or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple product managers address complains over Final Cut Pro X
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple product managers address complains over Final Cut Pro X - Page 5

post #161 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasparilla View Post

This is a great idea, but frankly they'd probably need heavy security to make sure Ubillos and company make it out... It'd be the right thing to do, but very un-Apple

Randy Ubillos is one buff guy and he looks a bit crazy so would put up a fight:



but as the saying goes 'never trust a guy who cuts his own hair'.

He buggered up iMovie and had everyone reverting back to the old version and this is now the second time he's done this with the entire professional video editing crowd.

I do think there are some great improvements but he just needs to follow through on the execution and make sure the software is fully-featured enough and is actually usable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc

The 1 Million $ question is: who WERE those pros that said this PRO version of FCP was simply "awesome"... and dropped their jaws?

The 1700 people who attended the Final Cut Supermeet. Although I heard one of them mutter 'Hallelujah' so maybe some of the crowd got their venues mixed up.

There's no denying the video demos were incredible - the colour matching demo was spectacular. Pretty much everything they showed was 'wow, this is really what magic is'. But nobody guessed what they didn't show would be so bad. The media reconnection issue is ridiculous, no import of FCP files is insulting, sporadic undo and autosave just infuriating and no ideas about volume licensing a non-starter - they need to fix this.

I suspect they don't want to come out and just apologise like Antennagate and MobileMe again because too many of those and you build up a reputation but they could even put an FAQ on their FCP page answering some of the important questions.
post #162 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Apple and everyone here says that the future of media is internet streaming on iMacs, Macbooks, iPhones and iPads. So there is no need for Apple to invest time and resources to support high resolution video cameras or advanced editing processes. Professional cinematography with studios full of exotic equipment is a dying art. But all these guys just can't accept the fact that the video of the future will be shot and edited on iPhones and iPads. And since not everybody has a gigabit internet connection, these videos will have to be downscaled anyway. So why bother developing professional tools for the Youtube and Facebook generation?

I look forward to Iron Man 3 made on an iPad.

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, DEAR GAWD.

Yes there is an erosion in professional film and video making but it hasn't totally evaporated quite yet.

This is like saying since everyone is looking forward to cheaper and greener vehicles Formula One and MotoGP will be cancelled next year, with Lamborghini shutting up shop too.

Now websites and print design, on the other hand, has gone down the toilet... I feel the pain of any print designer, and I'm trying to plan and invest a lot of resources in retooling from doing web stuff to apps.
post #163 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

...Sad fact as I see it, and have stated here many times in other threads:

Professional software development has been dead for the last 5 years or longer. Nothing truly new and groundbreaking has come to market similar to what we witnessed at the end of the 90's and early 2000's.

There are only 3 major software companies in the world today making software for creatives: MS, Adobe, and Apple.

Are we better off... or worse off for that fact?

I include MS because writing is also creative discipline. Look what they have done with Word over the years.

Adobe OWNS the print and graphics market. Look at what they have done between CS2 up to CS5.5. Yes. What HAVE they done?

And now Apple adds to the misery with their pro-apps division and this major snafu and slap in the face. Does SJ know that the guys at his previous company Pixar can't use this software? Does he appreciate getting a call from John Lassiter asking, "WTF Stevie?!!!"

Is Randy Ubillos the right guy for the job of cleaning up this mess that he created? No! And I can all but hope that SJ uses all of his penned-up and choice words telling this guy to take a hike. Probably along the lines of: "See that cliff?.... you know what to do... or do I have to tell you that too?!".

PS: Ubillos has caused Apple a major loss of Image & Corp. Branding to the tune of about 2-3 BILLION $$$'s!!! by my estimate.

A few points... Firstly I'm surprised Randy's name hasn't come up more, as in people saying "I'm going to f**** kill him!". If he is primarily responsible, don't worry, Steve has got his back. It's obvious Steve is very proud of him from almost every keynote.

Adobe from CS2 to CS4 I can say is not bad. They sped things up, made little nitty gritty improvements here and there to Photoshop, Dreamweaver and Flash (yes). Especially things like transitioning to Intel and tabbed files in Dreamweaver. Premiere Pro is not to be taken lightly, they've done quite some work there. After Effects is standard for any kind of motion, effects and titling work for anyone "one level prior" to using Discreet tools. CS5+ I think will start to hit some walls, and Fireworks has been kinda useless for some time. Dreamweaver will hit the HTML5 wall if it hasn't already. Most people use Dreamweaver because it has built-in FTP, tabbed browsing, hand-coding with code colouring and handles included files in code well.

The future is tools for mobile app development and deployment. Xcode is good but we need intermediaries. No, Adobe's Flash Builder doesn't seem right.
post #164 of 217
Ok my 2 cents for what it's worth:

I've used Final Cut since its first iteration and made many national TV shows and now I've used the FCPX I must agree it is a perfectly nice prosumer product with massive potential down the road as it improves with extra features. However, it's not an upgrade to 7 as it stands. I really wish Apple had re written FCP 7 as a 64 bit native app as well even if they changed nothing else and offered both a new 7 (8?) as well as FCPX. As it stands the old 7 it is far better suited to the professional's needs. No production house is going to switch to the current version IMHO, it's just too big of a change in approach as well as currently too limited. No migration path from 7 projects and no support for plug ins just for starters.

I do suspect many will (including me) start using it on the side 'as well' for small projects and await to see what comes along in improvements and get used to it. But for now any serious production work will remain in 7. So my suggestion is ... Just make sure you don't over write 7 with the new version, keep 7 what ever you do!


Quote:
Originally Posted by bwik View Post

Apple's new releases greatly pleases many "prosumers" like myself.

It also temporarily angers some professional FCP editors while they wait for features.

Compare the number of Prosumers (5 million?) with the number of professional editors (20,000?) and get back to me.

I think we have been giving creedence to FCP editors as if their priorities are Apple's own. Well, I am a prosumer and I matter much more to Apple than the pros do. Great, seeya.


As a share holder I don't disagree with the promise of FCPX as a prosumer product. As stated above, I just feel FCPro 7 deserved a rewrite and continued support and upgrades too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Out of all the complaints, the most ridiculous and unsupportable is that the new version is "not for professionals."

A few old geezers that are afraid of doing anything new or stopping their addiction to magnetic tape (of all things), are making a lot of sounds that it isn't for "professionals" because it removes their ancient workflows from the equation. The majority of professionals using the old Final Cut will move to the new one with no problems at all. The majority of professionals don't even use tape.

Final Cut Pro X is so totally *not* a "consumer" product in any way. Your just being ridiculous.

Just speaking personally, I have been 100% digital for over five years so I am not worrying about legacy formats (although some have to). I am the first to jump at anything new. The problem here is if you ran a production company with masses of video editing jobs under way and dead lines to meet you simply can't stop and change everything over night. As upgrades to previous FCP versions came out those in the business always tested it carefully before upgrading and these were minor changes in most cases. Once happy with the changes, the projects could be imported and updated and work continued. This is no longer possible.

This is simply far too much of a change to be taken on in the immediate future for professionals. Over time editors and edit houses will have to decide, if they are going to change, do they really want to stay with Apple now, which is sad. I am definitely planning to get to grips with X and hope for upgrades ASAP and using 7 as well. Many others will be looking around now worried their production future may not be looked after by Apple as a perceived move to prosumer will be seen from this version at least.
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 #165 of 217
There are so many comments to this article. I just have one question....
If you own the prior version, and I buy the latest version will the latest wipe out the older?
Thanks
"The cry of equality pulls everyone down." - Iris Murdoch
Reply
"The cry of equality pulls everyone down." - Iris Murdoch
Reply
post #166 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by muzzypat View Post

There are so many comments to this article. I just have one question....
If you own the prior version, and I buy the latest version will the latest wipe out the older?
Thanks

Both 7 and X are called "Final Cut Pro.app" Move your current FCPro 7 to a new folder before buying the new one to be safe. That's what I did. I don't know if I would have been warned as I had already moved 7 but I wasn't about to find out the hard way if it didn't ask! Of course I had cloned my drive first as well as used TM.

p.s. I hope treating you equally didn't pull me down!
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 #167 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I really wish Apple had re written FCP 7 as a 64 bit native app as well even if they changed nothing else and offered both a new 7 (8?) as well as FCPX. As it stands the old 7 it is far better suited to the professional's needs. No production house is going to switch to the current version IMHO, it's just too big of a change in approach as well as currently too limited. No migration path from 7 projects and no support for plug ins just for starters.

If they'd done that though, what would have happened is Final Cut X would have nestled into the Final Cut Express crowd and never been able to take over from FCP.

I like it when they cut the cord sometimes because of the fact that they end up making things so clean. I was over the moon when they did the big switch with OS X because they made the right decisions. I was over the moon when they did this with the switch to Intel because it opened up so much software and higher performance/price ratios.

When they EOL'd Shake, that was annoying but I could see why they did it and the impact was lower because they discontinued the app and went a new route entirely.

This move just feels so much worse because it's one of the few ProApps they have left that people genuinely respect them for, they launched it too soon and are trying to pass it off as a replacement knowing full well its limitations. Whether this was because they said shipping in June without letting the development team know beforehand, I don't know. I still don't know why they decided to launch it before Lion.

But I do think starting over was the right thing to do and I also think using iMovie as a base and not FCP was the right thing to do. They really just made a handful of bad decisions that they can put right again and hopefully the fixes won't be a long time coming.
post #168 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

If they'd done that though, what would have happened is Final Cut X would have nestled into the Final Cut Express crowd and never been able to take over from FCP.

I like it when they cut the cord sometimes because of the fact that they end up making things so clean. I was over the moon when they did the big switch with OS X because they made the right decisions. I was over the moon when they did this with the switch to Intel because it opened up so much software and higher performance/price ratios.

When they EOL'd Shake, that was annoying but I could see why they did it and the impact was lower because they discontinued the app and went a new route entirely.

This move just feels so much worse because it's one of the few ProApps they have left that people genuinely respect them for, they launched it too soon and are trying to pass it off as a replacement knowing full well its limitations. Whether this was because they said shipping in June without letting the development team know beforehand, I don't know. I still don't know why they decided to launch it before Lion.

But I do think starting over was the right thing to do and I also think using iMovie as a base and not FCP was the right thing to do. They really just made a handful of bad decisions that they can put right again and hopefully the fixes won't be a long time coming.

I agree with you on all points. I am enjoying playing with it for sure and in time it will no doubt be great for many uses but Apple need to continue to support 7 and even update it for several years. Entire production companies rely on it and this is like kicking them in the guts. They simply cannot switch to this over night.
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 #169 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by muzzypat View Post

There are so many comments to this article. I just have one question....
If you own the prior version, and I buy the latest version will the latest wipe out the older?
Thanks

No, the new version installs separately and the old version continues to work...you're supposed to be safe just installing it and running both. It's almost like the iMovie, er, um I mean Final Cut Xpress coders didn't even know about the old Final Cut Pro details.
post #170 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasparilla View Post

No, the new version installs separately and the old version continues to work...you're supposed to be safe just installing it and running both. It's almost like the iMovie, er, um I mean Final Cut Xpress coders didn't even know about the old Final Cut Pro details.

I didn't risk it and moved my FCPro 7 first as both versions when installed are are called 'Final Cut Pro.app'. Out of curiosity when you installed FCPX did it move or rename your FCPro 7 or perhaps place X in a folder?
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 #171 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I agree with you on all points. I am enjoying playing with it for sure and in time it will no doubt be great for many uses but Apple need to continue to support 7 and even update it for several years. Entire production companies rely on it and this is like kicking them in the guts. They simply cannot switch to this over night.

Second this, except for "enjoying playing" part. Can't spring for it just yet, given the known issues.

It would be so easy for them to fix this by keeping FCP available. They don't need to work on it, just keep it available.

And communicate with their customers, especially this group, who are more responsible for whatever prestige Apple used to have than any other group, because they contribute vastly to the whole culture's mythos. Conan's editors are just a taste of the PR wreckage to come.

I hate to say it, but I'm finding that good will doesn't change to indifference, it seems to change to ill will. Because so far what they've done looks like betrayal, and I'm not even on the inside of the industry. I just need video and audo tracks to do what I want and not what they think I want, and the emphasis to be on precision, like doing single-frame trims, not to be on speed and "jaw-dropping." Really dislike that phrase. Sign of the times, I suppose . . .
post #172 of 217
Okay people--Apple is no longer in the Pro Video Editing business. There isn't enough profit and in this day of You Tube etc., everyone is a film maker. Just move over to Premiere or run Vegas on your Windows partition. No big thing--this is the way the capitalist system works. Apple is now officially a prosumer software developer for video and film.
post #173 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

There are only 3 major software companies in the world today making software for creatives: MS, Adobe, and Apple.

Are we better off... or worse off for that fact?

I include MS because writing is also creative discipline. Look what they have done with Word over the years.

MS did have a line of "prosumer" photo and video software, it seems like that was swept under the rug within three months. I think they still sell it somewhere, but it's not getting the advertising it would get if they're truly serious about promoting it.

It seems like Corel could be a player if they tried. I don't know if they're a permanently damaged brand, if there's no room for a #2 in the market, like ketchup/catsup, it's either Heinz or it's generic in most people's minds. There might be other contributing factors, such as platforms, the market only seems to accept a certain number of platforms and the network effect pushes out the marginal ones pretty quickly.
post #174 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by rextilleon View Post

Apple is now officially a prosumer software developer for video and film.

Link to Apple's website where this is stated, please? Until then, that's your opinion only.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #175 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

If they'd done that though, what would have happened is Final Cut X would have nestled into the Final Cut Express crowd and never been able to take over from FCP.

I like it when they cut the cord sometimes because of the fact that they end up making things so clean. I was over the moon when they did the big switch with OS X because they made the right decisions. I was over the moon when they did this with the switch to Intel because it opened up so much software and higher performance/price ratios.

When they EOL'd Shake, that was annoying but I could see why they did it and the impact was lower because they discontinued the app and went a new route entirely.

This move just feels so much worse because it's one of the few ProApps they have left that people genuinely respect them for, they launched it too soon and are trying to pass it off as a replacement knowing full well its limitations. Whether this was because they said shipping in June without letting the development team know beforehand, I don't know. I still don't know why they decided to launch it before Lion.

But I do think starting over was the right thing to do and I also think using iMovie as a base and not FCP was the right thing to do. They really just made a handful of bad decisions that they can put right again and hopefully the fixes won't be a long time coming.


All good points, but I would put more emphasis on how the Shake fiasco (and for others the problems with Compressor. Soundtrack not being useable I always just wrote off as drag one could ignore) began the lack of faith for many that it was worth it to commit to FCP as their main format. Some time after Apple discontinued it they announced, more or less officially IIRC, that its more modern replacement was imminent in the next handful of quarters. Then they annoyed a lot of people by saying you should now use Motion for what you used Shake for, you get the same capabilities with Motion, which wasn't true, though it has some compositing aspects for sure. It was kind of like discontinuing the DAW app (because you bought it instead of created it and had no idea how to update it) and saying users should just use FCP because it handles audio. That was how they explained away Shake. Which left compositors saying "They don't know much about video production".

Sure, they were merely exiting the market of a tool they purchased and didn't know what to do with, and looking after their bottom line, but they made enough statements to show that the ones holding the reins only understood half of the field they had entered and were now servicing less and less.

Remember in 2009 (?) when Jobs claimed the layoffs/exodus of Pro Apps employees were completely support, none from engineering, to keep public confidence up, which was soon widely refuted by the Pro Apps engineers who left? To paraphrase what another poster said, having faith accounts for a lot in what format we commit to. I don't think Apple has recovered the faith of the professional creative communities since then, though obviously that's not their goal.

But like you I hope it works out for the best and everyone thrives.
post #176 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

A few points... Firstly I'm surprised Randy's name hasn't come up more, as in people saying "I'm going to f**** kill him!". If he is primarily responsible, don't worry, Steve has got his back. It's obvious Steve is very proud of him from almost every keynote.

Oh he is definitely in the cross-fire on a number of blog posts out there. He and Apple could have done MUCH better communicating their intent with the re-write, why, what was going to be there and what was going to need more time. I think that is all that the pros are, and were asking for.

Also, that FCS wouldn't be pulled the very day an incomplete rewrite was available.

Quote:
Adobe from CS2 to CS4 I can say is not bad. They sped things up, made little nitty gritty improvements here and there to Photoshop, Dreamweaver and Flash (yes).

Well, it was exactly that to which I was referring; nothing ground-breaking, but little improvements here and there. I'm not against kicking the bugs out and making it more efficient, but calling it a new release, at the prices Adobe asks, are stretching it, dontcha think? What ever happened to .5, .6, etc. updates? I believe the majority of Adobe's progs have not made it past .4 before a new CS is announced, if even that many. Considering the number of "nigglies" they "could" fix and add... not exactly admirable. Let's also take into effect that delivery is made over the internet these days and not on 4-6 discs in the mail... what pray tell is holding them back from releasing updates and fixes more often?

Re: Speed - I think that Moore's Law and the machines we have at our disposal had a lot to do with that as well. I'm not all that sure that Adobe's programs, or any other software for that matter, really makes good use of the power that's available.

When you take into consideration what an ARM processor and GPU can do on an iDevice, then multiply that by about 1000, are our desktop programs really 1000 times faster and more efficient? Could it be the software not hooking in well with underlying frameworks? Are the frameworks even being used correctly, or is there a lowest common denominator factor being used at the development stages and the programs are really only "ports"?

Which brings me full circle to why I believe, and fully back the idea that Apple decided to re-write from the ground up, the new FCP and it's code libraries. No doubt, this is the smart thing to do for the "Next Gen" software that can fully realize the massive power of 64-bit/multi-core processors and hardware. Repeat: Apple just "held it (out) wrong" to their pro user base.

Quote:
The future is tools for mobile app development and deployment. Xcode is good but we need intermediaries. No, Adobe's Flash Builder doesn't seem right.

Well I agree with you there. However, there still is a large base of pro users, creative specialists, and content providers out there that need access to full-blown desktop apps for the time being and probably the next 5 years or so.

I also see a future that marginalizes "pro" creatives, and see the majority of content being produced be individuals and distributed through social networks, syndicates, and agencies of one kind or another. See reality shows and their popularity for instance. Also, nothing more real than the "Dude Perfects" of the world shooting on their cells and creating 1 Million hits on YouTube, integrated with FB, Twitter, etc. etc.? At some point though, they will out-grow their iPhone/FCPX setup. What do they move "up" too? And does Apple make that tool?

*For example: DudePerfect (a classic "consumer/prosumer"), keeps getting "fake" comments on YouTube, so they shoot with 3 or 5 iPhones, and an iPad to boot. FCPX doesn't have an easy way to do multi-cam. How ironic is that? So what DO they use? And what kind of work-arounds are necessary? Will those guys stick around, or will they move to Android and Windows/Vegas?

OK... I'm stretching a situation here, but me thinks the FCP Dev-Team better get crackin' on that update, because in certain situations, it could also not be ready for consumers even.

Re: Lion and iMovie and FCP "Xpress".
I'm rather curious how Lion is going to sync your FCPX folder to iCloud... or not? Can you turn that off? Will your movie folder on the iPhone, iPad, sync with your monster FCPX edit? Would you want it to? What kind of bandwidth are we looking at here as a minimum? Will Apple sell/rent a Terabyte space in the iCloud?
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #177 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

MS did have a line of "prosumer" photo and video software, it seems like that was swept under the rug within three months. I think they still sell it somewhere, but it's not getting the advertising it would get if they're truly serious about promoting it.

It was called Expression and Media. I still have a copy here, and Media is used by many of my clients for quick libraries of photos, PDFs, contact sheets, etc. I was referring mostly to Office, and it's use in creating books, manuals, etc. While Office is seen by many as a tool for the secretaries and number crunchers of the world... I would almost bet that it is used just as much for "creative" endeavors of all kinds. Whether it's the "right" tool for the job is up for debate.

Quote:
It seems like Corel could be a player if they tried. I don't know if they're a permanently damaged brand, if there's no room for a #2 in the market, like ketchup/catsup, it's either Heinz or it's generic in most people's minds. There might be other contributing factors, such as platforms, the market only seems to accept a certain number of platforms and the network effect pushes out the marginal ones pretty quickly.

Corel has left the ball park for the "amateur league" long ago.

They recently, after almost 3 years, released their new version of Painter. Previously, a "pro" painting program that originated on the Mac, was purchased a number of times, and landed in their basket.

Yes. It is a "basket-case"! It is an example of a "bad port". Considering as well that they released a 64-bit version for Windows, with a "coming sometime for Mac in the future", we can judge that they are working on a way to fork the port, without using proper development and the OSX frameworks.

To be fair... it is better than their last couple of attempts, but it is NOT a Mac program any more than Gimp is a competitor to Photoshop, or even Pixelmator. They even make a "downloader" to download the program itself. How sad is that?

CorelDraw or PhotoPaint I wouldn't touch 'em with a "sound-boom" attached to a mouse! They just plain SUCK and are no competitor to Adobe.

The only competitor to Adobe was Macromedia. I do believe the DOJ should have been a little more awake when they let that happen lock-stock-and-barrel. I think we would still have a healthy software environment for creatives, IF they would have required it to be split up as they did when Macromedia and Adobe bought pieces of Aldus.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #178 of 217
I think a telling footnote to this thread, is something I found at this blog post, which is rather good:

Final Cut Pro X: the natives get restless

With a link to this article: Doomed Industries in America
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #179 of 217
Below is copied from the review at Macworld.

Performance

Without exception, FCP X is the fastest NLE I have edited on without the assistance of dedicated hardware. That performance gain comes from the programs native 64-bit toolset and the operating systems Grand Central Dispatch, which harnesses power from the GPU processing as well as the multicore CPU.

This 64-bit architecture lets FCP X access every byte of RAM, execute true multi-processing across all CPU cores, and unlock GPU-based graphics processing. Because FCP X processing is scalable, its always using the maximum power available to your computer, whether it be a MacBook Pro or a Mac Pro tower. Final Cut Pro X finally utilizes every CPU and GPU cycle to accelerate background processes.

That is done while simultaneously archiving the data stream and rendering, transcoding, and moving content in the backgroundall without bringing your machine to a grinding halt. Now, the extra RAM, disk speed, and powerful graphics card add a noticeable speed boost to your machine.

With that power, tasks like ingesting media become a minor background chore rather than a consuming process. You can immediately start editing in the foreground while the file is being transferred or transcoded for proxy creation, all of which happens in the background.

Theres a noticeable improvement in media handling and responsiveness after the transfer/ingest is complete. This is due to additional processing power being allocated back to application as soon as the Finder has completed its tasks.


*************************************

This is why FCP X was completely rewritten, and now I see the genius of this approach.

Also, if Apple can do this... I am now clamoring for the very same treatment to my every day software: Adobe CS6. In fact, Adobe should have done this with Flash already.

No buts about it. This is the future of what PRO software needs to be to take advantage of the hardware, OS-software and frameworks power, that I mention in an above post.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #180 of 217
Apple now has a lot of customers saying, "sorry, the thing you call FCX isn't good enough, but I would buy more copies of FC7 (for new students, seats, whatever)" ... so why not sell it to them?

Make it clear 7 is being phased out as X matures over the next few years, and that it will be sold with limited support and bug fixes; but sell it nonetheless (as that is what some customers want to buy, and they wont buy X).

The fact that Apple demoed the thing a NAB tells me they cared about the status of having a product for the pros. The fact that they took 7 off the shelves tells me they thought X was good enough for pros.

[Look at the iOS App Store. The "top tens" are dominated by video games. That's where the money is, but is that really where the future is? Games? Is Apple's drive for excellence on the hardware front matched on the software front?]
post #181 of 217
Every point you made in this post has been touched upon.

The current answer for that is that there is no reason to stop using FCP 7 if FCP X does not meet your needs.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorGonzo View Post

The problem with David Pogue's piece is that he doesn't work in post-production. So it's easy to say "Well some things are different, wait for a few patches and change your workflow. We all learned how to use the Word ribbon, didn't we?"
post #182 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

It was the promises made at NAB.

What was shown at NAB is what FCP X turned out to be

Quote:
In front of 1700 Final Cut Pro users, the presenter said "we want to create great software that you guys can use". How can they use it if it can't even open their project files or support some of the key features they need?

This is a matter of perspective isn't it. Taking the merits of FCP X within itself a lot of reviewers are saying it is a great piece of software. And in its current form doesn't replace FCP 7.


Quote:
One by one, the problems will disappear over time but the fact remains that Apple has created these problems when they had already been solved over the course of the years. Yes, the NAB demo is still awesome and the features are awesome but they shouldn't screw up on the basics like file management. If I have an MP4 called sunny-beach-1121.mp4 then let me reconnect it to ProRes sunny-beach-1121.mov. I don't want to be told it's offline and have to jump through hoops for this basic functionality. People do screw up edits by reconnecting the wrong stuff but those people aren't professionals and it's easy to put right if you have the right features - don't dumb down software designed for people who know what they're doing because chances are, they know better.

What I think your analysis missing is the fact that Apple is recreating FCP from the ground up. Everything is being recreated in that the way things are done in classic FCP are not being transferred directly over to the new FCP.

Whether this is a good thing or bad thing. Time will tell. But its clear that is what Apple is doing.



Quote:
It is a Fuck-up of Colossal Proportions to the power of X. I believe it can be fixed and probably without a fundamental rewrite - they can allow media bins to be tagged and hidden from view, they can change the way media reconnects. Whether they will is a different matter entirely. The software looks so good and it would be a shame if they just act all arrogant about doing things a certain way and lose the respect of the professionals who would appreciate the work and only impress the handycam crowd who won't even see what they did.

I supposed the fuck up. Is in that Apple isn't communicating the future direction of FCP with the wider community.

I'm sure if Apple had stated up front that this is a preview of the direction of FCP. To give editors an opportunity to get used to the new UI and that updates of critical features are coming in the near future. There would have been a lot less reaction.

Its likely Apple knew this backlash was going to happen and just likes to fuck with people.
post #183 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

What was shown at NAB is what FCP X turned out to be

That's what all magicians who use the sleight-of-hand on stage will tell their audience - you saw what you wanted to see. This kind of diversionary tactic is fine for entertainment but in business, it means real money and real jobs. While technically they did ship what they showed, they certainly implied this was the big FCP replacement aimed at people who currently use FCP for a living and they haven't delivered this, yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

What I think your analysis missing is the fact that Apple is recreating FCP from the ground up. Everything is being recreated in that the way things are done in classic FCP are not being transferred directly over to the new FCP.

This makes sense when software uses complex data layouts. For example, I wouldn't expect Shake to translate into Motion because there's no direct mapping between non-linear and linear dependency. All NLEs are really storing is clip locations e.g in and out points. That has a direct correlation in FCPX to what was in FCP. The very fact that they demoed the exact same timeline in both at the supermeet shows this.

I suspect the only reason for the lack of FCP 7 support is that (as Apple has stated via Pogue), they don't have the XML API ready yet. But I'd say to ship with iMovie support and force the target audience to wait for the XML API shows a misjudged sense of priority.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I'm sure if Apple had stated up front that this is a preview of the direction of FCP. To give editors an opportunity to get used to the new UI and that updates of critical features are coming in the near future. There would have been a lot less reaction.

Sure but they still discontinued the only fully-fledged option. If they'd called it a preview, it would have made that move even worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Its likely Apple knew this backlash was going to happen and just likes to fuck with people.

I sincerely hope not, although if they pulled this kind of thing on the consumer crowd, I'd be ok with it. Ship a new version of Pages that doesn't open any of the files from the previous version of Pages. Let's see how that goes down.

Just found an article yesterday with some other info. I imagine Ubillos has had a pretty hectic few days answering email. Like we suspected, he sees Final Cut X as the first step on a journey:

http://www.cambridgecomputershop.co....eviews/?p=2010

That's cool and I think everyone gets that but people who already know how to ride a bike don't want someone to put the training wheels back on their new bike just 'cos it's new. We know how the new one works too.
post #184 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Just found an article yesterday with some other info. I imagine Ubillos has had a pretty hectic few days answering email. Like we suspected, he sees Final Cut X as the first step on a journey:

http://www.cambridgecomputershop.co....eviews/?p=2010

That's cool and I think everyone gets that but people who already know how to ride a bike don't want someone to put the training wheels back on their new bike just 'cos it's new. We know how the new one works too.

Good analogy. What's so alienating about this fiasco is the combination of contempt and condescension that Apple has shown toward one of their heaviest user bases. I think the resentment is not going to diminish, but get worse.

Anyway, Gruber links to Josh Mellicker's piece, plus one from Larry Jordan, (on daringfireball.net):

http://www.dvcreators.net/what-does-...pro-x-release/
post #185 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

CorelDraw or PhotoPaint I wouldn't touch 'em with a "sound-boom" attached to a mouse! They just plain SUCK and are no competitor to Adobe.

I'll grant PhotoPaint, but what about CorelDraw isn't professional software?
post #186 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by rextilleon View Post

Okay people--Apple is no longer in the Pro Video Editing business. There isn't enough profit and in this day of You Tube etc., everyone is a film maker. Just move over to Premiere or run Vegas on your Windows partition. No big thing--this is the way the capitalist system works. Apple is now officially a prosumer software developer for video and film.

Well since we didn't get the 64 bit rewrite of FCS this probably also spells the demise of the Mac Pro since prosumers use iMacs. I bought another copy of FCS to add a little bit more capability to the studio and will probably buy another Mac Pro when they discontinue that. I need the slots to run my Black Magic cards. Seems strange though - stocking up on old tech.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #187 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

That's what all magicians who use the sleight-of-hand on stage will tell their audience - you saw what you wanted to see. This kind of diversionary tactic is fine for entertainment but in business, it means real money and real jobs. While technically they did ship what they showed, they certainly implied this was the big FCP replacement aimed at people who currently use FCP for a living and they haven't delivered this, yet.

I don't know about this analogy.

Magicians use slight of hand to trick the audience into seeing something that isn't real.

While the FCP X demonstrated was literally FCP X. People had expectation that their would be more than what they were shown. Apple never promised that - and no one seemed to ask about any other functionality than what was shown.



Quote:
All NLEs are really storing is clip locations e.g in and out points. That has a direct correlation in FCPX to what was in FCP. The very fact that they demoed the exact same timeline in both at the supermeet shows this.

Yeah but the may not being storing that information in the same type of container.

Quote:
Sure but they still discontinued the only fully-fledged option. If they'd called it a preview, it would have made that move even worse.

I do agree they should help those already using FCS 3 to feel at ease during the transition. People see to have taken it that Apple has completely abandoned FCS3. While it is clearly EOL, Apple has not directly stated its support status for the near future.



Quote:
I sincerely hope not, although if they pulled this kind of thing on the consumer crowd, I'd be ok with it.

I would agree with the accusation that Apple is flexing its arrogance. I cannot think of any company that would be brave (stupid) enough to pull the rug out from under its customers in this way. They would be too afraid that customers would move to a competitor and never come back.

Apple brazenly is not afraid of this outcome. I believe they are so sure of what they have coming in the near future. That they can pull the rug from under their customers and customers won't abandon them.

That's why I say they just like fucking with people.
post #188 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Well since we didn't get the 64 bit rewrite of FCS this probably also spells the demise of the Mac Pro since prosumers use iMacs.

Which... are also 64-bit...

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #189 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I don't know about this analogy.

Magicians use slight of hand to trick the audience into seeing something that isn't real.

While the FCP X demonstrated was literally FCP X. People had expectation that their would be more than what they were shown. Apple never promised that - and no one seemed to ask about any other functionality than what was shown.

There is only so much they can show in the given time slot, and I think it was regarded as a preview and not necessarily the final product. It would seem to me that there were a lot of features that people had no reason to expect would be dropped without at least some notice. And then there was a different group of people that were afraid of iMovie-ization of the software, and I don't remember much of a good response to those worries other than to wait and see the final product.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I do agree they should help those already using FCS 3 to feel at ease during the transition. People see to have taken it that Apple has completely abandoned FCS3. While it is clearly EOL, Apple has not directly stated its support status for the near future.

It would seem to me that pulling copies of the previous version is a statement that they are likely going to abandon support for it pretty quickly. Except for operating systems, I don't think Apple has ever made a patch for previous versions of software once they've released its replacement. I wonder what will be done for those that need to wait until the software advances, but also need to add another seat. They can't buy the old software from Apple, supplies from elsewhere will get scarce and the new software won't work with the existing projects.
post #190 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Out of all the complaints, the most ridiculous and unsupportable is that the new version is "not for professionals." The majority of professionals using the old Final Cut will move to the new one with no problems at all. The majority of professionals don't even use tape.

Sorry, you're wrong. How will those "majority of professionals" hand off their files to DI, sound stage, or color facility? You can't do it. Literally. An application that can't open existing projects, can't handle multicam, doesn't allow you to check colorspace or interlacing on an external display, has no professional output capabilities (it doesn't support EDLs/OMF/XML, so you can't hand off audio tracks to a mixing facility or picture to a color or DI facility), and doesn't allow you to mix audio at all (hello??), is quite patently NOT a professional tool. That's just the truth.

The simple fact is that FCPX, in current form, is not capable of being integrated into a post-production facility, a commercial corporate video environment, or a broadcast setting. Apple isn't even claiming it can be--you'd have to cobble together some awful mess of expensive plug-ins with waterfowl names and as-yet-unreleased AJA cards. You can't possible claim that's a professional solution. It's a bad, expensive hack.

To add insult to injury, they removed essential, use-it-everyday features and did not replace them with anything (e.g. Attributes and Photoshop layer support). And what about Shared Project, which we've been promised for years would be part of the ground-up rebuild? Still no Unity?

If you are the kind of "professional" who never uses a post-house and never mixes audio, then I'm sure you're happy. But the worlds of film, broadcast, and commercial video cannot currently use this tool.
post #191 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

There is only so much they can show in the given time slot, and I think it was regarded as a preview and not necessarily the final product. It would seem to me that there were a lot of features that people had no reason to expect would be dropped without at least some notice. And then there was a different group of people that were afraid of iMovie-ization of the software, and I don't remember much of a good response to those worries other than to wait and see the final product.

Yes I agree. No one expects a company to deprecate a large portion of the usable features in the introduction a new product.

I agree that was shocking. But I think the ensuing hysterics have been completely over the top. Should be interesting for those who study human behavior though.



Quote:
It would seem to me that pulling copies of the previous version is a statement that they are likely going to abandon support for it pretty quickly. Except for operating systems, I don't think Apple has ever made a patch for previous versions of software once they've released its replacement. I wonder what will be done for those that need to wait until the software advances, but also need to add another seat. They can't buy the old software from Apple, supplies from elsewhere will get scarce and the new software won't work with the existing projects.


I would take it as a clear signal they definitely are going to abandon support. Without any clear information on how quickly I wouldn't be too quick to assume until Apple says for sure.

Especially in light of the fact that a large number of features are missing from FCP X.
post #192 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by axual View Post

None of this griping matters. Those who complain can and will wait. It's not like the current version brings people to an editing halt. They are already using it and can continue to do so. Those who aren't complaining will buy or upgrade to the latest version.

Yes and no. Tell that to CNN, who owns 300 seats and now can't add anymore. Tell that to a large post facility, mapping out their purchase decisions for the next fiscal year. There's a cost to not communicating. Large, professional facilities with millions at stake need to plan longterm. Since Apple has killed the product that works for them, and its current product cannot be used in a professional environment, and it can't or won't provide a roadmap for when it will be able to integrate with professional workflows, the big houses are being forced to plan accordingly.

That means budgets are being revised right now, and they're weighing Avid or Premiere.
post #193 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

I don't know anything about video editing, but as a software developer I recently had to change from Xcode 3 to Xcode 4 which has a whole new GUI. It took time (watching tutorial videos), and there are still a few menus I miss, but I'm glad I made the change now.

Um, you're missing the point. This is not about learning a new GUI. The point is, without key capabilities like professional output (OMF/EDLs/XML), multicam, the ability to mix audio, and the ability to check colorspace & interlacing on an external display, this tool CANNOT be used in a pro setting. You cannot hand off your files to a mixing facility or a color facility or a DI facility. It cannot be done.

So this is as if Xcode4 made it impossible for you to export your code in a format that could actually be read by a computer. Seriously.
post #194 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady S View Post

Yes and no. Tell that to CNN, who owns 300 seats and now can't add anymore. Tell that to a large post facility, mapping out their purchase decisions for the next fiscal year. There's a cost to not communicating. Large, professional facilities with millions at stake need to plan longterm. Since Apple has killed the product that works for them, and its current product cannot be used in a professional environment, and it can't or won't provide a roadmap for when it will be able to integrate with professional workflows, the big houses are being forced to plan accordingly.

That means budgets are being revised right now, and they're weighing Avid or Premiere.

Thanks for adding some concrete examples to the discussion. The people who are trying to calm down those who are incensed about getting stiffed by Apple just don't get it. That's ok with me, because I don't want to the discussion to stop. Interesting that this thread is still alive.

Edit: Gruber's not letting it go away either. He links to this nice jab by Ian Betteridge:

http://www.technovia.co.uk/2011/06/h...187-words.html
post #195 of 217
I haven't heard any word of CNN or any other large post production facility totally freaking out over this the way some have.

I would imagine most are going about their work the way they were the day before FCP X was launched.

You are right that post companies are evaluating their future direction. With that they should always be evaluating their future direction. Apple will certainly need to shed some light on the future of FCP X for any large company to continue to invest in it as their tool of choice.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady S View Post

Yes and no. Tell that to CNN, who owns 300 seats and now can't add anymore. Tell that to a large post facility, mapping out their purchase decisions for the next fiscal year. There's a cost to not communicating. Large, professional facilities with millions at stake need to plan longterm. Since Apple has killed the product that works for them, and its current product cannot be used in a professional environment, and it can't or won't provide a roadmap for when it will be able to integrate with professional workflows, the big houses are being forced to plan accordingly.

That means budgets are being revised right now, and they're weighing Avid or Premiere.
post #196 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Which... are also 64-bit...

I'm not sure what you are implying but if i had to guess i would clarify that 64 bit hardware is simply no advantage unless your software is also compiled for 64 bit, not 32 bit as the current FCS is. Does that make sense?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #197 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I don't know about this analogy.

Magicians use slight of hand to trick the audience into seeing something that isn't real.

While the FCP X demonstrated was literally FCP X. People had expectation that their would be more than what they were shown. Apple never promised that - and no one seemed to ask about any other functionality than what was shown.

The magician analogy is on the mark. Although I followed it in the media and wasn't present I recall the NAB presentation as NOT the final released, finished program. There were many aspects that they absolutely left cryptic and up in the air. No one *seemed* to ask? Says who? There WERE unanswered questions but Apple did not use NAB or any time since then until the release to answer them. IIRC, after NAB no one even knew that Compressor wasn't part of the install but a $50 option. It was NOT a definitive affair. The whole thing was very much a "Check out this awesome demo of these great new features! To find out the details please wait for the release!" To make any judgement of the alertness or preferences of the people who were paying attention at NAB is just insane reasoning. Truthfully, by naming it FCPX rather than iVideoProd they were doing a bit of sleight of hand to distract people from what was to come.



Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I haven't heard any word of CNN or any other large post production facility totally freaking out over this the way some have.

Again, same thing. That means nothing.

First of all most video editors that work for humongous networks work 8 hour days, go home to their families and toil far above the fray of version releases. Among the ones I know they're the least likely of all people to post on forums or talk about their work. Just because you don't see stories with bold quotes from employees of CNN in a Mac forum or anywhere in the news means nothing. Plus, you think that having scored a direct iCNN upload from FCPX that anyone who works there would let themselves be quoted as a CNN employee unhappy with it?

The only sounds you hear are the ones made by people who like making sounds, on both sides. Doesn't reflect the ratio of happy to sad editors. You can't judge what's not coming to your radar as the silence of approval.
post #198 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Good analogy. What's so alienating about this fiasco is the combination of contempt and condescension that Apple has shown toward one of their heaviest user bases. I think the resentment is not going to diminish, but get worse.

Anyway, Gruber links to Josh Mellicker's piece, plus one from Larry Jordan, (on daringfireball.net):

http://www.dvcreators.net/what-does-...pro-x-release/

Consumers are Apple's heaviest user base. The disconnect comes from video editors that somehow still view Apple as the "Beleaguered" company that they have helped save.

Consumers rule the roost now and the Pro stuff is on the periphery. If anyone doubts this look at the quarterly reports. That's not 3 million editors buying Macs every quarter it's consumers.

I don't think Apple has plans to abandon the Pro market but with 70 billion in the bank they don't have to sweat studios moving to Avid or Adobe (both they could buy with cash). Its about return on investment and a new codebase in FCPX and lower pricing lets Apple focus on one program (instead of the FCP Express/Studio ) with a more extensible foundation. I suspect Logic Studio will be the next heavily discounted program.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #199 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Consumers are Apple's heaviest user base. The disconnect comes from video editors that somehow still view Apple as the "Beleaguered" company that they have helped save.

Consumers rule the roost now and the Pro stuff is on the periphery. If anyone doubts this look at the quarterly reports. That's not 3 million editors buying Macs every quarter it's consumers.

Cool Apple develops a prosumer app. Does that mean that being a liar is justified for the bottom line? They said the professionals were in jaw dropping approval of the update. Then they pull the rug out from under them. Deception has no justification. Liar is liar, no gray area involved.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #200 of 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Cool Apple develops a prosumer app. Does that mean that being a liar is justified for the bottom line? They said the professionals were in jaw dropping approval of the update. Then they pull the rug out from under them. Deception has no justification. Liar is liar, no gray area involved.

Well let's be honest ...you're not going to wow people showing OMF export to Pro Tools or nifty EDL stuff. I think the assumption was this "basic" stuff was in there.

Now let's say XML/EDL/OMF/Full Tape log and capture/Multicam and other stuff was in fact in there you'd have Pros frothing at the mouth talking about how cool the background rendering is or the 4k support or the speed.

It's not 64-bit that's giving FCPX speed it's AV Foundation (Quicktime's 64-bit replacement API) mated to OpenCL and GCD that is powering the core. We're not even running on Lion yet which will probably yield even more performance improvement.

Evolve or perish. If the plucky upstart running FCPX and Logic X (assumed name) can deliver as good a product in half the turnaround time then prosumer or not that's tough competition. Time = $$$
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple product managers address complains over Final Cut Pro X