Why do we still need the DX boxes for Avid?  I agree the capabilities of the Nitris DX box are amazing.  I believe the Mojo DX is overpriced.  But why can't we have a cheaper alternative???

This works with FCP, Premiere Pro, and something called Cineform (forgive my ignorance of this product).  And it is PC and Mac and desktop and laptop.  Makes you realize how limited and overpriced the Mojo DX really is. 

Avid - PLEASE let us use 3rd pary hardware for I/O and monitoring.  PLEASE!!!

From the Videoguys website:

Please

I agree!!!! C'mon Avid!

Because Avid is a hardware company that make software for them. It is like asking Apple to make FCP to run on Windows computers.

A few of us have been wanting a matrox style box for a long time but the vast majority of Avid customers seem not to care and are happy to pay the big Avid price ticket.

So no demand outside of a tiny number of independent editors.

As you all know, I've been BEGGING Avid for affordable HD I/O hardware for years. MojoDX is a very nice box, it's just too expensive. Especially when compared to other I/O solutions on the market.

If Avid would put together an HD Hardware solution with Media Composer for under $5K, it would sell off the hook! Doesn't matter if it's Avid or 3rd party hardware, it's what Avid customers in our market space want. Affordable HD I/O.

I have no idea what they are planning. Most of the folks who I knew at Avid aren't there anymore. We can just keep hoping that the new management team is really listening, and really "New Thinking".  If they are, then they have to see the opportunity that exists for them. They could steal back tons of marketshare and stop so many shops from leaving Avid.

I know they could do it if they really wanted to. Either by designing their own, sourcing from a 3rd party or simply allowing 3rd party hardware to work. It really comes down to a very simple question "Does Avid want to offer their customers an affordable HD I/O solution?". Only time will tell.

Gary

Even a 'monitoring' solution would be a start. They can skip the 'I' part of the I/O equation if they want to keep gouging us for that part of it, since so many workflows are file based anyway. How 'bout a $900 box to monitor our HD work? And how about a cheap two seat shared environment over Ethernet for an editor and one assistant? THAT would set Avid apart, because FCP flat doesn't have a decent shared project capability! Period!

Chris

If they were going to do it they would have done something by now. Avid has positioned itself as a software solution (with NO HD monitoring) at the low end; and the DX hardware at the high end.

If you are not content with adding a second graphic card to drive a third monitor and using full screen playback, then tough. Even though I wish it was different I don't see this changing.

4.0 will be the last upgrade my current computer can handle. When I have to buy a new box it will definitely be a Mac Pro. I have been slowly embraccing the Mac side so that I will have choices in the future.

I really appreciate what Avid has done with the last two upgrades 3.5 and 4.0. They have solved a lot of the issues that I was running into daily working with many different formats and frame rates. They still have a way to go with the RED workflow to compete with FCP. The race to rewrite for 64bit may be the next major prize.

We will see.

From a business point of view, weighing up which direction to invest in, Final Cut Studio is tough to beat talking from the point of view of the current Thai market.

The hardware choices from low cost to high cost for Final Cut Studio and Premiere gives great flexibility, even a single piece of hardware can work with both. A low cost suite can be set up and then upgraded according to the needs of the work coming in. The high end for Avid is great but without the low end, there is no scale and no flexibility in investment choices.

Also, when Apple got hold of Color there are now color correction control surfaces available at a very affordable prices (Tangent Wave / Euphonix MC Color). This is another hardware issue that I can only see becoming more significant.

I want a low cost color correction solution with a control surface. I prefer Avid's CC work space. But I'm feeling the pressure to move over to Color. The work is coming in for this. I do though get the feeling that Apple is using Color to pull in more FCP converts because of workflow reasons.

In an ideal world, I'd like to see Avid either introduce their own lower cost hardware to provide some basic but essential functions such as external monitor preview and export to a VTR or at least open up to some 3rd party hardware. I think I'd be happier if Avid made their own and kept it rock solid. And I'd also like to see Avid develop their color correction tools more (which I get the impression from the changes happening they are doing this, but have never heard anything addressing this issue directly) and be able to allow the use of a surface controller like the Tangent Wave.

With those two main areas addressed, I think it would be easier for me to convince management at my facility to invest more with Avid and to convince clients to use Avid more, in numbers like they used to five years ago.