I use Keynote to make my presentations, and one time I wanted to build a presentation with someone else. I asked my friend who has worked at Apple for 20 years, "How do you guys build Keynote presentations together? There doesn't seem to be an easy way to do that?".
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.
I've been working at Apple for almost 12 years. While secrecy is indeed paramount, once a tool is internally blessed, we collaborate normally using it. Keynote collaboration is actually pretty standard nowadays.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.
That's a weird answer, Keynote can shares presentations, and multiple people can work on the same presentation in real-time, either on the macOS/iOS or the web version.
The feature has been available for years: https://support.apple.com/en-us/guide/keynote/tan4e89e275c/m...
They were BSing you or working in a different part of the company than SWE.
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.
>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.
> We don't collaborate at Apple because of the (perceived) risk of leaks.
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.)
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.
>So it doesn't surprise me that their video editing tools are designed for a single user at a time.
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 seem to recall an anecdote from a colleague that interviewed with one of Apple's security teams. The actual room where the interview took place was locked from the outside and you had to use a badge reader on the inside to leave. I guess they didn't want folks wandering if someone needed to make a restroom break, but I can't help but wonder about issues like, say, a fire...
>but it was actually in 2013, 12 years ago. I didn't think it was that long ago.
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.
Obviously a huge bias here (I work for Figma), but it’s one of my favorite things about Figma Slides. The product still has a ways to go, but man being able to actually be collaborative and not feel like you’re fighting against the software is a game changer.
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.
I wouldn't be surprised if their attitude toward remote collaboration probably changed pretty significantly around 5 years ago. But fair enough that it may not yet be a primary consideration in all of their software.
Apple is famously a company that encourages cross functional collaboration, as anyone who’s ever interviewed there could attest to, or known more than your friend. They’re secretive yes, but also collaborative.
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?
Isn't it also true that Apple have dozens of different scm / developer platforms scattered around the company? e.g. some teams use gitlab, others phabricator etc etc
Huh. At my last company, probably less so presentation collaboration (in my case, less though still some if I were co-presenting) but shared documents with editors and so forth were huge. Better built-in workflows would have been nice ut it worked well enough with a bit of discipline, e.g. once you do a handoff you (mostly) don't make further changes unless you noting a typo or something.
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.
Interesting, but this misses perhaps the most embarrassing part: They're using Avid and not FCP.
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.
Avid does have a cloud based solution. This isn't that.
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.
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.
> "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... I’m not entirely sure we were supposed to see that, but there it is. Oops."
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.
There are a number of reasons why the industry centralises. Particularly in post. One of them is the fact that the shot footage is insured and those policies have very strict clauses about handling the material. Yes this applies to an all-digital production as it would have applied to the film era.
The linked promotional materials [0] say that they remote into a mac mini running Avid.
> 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.
I would like to use this comment to mention Parsec. It's unbelievable how much snappier it feels compared to the default Screen Sharing. What is their secret sauce?!
I just wish it didn't require an internet connection for authentication
Try Moonlight, similar tech but open/no cloud auth. Works better over local networks though as opposed to internet (which you need to set up via vpn/portforward etc)
Is there a free alternative to Screen Sharing that is more performant? I'm just surprised at the latency and cpu usage of Screen Sharing on my lan. (Mac specific)
Is it really just authentication? I thought the whole screen data was passed through an intermediate server, but I can see how a peer 2 peer system would be more efficient. I can't imagine the wonky NAT hacks that need to take place though.
Video editing is not as portable as coding, there ain't no git. It doesn't surprise me that they have to do that, I imagine it's simply speedier and comfier to connect to a desktop that already has the work in progress in the latest state instead of ensuring everything is synced on different devices one uses. I also imagine that beefy MBPs with M3 and upwards could handle 4K editing of Severance (or maybe 8K) and they'd edit on local machines, should it be actually more convenient than connecting to a remote desktop. It's a bit shameful to admit, but still something we have to deal with while having such crazy advances in technology.
In principle a good editing tool could use Git for the edit operations (mere kilobytes!) and use multi-resolution video that can be streamed and cached locally on demand.
When I got into projection design I tried using git to keep track of my VFX workspace. After typing `git init` I heard a sharp knock at my apartment door. I opened it to find an exhausted man shaking his head. He said one word, “No.” and then walked away.
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.
Meta: If I had to rank software features of an NLE when I was employed as an editor, key-to-photon (or click-to-sample, etc) latency would rank #1, far outpacing all other concerns. It's fundamental to the rhythm feel of the result, and prevents fatigue.
Avid bent over backwards to optimize for that in their software. I can't imagine cloud/remote editing being a good artist tool.
Makes sense why the framerate is so bad during some of the playback scenes. Also makes sense as multiple editors will be sharing the same editing tasks and it’s easier to share a single resource with the scenes loaded that are connected to local storage, and manipulate remotely, versus trying to pull that content to your machine and then push it back.
I've been working this way for a long time. Not video editing, but it's the same principle -- I want to be over here (with my monitor, keyboard and mouse) but the large, complex, performance-sensitive environment I need to use is over there.
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.
He's saying that Apple stuff is hard for IT people to configure, customize, and virtualize, but isn't Apple's whole selling point that you don't need to be an IT person to use their products? It's a different market.
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.
[+] [-] jedberg|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] aschobel|1 year ago|reply
Opinions are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.
[+] [-] galad87|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] eschaton|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] carlmr|1 year ago|reply
The severed floor.
[+] [-] JKCalhoun|1 year ago|reply
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.)
[+] [-] mattl|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] js2|1 year ago|reply
Real-time collaboration was added in Keynote 7.0 released in Sept 2016.
https://www.macworld.com/article/228811/keynote-pages-and-nu...
[+] [-] llm_nerd|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] jc__denton|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] ksec|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] jjcm|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] spacedcowboy|1 year ago|reply
Keynote works just fine with multiple simultaneous users. I work at Apple (for now) and do it all the time with managers/EPMs etc.
[+] [-] nerevarthelame|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] dagmx|1 year ago|reply
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?
[+] [-] rcarmo|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] 486sx33|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] mhh__|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] ghaff|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] KaiserPro|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] DidYaWipe|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] kjeldsendk|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] LASR|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] abalone|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] citizenpaul|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] nickdothutton|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] afro88|1 year ago|reply
> 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...
[+] [-] brcmthrowaway|1 year ago|reply
I just wish it didn't require an internet connection for authentication
[+] [-] poisonborz|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] kjeldsendk|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] thomasjudge|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] TZubiri|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] TZubiri|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] impoppy|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] jiggawatts|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] Uehreka|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] jpalomaki|1 year ago|reply
[1] https://www.jumpdesktop.com [2] https://parsec.app
[+] [-] omershapira|1 year ago|reply
Avid bent over backwards to optimize for that in their software. I can't imagine cloud/remote editing being a good artist tool.
[+] [-] vsviridov|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] atonse|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] whalesalad|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] chris_pie|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] megadata|1 year ago|reply
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_client
[+] [-] jmull|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] krupan|1 year ago|reply
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.
[+] [-] danhau|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] fathermarz|1 year ago|reply