FCP 3: User Interface

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Well, I saw a snapshot of FCP 3 on OSX and Apple only partially aqua-fied it. It looks really bad. Either totally aquafy it or keep the old UI but now its just seems funky. It is a shame becuase Microsoft did a great job on IE and other apps and Apple failed to do it with its own marquee product. (Although they did do a good job on QT and iMovie, iTunes). They got timid. I would really now look forward to FCP 3.1 when they get it really done.



On the other hand, their are many great new features and improvements like voice over, r/t effects and offline r/t, color enhancements and titleing sw that make it worth the $299 upgrade.



What are your thoughts on the UI?



-------------

Talibabble: Don't listen to a word I say from my cave
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 27
    Actually, I think FCP3 looks okay. If Apple had completely "Aquafied" the interface, FCP would be way too bright. Yes, there are obviously some flaws where the interface is inconsistant, but overall I think Apple did a fine job merging the grey-purple of FCP1&2 with Aqua.
  • Reply 2 of 27
    daverdaver Posts: 496member
    [quote]Originally posted by Talibabble:

    <strong>Well, I saw a snapshot of FCP 3 on OSX and Apple only partially aqua-fied it. It looks really bad. Either totally aquafy it or keep the old UI but now its just seems funky. It is a shame becuase Microsoft did a great job on IE and other apps and Apple failed to do it with its own marquee product. (Although they did do a good job on QT and iMovie, iTunes). They got timid. I would really now look forward to FCP 3.1 when they get it really done.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I think most would agree that IE on OS X looks pretty gross, with its use of nonstandard interface elements and distinctly pseudo-Aqua appearance. I haven't used Office v. X yet.
  • Reply 3 of 27
    kecksykecksy Posts: 1,002member
    Office v.X is pure Cocoa. Pure aqua UI and is the best version of M$ office I've used.
  • Reply 4 of 27
    cosmocosmo Posts: 662member
    Office 2001 was a lot better than X, not to say tha tX was bad but 2001 was far more stable and certainly faster on my iMac. I'm waiting patiently for a good replacement for word.



    Anyway could someone please post a screenshot of FCP 3s interface?
  • Reply 5 of 27
    [quote]Office v.X is pure Cocoa. Pure aqua UI and is the best version of M$ office I've used.<hr></blockquote>

    Its officially known as a CARBON app young man. Its best not to demonstrate ignorance in a public forum.
  • Reply 6 of 27
    [quote]Office v.X is pure Cocoa.<hr></blockquote>I wish...
  • Reply 7 of 27
    [quote]Originally posted by Cosmo:

    Anyway could someone please post a screenshot of FCP 3s interface?<hr></blockquote>Um... <a href="http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro"; target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro</a>;
  • Reply 8 of 27
    [quote] Its best not to demonstrate ignorance in a public forum. <hr></blockquote>



    It's best not to come off as an asshole either.
  • Reply 9 of 27
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    [quote]It's best not to come off as an asshole either.<hr></blockquote>

    And who made you queen of the world?



    I'm tired of the bullshit, and mostly wrong info on cocoa vs. carbon. BOTH are native OSX API's, and it is possible to program a bad app and a good app using either carbon and cocoa. Office happens to be a mediocre, overpriced carbon port of a crucial app suite, that is slower and possibly buggier than its previous incarnation Office 2001.
  • Reply 10 of 27
    [quote] I'm tired of the bullshit, and mostly wrong info on cocoa vs. carbon.<hr></blockquote>



    Are you ? Oh you poor thing.
  • Reply 11 of 27
    children please. this is the FCP thread. the point of message boards is to help each other in a civil and intelligent way.



    I got 3.0 today, and the UI varies not very much at all from 2.0. You will feel very much at home, just with more power. There are more options, like multiple file imports, and subtle menu aquifications, but other than that the timelne, viewer, and project windows look exactly the same, which is where you spend most of your time anyway.



    i just feel sorry for the bastards on e-ba trying to pass off academic versions as retail ones, because the academic version now has it stamped all over it, oh well.
  • Reply 12 of 27
    FCP looks fine. The blue Aqua looks funny in it, but I use Graphite most of the time anyway, so I think it would look good.
  • Reply 13 of 27
    sinewavesinewave Posts: 1,074member
    [quote]Originally posted by Keeksy:

    <strong>Office v.X is pure Cocoa. Pure aqua UI and is the best version of M$ office I've used.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Wrong.. it's carbon, And it doesn't use the Extras.rsrc to grab all of it's GUI elements.
  • Reply 14 of 27
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by Sinewave:

    <strong>



    Wrong.. it's carbon, And it doesn't use the Extras.rsrc to grab all of it's GUI elements.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    who gives a fuck. Office v.X works great. it's a tremendous first effort and it'll only be improved. extras.rsrc can't give everything that every app needs at this point. that's also why Adobe didn't use it.



    because you can't use unsupported theming on it people get mad

    <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
  • Reply 15 of 27
    Sinewave's just mad because he can't use sosumi on it...



    meh. stop whining. by definition, as you're doing something totally unsupported and undocumented, it should not work for everything. Yeah, i wish that everything had interface consistency. But it doesn't. life goes on.
  • Reply 16 of 27
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    who gives a fuck. Office v.X works great. it's a tremendous first effort...<hr></blockquote>Doesn't work great for me. Notice if you hold down a menu when Entourage is busy that it halts everything it's doing. Single threaded Carbon apps piss me off.
  • Reply 17 of 27
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>



    who gives a ****. Office v.X works great. it's a tremendous first effort and it'll only be improved. extras.rsrc can't give everything that every app needs at this point. that's also why Adobe didn't use it.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Office v. X does not work great, and it's certainly not a tremendous first effort (why didn't you same about Apple when they released Mac OS X?).



    The Aqua interface is only skin deep (as so much else in Microsoft apps on the Mac), and again they have shown that they are color blind:











    Gee, it took me a whopping five minutes to make this:







    [ 12-23-2001: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
  • Reply 18 of 27
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by crawlingparanoia:

    <strong>Doesn't work great for me. Notice if you hold down a menu when Entourage is busy that it halts everything it's doing. Single threaded Carbon apps piss me off.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    don't even touch Entourage so I wouldn't know. if so, that sucks. I use Mail. When Palm support is added to Entourage I'll probably switch.



    [quote]Office v. X does not work great, and it's certainly not a tremendous first effort (why didn't you same about Apple when they released Mac OS X?).<hr></blockquote>



    how does it not work great?

    how is it not a tremendous effort?

    MS= 1 year to work on this, limited funds, matches and improves upon feature set of previous version.

    Apple= 4+ years, hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars, not even basic hardware support upon release.



    [quote]

    The Aqua interface is only skin deep (as so much else in Microsoft apps on the Mac), and again they have shown that they are color blind:<hr></blockquote>



    dear god, a visual bug. nver has this happened before



    sad human beings
  • Reply 19 of 27
    sinewavesinewave Posts: 1,074member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>



    who gives a ****. Office v.X works great. it's a tremendous first effort and it'll only be improved. extras.rsrc can't give everything that every app needs at this point. that's also why Adobe didn't use it.



    because you can't use unsupported theming on it people get mad

    :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Funny the Photoshop team made use of the Extras.rsrc in all the widgets it uses. Illustrator uses the SAME widgets but needed "custom" resources. The Photoshop team has it going on.. what can I say. It's out of pure laziness applenut. A GUI is supposed to be system wide. Something Apple used to take pride in. Read the basic Human Interface Guidelines sometime. Using custom widgets for something the Extras.rsrc doesn't supply is one thing.. using them just out of laziness is another. Both Office X and Illustrator does this.
  • Reply 20 of 27
    sinewavesinewave Posts: 1,074member
    [quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:

    <strong>Sinewave's just mad because he can't use sosumi on it...

    </strong><hr></blockquote>

    Uh yeah I can use Sosumi on it. And that isn't the reason I am complaining.

    [quote]<strong>

    meh. stop whining. by definition, as you're doing something totally unsupported and undocumented,it should not work for everything. Yeah, i wish that everything had interface consistency. But it doesn't. life goes on.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    I am hardly whining... jeesh say anything bad about anything Apple and you get called a whiner in here. Are there THAT many zealots out there?
Sign In or Register to comment.