11 ms·

That's what Apple was promising for years before the FCP update and look how that turned out.

chrischen 14y ago
They don't have to do nearly as much work to satisfy the Mac Pro market. It's mainly just keeping the hardware up-to-date so the enthusiasts and high end users aren't using 2 or 3 year old parts.
DannoHung 14y ago
I thought most of the FCX grouses had been responded to.
- protomyth 14y ago
  Some of it. The last update did quite a bit ( see http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4589 http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4589 ), but they still have a ways to go to replace the previous version.
- abruzzi 14y ago
  Some points, yes. Unfortunately, at least for my they have stated that they won't be bringing back the features that kill it for me (tape support.)
  - batista 14y ago
    Tape's probably still used for a lot of work and will for some time, but it will be like bringing back the floppy disk: http://collider.com/film-camera-production-ended-arri-panavision-aaton/120103/ http://collider.com/film-camera-production-ended-arri-panavi... http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/06/the-silver-screen-no-more-distribution-of-film-to-cease-by-2013-in-the-us/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/06/the-silver-screen-no-...
batista 14y ago
>That's what Apple was promising for years before the FCP update and look how that turned out. Yes, how did that turn out? It turned out as a great program, that Apple spend millions and years to rewrite from scratch to have a clean future proof codebase. If you want to bring an example of Apple not caring about the pro market, Final Cut Pro X is NOT it. If anything, it's a counter-example. Only idiots that don't understand software engineering complained. Ie, that you have to cut some corners, since you cannot have everything from the old version + new features, in a 1.0 release and ship in any reasonable timeframe. So, yes, it didn't have ALL the features from the previous version. But soon after it was introduced, it got 2-3 updates, with major missing features (like multi-camera editing) added. And it's just in version 1.0 (post rewrite). Compare to what happened with Netscape. Navigator wasn't going nowhere. But Mozilla took a lot of years and didn't bring everything Navigator had from day one. But thanks to that rewrite --which took like 5 years to produce something stable and usable--, we still, in 2012, have a stable, fast, Firefox. If that rewrite had not happen, there would be no Firefox today, Navigator would have died unable to compete with IE (much less with Chrome and Safari).
- jpxxx 14y ago
  I honestly don't think this is enough. My video editing pals are dumping FCP in droves and there is no heat behind FCPX (updated or not) at all. And where there's no heat, there's no shop talk. Where there's no shop talk, there's no business needs discussion, and where there's no business needs discussion there's no sale. Apple lost control of the dialogue here.
  - batista 14y ago
    I don't see that. Actually professionals (in general, but also people I know) don't update that often. Think 5-6 years timescale. They need a stable base, and they don't even upgrade OSes or computers. So, in all the time FCPX is out, they are still 1 or 2 FCP versions behind. They might get on the FCPX bandwagon on v2 or even 3. In another field I know even better because my brother works on it, professional music studios still use Logic 7 and 8, a lot even use G5 (G5's man!). All the hoopla about FCPX is from amateur and semi-pro guys, that can jump around from program to program without care. It's not as if they have (much) work to do. See also the second version of the FCPX impressions (after the first updates), from some pros in Philip Bloom's site: http://philipbloom.net/2012/02/07/fcpxeditors/ http://philipbloom.net/2012/02/07/fcpxeditors/

They don't have to do nearly as much work to satisfy the Mac Pro market. It's mainly just keeping the hardware up-to-date so the enthusiasts and high end users aren't using 2 or 3 year old parts.

DannoHung 14y ago

I thought most of the FCX grouses had been responded to.

protomyth 14y ago
Some of it. The last update did quite a bit ( see http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4589 http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4589 ), but they still have a ways to go to replace the previous version.
abruzzi 14y ago
Some points, yes. Unfortunately, at least for my they have stated that they won't be bringing back the features that kill it for me (tape support.)
- batista 14y ago
  Tape's probably still used for a lot of work and will for some time, but it will be like bringing back the floppy disk: http://collider.com/film-camera-production-ended-arri-panavision-aaton/120103/ http://collider.com/film-camera-production-ended-arri-panavi... http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/06/the-silver-screen-no-more-distribution-of-film-to-cease-by-2013-in-the-us/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/06/the-silver-screen-no-...

batista 14y ago

>That's what Apple was promising for years before the FCP update and look how that turned out. Yes, how did that turn out? It turned out as a great program, that Apple spend millions and years to rewrite from scratch to have a clean future proof codebase. If you want to bring an example of Apple not caring about the pro market, Final Cut Pro X is NOT it. If anything, it's a counter-example. Only idiots that don't understand software engineering complained. Ie, that you have to cut some corners, since you cannot have everything from the old version + new features, in a 1.0 release and ship in any reasonable timeframe. So, yes, it didn't have ALL the features from the previous version. But soon after it was introduced, it got 2-3 updates, with major missing features (like multi-camera editing) added. And it's just in version 1.0 (post rewrite). Compare to what happened with Netscape. Navigator wasn't going nowhere. But Mozilla took a lot of years and didn't bring everything Navigator had from day one. But thanks to that rewrite --which took like 5 years to produce something stable and usable--, we still, in 2012, have a stable, fast, Firefox. If that rewrite had not happen, there would be no Firefox today, Navigator would have died unable to compete with IE (much less with Chrome and Safari).

jpxxx 14y ago
I honestly don't think this is enough. My video editing pals are dumping FCP in droves and there is no heat behind FCPX (updated or not) at all. And where there's no heat, there's no shop talk. Where there's no shop talk, there's no business needs discussion, and where there's no business needs discussion there's no sale. Apple lost control of the dialogue here.
- batista 14y ago
  I don't see that. Actually professionals (in general, but also people I know) don't update that often. Think 5-6 years timescale. They need a stable base, and they don't even upgrade OSes or computers. So, in all the time FCPX is out, they are still 1 or 2 FCP versions behind. They might get on the FCPX bandwagon on v2 or even 3. In another field I know even better because my brother works on it, professional music studios still use Logic 7 and 8, a lot even use G5 (G5's man!). All the hoopla about FCPX is from amateur and semi-pro guys, that can jump around from program to program without care. It's not as if they have (much) work to do. See also the second version of the FCPX impressions (after the first updates), from some pros in Philip Bloom's site: http://philipbloom.net/2012/02/07/fcpxeditors/ http://philipbloom.net/2012/02/07/fcpxeditors/