FCP-X and the Odd Couple intertwine.

[Walter Soyka]

[Bill Davis] “Looking back at the beachballs and delays – they seem to come up when I’ve told X to do something, changed my mind, tried to “un-do” it and then do something different.”

Interesting theory on performance.

Can you give a couple more specific examples of the sorts of operations that seem to causing you the most beachballs and slowdowns? That might help me move from wildly uninformed speculation as to what might be going on under the hood to mostly uninformed speculation as we continue discussing.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events

[Jim Giberti]

They happen to me with dismaying frequency these days. Always when loading X (I’ve currently got maybe ten 30 second spots and one 3 minute short film linked to perhaps 7 Events.)

The other issue I see is how quickly X chugs through RAM – with no purge function. It’s really pretty lame. The only way to restore the program when it reaches the cold molasses stage is to quit it and restart. Not really very evolved.

[David Lawrence]

[Oliver Peters] “This is a fundamental design issue that absolutely has to be in the design from day one. It isn’t, which gives me great concern that it was even contemplated as needing to be part of the way FCP X can be used.”

Agreed. Frankly, I really wonder if Pro Apps ever tested on any project besides that Audi commercial during development. It sure doesn’t seem like it!

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl

[Richard Herd]

[David Lawrence] “I really wonder if Pro Apps ever tested”

NO!! Why would Apple spend money on testing? It’s a bad return on investment to build features editors MIGHT want.

Instead, they charge us $299 to test it and request features that editors DEFINITELY need.

[Bill Davis]

[Franz Bieberkopf] “That a design team would sit down and reserve this aspect for later development or third party solutions or actually just not think about it boggles my mind.

It doesn’t leave me confused, though.
“

But Fritz, I think it *does* leave you confused

Your confusion is thinking that software is a thing with a persistent “now” that must always be fully realized and complete and meet every need you feel it must when you want it to meet that need.

I totally understand that desire. In a perfect world, all software would do precisely that. And we’d all be always happy with our software just the way it is.

But the truth is that this is actually NEVER the case. All software exists in constant states of flux, development, and re-imagining. I bet that like me, you’ve had software that has satisfied you, right up to the point the offering company has changed it – and suddenly it no longer satisfies you. In trying to achieve X, they broke Y.

I think this just indicates that you’re the classic “glass half empty” and I’m the classic “glass half full” type. Which is fine, as long as we’re both self-aware enough to realize that how we feel about the glass has absolutely no effect on the actual level of it’s water.

“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor