or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Troubled development, 2011 launch rumored for Apple's Final Cut Studio
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Troubled development, 2011 launch rumored for Apple's Final Cut Studio - Page 2

post #41 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey View Post

I think you missed Stone's point. He was saying it's not neglectful because Pro's (god I've come to hate that term anymore, it's used so loosely) don't really need frequent upgrades and as a matter of fact we shy away from them. I'm not fond of upgrading at all unless I have to and frankly I think Apple updates are too frequent. They are annoying for one. Most of them cause minor to major problems with hardware and when you are talking about an extra $30k+ in hardware and $200k + projects that go into overtime because some dip decided to install an update, that's a big problem and I'd fire the person that cost me an extra $5k.

I avoid updating software as much as I can until I upgrade my hardware and again, with hardware costs what they are that's only once ever couple of years. Sometimes 5 if it's really high end gear. If I need a new feature, most likely I'm replacing the whole system and not just the software.

We aren't being sidelined at all. Apple is doing nothing Digidesign does with Protools and Avid. They hardly ever update their suites and that is a good thing. It should work out of the box and not need replacing until the whole kit needs to be replaced.

Nope I totally got it and agreed with him to a point. I then added a second point ... that I hope the development on pro apps is not put on the back burner. You are entitled to your opinion obviously however, I have always embraced updates from Apple (Adobe is a different story). Obviously I would not switch a workstation in the middle of any particular project for sure. When you go back over each iteration of FCPro every update is spectacular. I have always found the updates well worth the time to clone the drive, install and learn.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #42 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacShack View Post

Beacause...

If you want to be taken serious you might want to atleast support your opinion with one citation or reference.

When is the next version of OS X due anyways?

Some point in 2012 - but what's wrong with the current version which is constantly revised and updated by a dedicated team within Apple? Why the question?
post #43 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

Agreed.
Apple has a great habit of doing a ton of work very efficiently with a minimum of people. They don't just throw personnel at a problem.
Unfortunately, the flip side is that their frugal ethos tends to make them wait too long to staff up projects that urgently need attention. Hire some more people for Pete's sake! The whole pro app market and it's accompanying prestige and synergy is nothing to toy with.

You're very wrong. There are several thousand developers working for apple. Each working in carefully headed and supported teams of highly skilled developers working in their specific areas of expertise. The team working on the iPad had nothing to do with the team working on FCS. The skills and technologies are utterly different.

There are a lot of naive people around who seen to think that apple have a list of jobs and work down them one at a time. This sort of thinking is stupid, to be quite frank.

Do you think the team that work on hardware design for the iPad have anything to do with mobileme for instance? Are the itunes developers brought in to work on multitouch technology?

I think a few people need to engage brain before typing utter rubbish.
post #44 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Apple are neglecting nothing.

Now THAT is BS. Whether this rumor is true or not, there's no question that the "pro" apps are one of the lowest priorities at the company.

Want to talk about neglect? Look at Soundtrack Pro, it's one of the buggiest apps apple has ever released. Major bugs, many acknowledged by apple, and only one bugfix release since 3.0. Some just completely idiotic bugs (panes constantly opening by themselves??), don't know how they didn't get noticed and baffling why they haven't been fixed.

Logic only uses all processing cores on quads, not supporting the 8 core machines that came out 18 months ago. And with Logic, the new six core machines run WORSE than lower clocked quads unless you disable two cores. If that's not giving the finger to professionals I don't know what is.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

The software is insanely good and the stability and performance are unparalleled by any other machine or OS out there.

Which software is that specifically? There are a number of "pro" apps with serious stability and performance issues. And which Apple apps are 64 bit? Aperture and Logic? Which apple apps use all CPU cores? Including hyperthreading?


Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Also, although the article states that "Apple" "released" a "statement" to the effect that the new FCP would be awesome and the customers would love it, I seem to recall that that was actually communicated via one of Steve's off-hand emails

Jobs said that and then a day or two later another company spokesperson (Bill Evans) also made a similar statement and reiterated the "awesome" part.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20005409-37.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Apple have focus on multiple projects both software and hardware at all times, where did you read that there was inadequate staffing or resources?

I don't know why you think the idea of Apple pulling people from one project (and delaying it) to help out with another is so crazy. Did you forget this one?

Quote:
iPhone contains the most sophisticated software ever shipped on a mobile device, and finishing it on time has not come without a price we had to borrow some key software engineering and QA resources from our Mac OS X team, and as a result we will not be able to release Leopard at our Worldwide Developers Conference in early June as planned.
post #45 of 79
I'm a principal in a post house that finishes national network shows and feature-length projects for international festival and (sometimes) theatrical release. We dance between Avid and Final Cut depending on editor preferences and finish (are we unique?) in Color. These days our Avid licences are getting more use, and we've never opened Premiere. Yet FCS remains a vital part of our workflow, and it works well, mostly.

Everyone who uses these tools professionally has a eye on what competing tools are up to - for us as long as FCS delivers what our clients want and can afford we won't switch.. But DaVinci Resolve is there with sound and better conform tools and if Color doesn't evolve soon it'll be our clients that force the change..

Likewise FCP lives in a world of constantly changing source formats which other apps handle natively. It needs to keep supporting these, and IMHO MXF containers to maintain its foothold in the professional space.

Avid MC 5 is buggy, especially AMA, but we'll pay for capability and if FCS halts we'll have to protect our future flows.

Let's hope it doesn't - the day I have to move to Premiere for onlining to HDCAM SR is the day I'll give it away!
post #46 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Who's talking to who so that a French Mac site is privy to the inner workings of major technology at one of the most famously secretive tech companies around?

I mean, is the idea that a FCP lead goes home and complains to his wife that engineers are being shifted to iOS, or that those assholes over at Motion are trying to commandeer the interface, and then she tells her buddy at the gym who promptly calls up France?

FCS is used by very high earning companies so they need to make sure they do it properly and the only way to do that is to find out what those people want. Filmmakers use Final Cut, France hosts some of the most important film festivals in the world, it's not unreasonable to expect that word has reached filmmaker circles about the reasons why there hasn't been a significant update to one of the most widely used editing suites.

Pro apps don't need to be secretive because Apple doesn't do anything innovative with them anyway. I can imagine how many professionals were wetting themselves with excitement when Apple introduced multi-touch support in Motion. Just what they were waiting for I'm sure.

All of Apple's big software franchises were bought from innovative software companies and have stagnated or died from that point until now.

It takes a lot of time to make innovative software of course but their efforts here are sorely lacking.
post #47 of 79
Pulling FCS coders to work on iOS? That makes no sense.

They're pulling FCS coders to work on iMovie for iOS.
post #48 of 79
Maybe this has something to do with the Avid cheap upgrade prices expiring tomorrow...?
post #49 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


Jobs said that and then a day or two later another company spokesperson (Bill Evans) also made a similar statement and reiterated the "awesome" part.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20005409-37.html

Ah, then it's less egregious than I remembered.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #50 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

FCS is used by very high earning companies so they need to make sure they do it properly and the only way to do that is to find out what those people want. Filmmakers use Final Cut, France hosts some of the most important film festivals in the world, it's not unreasonable to expect that word has reached filmmaker circles about the reasons why there hasn't been a significant update to one of the most widely used editing suites.

Not sure if I follow that-- getting feedback from users ≠ chatting with them about conflict within the dev teams.

Quote:
Pro apps don't need to be secretive because Apple doesn't do anything innovative with them anyway. I can imagine how many professionals were wetting themselves with excitement when Apple introduced multi-touch support in Motion. Just what they were waiting for I'm sure.

All of Apple's big software franchises were bought from innovative software companies and have stagnated or died from that point until now.

It takes a lot of time to make innovative software of course but their efforts here are sorely lacking.

No argument there.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #51 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by knwbuddy View Post

Fortunately or unfortunately, their profits will also significantly rise.

Apple has never before been so hot in the CE industry. Their rise started with the iPod, accelerated with the iPhone, and is reaching higher and higher plateaus with the iPad.

None of that shit was true back when they needed niche users to just survive. I can't imagine that the profits from the Pro apps adds anything significant to Apple's bottom line.

Yes i agree it doesn't add much to their bottom line which is cause for concern. On the other hand i am trusting that apples strategy to build a far reaching ecosystem of products and services might be a saving grace for its pro divisions.

Steve-o has carved out some market dominance - albeit in consumer land - and going forward that dominance and the technologies emerging from it will be leveraged for pro solutions. Solutions where pro apps deliver completed media interactivity tailored to ios devices and services. Those pro apps could also be best of breed for markets beyond ios. However i seriously question whether apple will support blu-ray fully and we know how apple is not bashful about killing technologies its not fond of.

I'm hoping that apple is thinking of media creatives like they are software developers, then they will give them the tools and their ecosystem is assured success. In this way apple can build into those tools features that couple with ios solutions - and of course apple will do that better than anyone else.

Final Cut was so far ahead of the competition when it came out - its taken the industry this long to create software that competes admirably with it - and as far as UI goes its still the champ. Please apple give Randy his due and empower him and his team to blow our minds again - and Soon!
post #52 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by knwbuddy View Post

I can't imagine that the profits from the Pro apps adds anything significant to Apple's bottom line.

While that's probably true of direct profits, don't forget that a user of pro apps is also going to be the same customer who buys a mac pro or other high end (and high margin) machine.

If they drop the ball on the app, they may lose that computer upgrade as well.

And if someone switches apps, in many cases it does make sense to consider switching to cheaper PC hardware as well. (and then since he's not running mac, no point in keeping the wife on that platform either...)

The pro apps have a halo effect, take that away and there's a segment of computer sales at risk. One big weakness of macs has always been lack of software - for a while Apple was helping that end, but now they seem to be asleep at the wheel.
post #53 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post

Maybe Apple should create a wholly owned subsidiary company for its software applications business. Merge in the Filemaker business and acquire Adobe to create a full set of pro and consumer applications. Just keep iOS and OSX development in house.

That's the best post yet.

What's the easiest way to higher qualified engineers? Buy Adobe.

Although I have to say I'm not complaining about the upgrade cycle with Final Cut. Pro apps shouldn't be upgraded too frequently.

If you look at media production apps on OS X, you'll see weird gaps and the need to go back and forth across vendors:

Entry: iLife (but you're missing graphics and audio editing beyond GarageBand)
Mid-point: Adobe CS (switching vendors), maybe Final Cut Express
Pro: Final Cut Studio, Aperture, and Adobe CS (mixing vendors)

Apple should buy Adobe and merge all app development (including FileMaker) into one business unit divided into Office, Media, and Gaming divisions. Within the business unit have another division responsible for online services which works cross-functionally with the other divisions as well as with the iOS and OS X developers.

The point being that Apple should provide a smooth transition at 3 different user levels from entry to advanced to professional with a full suite of software that doesn't require alternating between vendors.
post #54 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

Now THAT is BS. Whether this rumor is true or not, there's no question that the "pro" apps are one of the lowest priorities at the company.

Could not agree with you more. Has Apple fully ported FCS to Cocoa? Has it made it 64 bit or optimized it for Grand Central Dispatch? Is Apple eating its own dog food when it comes to using its own OS technologies to improve FCS? No, it isn't. So what does that say about its priorities vis a vis FCS? You don't need a rumor to see where Apple's priorities are, and they sure as hell aren't of FCS.

This might change (if when Apple releases the alleged "awesome" update that is in the works), but face facts people, Apple does not love its Pro users anymore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

Want to talk about neglect? Look at Soundtrack Pro, it's one of the buggiest apps apple has ever released.

Biggess POS ever. Compressor can also be frustrating as hell too when things aren't working properly. Ditto with Color (although the latest update was a great improvement).

Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

Which software is that specifically? There are a number of "pro" apps with serious stability and performance issues. And which Apple apps are 64 bit? Aperture and Logic? Which apple apps use all CPU cores? Including hyperthreading?

Exactly. It is inexcusable that Apple slams Adobe and others for not porting their apps to Cocoa but can't do this itself. See above for other examples of this type of neglect (64 bit, GCD, etc).
post #55 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

While that's probably true of direct profits, don't forget that a user of pro apps is also going to be the same customer who buys a mac pro or other high end (and high margin) machine.

If they drop the ball on the app, they may lose that computer upgrade as well.

And if someone switches apps, in many cases it does make sense to consider switching to cheaper PC hardware as well. (and then since he's not running mac, no point in keeping the wife on that platform either...)

The pro apps have a halo effect, take that away and there's a segment of computer sales at risk. One big weakness of macs has always been lack of software - for a while Apple was helping that end, but now they seem to be asleep at the wheel.

For every purchase of a MacPro and their other mac gadgets, Apple is getting probably 100 iPads out the door.
post #56 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by macslut View Post

What's the easiest way to higher qualified engineers? Buy Adobe.

Apple should buy Adobe and merge all app development (including FileMaker) into one business unit divided into Office, Media, and Gaming divisions.

One problem is that when Apple buys things, they tend to discontinue them on other platforms. Logic, Final Cut and Shake are examples. Logic code is used to build Garageband too.

Once this happens, it severely limits the uptake of the software because although professionals might use the software, there are 50 times more people learning how to use it and they will typically have Windows PCs.

If Apple owned Adobe, it's unlikely that people will buy Macs to use the software, some other company will come along like Quark and take up their marketshare.

I think Apple just needs to maintain strong partnerships with the big players. Sometimes they do that by being nice but mostly they do it by being good at what they do so people want to partner with them and then they get to call the shots. Innovation mostly happens with smaller startups.

I think if they were to buy up smaller companies that develop plugins and specialised graphics software, that could add a good deal of value. The Foundry for example develop AE plugins, which gives that package a lot of its appeal and they develop Nuke, pretty much the next best thing to Shake - Nuke 5 is more or less what Shake 5 should have been.

They have something like $40b to spend. They can buy up a few of these small companies without much of an impact to their finances and boost their pro apps quite a lot. With the money they have in reserve, they can keep operating for another 50 years without making another penny so they can afford to make a few purchases.

They have to make some smart spends too because the long term profit will be in services, not products. One day computers will be inexpensive throw-away items but we will always need communication, transport, energy, food, entertainment etc. They have moved into communication with the iPhone and entertainment with the ATV and iTunes. Food is out - alphabety spaghetti with just the letter 'i' wouldn't be the same. Transport seems like a good fit IMO. They are engineers and the transport system is in need of a major overhaul. They've dabbled in battery tech and I think an iDrive would be kinda cool.

Battery tech needs improvement and communication needs improvement. We should have ubiquitous wifi signals to any device wirelessly by now.

When there are big industries needing to be sorted, I doubt any of the engineers at Apple want to sift through decade-old legacy code to find out why software is going wrong. They seem to prefer to write small branches of new code and then migrate the legacy code into it. They are probably factoring touch support into their UIs too.
post #57 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Some, here, claim that node-based editing is the future! I don't know.

I think that this would be very difficult to use (visualize) in a composite with multiple layers and masks.

Nodes are to layers what multi-tasking is to single-tasking. Layer editing is essentially just a single noodle path. Nodes are better for effects (keying, 3D pass compositing, building unique effects) as they are more flexible, layers are better for animation.

The Conduit plugin for FCP is a good example of combining the two where you get node effects that you can apply to a specified set of layers and time range. If they did this with Final Cut, you wouldn't need Motion or Shake separate and again, no intermediate steps required.

It makes the software more monolithic when this happens though and harder to maintain but if they develop is the right way, they can keep it under control.
post #58 of 79
At least they can agree to disagree As for FCS future development studios want stability in their pipeline. If they want to wait instead of rushing a half developed product out the door I'm all for that. Just don't make us wait to long. As for the Shake and Motion teams I hope they take the best of both to make one kick ass tool that doesn't have a step learning curve, works well with other tools in the pipeline and doesn't cost a fortune.
Unity3D, Maya, Final Cut, iPhone 5S, Apple TV, Mac Pro, MBP, iPad Mini
Reply
Unity3D, Maya, Final Cut, iPhone 5S, Apple TV, Mac Pro, MBP, iPad Mini
Reply
post #59 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacShack View Post

Beacause...

If you want to be taken serious you might want to atleast support your opinion with one citation or reference.

When is the next version of OS X due anyways?

Because that is not how a company works, you cannot have your programmers sit around and do nothing till you figure out your differences. There are meetings, statistics, presentations, and voting. It's part of a proactive environment. Apple does not suffer from competitive leadership, thanks to SJ.

I've been in this business long enough, and I'll tell you this rumor is just that, a rumor.
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #60 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"Some fundamental differences of opinion about the ideal interface have hamstrung this part of the project which has now been deferred to the next version, in 2013," the report said.

Oh, I can imagine half of the group getting comfy, like "If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Why should we change what's working?" While the other half goes "Hey, we haven't come to this position by thinking like that!". Then there's a lonely developer from the previous Shake team speaking to himself "Node based... whatever the UI we make it's gotta rival node based GUIs." only go get slapped in response by "Well, Node-based UIs may be unrivalled in flexibility and control, but Steve Jobs doesn't like it...". "Ehm... Colors is node based...", "Yeah, well... not anymore.. haven't you heard?". Then some proud Motion team leader goes crazy "We made Motion to what it is today. The best post production software on the planet. You can make a professional orbital camera swipe by just slapping a behaviour onto anything. The whole suite needs professional "behaviours". The following cold silence in the room speaks for itself... A distant cough followed by "Are you nuts!" can be heard by down the hall by a concept artist not part of the meeting...

Final Cut Pro needs:
- There HAS to be a "Render-to-screen" workflow as well as the current "render-to-codec-to-screen". It would save A LOT of time and improve the "realtime flow".
- The timeline and audio is dated, inefficient and boring.
- Both audio filters and audio control is a joke. It's ancient, inefficient lacks overview and control.
- H.264 editing is possible on an iPhone, but not decently on a Mac Pro. Streamlined H.264 editing with "Render-to-screen" mode and presumptive keyframe buffering to ensure playback is needed to offer a modern work flow with professional AVC, and dSLR cameras.
- Motion and Filter control is a joke. The whole window is so poorly organized. In fact, it's never been good.
Bottom line: Final Cut Pro is decent for just editing video, but everything else is poor.

Motion:
- It lacks professional control and overview. I don't even know what it's meant for? Making cool TV show vignettes with pre-scripted behaviours? I tried to like it many times, but it just isn't very useful.
- Motion needs to be canned, and Shake reinstated and developed to take on the battle with Nuke, or whatever is considered the best post production today. Shake was Low CPU - Precise controls - great overview; the precise opposite of Motion.
- They really shouldn't abandon Node based UI, but rather evolve it. It's the most versatile solution for a lot of post production purposes.
Bottom line: It's clumsy. It's like using finger paint when you need a scalpel. It's just fundamentally wrong.

Soundtrack Pro:
- Why does it even exist? Because the audio environment in FCP sucks. I think they should rather go to the bottom of what's wrong and make a great audio environment within FCP itself instead of sending the trouble to another program. For deeper and more creative audio editing use Logic. Everyone I know that is serious about Soundtrack pro is hating it.
Bottom line: FPC needs a complete overhaul on the audio department, to eliminate the need for Soundtrack Pro.

Color:
- It is very powerful, showing great results, and pretty good performance too.
- I'm not too fond of having to send footage here and there, to render it, and send it back. I feel like there's a generation loss every time I do so, and building up huge files in order to secure the 2nd generation quality.
- I think just the basic color grading should be available in FCP as well. The result is MUCH better than with "color 3-way". I thought it was the same.. but not when looking at the results.
Bottom line: great quality.

Compressor:
- Dude... it's exporting slower than iMovie for iPhone 4. What's up?
- The scaling engine is pretty bad. Too blurry.
- There are STILL strange pauses and beachball moments, after years of development.
- Does the preview window even work? I feel I can't trust it.
- The UI I'd say is good. Good overview, and workflow.
Bottom line: For once the UI is good. But poor performance.

DVD Studio Pro:
- BluRay.
- Author QuickTime with Embedded menus, subtitles and multiple audio tracks - ready for the iTunes store or AppleTV.
Bottom line: Apple has a vision for video now more than ever. Why not pursue it with DVD-studio pro?

To sum up. Sorry guys.. but don't listen to the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." people. It really IS broke.. and it is in urgent need of fixing. The whole suite has an overall poor overview and UI that rather gets in the way, than helping me get things done. A lot of what's under the hood is good, but the presentation is not living up to Apple's standards.

Sorry for taking up space here.. I shall now go and post this on Apple's feedback forms.
post #61 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

Oh, I can imagine half of the group getting comfy, like "If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Why should we change what's working?" While the other half goes "Hey, we haven't come to this position by thinking like that!". Then there's a lonely developer from the previous Shake team speaking to himself "Node based... whatever the UI we make it's gotta rival node based GUIs." only go get slapped in response by "Well, Node-based UIs may be unrivalled in flexibility and control, but Steve Jobs doesn't like it...". "Ehm... Colors is node based...", "Yeah, well... not anymore.. haven't you heard?". Then some proud Motion team leader goes crazy "We made Motion to what it is today. The best post production software on the planet. You can make a professional orbital camera swipe by just slapping a behaviour onto anything. The whole suite needs professional "behaviours". The following cold silence in the room speaks for itself... A distant cough followed by "Are you nuts!" can be heard by down the hall by a concept artist not part of the meeting...

Final Cut Pro needs:
- There HAS to be a "Render-to-screen" workflow as well as the current "render-to-codec-to-screen". It would save A LOT of time and improve the "realtime flow".
- The timeline and audio is dated, inefficient and boring.
- Both audio filters and audio control is a joke. It's ancient, inefficient lacks overview and control.
- H.264 editing is possible on an iPhone, but not decently on a Mac Pro. Streamlined H.264 editing with "Render-to-screen" mode and presumptive keyframe buffering to ensure playback is needed to offer a modern work flow with professional AVC, and dSLR cameras.
- Motion and Filter control is a joke. The whole window is so poorly organized. In fact, it's never been good.
Bottom line: Final Cut Pro is decent for just editing video, but everything else is poor.

Motion:
- It lacks professional control and overview. I don't even know what it's meant for? Making cool TV show vignettes with pre-scripted behaviours? I tried to like it many times, but it just isn't very useful.
- Motion needs to be canned, and Shake reinstated and developed to take on the battle with Nuke, or whatever is considered the best post production today. Shake was Low CPU - Precise controls - great overview; the precise opposite of Motion.
- They really shouldn't abandon Node based UI, but rather evolve it. It's the most versatile solution for a lot of post production purposes.
Bottom line: It's clumsy. It's like using finger paint when you need a scalpel. It's just fundamentally wrong.

Soundtrack Pro:
- Why does it even exist? Because the audio environment in FCP sucks. I think they should rather go to the bottom of what's wrong and make a great audio environment within FCP itself instead of sending the trouble to another program. For deeper and more creative audio editing use Logic. Everyone I know that is serious about Soundtrack pro is hating it.
Bottom line: FPC needs a complete overhaul on the audio department, to eliminate the need for Soundtrack Pro.

Color:
- It is very powerful, showing great results, and pretty good performance too.
- I'm not too fond of having to send footage here and there, to render it, and send it back. I feel like there's a generation loss every time I do so, and building up huge files in order to secure the 2nd generation quality.
- I think just the basic color grading should be available in FCP as well. The result is MUCH better than with "color 3-way". I thought it was the same.. but not when looking at the results.
Bottom line: great quality.

Compressor:
- Dude... it's exporting slower than iMovie for iPhone 4. What's up?
- The scaling engine is pretty bad. Too blurry.
- There are STILL strange pauses and beachball moments, after years of development.
- Does the preview window even work? I feel I can't trust it.
- The UI I'd say is good. Good overview, and workflow.
Bottom line: For once the UI is good. But poor performance.

DVD Studio Pro:
- BluRay.
- Author QuickTime with Embedded menus, subtitles and multiple audio tracks - ready for the iTunes store or AppleTV.
Bottom line: Apple has a vision for video now more than ever. Why not pursue it with DVD-studio pro?

To sum up. Sorry guys.. but don't listen to the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." people. It really IS broke.. and it is in urgent need of fixing. The whole suite has an overall poor overview and UI that rather gets in the way, than helping me get things done. A lot of what's under the hood is good, but the presentation is not living up to Apple's standards.

Sorry for taking up space here.. I shall now go and post this on Apple's feedback forms.

Seems to me that you can see lots of room for improvement, I don't see anything above that is "broken" - you also don't know what the update will bring, maybe some of your suggestions. There is a difference between modification and new features/integration and something being "broken". I don't understand the desire for software updates and extra expense every year. Every two-three years is just fine for a professional studio. I'd rather have the tools of my trade gradually evolve and not be released in a hurry to satisfy a need for constant updates that I simply don't understand.

It's like people saying the OSX is being neglected because we're not smothered in rumours about what 10.7 will bring. There's nothing wrong with 10.6 that isn't going to fixed with incremental updates. But people want it new, and now, because otherwise it's obviously "a low priority". It's like children on christmas eve who are then bored by lunchtime on christmas day.

yes there are some bugs experienced by some people - it doesn't need anything more than a point upgrade to address these. 2011 for the new FCS is just fine. And other than this speculation and heresay, no one is suggesting there is any 'issue' or 'neglect' going on here. It's either being worked on or it's not - and as it appears that the former is correct then you can't be working on an update for something and be neglecting it at the same time - it's one or the other.

There are simply difficulties in developing software that take time - and whoever above suggested that Adobe's software engineers are better than Apple's obviously isn't using CS5 on a mac. It's a pile of unstable, inconsistent, bloatware.
post #62 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2 cents View Post

"The report claims that Mac OS X and associated applications are now considered "less urgent" within Apple."

Even though I am not surprised at this statement, I still don't like the sound of it.

Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I agree that it's a bit sad, but I don't know how anyone could dispute the obvious truth of the statement. If you were in charge of Apple right now, you'd probably agree with it, no?

And Yes.
post #63 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

.

Compatibility with prior versions is most important even for someone like me, who is not a professional.

I have many hours invested in creating home movies and some special videos for friends. Also, I have invested several thousand dollars in 3rd party plugins.

...............

Today, when time is the critical factor, I prefer to use iMovie over FCP because you can do an acceptable job of most things, quickly: titles; limited effects; transitions; syncing audio and video'

Even when I need to use FCP or Motion for some effects-- often it is easier to export those "clips" to iMove for inclusion in a final product.

As far as UI goes, there are some things in the Pro and Prosumer products that scream out for a touch interface-- I would like to see touch enhancements where applicable.

I suspect that Apple will release an iPad version of the iPhone iMovie app. I think that could be an interesting experiment to see how a Prosumer product could work with a Touch interface on a large enough screen to make editing practical.

If Apple are smart, they will cross-pollinate their OS X and iOS efforts wherever UI is involved -- especially apps.

I would like the capability to attach an iPad to a Mac and use it as a large touch pad to control, say a tracking path or 3D camera movement. Similarly, I'd like to use an iPad as a touch display to manipulate a detail portion of a video -- say, zoom in and refine a mask, or a bezier path for rotoscoping, or test various effects, dynamically.

...............

You mean a merging of the consumer, prosumer and pro apps line and unifying the experience across iOS devices and the Mac? You speak heresy, witch!



Nah but seriously, Apple has some choices to make on which way to roll. Right now everything is about iOS, the Mac is cool, and selling well, but is starting to lag behind a little. Thank goodness the engineering is solid on Mac OS X for the past several years, there hasn't been a remarkable drop in quality of Mac *software* experience. Hardware, well, perhaps, perhaps a different story, debatable.

Your ideas are good. But right now whether we like it or not it is possible, not just due to this rumour, that there is a divergence within Apple between the Mac and [Other] teams. Apple is hamstrung as it is trying to make those 15 million+ iOS devices *per month*. iPad alone will outsell Macs soon, if it hasn't already, certainly it will in 2011.
post #64 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

For every purchase of a MacPro and their other mac gadgets, Apple is getting probably 100 iPads out the door.

Even if that's true, don't you think Apple wants to keep selling Mac Pros?


Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

Soundtrack Pro:
- Why does it even exist? Because the audio environment in FCP sucks. I think they should rather go to the bottom of what's wrong and make a great audio environment within FCP itself instead of sending the trouble to another program. For deeper and more creative audio editing use Logic. Everyone I know that is serious about Soundtrack pro is hating it.

While I see your point, as an audio guy and Logic user I'd much rather see STP fixed than dumped. There are people who need an app like STP who aren't FCS users, and Logic doesn't do everything STP does and probably never will (although I'd love to see some better integration between Logic and STP. Prime example, Logic doesn't do destructive editing on files, at least not to the degree a dedicated editor does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Seems to me that you can see lots of room for improvement, I don't see anything above that is "broken"

Have you ever used Soundtrack Pro? Extremely buggy with lots of things that are broken. Maybe you haven't encountered any problems in any of the apps, but that doesn't mean the problems don't exist.
post #65 of 79
palegolas, excellent post which I completely agree with. nvidia2008, one person's "it ain't broken" is another ones "what a hindrance to have to work this way". When I use pro apps they have to go "Boom, boom, boom", one thing to another, fast flow, because it's not pecking at the screen like a high school media class, it's ten people standing behind me, all wanting things to go faster, and sometimes they're not being unreasonable. There are unnecessary bottlenecks in the workflow. And if they DO go faster when they work somewhere else on a rig with apps that get updated regularly, with good support and quick fixes (there was a time a few years ago when Compressor was broken for so long I swear that was when my hair turned grey), well, I can't compete if I wait around for Apple to fix something.

One of Apple's biggest shortcomings is that they offer these "pro apps" but really don't service the needs of the market they intend to sell to. And this is coming from a total Apple apologist. I love Final Cut and Aperture, but the company to user link is terrible for the professional.
post #66 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Agreed and I definitely don't want a dumbed down version for prosumers.

How will making the interface more accessible be "dumbed down"? Why must everyone immediately assume the two goals (easy to use and "pro") have to be mutually exclusive?

Quote:
I am sad that those of us paying the big bucks for high end MacPros, ACDs and Pro apps are being sidelined because of iOS.

Really? iOS is funding the drive and innovation for everything else Apple is doing. Yes, Mac sales are significant and the company was profitable with just them, but the financial security and influence Apple has in the market today is largely due to the iOS.

Again, why can't they be successful in both? For the iOS to succeed the Mac doesn't have to fail, and vice versa.

Quote:
I love iOS but Apple have the $s to do both surely?

It's not about $$$, it's about resources. Apple is more like a startup than a company their size. That's part of the their strength and why their products are much tighter out the gate than many of their competitors. Throwing more resources at a problem becomes an exercise in diminishing returns. The drawback is you end up having to shift focus and some things slow down.

Oh well. I would rather see Apple focus more resources on the fast changing consumer space with the iOS. You have heard from multiple professionals in this thread and I can also assure that most professionals don't want yearly or even 18 month updates. The only time you see a rush to a new program or update is if there is some component of the workflow that is now missing - and those are pretty rare and far between. If you happen to be in that rare group then it's no fun being you, but it's reality.

Companies will also leapfrog each other on a regular basis. Lots of people were jumping to Light Room because they were convinced (mainly by baseless rumors and internet blabber) that Aperture was abandoned, Apple didn't care about professionals, etc. - and then lo and behold, Aperture 3 was released and it leapfrogged the light room beta. It's the nature of the industry.

You can constantly run from the latest "new/shiny" toy of the moment, continually buying new software and learning new interfaces, or you can use the tools you have and work within the ecosystem you are in.

And yes, there are some people pushing the extreme envelope for who doing the above is perfectly legitimate, but I'm always amazed at the amount of people wringing hands about "the other software" when they don't even exploit all the tools they have at their current disposal because they are constantly looking at the greener grass on the other side of the fence.
post #67 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

The whole pro app market and it's accompanying prestige and synergy is nothing to toy with.

Please. Real professionals are not worried about a six month delay in a product cycle. Unless there is a GLARING deficiency between products. So far I haven't seen anything that FCS is glaringly deficient in vs. it's competitors, including the new Premiere.

The worst thing they could do is "just hire some more developers" and sink the quality of their products. There are no fast/easy fixes to issues like this, and it's where companies like Microsoft went violently off the rails with their first attempt at Vista.

No thank you. It may not be perfect, but I'll stick with Apple's methodology.
post #68 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by columbus View Post

It completely ridiculous that a company as cash rich as Apple can't manage their resources better.

LOL - companies that are "cash rich" like Apple are that way because they are excellent at managing their resources.

Companies that don't manage resources well either decline or go out of business. Your contradicting yourself.
post #69 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacShack View Post

If you want to be taken serious you might want to atleast support your opinion with one citation or reference.

I find it hilarious (and telling) you are trying to hold an anonymous poster in an Internet forum to a higher standard than the original BS report.

And it was a total BS report, BTW - go try to defend that than attacking people pointing out the obvious.

Quote:
When is the next version of OS X due anyways?

When it's done?

Whenever Steve can get the most pleasure spinning up Internet forum trolls by purposely holding it back?

Why is it even relevant to the discussion at hand?
post #70 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

I don't know why you think the idea of Apple pulling people from one project (and delaying it) to help out with another is so crazy. Did you forget this one?

Shifting people between Mac OSX and iOS is one thing since they share the same common code base.

Implying that they are shifting people from FCP to iOS, or Logic to some other portion of the company because of one report of them shifting people from Mac OSX to iOS is idiotic.
post #71 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neruda View Post

Could not agree with you more. Has Apple fully ported FCS to Cocoa? Has it made it 64 bit or optimized it for Grand Central Dispatch? Is Apple eating its own dog food when it comes to using its own OS technologies to improve FCS? No, it isn't.

Er, what version of Mac OS did Grand Central Dispatch debut in?

Oh, that's right - the current one!

Quote:
So what does that say about its priorities vis a vis FCS? You don't need a rumor to see where Apple's priorities are, and they sure as hell aren't of FCS.

Really? So you think a 64 bit, Cocoa rewrite that leverages brand new APIs just fall out of the sky?

As much as I think Adobe was sleeping, they did get themselves regrouped and released a cocoa/64 bit version of Photoshop.

I have no doubt the FCP and other Apple Pro app developers were caught as flat footed with the decision to not go forward with 64bit Carbon. Combine that with all the new API stuff in Snow Leopard and I'm not surprised in the least it's taking Apple longer to ship out their Pro apps.

10.6 should be the last major change to system API's. There have been several discussions of 10.6 and how it was what should be the last major change to the OS foundations of Mac OSX - I think we are going to start seeing allot of accelerated development from not only Apple but other vendors. It's been a long and rocky road, but Apple finally has a rich foundation of mature API's, and nicely maturing API's like GCD.

Quote:
This might change (if when Apple releases the alleged "awesome" update that is in the works), but face facts people, Apple does not love its Pro users anymore.

Bunch of petulant whining. And he gets called on his statements like USB 3 in the comments.

I have news for people like him and you - stop being so damn jealous of the iOS! Even before the iOS Apple didn't kick out updates for half the people out there. Nothing has changed because of the iOS. If anything, Apple has MORE resources to devote to their Pro apps because of the iOS. I know that on the business side of things they are more corporate focused than they have ever been because of the iPhone - mainly because of the iPhone and now iPad, they actually have a chance at cracking the corporate walls.

Quote:
Biggess POS ever. Compressor can also be frustrating as hell too when things aren't working properly. Ditto with Color (although the latest update was a great improvement).

Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?

Get a grip!

Quote:
It is inexcusable that Apple slams Adobe and others for not porting their apps to Cocoa but can't do this itself. See above for other examples of this type of neglect (64 bit, GCD, etc).

Please point me to a public comment by Apple about Adobe and 64 bit.

Again, what a bunch of hysterics over nothing. If I didn't know any better I would swear I was at a sewing circle listening to a bunch of old women kevetching!
post #72 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

I have news for people like him and you - stop being so damn jealous of the iOS! Even before the iOS Apple didn't kick out updates for half the people out there. Nothing has changed because of the iOS. If anything, Apple has MORE resources to devote to their Pro apps because of the iOS. I know that on the business side of things they are more corporate focused than they have ever been because of the iPhone - mainly because of the iPhone and now iPad, they actually have a chance at cracking the corporate walls.

(quote snipped)

Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?

Get a grip!


(quote snipped)

Again, what a bunch of hysterics over nothing. If I didn't know any better I would swear I was at a sewing circle listening to a bunch of old women kevetching!


Spoken like someone who doesn't have to use pro video apps : )

There are non-OSX video production tools that leave FCP in the dust. It's not an Apple or Adobe or Avid only world behind the scenes. It's not about kvetching, jealousy or being ignorant of how difficult it is to write good software. It's about wanting to use the best tools available within a budget. And Apple has a history of promoting "pro" software that eventually becomes less pro, even if the users become MORE pro.
post #73 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Implying that they are shifting people from FCP to iOS, or Logic to some other portion of the company because of one report of them shifting people from Mac OSX to iOS is idiotic.

Then good thing I didn't imply that. That report was just refuting the notion that apple never pulls people from one team to another, or that projects aren't delayed because of that.

If you read my other posts, I did mention FCP talent getting pulled for things like iMovie. Quicktime itself wouldn't surprise me as well (although that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing).

Logic, that team regularly gets shifted to Garage Band, that's a known fact (actually it sounds like one team has to work on both apps).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

So you think a 64 bit, Cocoa rewrite that leverages brand new APIs just fall out of the sky?

So you think that they couldn't get started on a 64 bit Cocoa rewrite until recently? They have had YEARS to work on it - have they actually been doing that? Sure looks like they put it off instead of actually digging into it at the point where they were pestering third parties to get started on it.

Quote:
I have no doubt the FCP and other Apple Pro app developers were caught as flat footed with the decision to not go forward with 64bit Carbon.

And isn't that still apple's fault? You say that make it somehow makes it all OK.

Quote:
Bunch of petulant whining.

You really think the latest Mac Pros are a decent upgrade? Or do you agree with that part of the "whining"?

Quote:
Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?

Have you actually used STP extensively, or just making assumptions? Sorry, but with an app as bad as STP, "all complex software has issues" doesn't cut it, the software is a flat out embarrassment.

Do you do video or audio work for a living? If not, you're not really in a position to attack those who do, and who are unhappy with the current state of the "pro" apps.
post #74 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

Spoken like someone who doesn't have to use pro video apps : )

I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.

Quote:
There are non-OSX video production tools that leave FCP in the dust. It's not an Apple or Adobe or Avid only world behind the scenes. It's not about kvetching, jealousy or being ignorant of how difficult it is to write good software. It's about wanting to use the best tools available within a budget. And Apple has a history of promoting "pro" software that eventually becomes less pro, even if the users become MORE pro.

So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....

Why is FCS still growing?

If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.

So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.
post #75 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.



So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....

Why is FCS still growing?

If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.

So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.

I am an editor in a large post-production facility, and we once had several shake licenses, and we considered moving to FCP, after years of AVID. AVID was a stagnant company, but it reinvented itself with a great product at a lower price - and now Apple has been in the doldrums with FCS. They discontinued shake - which really, really took us by surprise. They've really not done much of anything with FCS since FCS 2.0 at NAB 2007 - while AVID and Adobe have been working overtime. Apple did very little with color - a point release, while Blackmagic acquired Da Vinci and has released Resolve at a price almost every budget can afford. Neither did it touch DVD Studio Pro - which has become simply irrelevant. The industry has gone Blu-Ray, while Steve Rimjobs through his reality distortion field tries to tell us Blu-Ray is a bag of hurt. Motion is a big joke, despite Apple's website directing shake users towards motion. Back in '06 Apple had a real chance to gain inroads as a credible platform for post-production, but the really fumbled the ball, and now any editor with any decent proficiency edits on Media Composer.

So now we have migrated to Nuke, Media Composer, Pro Tools - all running on HP workstations, as Apple has become out of touch with its pro customers.
post #76 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.



So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....

Apple does a fantastic job PROMOTING pro software, which isn't part of what anyone has questioned. It's the job they do fulfilling the promise of the promotion


Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Why is FCS still growing?

Not among professional houses it isn't, and not where Apple didn't practically subsidize college media wings. Please show me where it is growing disproportionate to the growing amount of video footage being professionally edited in total, aside from Apple ads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.

So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.

Aside from the fact that you twist the meaning of what I and others are saying, you don't seem to understand the points we're making. If it's not clear you'd have to talk to professionals who have their work riding on their tools. Two things you need to know: there's a reason why so many of the films that get rough edited in FinalCut get handed over to something else to be fine edited on; and FC is great when the budget is smaller, as in documentaries, and much editing happens wherever you can do it, including any old office with a decent Mac. Bump up the budget, and get into the arena of news and broadcast (where a HUMONGOUS amount of editing happens) and the ball game is different. You don't call the people working their asses off under that kind of pressure whiners when they say something doesn't cut it. Google some weekly shows and see what I mean.

I use FC (though I'm an audio pro, not video) and know many editors using all of the systems. In fact I know several who work with Avids, Quantels etc. at work and have FCP at home. Nobody who is working steadily kvetches and whines about anything but the clients : ) But they can explain why they have preferences. Apple's direction for the past few years has made me see more FC at home but less in the edit suites.
post #77 of 79
FCP was updated a year ago. Apple has stated already that they're hard at work on a new version. According to Apple, it will be very impressive. Apple has yet to announce an actual deadline, so if they're missing any deadlines, it's their own internal one(s) and we don't know what those are.

This is Pro-grade, industry-standard software, folks. It doesn't get updated every month. Meanwhile, for all the BS about Apple only caring about their "iToys" (that just so happen to dictate the pace of change in nearly the entire industry), Snow Leopard is getting constant updates, in fact all we keep hearing about are new seeds to developers.

The HardMac story is bogus.

By the way, have you noticed the powerful editing tools available to users of Apple mobile devices? Just a few years ago stuff like this cost a small fortune and required a fair bit of training. The stuff I'm able to do with photos on an iPhone 4 is pretty impressive, to say the least. Just take a gander at the iPhone 4 photos section on MacRumors. Thanks to Apple, of course. Interesting ....
post #78 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcmillasc View Post

and now any editor with any decent proficiency edits on Media Composer.

In comparing MC to FCP, the Mac version of MC is not very robust. If you like working on Mac then FCP is better, especially having Soundtrack, Motion and Color all integrated is a big plus. FCP is much better for titles and audio work too. Subtitles are also easier to manage in FCP. Although my language is English, if yours is something else, keep in mind that MC is English only. I think deciding which application best suits your needs involves several factors such as your associates and team members, workflow practices, post house preferences, and whether or not you are going to BR, the later being a significant reason to go with MC on Windows, but not everyone will have the same priorities. Both MC and FCP have pros and cons. Neither is better or worse than the other.

With either decision you are really just using a clip editor. As you mentioned, for real compositing power you need Nuke and especially the third party plug-in market, but that is a completely different thread.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #79 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....

Why is FCS still growing?

Is there any actual evidence that it is?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

This is Pro-grade, industry-standard software, folks.

If you actually try and use the software, it's pretty obvious that's not the case. I'd never consider software this buggy "pro grade" by any stretch of the imagination. And I don't care how often enough it gets updated as long as it's often enough that nasty bugs don't just sit there - and by that measure it hasn't been getting updated nearly enough. Just now I'm trying to use STP and it's screwing with my audio files in yet another new way I haven't even seen before.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Troubled development, 2011 launch rumored for Apple's Final Cut Studio