or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple updates Final Cut Pro X with requested features, offers free trial
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple updates Final Cut Pro X with requested features, offers free trial - Page 2

post #41 of 113
Why did Apple feel the need to add features? Afer all, we were told repeatedly on this site and others that editors who wanted things like XML were just troglodytes and luddites who were afraid of change. Is Apple catering to neanderthals now?
post #42 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post


FCP X is not lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready. Nothing wrong with that. As many times before, they simply failed at communication. They told editors about all the great new stuff (which is definitely there, and definitely amazing - the time we save with X must be measured in days, not hours). But we rarely need multi-cam editing, we do not use Pro Tools, and we do not exchange data with other NLEs - of course there are editors who do need that. And to them, a detailed list of initially unavailable features should have been made available before they buy.

I think what you meant to say was

FCP X IS lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready.
post #43 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post

Wow. Apple almost NEVER pre-announces upcoming features like this (WWDC announcements notwithstanding). They're definitely getting out of their comfort zone trying to win over some of the Final Cut Pro users they've riled up over the .0 release.

With a product like this professionals need some features and not others.

The whingers are very short sighted and moronic in their dealings with this product. Apple released this product to Prosumers in order to give them and update as they hadn't had one in four years. In the meantime however they were listening to the pros to get the features they need.

Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to make Final Cut Pro X the best app out there they railed on it in forums like this. All they had to do was POLITELY go through the proper channels and let Apple know what features they need and Apple will decide if it's viable.

Some features needed will go such as importing old workflows but that's because the old format was a mess. Is it going to annoy a lot of people? Yes but that's the nature of change. Was Apple going to return some features like multiple-cam? Yes but they hVe to do it in a way to fit in with the new way of doing things.

Apple DID release a perfect product. They released a product perfect for the Prosumers while leaving the way open for the pros to make it a perfect product for them.

Stop whinging about what isn't there, go through the proper channels, and nicely tell Apple what you need and why you need it.

Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.
post #44 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorGonzo View Post

Because professionals are quite often asked to draw on projects that were created a long time ago.

With FCP7 dead in the water, you need a viable migration path. When you suddenly can't add seats, can't get support, then can only get seats by calling Apple for some vague window of time when FCP7 will be made available again... you have to move on.

Do you agree that a "best effort" approach similar to what Premiere uses would satisfy most uses:

1) Export XML from FCP 7

2) Import XML into FCPX

3) Log things it could't handle that need manual attention (e.g. incompatible effects)


I have proven to myself that you can move a project manually -- tedious, but acceptable!

If Apple isn't going to provide a FCP 7 Import, a 3rd-party could provide a tool to automate the conversion process.


At some point in time FCP 7 isn't going to be supported on the latest hardware and OS -- so you would have to:

1) maintain a legacy OS X, Legacy Hardware, and a Legacy FCP7 system to provide access to legacy systems.

or

2) at a leisurely pace, have an assistant editor (or hire a service) to convert your legacy FCP 7 projects to FCPX using a conversion tool.


The user has to decide, for himself, whether FCPX and the benefits of this revolutionary NLE, offers enough advantage to offset the effort to retrain oneself -- or just migrate to another familiar NLE.

I think a conversion tool might help in this decision.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #45 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

Why did Apple feel the need to add features? Afer all, we were told repeatedly on this site and others that editors who wanted things like XML were just troglodytes and luddites who were afraid of change. Is Apple catering to neanderthals now?

+5
Everything 'professional' related on this site gets the same treatment.
Most of the forum are investors. Thus the attitude of 'Shut up and watch the stock grow'.
post #46 of 113
Faced with growing complaints, Apple resumed sales of the previous, $999 version of Final Cut Studio earlier this month. Orders have only been taken over the phone, and Apple has said it has a "limited quantity" of the end-of-life product. The company has also provided refunds to some dissatisfied customers.


"Limited quantities"?????

It's software, not hardware.
post #47 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by sticknick View Post

FCP7 was what? A couple grand?

FCPX was $300?

I don't see that as too much to complain about what was missing and what was not. For $300, you test a new project in FCPX to see if it does what you want/need and let Apple know what you think is missing - all the while you work on your actual production material in FCP7 (which you paid three times as much for).

Then when FCPX is up to your expectations, you start a new production piece in it.

As for opening FCP7 projects in FCPX, why? Besides the fact that X is a complete rewrite, you never *ever* open existing projects in new versions of the software. EVER. I'm not even close to a pro, but I know that much.

Not sure where all the wildly exaggerated Studio prices came from. All the people who bitched and moaned about Studio's price have essentially made the apps more expensive now. Instead of $999 for full suite/$299 for upgrades (FCP, Color, SoundTrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Motion, Compressor, LiveType, etc.), you now pay $449 for FCP, Compressor, Motion, every time. You will spend more money in the long run and get less content. It's a shame that so many people are too cheap and miserly to appreciate what a great value FCS was.
post #48 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

With a product like this professionals need some features and not others.

The whingers are very short sighted and moronic in their dealings with this product

..... going to annoy a lot of people? Yes but that's the nature of change. Was Apple going to return some features like multiple-cam? Yes but they hVe to do it in a way to fit in with the new way of doing things.

Apple DID release a perfect product. They released a product perfect for the Prosumers while leaving the way open for the pros to make it a perfect product for them.

Stop whinging about what isn't there, go through the proper channels, and nicely tell Apple what you need and why you need it.

Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.

You don't know what you are talking about. And since it has all been explained many times factually, without whining, I guess you will never get it.
post #49 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

But Apple NEVER releases a product until it is as perfect as then possible. Look at cut and paste. They could have released a half-assed version on the first iPhone. But it took them YEARS to figure out how to do it, so they refused to release anything for several years.

Now they release a product which is lacking?

Is this a new strategy? Release an incomplete beta and add stuff if, as and when customers scream?

Isn't that a very Google-like way of going about things?

Except Lion server where they actually went backward - they dropped functionality and half of the things are broken and do not work well at all.
post #50 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by See Flat View Post

You don't know what you are talking about. And since it has all been explained many times factually, without whining, I guess you will never get it.

Apple knows why we need it
post #51 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post

Hopefully Apple has learned something from this experience. They have to listen more and they have to be less rash with professional products. Consumers may want a 'faster horse', but professionals know their industries. I applaud Apple shaking off the cobwebs of legacy from NLE but they had to do it more sensitively.

A free trial of Final Cut Pro X at launch would have taken much of the sting out of what happened. Telling everyone prior to launch that there was a lot missing, it was coming, and that professionals would be better off sticking with Final Cut Pro 7 for the time being and treating Final Cut Pro X as a training tool for future projects would have taken almost all the sting out.

That, of course, required not declaring the industry standard NLE suite end of life.

Apple's Achilles heal is a lack of listening. It's what makes them great sometimes, they go their own way, but when taken too far it gets them into sticky situations like this.

That said, the reaction to FCPX was absurd and hopefully adding in some of this functionality will help recover some of the software's reputation.


PLEASE, PLEASE - what is going to happen to video out support - it is written all over the walls that FCP does not have this option and no one has addressed it.
post #52 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Note that despite supposedly vast feedback, they have done nothing about the importing of previous FCP projects. If they really are caving to feedback that should have been first on the list.

The XML import/export is enough for this. XML is plain text and you can export an XML file from FCP7 so even if it needs reworked by an intermediate process, it will be possible to transfer the edit list over. Creating corresponding events for the timeline clips will be the trickiest part but they just seem to be Quicktime reference clips so you could even do this automatically with Python or Applescript.

This one update covers the most important missing elements. The import SDK allows high-end camera formats like XDCam to be imported and the XML features allow integration with colour correction software and professional audio software.

3rd parties are going to have to pull up some of the slack but it's a good development and good that they didn't wait until next year for this one.
post #53 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by thetroupe View Post

i think what you meant to say was

fcp x is lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready.

agreed

Quote:
Originally Posted by RegurgitatedCoprolite View Post

Yeah, but Apple didn't make it perfect and exactly like FCP 7, so it's time for the bitchers to start bit chin'.

PLEASE, PLEASE - what is going to happen to video out support - it is written all over the walls that FCP does not have this option and no one has addressed it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sportytoes View Post

Faced with growing complaints, Apple resumed sales of the previous, $999 version of Final Cut Studio earlier this month. Orders have only been taken over the phone, and Apple has said it has a "limited quantity" of the end-of-life product. The company has also provided refunds to some dissatisfied customers.

"Limited quantities"?????

It's software, not hardware.

Software has to be made too
post #54 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.

It was Adobe with fierce competition laying waste to FCPX that forced Apple to even think about addressing the issues.
When over half of your market gets up from the table and says no thanks - that seems to be the magical number before Apple starts to listen.

In a professional environment, it's trust that keeps relations good. Having a road map and some transparency in regards to future development. FCPX came out of nowhere and they killed FCP licenses. Didn't exactly instill trust with professionals now did it.
post #55 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.

No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios dont't switch apps during a project and have no need to open old projects in fcpx at all.
It is a stupid request really, I mean, final cut studio 3 does not suddenly invalidate. It's not an OS upgrade either, replacing an old version. It's just a set of apps you can install on the same machine, for crying out loud! Just not run at the same time.

Anyway technically wise it's not possible to open old projects because it's so different: fcpx uses tags and stores files in a database.
post #56 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mode View Post

It was Adobe with fierce competition laying waste to FCPX that forced Apple to even think about addressing the issues.

What evidence is there of this? Adobe reported they've sold 45% more copies of Premiere than last year. Notice they didn't give any real numbers, likely because it's 45% more of hardly anything.

Quote:
When over half of your market gets up from the table and says no thanks - that seems to be the magical number before Apple starts to listen.

Just to let you know, this statement makes it difficult to take anything you say seriously.
post #57 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.

Not just every *professional* but *ANYBODY* whose content was created in prior versions of FCP.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #58 of 113
I've been using FCP since 2001. I was warned off FCPX by a disgruntled user who described the update as follows:

"It was like walking into my familiar living room, expecting some spanking new shiny comfortable furniture, no squeaks in the doors, a nice new carpet, the walls repainted, the windows properly insulated and a few cosmetic improvements, such as some nice new pictures and ornaments.

What did I find? All the comfortable old solid furniture had been dumped and replaced with cheap IKEA imports, there was a large hole in the floor, the couch had been sawn in half, the TV was missing, there was a pile of sand and cement where the bar used to be, and the whole room was littered with dog turds".
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #59 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by dacloo View Post

No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios dont't switch apps during a project and have no need to open old projects in fcpx at all.
It is a stupid request really, I mean, final cut studio 3 does not suddenly invalidate. It's not an OS upgrade either, replacing an old version. It's just a set of apps you can install on the same machine, for crying out loud! Just not run at the same time.

Anyway technically wise it's not possible to open old projects because it's so different: fcpx uses tags and stores files in a database.

At some point, FCP 7 will not be able to run on the latest Mac hardware and Latest Mac OS -- probably 2-3 years from now.

If editors want to be able to open FCP 7 projects they will need to maintain FCP 7 seats with people trained on ever more obsolescent, FCP7/FCS apps, OS X version and hardware.

Many editors have a need to go back and perform minor updates on legacy projects such as educational material.

Over time, it will become more difficult and costly to do so. Realizing this, most editors are looking for a path forward from FCP 7/FCS.


So far, no path forward exists for FCP 7 to FCPX. There are "best effort" paths forward for Adobe and Avid.

It is technically possible to move FCP 7 projects manually to FCPX. I've done it.

You can't open FCP 7 projects with FCPX, * that is true. But it has nothing to do with tags or the database.

* nor can you open FCP 7 projects with Adobe or Avid.


FCPX stores tags, data and metadata (from the clips, user tagging and from clip analysis) in the database. The actual media files are not stored in the database -- only referenced by it. The media can be copied into FCPX specified locations or it can remain where it currently exists -- and be accessible by both FCPX and FCP 7.

Event Database information is created as media is ingested into FCPX (whether the media is copied or stays in place).

Similarily, Project Database information is created as events, effects, etc. are edited into the Storyline.

The source media doesn't move and remains unchanged.

Much of the speed gain in FCPX is because it can get all the info from the database -- as opposed to continuously going out to the clips to access the data. On a large FCP 7 project this can result in a significant amount of BeachBalling.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #60 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by dacloo View Post

No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios dont't switch apps during a project and have no need to open old projects in fcpx at all.
It is a stupid request really, I mean, final cut studio 3 does not suddenly invalidate. It's not an OS upgrade either, replacing an old version. It's just a set of apps you can install on the same machine, for crying out loud! Just not run at the same time.

Anyway technically wise it's not possible to open old projects because it's so different: fcpx uses tags and stores files in a database.

You're completely missing the point.

Every studio I've ever worked in has a need to open old projects all the time. In fact, just yesterday I worked on a 2.5 year old project to complete changes requested by a client on Friday. Guess what? Find the archive drive, slide it in, boom! I'm working on it. Took me 5 minutes to be up and running. Ultra-common scenario.

If FCPX can't do that, I'm facing running a separate machine with FCS basically in perpetuity. A machine that will, I might add, have a radically different editing interface than the hypothetical new FCPX machine. It's a pain no matter how you slice it.

Which brings me to your point about same-system installs: there are many reports from the field that the two versions of FC actually don't co-exist nicely on the same machine - kernel panics, lock-ups, etc.

Hell, I went to an FCPX demo last week and even the bloody Apple rep himself told me not to install it onto the same system drive. Bravo! Separate system drives for the two packages! How useful!

So, I'd kindly argue that your "crying out loud" is erroneous, at least for some.

______

As an aside, what I did like in the demo, I really liked. I think this product has a bright future.

But I think it will also have a dismal and trying present.

Apple has rocked the boat hard...and it has made waves, both good and bad. I believe thay have set themselves back 2 or 3 years in this game for the time being - we'll see whether they come out on top as the major professional production tool of choice or not...
post #61 of 113
Many studios need to access previous projects. For example I have enjoyed working with the same ten or so clients for the last 15 years. They consider everything they have ever done with you as work that they own. They expect us to pull stuff from old projects all the time.

What do you think people would say if Microsoft Word all of a sudden was unable to open files created in previous versions? Office workers have no need to open old projects! It is a stupid request really. Yeah right!

If the XML import/export feature works as advertised it may help somewhat, but it still requires that you maintain a working FCP7 workstation to do the exporting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dacloo View Post

No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios dont't switch apps during a project and have no need to open old projects in fcpx at all.
It is a stupid request really, I mean, final cut studio 3 does not suddenly invalidate. It's not an OS upgrade either, replacing an old version. It's just a set of apps you can install on the same machine, for crying out loud! Just not run at the same time.

Anyway technically wise it's not possible to open old projects because it's so different: fcpx uses tags and stores files in a database.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #62 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by dacloo View Post

No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios... have no need to open old projects

Are you insane?
post #63 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

Why did Apple feel the need to add features? Afer all, we were told repeatedly on this site and others that editors who wanted things like XML were just troglodytes and luddites who were afraid of change. Is Apple catering to neanderthals now?

XML is a pro's request and opens the door for third party developers being able to read and write the file. Just an example of this is Mocha Pro being able to ingest transformation tracking data.

XML (and a general plugin API which FCPX lacks) is important to build a platform that lasts.
post #64 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Many studios need to access previous projects.

Sure they do, but as I wrote you can use FCP 7 to do so.
Runs perfectly on Lion, does everything you need to finalize old projects.
post #65 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctorGonzo View Post

Are you insane?

No I am not. Just don't quote one line to change the context of my post. Read beyond that line.
How lame.
post #66 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

What evidence is there of this? Adobe reported they've sold 45% more copies of Premiere than last year. Notice they didn't give any real numbers, likely because it's 45% more of hardly anything.



Just to let you know, this statement makes it difficult to take anything you say seriously.

Sorry your first page result in Google only showed a 45% INCREASE in Premiere sales on another Apple Rumor site. Sorry you didn't dig deeper. Sorry for shattering your bubble.

Just to let you know, shoddy attempts to discredit someones statement by doing a 5 second google search... make all and any of your counter statements, (for the rest of your life), difficult to take seriously.
post #67 of 113
What bubble did you shatter?

You still haven't found any real numbers for what that 45% increase means. It could mean we sold 145 copies this year - while we only sold 100 last year.

Adobe would have to sell hundreds of thousands of copies to gain market share on FCP or Avid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mode View Post

Sorry your first page result in Google only showed a 45% INCREASE in Premiere sales on another Apple Rumor site. Sorry you didn't dig deeper. Sorry for shattering your bubble.

Just to let you know, shoddy attempts to discredit someones statement by doing a 5 second google search... make all and any of your counter statements, (for the rest of your life), difficult to take seriously.
post #68 of 113
Bad news. XML import FOR OTHER FCPX 10.1 project ONLY. FCP7 or PPRO XML files are not supported.

What a dud.
post #69 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

At some point, FCP 7 will not be able to run on the latest Mac hardware and Latest Mac OS -- probably 2-3 years from now.

If editors want to be able to open FCP 7 projects they will need to maintain FCP 7 seats with people trained on ever more obsolescent, FCP7/FCS apps, OS X version and hardware.

Many editors have a need to go back and perform minor updates on legacy projects such as educational material.

Over time, it will become more difficult and costly to do so. Realizing this, most editors are looking for a path forward from FCP 7/FCS.


So far, no path forward exists for FCP 7 to FCPX. There are "best effort" paths forward for Adobe and Avid.

It is technically possible to move FCP 7 projects manually to FCPX. I've done it.

You can't open FCP 7 projects with FCPX, * that is true. But it has nothing to do with tags or the database.

* nor can you open FCP 7 projects with Adobe or Avid.


FCPX stores tags, data and metadata (from the clips, user tagging and from clip analysis) in the database. The actual media files are not stored in the database -- only referenced by it. The media can be copied into FCPX specified locations or it can remain where it currently exists -- and be accessible by both FCPX and FCP 7.

Event Database information is created as media is ingested into FCPX (whether the media is copied or stays in place).

Similarily, Project Database information is created as events, effects, etc. are edited into the Storyline.

The source media doesn't move and remains unchanged.

Much of the speed gain in FCPX is because it can get all the info from the database -- as opposed to continuously going out to the clips to access the data. On a large FCP 7 project this can result in a significant amount of BeachBalling.

Lion supports virtualization of Mac OS X, so as long at the VM can support at least Lion, you'll be able to run FCP7 on a Mac.
post #70 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post

Wow. Apple almost NEVER pre-announces upcoming features like this (WWDC announcements notwithstanding). They're definitely getting out of their comfort zone trying to win over some of the Final Cut Pro users they've riled up over the .0 release.

Actually they DO pre-announce from time to time. For example, they had pre-announced FCPX at a video editors' conference, they had pre-announced Logic Pro 8 at an audio one.

Also: this could be Tim Cook at work.
post #71 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

Why did Apple feel the need to add features? Afer all, we were told repeatedly on this site and others that editors who wanted things like XML were just troglodytes and luddites who were afraid of change. Is Apple catering to neanderthals now?

Who said, in this site or elsewhere, that "editors who wanted things like XML were just troglodytes and luddites who were afraid of change"?

Now, editors that complain about the UI "dumbing down" are indeed troglodytes afraid of change.

Oh, and editors that suddenly don't understand that their old FC 7 version works just as fine as it did, while needed features are added to future FCPX versions are also "troglodytes afraid of change".

In short, they wanted a new version, as long as it wasn't new enough --i.e the classic Adobe way of piling some stuff on top of bloated 20-year-old codebases and calling it the next version.
post #72 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by tfg View Post

Bad news. XML import FOR OTHER FCPX 10.1 project ONLY. FCP7 or PPRO XML files are not supported.

What a dud.

You *do* understand what XML is, right? *Right*?

You understand that from the moment it supports XML import, it's a matter of days to see import from FCP7 and PPRO XML implemented, possibly by third parties...
post #73 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by foljs View Post

You *do* understand what XML is, right? *Right*?

You understand that from the moment it supports XML import, it's a matter of days to see import from FCP7 and PPRO XML implemented, possibly by third parties...

You don't seem to understand that in order for FCPX to import xml it needs to be able to parse it and understand what the nodes mean. If the export functions from other standards based xml decision lists are not understood by FCPX there is nothing that a third party can do except write a plugin for the exporting application to format the xml in a non-standard FCPX format. I seriously doubt that is going to happen.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #74 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by samwell View Post

So, no one's going to mention that the ability to open a FCP 7 file requires a $400 plugin?

FCP X is an unbelievable bargain at it's current price. What's $400? If you're a pro, you can make this back in several hours work (or several hours work saved).

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #75 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

FCP X is an unbelievable bargain at it's current price. What's $400? If you're a pro, you can make this back in several hours work (or several hours work saved).

A Prius is an excellent bargain at $35K if what you need to do is run errands - you'll save lots of money on gas. But if you need to transport bags of cement and concrete block, it is a complete waste of money because it can't do the job.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #76 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by theguycalledtom View Post

Wow, good call, couldn't have said it better myself.

Call me crazy but they could have released a beta or the free trial at launch and got this kind of feedback before forcing customers to pay $300.

Forcing???
post #77 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morky View Post

Lion supports virtualization of Mac OS X, so as long at the VM can support at least Lion, you'll be able to run FCP7 on a Mac.

I didn't know that! However, that doesn't really resolve the issue:

-- The old OS X version and Old FCP 7/FCPS apps won't exploit new OS or hardware features
-- It will become increasingly more difficult to find trained people and training for the obsolescent system
-- it will become more costly, especially when compared to modern alternatives.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #78 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

But Apple NEVER releases a product until it is as perfect as then possible. Look at cut and paste. They could have released a half-assed version on the first iPhone. But it took them YEARS to figure out how to do it, so they refused to release anything for several years.

Now they release a product which is lacking?

Is this a new strategy? Release an incomplete beta and add stuff if, as and when customers scream?

Isn't that a very Google-like way of going about things?

Hmmm - Conrad Joe has only been a member since this month and already over 200 posts. Can we maybe say "professional troll"? Besides the fact that he is clueless. It didn't take Apple "years" to introduce cut and paste, and to not think that Apple already had most of these new features planned is just plain stupid. Especially with how quickly they were released. Once again, Apple changes the paradigm of how we work, and we have the whinners and fools rearing their heads.j This was version ONE of a totally new, and complex, editing system. Get over yourself.
post #79 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.

Bullshit! They still have FCP 7. Move on...
post #80 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by samwell View Post

So, no one's going to mention that the ability to open a FCP 7 file requires a $400 plugin?

Yet another moron speaks! FCP X costs hundreds of dollars less than the previous version! So even with $400 add on it still costs you hundreds LESS!!!!! If you are a pro and need this feature, suck it up and quit your bitching.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple updates Final Cut Pro X with requested features, offers free trial