I could see switching to FCPX if it was much better than FCP 7 but it isn't. It renders faster because it is 64 bit and can use all the memory and cores available which the older version is really inefficient at, but in almost every other category it lacks the features of FCP 7.
Professionals would sacrifice the time and effort to make the transition if it was more advanced. Sort of like they did when they switched to FCP from Avid many years ago.
Apple should have named it iMovie Pro.
The professionals may have eventually embraced iMovie Pro in a few years when it started becoming apparent that it was superior to FCP 7
The main problem is Apple unexpectedly EOL-ed FCP 7 when the successor was in no way capable of replacing it.
It seems to me that Apple has not made a mistake, but taken a conscious business decision. They see that the market for prosumer product is much greater than that for high end pros. There are already good options for them such as Avid. Instead of putting resources into a product for a relatively few elite users, they'd rather create the best product for all the rest.
It sucks for the pros. I feel your pain (sincerely).
I don't think it was wrong for Apple to reboot Final Cut. The big problem I see is simply the abrupt EOL of their legacy FCS3 product, relied upon by an entire industry that has very specific needs. While FCPX might soon me a much better product than FCS3 in terms of creative workflow, there are critical needs that video and film producers have, such as outputting to a broadcast monitor that are simply unsupported at this point.
What Apple should do is offer a free FCS3 license with a purchase of FCPX. It will get the industry playing with the new product and allow them to buy seats to continue working on current projects, and as well as give them the ability to keep working in the status quo environment while FCPX matures. Secondly, Apple should publicly commit to support FCP7 on Mac OS X through version 10.8 (Lion is 10.7 - for all intents and purposes, the current version of the Mac OS). This would remove a lot of the anxiety that exists, as I'm sure Apple will be working at high speed to get the missing features and 3rd party support into FCPX.
I don't see why they're complainingl. If you like the previous version, stick with it. Or you could've waited for the reviews and then bought it after reading other experiences.
It's not like FCP7 suddenly ceased to work or suddenly became obsolete.
From my experience, you NEVER upgrade immediately on a major release. You finish your mission critical stuff on your current pipeline. If you need to start a new project, you use that pipeline.
Then slowly on the side, you start building up your new workflow. It takes a while. By the time you get comfortable with it, the software is more mature and bugs/features have been addressed.
These things take a few years anyways. Look at the original FCP conversion. Everyone was calling it "prosumer-at-best", and now, FCP7 is a pretty complete Pro App.
That being said, they redesigned the software to make it more user-friendly and possibly decrease the learning curve. That will increase the user base, and possibly eat at Premiere's designer/prosumer marketshare.
By the time it's fully mature, it will have a much larger user base, and be used by amateur cinematographers and pros alike.
Oh, also, what Teejaysplace24 said. :-) The email looks fake, or someone's getting fired.
I agree except the problem is keeping the 7 version available and supported in the mean time, if Apple do that then there is time for X to mature I hope.
BTW Do we assume Aperture too will be dropped one day as iPhoto gets a little slicker? None of this helps Apple's Pro end and only helps Adobe (I hate to say!).
Yesterday, there were hundreds, if not thousands of professional editors swearing at their computers running Avid and Final Cut Pro because either their computers, their software or their staff just could't get it 'right' fast enough.
Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.
Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.
Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.
They also only charged a "prosumer" $300 for it, not the standard $1000+
You are correct.
As long as editors are not being misled about what they are being sold, they should have no complaint. I think there is enough information out there now to set the record straight about what a FCPX buyer will be getting.
Wow man, if you just think it, it will happen. Let's all hold hands and wish real hard and maybe FCPx will have the needed features.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka
Yesterday, there were hundreds, if not thousands of professional editors swearing at their computers running Avid and Final Cut Pro because either their computers, their software or their staff just could't get it 'right' fast enough.
Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.
Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.
Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.
They obviously blew it but what do I care, I don't do video anyway.
Finally something negative the trolls and haters can really sink their teeth into. The catch has been sparse these last few years. This will feed them for a day or two.
I bought two copies of FC Studio 3 (FCP 7) upgrade from BH Photo the day FCP X was released. They'll be hitting Ebay tomorrow. I thought for sure Apple would reverse their decision and rerelease FCP, but it hasn't happened. And BH shows the upgrade and the full license as discontinued. That is a change from yesterday when they still had full licenses.
Yesterday, there were hundreds, if not thousands of professional editors swearing at their computers running Avid and Final Cut Pro because either their computers, their software or their staff just could't get it 'right' fast enough.
Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.
Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.
Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.
For all the people saying apple should've waited longer to release FCP X, have you simply forgotten about all the pro's griping after every single conference how the pro's were forgotten, how apple didn't care about FCS etc. It had been years since an update and to say people were antsy is an understatement.
Then there are those saying apple should just sell both 7 and X. I agree with you, but this wouldn't solve the problem of people whining. Then there'd be a whole circus of customers complaining that they bought 7, but that now they need to upgrade to X, but now they have to pay full price or some such nonsense. Inevitably, a ton of people would get confused, buy 7 in late 2011 and be furious when it never got upgraded again.
Basically, what people are saying is that apple is good for professionals and businesses because they constantly try to improve and redefine how we use our computers. If your business is so inflexible as to be drastically effected by the inability to buy new machines for legacy software, then maybe the problem is with your archaic business model.
Given the opportunity, poorly run companies will keep using outdated, terrible software forever, just look at IE 6 marketshare. So yes, if you're a terribly managed, head in the sand style production company, apple isn't the hardware/software vendor for you.
If, however, your trying to constantly prove your business, then having the opportunity to start learning FCP X on new little side projects and continuing to use FCS 7 for your current major products is a wonderful way to bridge this transition period.
All i can imagine is that Steve is probably asking the engineers like what he did with the mobule me group and will ask wat it does, and then says"why the F*** doesnt it do that?" LOL
Part of this screwup deals with Apple's own culture...at least the culture of product development. In recent years, Apple has been comfortable with introducing a new product and jettisoning the old own immediately. Usually Apple upgrades are so good, this isn't a big problem. But every now and then, it is and blows up in Apple's face. This is one of those times.
What's interesting is that this happened before with iMovie years ago and Apple ended up backpeddling and kept the old iMovie HD around for awhile. So you think that Randy Ubillos would have wanted to avoid that situation this time around. So it's mystifying how Apple could have gotten themselves into this mess.
But some of it has to do with a blind spot toward pro users in general, despite having a previously good relationship with this market and doing their best to blow up the pro video market over the past several years. For comparison, if any of Apple's major technology vendors like SAP or Oracle made a new version of something and then just dropped support and availability of the previous version, Apple IT Services would be screaming bloody murder right now.
Final Cut Pro X will get it's act together at some point. No one is saying that the new version doesn't do the things it does support. The issue are the things that were left out.
I also received a refund, no questions asked, from the Apple iTunes store.
The body of the email was:
"Greetings from Apple iTunes, before I address your issue I would just like to take the opportunity to address myself. My name is XXXX and I look forward to working with you to resolve any issues you may have. Now, I understand that you have purchased "Final Cut Pro" however it has less functionality then the previous version "Final Cut Pro 7." I can certainly appreciate your eagerness to have this issue resolved, rest assured I am more then happy to help!
First and foremost, I would like to extend an apology for the delayed response to your email. iTunes Support endeavors to send a reply within 24 hours; however, due to new product releases and features for the iTunes Store we are experiencing higher volumes than normal. We appreciate your patience and understanding.
XXX, what I have done for you is, I have gone ahead and reversed the charge for this purchase.
In five to seven business days, a credit of $299.99 should be posted to the credit card that appears on the receipt for that purchase. I sincerely apologize for any inconveniences this issue has caused.
Should you have any further questions or concerns in regards to this issue, please do not hesitate to reply to this email, and I will gladly address them for you.
Thank you for choosing iTunes as your source for online entertainment, and I hope you have a fantastic day, XXXX!
Sincerely,
XXXXXX
iTunes Store Customer Support
Please Note: I work Friday, Saturday and Sunday 12:30-9:30 pm EST
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to assist you. You may receive an AppleCare survey email; any feedback you provide would be greatly appreciated"
It's was a refreshing reaction by Apple to a very misunderstood and botched product launch.
It reminds me a bit of when Coca-Cola took away a product loved by millions and replaced it with a product more favored by kids. In the end of course, Coca Cola bowed to pressure from their fans and brought back the product that everyone knew and loved.
Let's hope that Apple can remedy the FCP-X debacle with equal success! How about FCP 8!
That e-mail I believe. I do not believe the one posted in the OP is authentic. There is no way an Apple employee is going to apologize for the "inadequacies" of Apple's product, nor is he going to write: "I understand that Final Cut Pro X does not work as well...."
No way. A real refund with an altered e-mail...that's what's most likely.
Not sure if they were able to verify the authenticity of this email, but it's overall tone somewhat calls that into question. First of all, the email keeps referring to the department as 'iTunes" or the 'iTunes Store". Obviously, as a Mac product, this purchase was handled by the Mac App store and not the iTS. They might be the same team internally, but Apple doesn't usually mince words when it comes to product identification.
Further, I simply can't believe that any Apple employee would be given license to describe their own product as "inadequate", even if it was. After all, this is the same company that designed the hockey puck mouse, which Steve Jobs summarily described as "the best mouse ever created", despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. When Apple does admit to mistakes - such as the iPhone 4's antenna-gate fiasco - it's usually preempted by a 20 minute presentation explaining how much better the new product still is than it's competition, followed by somewhat begrudging attempts at keeping everyone happy (and quiet). This email made no mention of Apple standing by the redesign or how great the new features were, etc. Either they've turned over a new leaf or someone is going to be having a long conversation with their manager tomorrow.
So for their sake, I hope this is fake.
That's what I think, too. I've never seen anything like that from ANY company, much less Apple.
Re-release FCP 7 and call it a day. Rebrand FCP X as FCE until X is ready to replace 7. It's called a transition period.
I agree that Apple should make FCS available again!
I think Apple should keep the FCPX branding and keep FCE EOLd.
I've posted on other threads that I think that FCPX is an amazing product as far as it goes -- and likely will be the platform to build upon for Appe's Pro apps.
Some things you should realize...
Apple probably released FCPX when it needed to -- to make a statement of and show the advantages coming from a total rewrite of FCP designed to exploit the latest technology.
FCPX is by necessity incomplete -- FCS grew over many years, and over time was refined. One very important refinement is 3rd-party plugins. The latest FCS included quite a few of these 3rd-party plugins.
Because the plugins were built for a different code base, they cannot run on the rewritten FCPX code base, nor exploit the hardware with OCL and GCD.
Therefore, there was no acceptable way for FCPX to open most FCP7 projects -- they used plugins that would not work on FCPX.
But this is changing! The FCPX plugin SDK is now available and some 3rd-parties have already converted their plugins to run under (and exploit) FCPX.
Some of the other missing things will come. Apple has already identified some things it will add and said FCPX is just the beginning.
So, Apple has drawn a line in the sand and said this is where we're going and we believe that within 12-18 months, the FCPX product suite will be fleshed out by Apple and 3rd-parties alike -- to the point it will surpass whatever we know today as FCS.
Or, Apple could have just done a minor refresh to FCS (no XCode-base, no 64-bit, no OCL/GCD) -- no path to the future, no big deal!
Finally, Apple could have handled it better -- though we all enjoy seeing the "Big Guy" get his comeuppance... if just a little bit.
Comments
Professionals would sacrifice the time and effort to make the transition if it was more advanced. Sort of like they did when they switched to FCP from Avid many years ago.
Apple should have named it iMovie Pro.
The professionals may have eventually embraced iMovie Pro in a few years when it started becoming apparent that it was superior to FCP 7
The main problem is Apple unexpectedly EOL-ed FCP 7 when the successor was in no way capable of replacing it.
Can all FCPX engineers, and other staff report to my office at 13:00 (yes, that's in three minutes!)
SJ
I feel another "you should all hate each other for letting each other down" speech coming on
It sucks for the pros. I feel your pain (sincerely).
What Apple should do is offer a free FCS3 license with a purchase of FCPX. It will get the industry playing with the new product and allow them to buy seats to continue working on current projects, and as well as give them the ability to keep working in the status quo environment while FCPX matures. Secondly, Apple should publicly commit to support FCP7 on Mac OS X through version 10.8 (Lion is 10.7 - for all intents and purposes, the current version of the Mac OS). This would remove a lot of the anxiety that exists, as I'm sure Apple will be working at high speed to get the missing features and 3rd party support into FCPX.
It's not like FCP7 suddenly ceased to work or suddenly became obsolete.
From my experience, you NEVER upgrade immediately on a major release. You finish your mission critical stuff on your current pipeline. If you need to start a new project, you use that pipeline.
Then slowly on the side, you start building up your new workflow. It takes a while. By the time you get comfortable with it, the software is more mature and bugs/features have been addressed.
These things take a few years anyways. Look at the original FCP conversion. Everyone was calling it "prosumer-at-best", and now, FCP7 is a pretty complete Pro App.
That being said, they redesigned the software to make it more user-friendly and possibly decrease the learning curve. That will increase the user base, and possibly eat at Premiere's designer/prosumer marketshare.
By the time it's fully mature, it will have a much larger user base, and be used by amateur cinematographers and pros alike.
Oh, also, what Teejaysplace24 said. :-) The email looks fake, or someone's getting fired.
I agree except the problem is keeping the 7 version available and supported in the mean time, if Apple do that then there is time for X to mature I hope.
BTW Do we assume Aperture too will be dropped one day as iPhoto gets a little slicker? None of this helps Apple's Pro end and only helps Adobe (I hate to say!).
Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.
Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.
Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.
For further reading: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ide..._film_editing/
They also only charged a "prosumer" $300 for it, not the standard $1000+
You are correct.
As long as editors are not being misled about what they are being sold, they should have no complaint. I think there is enough information out there now to set the record straight about what a FCPX buyer will be getting.
Yesterday, there were hundreds, if not thousands of professional editors swearing at their computers running Avid and Final Cut Pro because either their computers, their software or their staff just could't get it 'right' fast enough.
Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.
Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.
Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.
For further reading: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ide..._film_editing/
They obviously blew it but what do I care, I don't do video anyway.
Finally something negative the trolls and haters can really sink their teeth into. The catch has been sparse these last few years. This will feed them for a day or two.
Yesterday, there were hundreds, if not thousands of professional editors swearing at their computers running Avid and Final Cut Pro because either their computers, their software or their staff just could't get it 'right' fast enough.
Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.
Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.
Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.
For further reading: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ide..._film_editing/
Just get the required 10,000 hours in and even you (yes, YOU) could be a pro editor!
Then there are those saying apple should just sell both 7 and X. I agree with you, but this wouldn't solve the problem of people whining. Then there'd be a whole circus of customers complaining that they bought 7, but that now they need to upgrade to X, but now they have to pay full price or some such nonsense. Inevitably, a ton of people would get confused, buy 7 in late 2011 and be furious when it never got upgraded again.
Basically, what people are saying is that apple is good for professionals and businesses because they constantly try to improve and redefine how we use our computers. If your business is so inflexible as to be drastically effected by the inability to buy new machines for legacy software, then maybe the problem is with your archaic business model.
Given the opportunity, poorly run companies will keep using outdated, terrible software forever, just look at IE 6 marketshare. So yes, if you're a terribly managed, head in the sand style production company, apple isn't the hardware/software vendor for you.
If, however, your trying to constantly prove your business, then having the opportunity to start learning FCP X on new little side projects and continuing to use FCS 7 for your current major products is a wonderful way to bridge this transition period.
They also only charged a "prosumer" $300 for it, not the standard $1000+
I don't know if you recall before FCP was bundled with Studio, but then the standalone app was also around $300.
What's interesting is that this happened before with iMovie years ago and Apple ended up backpeddling and kept the old iMovie HD around for awhile. So you think that Randy Ubillos would have wanted to avoid that situation this time around. So it's mystifying how Apple could have gotten themselves into this mess.
But some of it has to do with a blind spot toward pro users in general, despite having a previously good relationship with this market and doing their best to blow up the pro video market over the past several years. For comparison, if any of Apple's major technology vendors like SAP or Oracle made a new version of something and then just dropped support and availability of the previous version, Apple IT Services would be screaming bloody murder right now.
Final Cut Pro X will get it's act together at some point. No one is saying that the new version doesn't do the things it does support. The issue are the things that were left out.
I also received a refund, no questions asked, from the Apple iTunes store.
The body of the email was:
"Greetings from Apple iTunes, before I address your issue I would just like to take the opportunity to address myself. My name is XXXX and I look forward to working with you to resolve any issues you may have. Now, I understand that you have purchased "Final Cut Pro" however it has less functionality then the previous version "Final Cut Pro 7." I can certainly appreciate your eagerness to have this issue resolved, rest assured I am more then happy to help!
First and foremost, I would like to extend an apology for the delayed response to your email. iTunes Support endeavors to send a reply within 24 hours; however, due to new product releases and features for the iTunes Store we are experiencing higher volumes than normal. We appreciate your patience and understanding.
XXX, what I have done for you is, I have gone ahead and reversed the charge for this purchase.
In five to seven business days, a credit of $299.99 should be posted to the credit card that appears on the receipt for that purchase. I sincerely apologize for any inconveniences this issue has caused.
Should you have any further questions or concerns in regards to this issue, please do not hesitate to reply to this email, and I will gladly address them for you.
Thank you for choosing iTunes as your source for online entertainment, and I hope you have a fantastic day, XXXX!
Sincerely,
XXXXXX
iTunes Store Customer Support
Please Note: I work Friday, Saturday and Sunday 12:30-9:30 pm EST
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to assist you. You may receive an AppleCare survey email; any feedback you provide would be greatly appreciated"
It's was a refreshing reaction by Apple to a very misunderstood and botched product launch.
It reminds me a bit of when Coca-Cola took away a product loved by millions and replaced it with a product more favored by kids. In the end of course, Coca Cola bowed to pressure from their fans and brought back the product that everyone knew and loved.
Let's hope that Apple can remedy the FCP-X debacle with equal success! How about FCP 8!
That e-mail I believe. I do not believe the one posted in the OP is authentic. There is no way an Apple employee is going to apologize for the "inadequacies" of Apple's product, nor is he going to write: "I understand that Final Cut Pro X does not work as well...."
No way. A real refund with an altered e-mail...that's what's most likely.
I don't know if you recall before FCP was bundled with Studio, but then the standalone app was also around $300.
For FCP5, the last version that was available without purchasing FCS, the upgrade was $399 and $999 for standalone. FCS was $1299.
http://www.macworld.com/product/2665...cut_pro_5.html
Not sure if they were able to verify the authenticity of this email, but it's overall tone somewhat calls that into question. First of all, the email keeps referring to the department as 'iTunes" or the 'iTunes Store". Obviously, as a Mac product, this purchase was handled by the Mac App store and not the iTS. They might be the same team internally, but Apple doesn't usually mince words when it comes to product identification.
Further, I simply can't believe that any Apple employee would be given license to describe their own product as "inadequate", even if it was. After all, this is the same company that designed the hockey puck mouse, which Steve Jobs summarily described as "the best mouse ever created", despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. When Apple does admit to mistakes - such as the iPhone 4's antenna-gate fiasco - it's usually preempted by a 20 minute presentation explaining how much better the new product still is than it's competition, followed by somewhat begrudging attempts at keeping everyone happy (and quiet). This email made no mention of Apple standing by the redesign or how great the new features were, etc. Either they've turned over a new leaf or someone is going to be having a long conversation with their manager tomorrow.
So for their sake, I hope this is fake.
That's what I think, too. I've never seen anything like that from ANY company, much less Apple.
Re-release FCP 7 and call it a day. Rebrand FCP X as FCE until X is ready to replace 7. It's called a transition period.
I agree that Apple should make FCS available again!
I think Apple should keep the FCPX branding and keep FCE EOLd.
I've posted on other threads that I think that FCPX is an amazing product as far as it goes -- and likely will be the platform to build upon for Appe's Pro apps.
Some things you should realize...
Apple probably released FCPX when it needed to -- to make a statement of and show the advantages coming from a total rewrite of FCP designed to exploit the latest technology.
FCPX is by necessity incomplete -- FCS grew over many years, and over time was refined. One very important refinement is 3rd-party plugins. The latest FCS included quite a few of these 3rd-party plugins.
Because the plugins were built for a different code base, they cannot run on the rewritten FCPX code base, nor exploit the hardware with OCL and GCD.
Therefore, there was no acceptable way for FCPX to open most FCP7 projects -- they used plugins that would not work on FCPX.
But this is changing! The FCPX plugin SDK is now available and some 3rd-parties have already converted their plugins to run under (and exploit) FCPX.
Some of the other missing things will come. Apple has already identified some things it will add and said FCPX is just the beginning.
So, Apple has drawn a line in the sand and said this is where we're going and we believe that within 12-18 months, the FCPX product suite will be fleshed out by Apple and 3rd-parties alike -- to the point it will surpass whatever we know today as FCS.
Or, Apple could have just done a minor refresh to FCS (no XCode-base, no 64-bit, no OCL/GCD) -- no path to the future, no big deal!
Finally, Apple could have handled it better -- though we all enjoy seeing the "Big Guy" get his comeuppance... if just a little bit.