or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple rumored to be near completion of new 'Logic Pro X'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple rumored to be near completion of new 'Logic Pro X' - Page 2

post #41 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


Ubillos was then charged with handling the refresh of Final Cut Pro, which required an extensive update to bring it up to date as a modern 64-bit Cocoa app for Mac OS X and its new QuickTime X architecture. Final Cut was originally written for PowerPC Macs running the Classic Mac OS and its earlier QuickTime video architecture, long before modern frameworks such as Core Video and Grand Central Dispatch had developed.


I think that this project went wrong under the thrall of new features and new work methods. They could have turned Final Cut Pro 7 into a fully functioning 64-bit version and had the new features as options, to be accessed on demand, rather than being the only choice.

The major screwup was not respecting the billion man-hours of experience that Final Cut Pro 7 represented in the professional world. Ubillos deserves unilateral condemnation for that.

Final Cut Pro X is a shining example of the "irresistible pull of self-delusion" that often shows up when people start believing themselves to be way ahead of everybody else. Ubillos has never made a mortgage payment from being a video editor in a long, long time.

There are a HUGE number of deficiencies in FCPX. And a large, but not huge, number of improvements, too.

FCPX is a great improvement over Final Cut Express.
post #42 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzMega View Post

I think that this project went wrong under the thrall of new features and new work methods. They could have turned Final Cut Pro 7 into a fully functioning 64-bit version and had the new features as options, to be accessed on demand, rather than being the only choice.

The major screwup was not respecting the billion man-hours of experience that Final Cut Pro 7 represented in the professional world. Ubillos deserves unilateral condemnation for that.

Final Cut Pro X is a shining example of the "irresistible pull of self-delusion" that often shows up when people start believing themselves to be way ahead of everybody else. Ubillos has never made a mortgage payment from being a video editor in a long, long time.

There are a HUGE number of deficiencies in FCPX. And a large, but not huge, number of improvements, too.

FCPX is a great improvement over Final Cut Express.

But that tunnel vision is exactly what allows Apple (in other circumstances) to excel, by throwing out all of the preconceived notions about what a product/application can and cannot be.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #43 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzMega View Post

They could have turned Final Cut Pro 7 into a fully functioning 64-bit version and had the new features as options, to be accessed on demand, rather than being the only choice.

The major screwup was not respecting the billion man-hours of experience that Final Cut Pro 7 represented in the professional world. Ubillos deserves unilateral condemnation for that.

If you truly knew the Herculean effort it would have taken to "safely" move Quicktime into 64-bit land you may think otherwise. The whole point of Cocoa Frameworks is rapid application development which is why Apple has moved away from legacy Quicktime and wisely towards creating AV Foundation ..the Audio/Video core for the future which happens to run nicely on iOS (ARM based platforms) and Intel.

Apple's success is largely in part because they do not make foolish decisions like pouring too many resources into software and hardware that should be deprecated.
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 #44 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Netimoon View Post

Yeah. I understand why professionals are upset with FCPX,

You know a lot of folks are saying that but no one can come up with numbers of just how many folks are pissed off, especially enough that they demanded refunds.

Makes me wonder if the talk of folks being so mad about FCPX is a tad overblown. Sure some folks are pissed but really how many. ANd how many are mad because they thought they were going to get the same power etc for a third the price and oops, they didn't (at least yet). How many are mad about X, Y and Z being missing but they never have need to use them. They just want them there to feel like they got a super awesome deal. and so on.

And how about the names of some of these professionals. Maybe some really big names, some long time FCP users even. Is Coppola pissed. Did Leverage decide to switch to Avid. Oh my gosh, is Microsoft's ad agency of choice now using Premiere and not FCP.

I doubt you can find any major names. Why? because they weren't dumb enough to bank on FCPX being ready out of the box and have more than enough seats of FCS3 to cover their needs. If they have downloaded FCPX it is to learn the UI, not to use it on any current projects if even before the end of the year.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzMega View Post

Ubillos has never made a mortgage payment from being a video editor in a long, long time.

Anyone that doesn't do his homework before changing up mission critical software, especially in mid project is not a professional. Pros aren't that stupid
post #45 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosdog View Post

But unlike FCP X, where Apple has no real competition, Logic has a serious rival: Pro Tools 9. And it just gets better and better and more open.

I use them both, but its the matter of where the source material came from or pre-considerations if its going to be mostly MIDI or recording project.

Two icons sits together side by side in my dock.
And if Apple screw it this time, like with FCP X - I will stick to Pro Tools, thats all.


For *you* : ) Apple has a rival in PT9, but for the rest of the world Apple has about 10 rivals in the niche that Logic sits in, all up and down the power and cost scale. The most interesting shift as I have seen it is how Logic has been more pervasive than Digital Performer, especially among those not choosing MOTU hardware, while Reaper (a powerful but awkward Windows port that I personally can't use at all) which is $60 has a surprisingly large and loyal Mac user base.

The Logic user base has grown in all non-Digidesign/AVID hardware settings more than any other DAW, in my experience. There are now many varieties of USB and FW interfaces from several manufacturers available, and I'm seeing Logic and Reaper as the clear benefiters overall. I never see DP anymore unless the user has gone with MOTU hardware, and they have a decent but not commanding portion of the market there.

There are many alternative to Logic for Logic users if Apple alienates them. Apple does have a lot to lose. They don't have a chance at the Reaper crowd (where there's great support) for the low budgets, so to assume they can make a mint by moving Logic firmly away from the pro market would be foolish, because the DAW world is way different from the DVW (? : ) ) one.
post #46 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

For *you* : ) Apple has a rival in PT9, but for the rest of the world Apple has about 10 rivals in the niche that Logic sits in, all up and down the power and cost scale. The most interesting shift as I have seen it is how Logic has been more pervasive than Digital Performer, especially among those not choosing MOTU hardware, while Reaper (a powerful but awkward Windows port that I personally can't use at all) which is $60 has a surprisingly large and loyal Mac user base.

The Logic user base has grown in all non-Digidesign/AVID hardware settings more than any other DAW, in my experience. There are now many varieties of USB and FW interfaces from several manufacturers available, and I'm seeing Logic and Reaper as the clear benefiters overall. I never see DP anymore unless the user has gone with MOTU hardware, and they have a decent but not commanding portion of the market there.

There are many alternative to Logic for Logic users if Apple alienates them. Apple does have a lot to lose. They don't have a chance at the Reaper crowd (where there's great support) for the low budgets, so to assume they can make a mint by moving Logic firmly away from the pro market would be foolish, because the DAW world is way different from the DVW (? : ) ) one.

I use Reaper! But I only use it to cut music for dance studios and stuff.... I'm not into recording and all the other stuff.
post #47 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I hope that they don't make it more iOS like, so common amateurs and everyday fools can use it.

Yes because being more ergonomically, graphically and functionally efficient would be very bad. Say no to iOS for pro apps, keep mice and keyboard commands for another century please.

And you know, only amateurs and every day fools would benefit from touch iOS. Real pros who don't use anything but Symphony and Protools [cough], are pros because they use mice, keyboards and other relics from the past.

I guess you're over 40. I suggest you look at apps like Touch OSC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Anyone that doesn't do his homework before changing up mission critical software, especially in mid project is not a professional. Pros aren't that stupid

Last I heard, a professional engineer at NASA and/or at a contracted co. forgot about some ring seals and the world's most professional rocket ship exploded into professional little bits over the professional NASA center. Pros in all fields make very stupid mistakes. Just fewer than those who are not pros. Maybe you should design Logic X so we can be assured a pro developer had our backs.



.
post #48 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

I guess you're over 40. I suggest you look at apps like Touch OSC.

.

I have an iPad2 and I have that app and I own almost every other good music app for iOS. You're missing the point, iOS can be useful for pro applications, this was about dumbing down the desktop application of Logic and why that would be a mistake. I never said anything about iOS apps not being useful. I use my iPad quite a lot and it's useful for many different tasks.
post #49 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosdog View Post

But unlike FCP X, where Apple has no real competition, Logic has a serious rival: Pro Tools 9. And it just gets better and better and more open.

It's great that PT9 went hardware independent, but that's too little too late. Other than that there seems to be very little improvement in that update. And PT still has some limitations that are just astonishing for an app in 2011. No direct playback of stereo (or surround) files, they are all converted to multiple mono. No real time bounce which is a huge disadvantage compared to pretty much every other audio app. No features like freezing tracks. And no 64 bit support on mac or PC (where apps like cubase and sonar have been 64 bit for years), which is a huge limitation for anyone using big sample libraries. Not to mention that the basic version of PT doesn't include things like surround mixing, you have to pay an extra $2000 to get features that Logic includes for $499.

PT is great for things like sound effects editing and post mixing, but for music creation (especially stuff that's heavy on midi) if I wasn't going to use Logic I'd look at Cubase (or Sonar on PC) before I'd want to go back to PT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntson View Post

how do you explain the permanent loss of video out support

Meaning what exactly? The 64 bit version doesn't yet support video out (not sure why you think that's permanent) but that's very likely due to the horrible state of 64 bit quicktime, which sadly doesn't seem to be improved much in 10.7.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

If you truly knew the Herculean effort it would have taken to "safely" move Quicktime into 64-bit land you may think otherwise.

No question it's a big hurdle, but years have passed. For QT be still be in such a sorry state is inexcusable.


Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Is Coppola pissed. Did Leverage decide to switch to Avid. Oh my gosh, is Microsoft's ad agency of choice now using Premiere and not FCP.

There's no way in hell that any of them are using FCX at this point, they're either sticking with the previous FCS or switching. Feature films and national TV shows have been edited on FC, I doubt we'll see that with FCX for at least a year or two. Pro users complaining that an app that used to be able to do that high end work isn't able to in the newer version isn't "overblown" at all.
post #50 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

You know a lot of folks are saying that but no one can come up with numbers of just how many folks are pissed off, especially enough that they demanded refunds.

Well, this can't be a good sign.

Adobe sees 45% sales growth for Mac video tools after Final Cut Pro X exodus
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._x_exodus.html
post #51 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

You know a lot of folks are saying that but no one can come up with numbers of just how many folks are pissed off, especially enough that they demanded refunds.

Makes me wonder if the talk of folks being so mad about FCPX is a tad overblown. Sure some folks are pissed but really how many. ANd how many are mad because they thought they were going to get the same power etc for a third the price and oops, they didn't (at least yet). How many are mad about X, Y and Z being missing but they never have need to use them. They just want them there to feel like they got a super awesome deal. and so on.

And how about the names of some of these professionals. Maybe some really big names, some long time FCP users even. Is Coppola pissed. Did Leverage decide to switch to Avid. Oh my gosh, is Microsoft's ad agency of choice now using Premiere and not FCP.

I doubt you can find any major names. Why? because they weren't dumb enough to bank on FCPX being ready out of the box and have more than enough seats of FCS3 to cover their needs. If they have downloaded FCPX it is to learn the UI, not to use it on any current projects if even before the end of the year.


Anyone that doesn't do his homework before changing up mission critical software, especially in mid project is not a professional. Pros aren't that stupid


You're not anywhere near a major city, right? Just go ask some video post people instead of making incorrect assumptions. As a NYC'er I can name right off the top of my head Lorne Michaels Broadway video production facilities, which has some of the most forward thinking media people in the country running it. They were split AVID/FCP and, IIRC, made a HUGE FCP investment in the wake of or previous to Apple's secretive smoke and mirrors about what FCPX would be and were caught off guard by it. They're one of a barrel full of major names I can think of off the top of my head, but the reason you don't read about it is because they don't post on general Apple forums and I've never seen them post on a video forum either, but they're as big a name as they come. I'm betting they were a major reason Apple brought FCP back.
post #52 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

Feature films and national TV shows have been edited on FC, I doubt we'll see that with FCX for at least a year or two.

No feature films or national TV shows have been ENTIRELY done in FCP, due to the collaborative technical nature of film and broadcast on that tier, which further rules out using the "you are an island by yourself" FCPX.

But I know that's part of your point, just was the easiest way to quote : )
post #53 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


PT is great for things like sound effects editing and post mixing, but for music creation (especially stuff that's heavy on midi) if I wasn't going to use Logic I'd look at Cubase (or Sonar on PC) before I'd want to go back to PT.

This puts a sharper point on my previous post. PT and Logic are like Aperture and Photoshop. They cover different workflows and strengths though they have a wide overlap. Logic isn't competing against any version of PT. If one requires more than a cursory amount of midi editing they don't do it in PT. PT is where everything goes when it's mix time for a major release, but Logic is huge in production up to that stage.

What I find amazing about Apple's path for Logic since its EMagic days before they bought it. So powerful, way beyond any other software of its kind. But many diehard musician.engineers including myself were simply made insane by its unintuitiveness and couldn't use it, though it had many, many devotees. It's notable that it was not nearly as popular in the US as it was elsewhere, especially Europe, where they didn't find it as hard to use. When Apple bought it in 2002 (had to look that one up : ) ) it was much earlier than the "i"path that Apple has since established and made their moves more predictable. That they took Logic and turned it into the program that they did surprised and delighted me. They did dumb it down in a sense, but I think they did it right. Do they think they still need to dumb it down more to make it iLogic? Hope not. : )
post #54 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Actually, the only person I have to please is myself. I couldn't give two craps about the listeners.

Spoken like a true professional with real respect for your customers...
post #55 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Certain things aren't meant to be easy.

Hohoho, spoken like a true ignorant who doesn't understand the first thing about user interface design and human computer interaction...

I guess programmers should ask *YOU* what is supposed to be easy and what is not, right?
post #56 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

Let the uninspired complaints begin.

No one seems to look to the future with hope anymore.

They will do what they did to Final Cut Pro X. They will release a product useful for prosumers but not so much for the professionals but it will allow them to get used to the new interface so when it does get the pro features they demand they will be able to use it straight away with little downtime for training.

Of course anyone with half a brain should be able to work this one out... seems like there are a lot of people with less than half.

Perfectly said, my friend!
post #57 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

Let the uninspired complaints begin.

No one seems to look to the future with hope anymore.

They will do what they did to Final Cut Pro X. They will release a product useful for prosumers but not so much for the professionals but it will allow them to get used to the new interface so when it does get the pro features they demand they will be able to use it straight away with little downtime for training.

Of course anyone with half a brain should be able to work this one out... seems like there are a lot of people with less than half.


Nope, that's not what will happen if Apple changes the way Logic works too much. The user base which doesn't like it will move to another DAW option, of which there are more than several, and not return or look back. No one is going to "get used" to anything or wait for features they want that exist elsewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

Of course anyone with half a brain should be able to work this one out... seems like there are a lot of people with less than half.

Let the remarks from clueless armchair quarterbacks who don't work in the field continue.
post #58 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

Nope, that's not what will happen if Apple changes the way Logic works too much. The user base which doesn't like it will move to another DAW option, of which there are more than several, and not return or look back. No one is going to "get used" to anything or wait for features they want that exist elsewhere..

Speak for yourself.

I, and a lot of professionals, don't base my software use on whether it "changed too much" from the previous version, but on whether it's the BEST TOOL for my needs.

They could change the shit out of it, and it it's better than the competition for what it does, I will stick to it. And many people will come to it from competing products.

So, if the changes made will make a solid, expandable codebase for the product to expand in new ways (e.g better multicore support, full 64 bit support, new fangled editing options, etc), and cut off old cruft, more power to Apple.

The sames goes for FCP X. People left not because it "changed too much", but because it lacks some features they need. But if the new codebase lets Apple add those features back, have it be snappier, AND add new things in forthcoming versions, people will come back in droves.

That's how the industry works.

Else, we would still use command line sequencers with no audio...
post #59 of 59

A year later, no Logic X

Apple increments product features one bite at a time...hence the logo. Want the next big thing? You're gonna have to pick another fruit from the Apple Tree.

Reply

Apple increments product features one bite at a time...hence the logo. Want the next big thing? You're gonna have to pick another fruit from the Apple Tree.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple rumored to be near completion of new 'Logic Pro X'