-
Apple progress FCP X, Anything to report?
-
[Herb Sevush] “However the notion that “they all do it” is not an excuse for Apple doing it too. Money is truly the only voice to be listened to in the corporate world”
Key is that they are all driven by money which is why “they all do it.”
I think what makes Apple’s situation unique is that most of the other companies are primarily post production or creative tool oriented. It makes Apple’s road map a bit more inscrutable.
It seems though Apple is primarily a company that sells hardware and that all software and services are geared to serve that purpose. That doesn’t mean software and services are just “throw aways” but it does meant that selling hardware seems to be the driving force. That would also mean that moving from FCPX to Mac based Avid or Premiere isn’t really a short term financial threat.
I strongly suspect that given the potential advantages Avid and Premiere may have on Windows boxes that Apple’s “window of opportunity” would be to provide FCPX and complimentary hardware updates that would present a compelling case to purchase new Mac computers. Thunderbolt may be part of that picture. It may be the next MacPros (or whatever replaces them) are part of that picture as well. Apple is also guided by ease of use as well (UI).
I mention all the above because those who are moving their NLE dollars to Avid or Adobe, by itself, may not be seen as a big $ complaint. Apple, I suspect, is aware of the hardware costs if that’s part of the shift and I suspect they feel that they’re going to have a cost effective proposition to stay on (or move to) Macs.
-
“It seems though Apple is primarily a company that sells hardware and that all software and services are geared to serve that purpose.”
I think that with Apple the differentiation between OS software and the hardware it runs on is very hard to find; they excel at the point where the two are indivisible. The Imac doesn’t really exist without OSX, nor the iPhone without iOS.
“That would also mean that moving from FCPX to Mac based Avid or Premiere isn’t really a short term financial threat.”
If you’ll remember from that Keycode seminar you were kind enough to post, the question came up about which facilities were starting to jump. The only facility mentioned was jumping not just to another NLE they were jumping to PCs. I know in my case, if I am going to make the switch to either Avid or PPro next year, I will also be switching hardware platforms. The cost savings are fairly compelling, as is the speed difference, at least with PPro (I’m not sure if Avid is also faster on PC.) I don’t think these are isolated cases, especially if the next FCPX upgrades don’t reverse the common perception about Apple’s interest in the “Hollywood” end of the pro environment.
“Apple is also guided by ease of use as well (UI).”
I would say obsessed with ease of use, more than guided (which is not a bad thing), and also by a very strong sense of design, even if it works against the practicality of an item (see the bizarre connectors for the Cinescreen monitors.) I’m not sure which of these traits is the stronger influence on X.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
[Herb Sevush] “The only facility mentioned was jumping not just to another NLE they were jumping to PCs. I know in my case, if I am going to make the switch to either Avid or PPro next year, I will also be switching hardware platforms. The cost savings are fairly compelling, as is the speed difference, at least with PPro (I’m not sure if Avid is also faster on PC.) “
This is why I think FCPX will be part of a larger response to that. I suspect Thunderbolt will be one part. I think changes in the MacPro line will be another part.
I think the reason why Apple is nailing Thunderbolt to everything from the MBAir and MacMini on up is a clue. I see Thunderbolt serving three purposes. Video I/O, High Speed Storage, High Speed Connectivity to Server/SAN. All this requires third party support and third party developers are motivated by large viable target markets. This only happens if FCPX is a good choice for that market.
The goal is to drive down the cost of the level of entry as a “seat” in a facility. This means even Airs and Minis have to work in this environment but also the ability to have a high powered workstation. Making the workstation “modular” can drive down costs since you only buy what you need but can expand the “seat” as need expands.
Going deep into speculation but I think the changes in the MacPro will serve the above as well. I should branch this part off though.
When you look at the metadata and media management in FCPX the above makes a bit more sense. A “brain” other than your own workstation would probably have some deep controls for that. Not that that forgives the lack of certain controls in FCPX currently but one might guess that that control is still being worked out as the aforementioned direction is not yet developed.
Of course none of this means Apple will succeed but like at the pieces of the puzzle, I see this as part of “the next 10 years” that Ubillos mentioned. Apple is in the business of software selling and service hardware and driving such purchases as frequently and as widely as possible. This means that FCPX’s 10 year road map has very much to do with pushing the hardware Apple intends to surround it with.
-
Here’s the latest update I’ve seen. Has to do with the XML API:
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 09:47:58 -0700
Sometimes doing things right takes longer than expected. It is still on the way. We have not announced an exact release date.
Darrin
https://lists.apple.com/archives/pro-apps-dev/2011/Sep/msg00002.html
2 x3Ghz Quad MacPro
9 GB RAM
Mac OS X 10.5.5
QT 7.5.5
FCP 6.0.5
AJA Kona 3 (6.0.1 drivers)
G-Speed XL 12 RAID -
[Herb Sevush] “I would say obsessed with ease of use, more than guided (which is not a bad thing),”
I think Apple’s model is that ease of use leads sales. Sometimes it even does so over hardware power at times.
[Herb Sevush] “I would say obsessed with ease of use, more than guided (which is not a bad thing), and also by a very strong sense of design, even if it works against the practicality of an item (see the bizarre connectors for the Cinescreen monitors.) “
Don’t forget Apple wants to lock you in to their hardware. They’re not looking to have you connect their monitors to Windows boxes. Now with Thunderbolt being added that may eventually be another driver as people grow into situations where they need to daisychain and pass through. Non Thunderbolt mini display port monitors have to be at the end of the chain which makes adding and removing Thunderbolt device on a given port, very inconvenient. In short, they hope to persuade you to buy two Thunderbolt monitor to go on both your Thunderbolt ports (or one port as a 2nd monitor) so both ports remain available for you to add and remove devices as needed (again the modular approach I think they’re moving towards).
-
Given the above I can speculate where the MacPro might go and why.
The short version is think a MacMini on steroids.
MacPro (whatever they’ll call it) might be guided by the Mini form factor but bigger. Imagine a box that might work upright (and be thin) or flat and be stackable or rack mountable. It’ll have SSD and maybe one internal hard drive. It’ll have one or maybe two 16 lane PCIe slots for GPU use. It’ll have two or three Thunderbolt (copper) ports (don’t forget device can be daisy chained without speed loss if they are Thunderbolt native). An additional Thunderbolt port will be fiber (not powered). We already know Intel has this in mind. That last port, at 100gb will provide super high speed network connectivity to the “brain” of the network. Of course there will be no optical drive. You add Video I/O, Storage, Monitors as needed. That modularity will allow Apple to drive down the base unit cost for an affordable workstation.
This modularity means that the user buys what they need for standalone or facility seat use as needed. Keep in mind that facilities may centralize Video I/O (tape and/or file) and storage.
The facility seat of course will need GPU/CPU power and the access to the brain for storage and other control has to be extremely fast and affordable.
The same box has to be able to work as a complete stand alone unit with local Video I/O and Storage.
Having one box that can do both without having it being large with PCIe and internal drives gives you something that can expand sales. It fills a market gap between the current high end iMac and MacPro. The iMac doesn’t have CPU power to match the higher end MacPro nor does it allow any GPU choice. It also locks you into a built in monitor (which may be a deterrence for some).
Basically the new, lower cost, modular MacPro will serve a broader market than the current MacPro, yet can be used as either a stand alone workstation or a seat in a facility attached to the “brain” where storage and I/O aren’t part of the box.
Given a Quad Core i7 iMac is $2200, the above box would come in 6 and 12 core config (and maybe 16 or more depending on when it happens and what Intel is doing) but would be sans the iMacs monitor. Keep in mind that the current MacPro 8 core is $3500 and 12 core is $5000. A new, modular box just above the iMac’s price with more cores and more GPU flexibility would probably sell significantly more units and, if the price of the core box were significantly less than the current MacPros it might encourage more frequent upgrades to newer boxes.
That last point may be key because part of the success of the iOS business model is the willingness for people to buy new devices every year or two. This might be a bit of a stretch but think of how many people are still running MacPros from 2006-2008 vs how many bought iOS devices and have already replaced them with newer models. Having a modular box that’s less painful to update every two years for a facility to remain “state of the art” may well meet the needs of facility owners and Apple’s desire to increase volume sales. Such new MacPro would be more profitable all the way around.
-
Thanks for that Matt.
It’s one more reason why “summer” is until Sept 23. Given the demands people are making for FCPX viability, the next update’s importance grows. As it grows, the features in the update have to persuade people that Apple has serious intent in meeting “professional” demand. One may have started out as a bug fix may need to have one or more compelling improvements now. That means it may take a little longer.
Of course this may not be in the immediate next update but it may mean Apple is taking more time to do more development rather than rushing out small updates of small consequence that will further incense people.
-
“It’ll have two or three Thunderbolt (copper) ports (don’t forget device can be daisy chained without speed loss if they are Thunderbolt native)”
Excuse my ignorance here, and I understand the idea of daisy chaining but isn’t there still a bandwidth limitation here. Can a single Thunderbolt port handle a large raid doing multi-stream 2K and simultaneously handle 2 monitors and all their GPU requirements plus a separate video I/O?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“Of course this may not be in the immediate next update but it may mean Apple is taking more time to do more development rather than rushing out small updates of small consequence that will further incense people.”
This might be a good thing if they’re marketing folks were just as conscientious. I think many would be more forgiving of such an explanation for delays if the marketing department would step up a bit and clue the world in on it. Sure, they don’t traditionally do their marketing this way, but they don’t usually blow a product launch so very completely either. Would be nice to see some real innovation in all their departments at this point. Would go a long way to restoring a shred of faith in the ocean of ineptness.
Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username – vidmarv -
[Herb Sevush] “Excuse my ignorance here, and I understand the idea of daisy chaining but isn’t there still a bandwidth limitation here.”
Supposedly not with Thunderbolt from everything I’ve read. I guess it’s theoretically possible to saturate the bus but from what I’ve read it’s not likely as long as all devices are Thunderbolt compliant. If you had a firewire device with a Thunderbolt adaptor it would slow the bus unless it were put at the end of the chain.
Interesting reads
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
and
https://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htmTo put it one way, there aren’t really any devices that use all that bandwidth. It’s not that it’s infinite but high speed storage and any video i/o shouldn’t choke it. Keep in mind it’s two 10Gb/s channels, each being bidirectional.
I’ve read claims about GPU support but I can’t help but think a 16 lane PCIe port is still more appropriate for that. That’s why I mention that the future MacPro would still have a 16 lane PCIe slot for GPU.
I’ll also note that while Thunderbolt is by no means exclusive to Mac (it’s Intel’s baby really), the only Windows box maker that has announced support is Sony for one of their Vaio laptops (makes sense because Apple started on laptop as well) and Sony too is a video/media company. HP on the other hand has publicly said no to Thunderbolt but who knows what that means now.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up