex server with HW transcoding.
Then there is the actual gaming PC, a mini-ITX running steam remote play. Has power, a network cable and a fake HDMI dongle that emulates a monitor to trick the GPU into thinking something is actually plugged in.
Basically everything I do with desktop PCs at home is via some sort of remote interface.
Remote gaming is probably the most demanding of all of these. Low-latency HW-accelerated solutions eg: Parsec / steam-link are incredible technologies.
I carry an AppleTV + PS5 controllers to friends' houses and play the latest games across the internet.
Be honest—you're just playing Factorio
You can just follow that thread no write up needed tbh
Moonlight works great (over ethernet at least) locally though.
iPhones already do this today. I'm often surprised how well made they are
The extent of my 'cloud' involvement with apple is the operating system software update mechanism and having an account to download Xcode, so that I can install compiler + macports on a new machine.
I’m fairly sure they don’t use iCloud which is why some of that stuff is still less than desirable.
We can probably assume that Microsoft uses some kind of Exchange set up and Google will use a version of Gmail.
Whenever I meet with people from Apple, it’s over WebEx.
I heard a rumor that they use some Oracle enterprise groupware, which is presumably https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Beehive
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/02/apple-will-spend-more...
Opening a New Manufacturing Facility in Houston
As part of its new U.S. investments, Apple will work with manufacturing partners to begin production of servers in Houston later this year. A 250,000-square-foot server manufacturing facility, slated to open in 2026, will create thousands of jobs.
Previously manufactured outside the U.S., the servers that will soon be assembled in Houston play a key role in powering Apple Intelligence, and are the foundation of Private Cloud Compute, which combines powerful AI processing with the most advanced security architecture ever deployed at scale for AI cloud computing. The servers bring together years of R&D by Apple engineers, and deliver the industry-leading security and performance of Apple silicon to the data center.
Sometimes I play Civilization through an RDP connection to my desktop box below my desk over a dedicated ethernet connection and that's bad enough. Trying to do full video editing, with critical concerns over every pixel, color and timing....oof!
[1] - as they note, you can see him doing it over the remote connection and it looks hurky-jerk disastrous.
They're still editing on a Mac, just remotely, which is how you know that this choice is not a compromise caused by the Apple hardware ecosystem.
Linus Tech Tips uses Parsec too since at least 2020 for their remote employees for video editing.
Final Cut Server:
Even DVR hasn't been able to compete even though it's probably the industry standard for grading.
They have redundancy and backups.
> Unless the insurance is anti-piracy insurance?
This is a big part of it, actually. Content that leaks prior to launch can reduce revenues significantly. Both from lost viewership due to people already having seen it, and from negative reviews of the unfinished early edits. Many movies change significantly for the better from early cuts.
Lucifer, Minority Report, Blindspot, and Carmichael were all leaked, and those shows were on different networks, which means it was likely a third-party company that was doing effects in post. I don't recall if it was ever sussed out what exactly happened and now they all got leaked, but it definitely made the industry a bit warier.
Most studios are hyper paranoid about their movie or TV show getting leaked.
Undeterred by this ominous warning, I proceeded to create the git repo anyway and my computer immediately exploded. I have since learned that this was actually the best possible outcome of this reckless action.
>...please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
>Please don't use HN primarily for promotion. It's ok to post your own stuff part of the time, but the primary use of the site should be for curiosity.
<title>Why Apple’s Severance Gets Edited Over Remote Desktop Software</title>
<h1>Severed Edits</h1>
https://support.apple.com/guide/final-cut-pro/create-optimiz...
Which is how I’m editing stuff on an 8Gb original M1 Mac Mini and it just works.
Jump is excellent, BTW.
The article seems confused though. They say they are confused if Macs are being used to edit the show, but since the editors are remoting from one Mac to another it seems unambiguous.
The flavor of both the local machine and remote machine makes a difference. The OS of the machine you're remoting to makes the biggest difference, but since different OS's have their own ways of handling input devices, the local machine's OS is significant too. Every combo has its quirks, but I find Mac to Mac over Jump to be good.
I think some kind of KVM over IP solution would probably be what I need so I can put the workstation in another room.
The beauty of kvm over ip, though, is that it can work without any software whatsoever being installed on the client. You plug in a usb and video cable and from the client's perspective, it's the same as if you directly plugged in a mouse, keyboard and monitor. But if you can install software on the client (or enable the existing software, as in the case of Windows RDP), you can typically do better.
I think that's why a lot of tech companies now give their employees Apple laptops (they are easy for employees to self-support) but use everything but Apple in the data centers.
These days I think do something very similar to your friend. I pack an external keyboard and mouse I like, and a chromecast (just in case) and that's it. Not packing a big screen and a battery is just a huge bonus.
Isn't the editing software on Macs? Can't see what point is being made here.
Put another way, if Stiller's team was building this for Amazon or Netflix, would that be a Mac Mini on Richman’s desk, or an HP or Lenovo box? Why even use a Mac in this editing process at all, when other companies offer access to better GPUs anyway?
[...]
Sure, there's an Apple logo in the top-left corner (two, actually), but it feels superfluous, knowing that the software isn’t directly on the machine and it [could] just as easily be running on a Windows or Linux box a thousand miles away. There are way more efficient ways to do this, and Apple doesn't offer them. Instead it relies on cloud providers like MacStadium, or localized IT teams, to work around their convoluted rules around VMs.
The point of the article, and the full quote, is "These editors aren't working on Macs, per se. They're working around them".
[1] I don't know about the software they're using in particular (Avid?), but there is a chance the Macs are actually faster than what you can currently get from PCs regardless of GPU - nothing atm matches the bandwidth you can get from Apple Silicon, ProRes hardware encoders, power consumption, noise
[2] it's not even actually irrelevant as the overall experience of owning a Mac, outside of the remote desktop client, will be substantially different.
"These editors aren't working on Macs, per se. They're working around them. Sure, there's an Apple logo in the top-left corner (two, actually), but it feels superfluous, knowing that the software isn’t directly on the machine and it just as easily be running on a Windows or Linux box a thousand miles away"
But the source AND target of the remote connections are both macs, pretty straightforward
what would have been a far better PR is if Final Cut offered enterprise solution with "server" part that holds videos and does the heavy lifting and "client" part that works with miniatures doesn't let you export anything to disk and all that
> he works on iMac, which remotes into a separate Mac mini that runs Avid
So the conjecture from the article that the mac mini isn't powerful enough is false
> In other words, little of the horsepower being used in this editing process is actually coming from the Mac Mini on this guy’s desk. Instead, it’s being driven by another Mac on the other side of a speedy internet connection
And based on other comments here, this is a pretty common way to do things.
Why the sensationalism?
[0] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/03/how-the-mind-splittin...
Not what the article says... and that doesn't follow anyways. The remote experience was terrible and the non-remote experience wasn't shown at all. How fast the Mac Mini theoretically is doesn't matter at all once you have such an insane bottleneck.
> And based on other comments here, this is a pretty common way to do things.
And? The industry is making a mistake by knee-capping its editors. It's going into seconds-per-frame territory in the video, it's as close to unusable as you can get. The article seemed to definitively prove its case that someone desperately needs to step back and look at what the requirements for these editors actually are, rather than ramming conflicting demands into each other to appease the anti-piracy insurance mobsters.
If cloud companies have the opportunity they will divide the resources of that Mac into 30 vms and then meter access to the point where it would have been cheaper to go out and acquire the hardware yourself.
Unpopular opinion, but Apple should stick to its guns and maybe create a physical Mac rack server with legal and technical restrictions on maximum tenancy.
Otherwise what is the point of doing it on a mac?
That’s…how cloud computing is supposed to work? You pay them a premium to set this up. The fact that this isn’t possible is why everyone is annoyed.
Here is a talk from Netflix about cloud workspace for their artists https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/netflix-workst...
I wanted to test it out given that my son was looking to upgrade his PC and not only are component costs through the roof, there's barely any inventory to be had if you were trying to buy exactly what you want! (thanks, resellers...)
It's not a perfect setup obviously -- really only ideal for AAA games with cloud saves, no mods, etc (Cyberpunk 2077, that kind of thing), and I won't make the argument that it's ultimately better than local for gaming (it's not), but I will say that in my experience, the hardware-rendered framerates are through the roof, it streams seamlessly at high resolution, and I could see envision a scenario where video editing on an appropriate VM should be virtually indistinguishable from local.
Just food for thought!
* More powerful machines centrally located
* COVID-19 practices make lots of people in one place undesirable
* It's easy for rogue editors to steal stuff, and this prevents that
Kinda surprised professional video editing software hasn't been designed with this exact use case in mind - ie. A worker running local software doing editing, but then a remote server with tens of Tbytes of storage and high power GPU's.
The software would do standard definition and basic rendering fast locally, and simultaneously request the 8k data be rendered remotely and downloaded so a full fidelity preview can be seen after a few seconds.
Sounds like this author didn't watch the whole video. They are completely open about the fact that the editing team collaborated through remoting. At 5:20 an editor specifically says they "remoted into the Mac mini."
The second half of the post raises an arguably good question about the need for fancy Macs when cloud-based workflows only require glorified terminals. But that too may misplaced here -- it's entirely possible that the team members each do local editing work and then host their own collaboration sessions.
Avid bent over backwards to optimize for that in their software. I can't imagine cloud/remote editing being a good artist tool.
i think there have also been a handful of purpose built remote desktop packages that were purpose built.
The article argues:
> To me, though, it highlights a huge issue with Apple’s current professional offerings. They are built to work on a single machine. At least for high-end use cases, the remote workflow threatens to cut them out of the equation entirely...
This is hardly a "huge issue". Plenty of people work on a single machine. Once your project gets too big, you move more and more to remote and cloud. It's a spectrum, and you want a machine flexible enough to handle both.
You'd think there'd be some kind of "mipmap gateway" component to network-aware video editors, that incrementally re-renders scrub-quality and preview-quality renders of the timeline as the client tells it about project changes, and then streams those rendered changes back down the pipe to the client, proactively, into a local cache — without the client ever needing to (or even being allowed to!) hold the raw assets.
Then the local "fat client" editing UI could be snappy at pretty much all times — except for just after modifying the timeline, when it'd have to flush (some variable amount of) the preview cache. (And even then, the controls would still respond; just the preview and timeline-thumbnails would jitter, until the [active part of the] re-cache finished.)
Would this enable piracy? No! Who's going to want to release a 480p rip of a TV episode at this point? (And 480ps is all you need, for a functional live preview, when lining up ADB or B-roll or whatever else. Anything needing closer examination — VFX, say — could be rendered and sent by the gateway "on demand", as stills [on play-head stop] or as short clips [on first play after range-selection].)
(It would enable leaks... but so does RDP, if you combine it with local video-capture software. So that's nothing new.)
To get this you have to understand Apple's business model. They sell style, quality, and exclusivity, and ease of use. They can't ensure those things if they separate the hardware from the software. I'm sure they would love to make money from software licenses without the hardware. But it would end up creating new problems that would dilute the value of their product.
The proof is in the pudding. They're the most valuable company in the world because of their limitations, not despite them.