"The report claims that Mac OS X and associated applications are now considered "less urgent" within Apple."
Even though I am not surprised at this statement, I still don't like the sound of it.
Yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
I agree that it's a bit sad, but I don't know how anyone could dispute the obvious truth of the statement. If you were in charge of Apple right now, you'd probably agree with it, no?
Compatibility with prior versions is most important even for someone like me, who is not a professional.
I have many hours invested in creating home movies and some special videos for friends. Also, I have invested several thousand dollars in 3rd party plugins.
...............
Today, when time is the critical factor, I prefer to use iMovie over FCP because you can do an acceptable job of most things, quickly: titles; limited effects; transitions; syncing audio and video'
Even when I need to use FCP or Motion for some effects-- often it is easier to export those "clips" to iMove for inclusion in a final product.
As far as UI goes, there are some things in the Pro and Prosumer products that scream out for a touch interface-- I would like to see touch enhancements where applicable.
I suspect that Apple will release an iPad version of the iPhone iMovie app. I think that could be an interesting experiment to see how a Prosumer product could work with a Touch interface on a large enough screen to make editing practical.
If Apple are smart, they will cross-pollinate their OS X and iOS efforts wherever UI is involved -- especially apps.
I would like the capability to attach an iPad to a Mac and use it as a large touch pad to control, say a tracking path or 3D camera movement. Similarly, I'd like to use an iPad as a touch display to manipulate a detail portion of a video -- say, zoom in and refine a mask, or a bezier path for rotoscoping, or test various effects, dynamically.
...............
You mean a merging of the consumer, prosumer and pro apps line and unifying the experience across iOS devices and the Mac? You speak heresy, witch!
Nah but seriously, Apple has some choices to make on which way to roll. Right now everything is about iOS, the Mac is cool, and selling well, but is starting to lag behind a little. Thank goodness the engineering is solid on Mac OS X for the past several years, there hasn't been a remarkable drop in quality of Mac *software* experience. Hardware, well, perhaps, perhaps a different story, debatable.
Your ideas are good. But right now whether we like it or not it is possible, not just due to this rumour, that there is a divergence within Apple between the Mac and [Other] teams. Apple is hamstrung as it is trying to make those 15 million+ iOS devices *per month*. iPad alone will outsell Macs soon, if it hasn't already, certainly it will in 2011.
For every purchase of a MacPro and their other mac gadgets, Apple is getting probably 100 iPads out the door.
Even if that's true, don't you think Apple wants to keep selling Mac Pros?
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas
Soundtrack Pro:
- Why does it even exist? Because the audio environment in FCP sucks. I think they should rather go to the bottom of what's wrong and make a great audio environment within FCP itself instead of sending the trouble to another program. For deeper and more creative audio editing use Logic. Everyone I know that is serious about Soundtrack pro is hating it.
While I see your point, as an audio guy and Logic user I'd much rather see STP fixed than dumped. There are people who need an app like STP who aren't FCS users, and Logic doesn't do everything STP does and probably never will (although I'd love to see some better integration between Logic and STP. Prime example, Logic doesn't do destructive editing on files, at least not to the degree a dedicated editor does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm
Seems to me that you can see lots of room for improvement, I don't see anything above that is "broken"
Have you ever used Soundtrack Pro? Extremely buggy with lots of things that are broken. Maybe you haven't encountered any problems in any of the apps, but that doesn't mean the problems don't exist.
palegolas, excellent post which I completely agree with. nvidia2008, one person's "it ain't broken" is another ones "what a hindrance to have to work this way". When I use pro apps they have to go "Boom, boom, boom", one thing to another, fast flow, because it's not pecking at the screen like a high school media class, it's ten people standing behind me, all wanting things to go faster, and sometimes they're not being unreasonable. There are unnecessary bottlenecks in the workflow. And if they DO go faster when they work somewhere else on a rig with apps that get updated regularly, with good support and quick fixes (there was a time a few years ago when Compressor was broken for so long I swear that was when my hair turned grey), well, I can't compete if I wait around for Apple to fix something.
One of Apple's biggest shortcomings is that they offer these "pro apps" but really don't service the needs of the market they intend to sell to. And this is coming from a total Apple apologist. I love Final Cut and Aperture, but the company to user link is terrible for the professional.
Agreed and I definitely don't want a dumbed down version for prosumers.
How will making the interface more accessible be "dumbed down"? Why must everyone immediately assume the two goals (easy to use and "pro") have to be mutually exclusive?
Quote:
I am sad that those of us paying the big bucks for high end MacPros, ACDs and Pro apps are being sidelined because of iOS.
Really? iOS is funding the drive and innovation for everything else Apple is doing. Yes, Mac sales are significant and the company was profitable with just them, but the financial security and influence Apple has in the market today is largely due to the iOS.
Again, why can't they be successful in both? For the iOS to succeed the Mac doesn't have to fail, and vice versa.
Quote:
I love iOS but Apple have the $s to do both surely?
It's not about $$$, it's about resources. Apple is more like a startup than a company their size. That's part of the their strength and why their products are much tighter out the gate than many of their competitors. Throwing more resources at a problem becomes an exercise in diminishing returns. The drawback is you end up having to shift focus and some things slow down.
Oh well. I would rather see Apple focus more resources on the fast changing consumer space with the iOS. You have heard from multiple professionals in this thread and I can also assure that most professionals don't want yearly or even 18 month updates. The only time you see a rush to a new program or update is if there is some component of the workflow that is now missing - and those are pretty rare and far between. If you happen to be in that rare group then it's no fun being you, but it's reality.
Companies will also leapfrog each other on a regular basis. Lots of people were jumping to Light Room because they were convinced (mainly by baseless rumors and internet blabber) that Aperture was abandoned, Apple didn't care about professionals, etc. - and then lo and behold, Aperture 3 was released and it leapfrogged the light room beta. It's the nature of the industry.
You can constantly run from the latest "new/shiny" toy of the moment, continually buying new software and learning new interfaces, or you can use the tools you have and work within the ecosystem you are in.
And yes, there are some people pushing the extreme envelope for who doing the above is perfectly legitimate, but I'm always amazed at the amount of people wringing hands about "the other software" when they don't even exploit all the tools they have at their current disposal because they are constantly looking at the greener grass on the other side of the fence.
The whole pro app market and it's accompanying prestige and synergy is nothing to toy with.
Please. Real professionals are not worried about a six month delay in a product cycle. Unless there is a GLARING deficiency between products. So far I haven't seen anything that FCS is glaringly deficient in vs. it's competitors, including the new Premiere.
The worst thing they could do is "just hire some more developers" and sink the quality of their products. There are no fast/easy fixes to issues like this, and it's where companies like Microsoft went violently off the rails with their first attempt at Vista.
No thank you. It may not be perfect, but I'll stick with Apple's methodology.
I don't know why you think the idea of Apple pulling people from one project (and delaying it) to help out with another is so crazy. Did you forget this one?
Shifting people between Mac OSX and iOS is one thing since they share the same common code base.
Implying that they are shifting people from FCP to iOS, or Logic to some other portion of the company because of one report of them shifting people from Mac OSX to iOS is idiotic.
Could not agree with you more. Has Apple fully ported FCS to Cocoa? Has it made it 64 bit or optimized it for Grand Central Dispatch? Is Apple eating its own dog food when it comes to using its own OS technologies to improve FCS? No, it isn't.
Er, what version of Mac OS did Grand Central Dispatch debut in?
Oh, that's right - the current one!
Quote:
So what does that say about its priorities vis a vis FCS? You don't need a rumor to see where Apple's priorities are, and they sure as hell aren't of FCS.
Really? So you think a 64 bit, Cocoa rewrite that leverages brand new APIs just fall out of the sky?
As much as I think Adobe was sleeping, they did get themselves regrouped and released a cocoa/64 bit version of Photoshop.
I have no doubt the FCP and other Apple Pro app developers were caught as flat footed with the decision to not go forward with 64bit Carbon. Combine that with all the new API stuff in Snow Leopard and I'm not surprised in the least it's taking Apple longer to ship out their Pro apps.
10.6 should be the last major change to system API's. There have been several discussions of 10.6 and how it was what should be the last major change to the OS foundations of Mac OSX - I think we are going to start seeing allot of accelerated development from not only Apple but other vendors. It's been a long and rocky road, but Apple finally has a rich foundation of mature API's, and nicely maturing API's like GCD.
Bunch of petulant whining. And he gets called on his statements like USB 3 in the comments.
I have news for people like him and you - stop being so damn jealous of the iOS! Even before the iOS Apple didn't kick out updates for half the people out there. Nothing has changed because of the iOS. If anything, Apple has MORE resources to devote to their Pro apps because of the iOS. I know that on the business side of things they are more corporate focused than they have ever been because of the iPhone - mainly because of the iPhone and now iPad, they actually have a chance at cracking the corporate walls.
Quote:
Biggess POS ever. Compressor can also be frustrating as hell too when things aren't working properly. Ditto with Color (although the latest update was a great improvement).
Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?
Get a grip!
Quote:
It is inexcusable that Apple slams Adobe and others for not porting their apps to Cocoa but can't do this itself. See above for other examples of this type of neglect (64 bit, GCD, etc).
Please point me to a public comment by Apple about Adobe and 64 bit.
Again, what a bunch of hysterics over nothing. If I didn't know any better I would swear I was at a sewing circle listening to a bunch of old women kevetching!
I have news for people like him and you - stop being so damn jealous of the iOS! Even before the iOS Apple didn't kick out updates for half the people out there. Nothing has changed because of the iOS. If anything, Apple has MORE resources to devote to their Pro apps because of the iOS. I know that on the business side of things they are more corporate focused than they have ever been because of the iPhone - mainly because of the iPhone and now iPad, they actually have a chance at cracking the corporate walls.
(quote snipped)
Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?
Get a grip!
(quote snipped)
Again, what a bunch of hysterics over nothing. If I didn't know any better I would swear I was at a sewing circle listening to a bunch of old women kevetching!
Spoken like someone who doesn't have to use pro video apps : )
There are non-OSX video production tools that leave FCP in the dust. It's not an Apple or Adobe or Avid only world behind the scenes. It's not about kvetching, jealousy or being ignorant of how difficult it is to write good software. It's about wanting to use the best tools available within a budget. And Apple has a history of promoting "pro" software that eventually becomes less pro, even if the users become MORE pro.
Implying that they are shifting people from FCP to iOS, or Logic to some other portion of the company because of one report of them shifting people from Mac OSX to iOS is idiotic.
Then good thing I didn't imply that. That report was just refuting the notion that apple never pulls people from one team to another, or that projects aren't delayed because of that.
If you read my other posts, I did mention FCP talent getting pulled for things like iMovie. Quicktime itself wouldn't surprise me as well (although that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing).
Logic, that team regularly gets shifted to Garage Band, that's a known fact (actually it sounds like one team has to work on both apps).
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
So you think a 64 bit, Cocoa rewrite that leverages brand new APIs just fall out of the sky?
So you think that they couldn't get started on a 64 bit Cocoa rewrite until recently? They have had YEARS to work on it - have they actually been doing that? Sure looks like they put it off instead of actually digging into it at the point where they were pestering third parties to get started on it.
Quote:
I have no doubt the FCP and other Apple Pro app developers were caught as flat footed with the decision to not go forward with 64bit Carbon.
And isn't that still apple's fault? You say that make it somehow makes it all OK.
Quote:
Bunch of petulant whining.
You really think the latest Mac Pros are a decent upgrade? Or do you agree with that part of the "whining"?
Quote:
Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?
Have you actually used STP extensively, or just making assumptions? Sorry, but with an app as bad as STP, "all complex software has issues" doesn't cut it, the software is a flat out embarrassment.
Do you do video or audio work for a living? If not, you're not really in a position to attack those who do, and who are unhappy with the current state of the "pro" apps.
Spoken like someone who doesn't have to use pro video apps : )
I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.
Quote:
There are non-OSX video production tools that leave FCP in the dust. It's not an Apple or Adobe or Avid only world behind the scenes. It's not about kvetching, jealousy or being ignorant of how difficult it is to write good software. It's about wanting to use the best tools available within a budget. And Apple has a history of promoting "pro" software that eventually becomes less pro, even if the users become MORE pro.
So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....
Why is FCS still growing?
If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.
So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.
I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.
So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....
Why is FCS still growing?
If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.
So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.
I am an editor in a large post-production facility, and we once had several shake licenses, and we considered moving to FCP, after years of AVID. AVID was a stagnant company, but it reinvented itself with a great product at a lower price - and now Apple has been in the doldrums with FCS. They discontinued shake - which really, really took us by surprise. They've really not done much of anything with FCS since FCS 2.0 at NAB 2007 - while AVID and Adobe have been working overtime. Apple did very little with color - a point release, while Blackmagic acquired Da Vinci and has released Resolve at a price almost every budget can afford. Neither did it touch DVD Studio Pro - which has become simply irrelevant. The industry has gone Blu-Ray, while Steve Rimjobs through his reality distortion field tries to tell us Blu-Ray is a bag of hurt. Motion is a big joke, despite Apple's website directing shake users towards motion. Back in '06 Apple had a real chance to gain inroads as a credible platform for post-production, but the really fumbled the ball, and now any editor with any decent proficiency edits on Media Composer.
So now we have migrated to Nuke, Media Composer, Pro Tools - all running on HP workstations, as Apple has become out of touch with its pro customers.
I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.
So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....
Apple does a fantastic job PROMOTING pro software, which isn't part of what anyone has questioned. It's the job they do fulfilling the promise of the promotion
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
Why is FCS still growing?
Not among professional houses it isn't, and not where Apple didn't practically subsidize college media wings. Please show me where it is growing disproportionate to the growing amount of video footage being professionally edited in total, aside from Apple ads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42
If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.
So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.
Aside from the fact that you twist the meaning of what I and others are saying, you don't seem to understand the points we're making. If it's not clear you'd have to talk to professionals who have their work riding on their tools. Two things you need to know: there's a reason why so many of the films that get rough edited in FinalCut get handed over to something else to be fine edited on; and FC is great when the budget is smaller, as in documentaries, and much editing happens wherever you can do it, including any old office with a decent Mac. Bump up the budget, and get into the arena of news and broadcast (where a HUMONGOUS amount of editing happens) and the ball game is different. You don't call the people working their asses off under that kind of pressure whiners when they say something doesn't cut it. Google some weekly shows and see what I mean.
I use FC (though I'm an audio pro, not video) and know many editors using all of the systems. In fact I know several who work with Avids, Quantels etc. at work and have FCP at home. Nobody who is working steadily kvetches and whines about anything but the clients : ) But they can explain why they have preferences. Apple's direction for the past few years has made me see more FC at home but less in the edit suites.
FCP was updated a year ago. Apple has stated already that they're hard at work on a new version. According to Apple, it will be very impressive. Apple has yet to announce an actual deadline, so if they're missing any deadlines, it's their own internal one(s) and we don't know what those are.
This is Pro-grade, industry-standard software, folks. It doesn't get updated every month. Meanwhile, for all the BS about Apple only caring about their "iToys" (that just so happen to dictate the pace of change in nearly the entire industry), Snow Leopard is getting constant updates, in fact all we keep hearing about are new seeds to developers.
The HardMac story is bogus.
By the way, have you noticed the powerful editing tools available to users of Apple mobile devices? Just a few years ago stuff like this cost a small fortune and required a fair bit of training. The stuff I'm able to do with photos on an iPhone 4 is pretty impressive, to say the least. Just take a gander at the iPhone 4 photos section on MacRumors. Thanks to Apple, of course. Interesting ....
and now any editor with any decent proficiency edits on Media Composer.
In comparing MC to FCP, the Mac version of MC is not very robust. If you like working on Mac then FCP is better, especially having Soundtrack, Motion and Color all integrated is a big plus. FCP is much better for titles and audio work too. Subtitles are also easier to manage in FCP. Although my language is English, if yours is something else, keep in mind that MC is English only. I think deciding which application best suits your needs involves several factors such as your associates and team members, workflow practices, post house preferences, and whether or not you are going to BR, the later being a significant reason to go with MC on Windows, but not everyone will have the same priorities. Both MC and FCP have pros and cons. Neither is better or worse than the other.
With either decision you are really just using a clip editor. As you mentioned, for real compositing power you need Nuke and especially the third party plug-in market, but that is a completely different thread.
So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....
Why is FCS still growing?
Is there any actual evidence that it is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
This is Pro-grade, industry-standard software, folks.
If you actually try and use the software, it's pretty obvious that's not the case. I'd never consider software this buggy "pro grade" by any stretch of the imagination. And I don't care how often enough it gets updated as long as it's often enough that nasty bugs don't just sit there - and by that measure it hasn't been getting updated nearly enough. Just now I'm trying to use STP and it's screwing with my audio files in yet another new way I haven't even seen before.
Comments
"The report claims that Mac OS X and associated applications are now considered "less urgent" within Apple."
Even though I am not surprised at this statement, I still don't like the sound of it.
Yes.
I agree that it's a bit sad, but I don't know how anyone could dispute the obvious truth of the statement. If you were in charge of Apple right now, you'd probably agree with it, no?
And Yes.
.
Compatibility with prior versions is most important even for someone like me, who is not a professional.
I have many hours invested in creating home movies and some special videos for friends. Also, I have invested several thousand dollars in 3rd party plugins.
...............
Today, when time is the critical factor, I prefer to use iMovie over FCP because you can do an acceptable job of most things, quickly: titles; limited effects; transitions; syncing audio and video'
Even when I need to use FCP or Motion for some effects-- often it is easier to export those "clips" to iMove for inclusion in a final product.
As far as UI goes, there are some things in the Pro and Prosumer products that scream out for a touch interface-- I would like to see touch enhancements where applicable.
I suspect that Apple will release an iPad version of the iPhone iMovie app. I think that could be an interesting experiment to see how a Prosumer product could work with a Touch interface on a large enough screen to make editing practical.
If Apple are smart, they will cross-pollinate their OS X and iOS efforts wherever UI is involved -- especially apps.
I would like the capability to attach an iPad to a Mac and use it as a large touch pad to control, say a tracking path or 3D camera movement. Similarly, I'd like to use an iPad as a touch display to manipulate a detail portion of a video -- say, zoom in and refine a mask, or a bezier path for rotoscoping, or test various effects, dynamically.
...............
You mean a merging of the consumer, prosumer and pro apps line and unifying the experience across iOS devices and the Mac? You speak heresy, witch!
Nah but seriously, Apple has some choices to make on which way to roll. Right now everything is about iOS, the Mac is cool, and selling well, but is starting to lag behind a little. Thank goodness the engineering is solid on Mac OS X for the past several years, there hasn't been a remarkable drop in quality of Mac *software* experience. Hardware, well, perhaps, perhaps a different story, debatable.
Your ideas are good. But right now whether we like it or not it is possible, not just due to this rumour, that there is a divergence within Apple between the Mac and [Other] teams. Apple is hamstrung as it is trying to make those 15 million+ iOS devices *per month*. iPad alone will outsell Macs soon, if it hasn't already, certainly it will in 2011.
For every purchase of a MacPro and their other mac gadgets, Apple is getting probably 100 iPads out the door.
Even if that's true, don't you think Apple wants to keep selling Mac Pros?
Soundtrack Pro:
- Why does it even exist? Because the audio environment in FCP sucks. I think they should rather go to the bottom of what's wrong and make a great audio environment within FCP itself instead of sending the trouble to another program. For deeper and more creative audio editing use Logic. Everyone I know that is serious about Soundtrack pro is hating it.
While I see your point, as an audio guy and Logic user I'd much rather see STP fixed than dumped. There are people who need an app like STP who aren't FCS users, and Logic doesn't do everything STP does and probably never will (although I'd love to see some better integration between Logic and STP. Prime example, Logic doesn't do destructive editing on files, at least not to the degree a dedicated editor does.
Seems to me that you can see lots of room for improvement, I don't see anything above that is "broken"
Have you ever used Soundtrack Pro? Extremely buggy with lots of things that are broken. Maybe you haven't encountered any problems in any of the apps, but that doesn't mean the problems don't exist.
One of Apple's biggest shortcomings is that they offer these "pro apps" but really don't service the needs of the market they intend to sell to. And this is coming from a total Apple apologist. I love Final Cut and Aperture, but the company to user link is terrible for the professional.
Agreed and I definitely don't want a dumbed down version for prosumers.
How will making the interface more accessible be "dumbed down"? Why must everyone immediately assume the two goals (easy to use and "pro") have to be mutually exclusive?
I am sad that those of us paying the big bucks for high end MacPros, ACDs and Pro apps are being sidelined because of iOS.
Really? iOS is funding the drive and innovation for everything else Apple is doing. Yes, Mac sales are significant and the company was profitable with just them, but the financial security and influence Apple has in the market today is largely due to the iOS.
Again, why can't they be successful in both? For the iOS to succeed the Mac doesn't have to fail, and vice versa.
I love iOS but Apple have the $s to do both surely?
It's not about $$$, it's about resources. Apple is more like a startup than a company their size. That's part of the their strength and why their products are much tighter out the gate than many of their competitors. Throwing more resources at a problem becomes an exercise in diminishing returns. The drawback is you end up having to shift focus and some things slow down.
Oh well. I would rather see Apple focus more resources on the fast changing consumer space with the iOS. You have heard from multiple professionals in this thread and I can also assure that most professionals don't want yearly or even 18 month updates. The only time you see a rush to a new program or update is if there is some component of the workflow that is now missing - and those are pretty rare and far between. If you happen to be in that rare group then it's no fun being you, but it's reality.
Companies will also leapfrog each other on a regular basis. Lots of people were jumping to Light Room because they were convinced (mainly by baseless rumors and internet blabber) that Aperture was abandoned, Apple didn't care about professionals, etc. - and then lo and behold, Aperture 3 was released and it leapfrogged the light room beta. It's the nature of the industry.
You can constantly run from the latest "new/shiny" toy of the moment, continually buying new software and learning new interfaces, or you can use the tools you have and work within the ecosystem you are in.
And yes, there are some people pushing the extreme envelope for who doing the above is perfectly legitimate, but I'm always amazed at the amount of people wringing hands about "the other software" when they don't even exploit all the tools they have at their current disposal because they are constantly looking at the greener grass on the other side of the fence.
The whole pro app market and it's accompanying prestige and synergy is nothing to toy with.
Please. Real professionals are not worried about a six month delay in a product cycle. Unless there is a GLARING deficiency between products. So far I haven't seen anything that FCS is glaringly deficient in vs. it's competitors, including the new Premiere.
The worst thing they could do is "just hire some more developers" and sink the quality of their products. There are no fast/easy fixes to issues like this, and it's where companies like Microsoft went violently off the rails with their first attempt at Vista.
No thank you. It may not be perfect, but I'll stick with Apple's methodology.
It completely ridiculous that a company as cash rich as Apple can't manage their resources better.
LOL - companies that are "cash rich" like Apple are that way because they are excellent at managing their resources.
Companies that don't manage resources well either decline or go out of business. Your contradicting yourself.
If you want to be taken serious you might want to atleast support your opinion with one citation or reference.
I find it hilarious (and telling) you are trying to hold an anonymous poster in an Internet forum to a higher standard than the original BS report.
And it was a total BS report, BTW - go try to defend that than attacking people pointing out the obvious.
When is the next version of OS X due anyways?
When it's done?
Whenever Steve can get the most pleasure spinning up Internet forum trolls by purposely holding it back?
Why is it even relevant to the discussion at hand?
I don't know why you think the idea of Apple pulling people from one project (and delaying it) to help out with another is so crazy. Did you forget this one?
Shifting people between Mac OSX and iOS is one thing since they share the same common code base.
Implying that they are shifting people from FCP to iOS, or Logic to some other portion of the company because of one report of them shifting people from Mac OSX to iOS is idiotic.
Could not agree with you more. Has Apple fully ported FCS to Cocoa? Has it made it 64 bit or optimized it for Grand Central Dispatch? Is Apple eating its own dog food when it comes to using its own OS technologies to improve FCS? No, it isn't.
Er, what version of Mac OS did Grand Central Dispatch debut in?
Oh, that's right - the current one!
So what does that say about its priorities vis a vis FCS? You don't need a rumor to see where Apple's priorities are, and they sure as hell aren't of FCS.
Really? So you think a 64 bit, Cocoa rewrite that leverages brand new APIs just fall out of the sky?
As much as I think Adobe was sleeping, they did get themselves regrouped and released a cocoa/64 bit version of Photoshop.
I have no doubt the FCP and other Apple Pro app developers were caught as flat footed with the decision to not go forward with 64bit Carbon. Combine that with all the new API stuff in Snow Leopard and I'm not surprised in the least it's taking Apple longer to ship out their Pro apps.
10.6 should be the last major change to system API's. There have been several discussions of 10.6 and how it was what should be the last major change to the OS foundations of Mac OSX - I think we are going to start seeing allot of accelerated development from not only Apple but other vendors. It's been a long and rocky road, but Apple finally has a rich foundation of mature API's, and nicely maturing API's like GCD.
This might change (if when Apple releases the alleged "awesome" update that is in the works), but face facts people, Apple does not love its Pro users anymore.
Bunch of petulant whining. And he gets called on his statements like USB 3 in the comments.
I have news for people like him and you - stop being so damn jealous of the iOS! Even before the iOS Apple didn't kick out updates for half the people out there. Nothing has changed because of the iOS. If anything, Apple has MORE resources to devote to their Pro apps because of the iOS. I know that on the business side of things they are more corporate focused than they have ever been because of the iPhone - mainly because of the iPhone and now iPad, they actually have a chance at cracking the corporate walls.
Biggess POS ever. Compressor can also be frustrating as hell too when things aren't working properly. Ditto with Color (although the latest update was a great improvement).
Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?
Get a grip!
It is inexcusable that Apple slams Adobe and others for not porting their apps to Cocoa but can't do this itself. See above for other examples of this type of neglect (64 bit, GCD, etc).
Please point me to a public comment by Apple about Adobe and 64 bit.
Again, what a bunch of hysterics over nothing. If I didn't know any better I would swear I was at a sewing circle listening to a bunch of old women kevetching!
I have news for people like him and you - stop being so damn jealous of the iOS! Even before the iOS Apple didn't kick out updates for half the people out there. Nothing has changed because of the iOS. If anything, Apple has MORE resources to devote to their Pro apps because of the iOS. I know that on the business side of things they are more corporate focused than they have ever been because of the iPhone - mainly because of the iPhone and now iPad, they actually have a chance at cracking the corporate walls.
(quote snipped)
Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?
Get a grip!
(quote snipped)
Again, what a bunch of hysterics over nothing. If I didn't know any better I would swear I was at a sewing circle listening to a bunch of old women kevetching!
Spoken like someone who doesn't have to use pro video apps : )
There are non-OSX video production tools that leave FCP in the dust. It's not an Apple or Adobe or Avid only world behind the scenes. It's not about kvetching, jealousy or being ignorant of how difficult it is to write good software. It's about wanting to use the best tools available within a budget. And Apple has a history of promoting "pro" software that eventually becomes less pro, even if the users become MORE pro.
Implying that they are shifting people from FCP to iOS, or Logic to some other portion of the company because of one report of them shifting people from Mac OSX to iOS is idiotic.
Then good thing I didn't imply that. That report was just refuting the notion that apple never pulls people from one team to another, or that projects aren't delayed because of that.
If you read my other posts, I did mention FCP talent getting pulled for things like iMovie. Quicktime itself wouldn't surprise me as well (although that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing).
Logic, that team regularly gets shifted to Garage Band, that's a known fact (actually it sounds like one team has to work on both apps).
So you think a 64 bit, Cocoa rewrite that leverages brand new APIs just fall out of the sky?
So you think that they couldn't get started on a 64 bit Cocoa rewrite until recently? They have had YEARS to work on it - have they actually been doing that? Sure looks like they put it off instead of actually digging into it at the point where they were pestering third parties to get started on it.
I have no doubt the FCP and other Apple Pro app developers were caught as flat footed with the decision to not go forward with 64bit Carbon.
And isn't that still apple's fault? You say that make it somehow makes it all OK.
Bunch of petulant whining.
You really think the latest Mac Pros are a decent upgrade? Or do you agree with that part of the "whining"?
Hey - all complex software has issues. Think Premiere or Avid is magically bug/quirk/issue free?
Have you actually used STP extensively, or just making assumptions? Sorry, but with an app as bad as STP, "all complex software has issues" doesn't cut it, the software is a flat out embarrassment.
Do you do video or audio work for a living? If not, you're not really in a position to attack those who do, and who are unhappy with the current state of the "pro" apps.
Spoken like someone who doesn't have to use pro video apps : )
I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.
There are non-OSX video production tools that leave FCP in the dust. It's not an Apple or Adobe or Avid only world behind the scenes. It's not about kvetching, jealousy or being ignorant of how difficult it is to write good software. It's about wanting to use the best tools available within a budget. And Apple has a history of promoting "pro" software that eventually becomes less pro, even if the users become MORE pro.
So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....
Why is FCS still growing?
If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.
So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.
I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.
So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....
Why is FCS still growing?
If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.
So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.
I am an editor in a large post-production facility, and we once had several shake licenses, and we considered moving to FCP, after years of AVID. AVID was a stagnant company, but it reinvented itself with a great product at a lower price - and now Apple has been in the doldrums with FCS. They discontinued shake - which really, really took us by surprise. They've really not done much of anything with FCS since FCS 2.0 at NAB 2007 - while AVID and Adobe have been working overtime. Apple did very little with color - a point release, while Blackmagic acquired Da Vinci and has released Resolve at a price almost every budget can afford. Neither did it touch DVD Studio Pro - which has become simply irrelevant. The industry has gone Blu-Ray, while Steve Rimjobs through his reality distortion field tries to tell us Blu-Ray is a bag of hurt. Motion is a big joke, despite Apple's website directing shake users towards motion. Back in '06 Apple had a real chance to gain inroads as a credible platform for post-production, but the really fumbled the ball, and now any editor with any decent proficiency edits on Media Composer.
So now we have migrated to Nuke, Media Composer, Pro Tools - all running on HP workstations, as Apple has become out of touch with its pro customers.
I own and use FCS - not in a professional manner, mind you - but I'm not totally ignorant of some of these issues.
So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....
Apple does a fantastic job PROMOTING pro software, which isn't part of what anyone has questioned. It's the job they do fulfilling the promise of the promotion
Why is FCS still growing?
Not among professional houses it isn't, and not where Apple didn't practically subsidize college media wings. Please show me where it is growing disproportionate to the growing amount of video footage being professionally edited in total, aside from Apple ads.
If Final Cut is as broken and hopeless as it's being represented in this thread, then you would think you would see that reflected in fewer projects, not more projects, being done in FCS.
So, I while true I may not be a video pro, I can certainly see trends with real video pro's, and those trends crap all over the chicken littles in this thread. Now, I could be missing a latent trend of people ending their current cycle of projects and then planning to switch - so who knows. In six months perhaps the sky will fall. Historically, such things are pretty rare.
Aside from the fact that you twist the meaning of what I and others are saying, you don't seem to understand the points we're making. If it's not clear you'd have to talk to professionals who have their work riding on their tools. Two things you need to know: there's a reason why so many of the films that get rough edited in FinalCut get handed over to something else to be fine edited on; and FC is great when the budget is smaller, as in documentaries, and much editing happens wherever you can do it, including any old office with a decent Mac. Bump up the budget, and get into the arena of news and broadcast (where a HUMONGOUS amount of editing happens) and the ball game is different. You don't call the people working their asses off under that kind of pressure whiners when they say something doesn't cut it. Google some weekly shows and see what I mean.
I use FC (though I'm an audio pro, not video) and know many editors using all of the systems. In fact I know several who work with Avids, Quantels etc. at work and have FCP at home. Nobody who is working steadily kvetches and whines about anything but the clients : ) But they can explain why they have preferences. Apple's direction for the past few years has made me see more FC at home but less in the edit suites.
This is Pro-grade, industry-standard software, folks. It doesn't get updated every month. Meanwhile, for all the BS about Apple only caring about their "iToys" (that just so happen to dictate the pace of change in nearly the entire industry), Snow Leopard is getting constant updates, in fact all we keep hearing about are new seeds to developers.
The HardMac story is bogus.
By the way, have you noticed the powerful editing tools available to users of Apple mobile devices? Just a few years ago stuff like this cost a small fortune and required a fair bit of training. The stuff I'm able to do with photos on an iPhone 4 is pretty impressive, to say the least. Just take a gander at the iPhone 4 photos section on MacRumors. Thanks to Apple, of course. Interesting ....
and now any editor with any decent proficiency edits on Media Composer.
In comparing MC to FCP, the Mac version of MC is not very robust. If you like working on Mac then FCP is better, especially having Soundtrack, Motion and Color all integrated is a big plus. FCP is much better for titles and audio work too. Subtitles are also easier to manage in FCP. Although my language is English, if yours is something else, keep in mind that MC is English only. I think deciding which application best suits your needs involves several factors such as your associates and team members, workflow practices, post house preferences, and whether or not you are going to BR, the later being a significant reason to go with MC on Windows, but not everyone will have the same priorities. Both MC and FCP have pros and cons. Neither is better or worse than the other.
With either decision you are really just using a clip editor. As you mentioned, for real compositing power you need Nuke and especially the third party plug-in market, but that is a completely different thread.
So, if Apple does such a bad job promoting "pro" software, if their tools are not the best tools available within budget, and if it's not just about kvetching and whining.....
Why is FCS still growing?
Is there any actual evidence that it is?
This is Pro-grade, industry-standard software, folks.
If you actually try and use the software, it's pretty obvious that's not the case. I'd never consider software this buggy "pro grade" by any stretch of the imagination. And I don't care how often enough it gets updated as long as it's often enough that nasty bugs don't just sit there - and by that measure it hasn't been getting updated nearly enough. Just now I'm trying to use STP and it's screwing with my audio files in yet another new way I haven't even seen before.