View Full Version : SHAKE on MacOS X ?

03 March 2003, 06:33 PM
2.5 will be the last version for WIN, so i was wondering how it is on a Mac...because on a PC it was near perfect.

Anyone tried it?
Anyone working with it in a professional pipeline?
Does it worth the switch?

Thanks to all


03 March 2003, 08:28 PM
I've got a Shake windows license. And for all the questions I've had since the takeover, how Shake fares on a mac has never been one of them. Never even considered it.

Although I'll never be an Apple hardware customer, whether or not I remain an Apple software customer is entirely up to them.


03 March 2003, 08:32 PM
Thanks for your kind response...but i did not ask if you like Apple products, or if a PC is better than a Mac...:beer:

Im asking if SHAKE runs well on a MacOS X System in a production environement.

Thanks again.


03 March 2003, 08:47 PM
Hey, your welcome! Unless, there was sarcasm in that thanks...:hmm:

Regardless, although I doubt there's been much switching, I'm sure there's a few mac users who finally have the chance to use Shake who can answer your question.

I'll bow out now to give em room to speak. Sorry for butting in with my oh-so-hard-to-get-over-it bitterness....


03 March 2003, 08:55 PM
I assure you that there were non sarcasm in my thank...i just dont want this thread to become a PC vs MAC sure you understand that. ;)


03 March 2003, 09:20 PM
I do indeed understand that, and that wasn't my intent.

Although maybe I should start my own thread "Isn't it a pity that Apple is probably going to develop Shake only for mac in the future, and can we do anything to show them we want them to continue to support all platforms?"

Nah, too long a subject line :rolleyes:

Anyway, on with *your* thread :beer:


03 March 2003, 03:24 AM
Whew! Is it hot in here?

Anyway I have a friend who's tried it out an he said Apple kinda did a rush job on the port so it hasn't been to answer your question it's not as good as it is on a PC. Apple will make it run perfectly with the next version.


03 March 2003, 08:08 PM
i only tried it at home until now but as far as i can tell thereīs no difference in the workflow (plus you got limited quicktime I/O) and the software seems to be a bit less buggy as far as the interface is concerned, but that could be a problem of the release i got at work? concerning speed i really donīt know, on a dual 1ghz g4 it seems to be a wee bit slower than on the dual xeon at work but i guess that really doesnīt surprise anyone?
i think itīs definitely worth switching as shake is still the best desktop compositor around - keeping in mind that i donīt hate macs as much as most people do around here

03 March 2003, 06:18 PM
I hate everyone who tries to take my options away for personal gain. I guess that is called business those days. First is dirty play and the customer satisfaction I guess goes out of the window. What is strange we still fallow the little carrot... I had already gave up on companies like IBM, Apple, Sony, and I am moving slowly away from Microsoft. :wip:

03 March 2003, 10:37 PM
you're going ot be hating everyone i'm afraid, it's impossible not to read on someones shoes, in fact the more "moderate" you are the more shoes you tread on, better do a good job and really say it like you mean it :D

Mac version of Shake seems fine from the (very) few times i've had the opportunity to actually try it. See if you can organize a demo of Shake on the mac at your nearest reseller.

03 March 2003, 02:55 PM
I dont think anyone needs a biased apple-employee-demo-artist to tell us that Shake rocks.

And yes there's a very simple way to not step on anyones toes at all, for example, what Microsoft did when they acquired Softimage, they just ported Softimage|3D to NT and thats it. That was half a decade ago and ILM is still using it on irix and now linux.
A little more than a year ago almost no one had heard about Shake, films like FinalFantasy and LOTR made it famous, the result is sadly that Shake seases to exist if they go through with their plans to remove Shake from linux as well. We've lost too many good compositing platforms this past year :thumbsdow

03 March 2003, 03:29 PM
shake is very stable on os x. i have not experienced any problems.

heh... it makes me laugh when someone says "ill not be apple customer, ever".

i dont care if my machine is called PC, IBM, SGI, APPLE etc... if it do it's job... it's fine. im earning money, having fun...

chill out ppl!


sorry 4 my english.

04 April 2003, 09:11 AM
Great to see that Apple does in fact not abandon any of the other professional platforms Shake is available on.

I'm a bit biased on the Windows subject. I see that all Apple has done in promotion for Shake were featuring motion pictures that were done with Shake. All of them on SGI or Linux.

And for the new price of Shake, you can get a Mac and a license. I don't know about pricing before Apple bought the product, but I presume the Mac version now is half the original price.

Does anyone know if the OS X version still has that annoying annual maintenance fee?

04 April 2003, 09:26 AM
FYI: Windows is a professional OS, and currently it is the most attactive one for smaller studios (read: studios without a great deal of inhousedevelopment), all things considered. If you're just working in 1 app, you can tailor yourself a Linuxbox, otherwise, probably not.

04 April 2003, 09:38 AM
I know that Windows is supposed to be a professional OS. And due to the demand of smaller production houses, Apple half cut the price for the OS X version.

Scenario 1: You get a new Mac plus Shake and save money.

Scenario 2: You get a non-OSX license on an existing older system and it's more expensive than Scenario 1. This would also apply if Apple hadn't decided to buy Shake.

Please note that I don't endorse the decision to abandon a platform, nobody would want that. I'm just saying it's not the worst thing that could have happened, considering the investment needed.

04 April 2003, 10:07 AM
Since Shake will easily render twice as fast on your average home PC than on any mac on earth, you'll be regaining that money within the first project you work on. Time is indeed money. This is what it's all about, macs just dont cut the cheese anymore.

04 April 2003, 10:10 AM
Despite the fact that Apple will revolutionize the way you think about Mac speed this year, you have no proof on how fast Shake can be on OS X. The new version has clearly been optimized.

Please wait for tests :)

04 April 2003, 10:42 AM
Optimized or not, the power isnt there, but the pricetag sure is.

(by revolutionize, I assume you mean when macs turn into PC's? :) )

04 April 2003, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by tobyx
And for the new price of Shake, you can get a Mac and a license. I don't know about pricing before Apple bought the product, but I presume the Mac version now is half the original price.

Does anyone know if the OS X version still has that annoying annual maintenance fee?

Yea, Shake gui version was always 10k on win/linux/irix, nongui was/is 4k(2k on mac). As for the annual maintenance, this is a must have for most highend software packages that have a very small user base. They cannot afford to innovate and produce new versions every year without support. Adobe sells a couple hundred thousand versions of Afterfx, so they can afford to not have this. Shake has under 5,000 licenses, so they cannot.

To answer your question, yes you do have to pay annual maintenance of a little over 1k per year, but you get full updates and support for it.

04 April 2003, 10:48 AM
Haha, well no. I mean when the 970 is announced :)

People expect this to happen during the WWDC in June in San Francisco.

This is off-topic. But believe me, Shake will rule more than you might imagine ;)

04 April 2003, 01:53 PM
NESEL: you might want to have a look at the quicktour ( for Shake 3 at

It shows Shake running under OSX, and it looks perky. You must take this with a pinch of salt; we don't know what maching it is running on, we don't know the resolution of the source files.

CGTalk Moderation
01 January 2006, 04:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.