-
I can’t believe how fast can work in FCP X already.
-
[Daniel Rutledge] “Chris, I don’t want to go back and forth about this indefinitely. “
Dude, you keep thinking I’m arguing with you, and I’m not. I’ve read and re-read my last response to try and understand your last post, but I can’t. For the most part, I agreed with you, and where I didn’t I noted that it was for me, or for myself and the people I work with. In general, through this thread, you’ve misunderstood a number of things I’ve said, as well as misquoting me and attributing to me a number of sentiments that I just don’t have. Granted, some of that could be the fault of the communicator, but it is my opinion that you read way too much into things.
[Daniel Rutledge] “It seems like you took it to mean that any criticism was wrong and that even though you had legitimate criticisms, I was dismissing them as invalid. Although I may not share all of your points of view, I never called any of your concerns illegitimate.”
I don’t know how you got to that, but I’ve gone back through the entire thread, and I’m pretty sure that’s in your head, not in mine. Frankly, it feels like you are having a discussion with someone else, and I seem to be along for the ride.
[Daniel Rutledge] “The only thing that we seem to disagree about is what the future of editing tools will be. Since it is all opinion, then it is impossible to resolve.
“No. I haven’t even discussed that with you. The only thing I’ve discussed at all related to this is the practicality of a working editor making extra-long term decisions about his tools in a world that changes far to quickly for that.
-
[Chris Harlan] “[Daniel Rutledge] “The only thing that we seem to disagree about is what the future of editing tools will be. Since it is all opinion, then it is impossible to resolve.
”No. I haven’t even discussed that with you. The only thing I’ve discussed at all related to this is the practicality of a working editor making extra-long term decisions about his tools in a world that changes far to quickly for that.
“To be fair, we also discussed touch screen interfaces, where my comments were pretty much limited to the fact that I don’t like them as much as I once thought I would.
-
[Bill Davis] “Uh, David-
It was Apple Senior Director of Marketing Richard Townhill:
“We are giving people the opportunity to see for themselves how powerful, amazing and revolutionary Final Cut Pro is,” Townhill said, adding that the updated suite offers a modern foundation that will last “for the next 10 years.””Oh, I get it now, because Mr. Townhill said it, that makes it so.
Well, I guess we should really take him at his word then – since he said we’re giving “people” the opportunity to see for themselves, and he never said anything about “editors,” that might explain why it’s not a modern foundation for most editors.
-
Okay Chris, if I misunderstood you then I’m sorry I did. I’m glad that it seems like we both are on the same page about fundamentally agreeing.
-
David that quote the Bill posted is exactly what I was referring to. you may not like the new software and you may think that Apple has deserted the professional community, but why would he lie about the ten years.
Most software that I use doesn’t get rewritten from the ground up all that often. In fact the more complex the software, the less often you see major changes.I have the feeling that FCP is going to look this way for quite some time to come.
-
Just to clarify what my conjecture and opinions are based upon, I am linking below to some articles (which I am not necessarily endorsing the full content of) which contain some interesting information. Mostly I am referring to the quotes from Apple designers and execs (or former designers and/or execs)
https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399599,00.asp
Some of the ideas I have expressed are based partially on concepts about the implementation of FCP X from this talk given by Evan Schectmann from Radical Media:
BTW – That talk was given before 10.0.3 was released.
Also see the videos dealing with future concepts in interface posted in a previous post above.
Just trying to establish that I am not some drunk guy sitting around making up fantasies. I have actually spent a lot of time thinking about this. I don’t think that it makes my opinion any more valid than yours, but there is some method behind my thinking.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “Oh, I get it now, because Mr. Townhill said it, that makes it so.
Well, I guess we should really take him at his word then – since he said we’re giving “people” the opportunity to see for themselves, and he never said anything about “editors,” that might explain why it’s not a modern foundation for most editors.”
Really? Your argument is that Mr. Townhill doesn’t understand that “editors” are also “people?” Or are you arguing that a person who holds the position of the senior marketing manager at Apple wouldn’t understand his own companies product development thinking?
That’s just nuts.
David, sorry, but what you keep writing reflects the fact that you can’t see anything about the program reasonably or fairly, and are even willing to try to “spin” facts when presented with them.
Daniel said that he read that X was going to be Apples bet for the next decade of pro editing development. Mr. Townhill’s quote directly and incontrovertible proves that’s a fact. You questioned Daniel, and it turns out YOU were wrong.
That kinda stuff happens all the time. What doesn’t happen all the time is people confronting the FACT of their wrongness, yet continuing to try to argue the point anyway. What’s up with you? Did the FCP-X team run over your pet kitten or something? You’re not arguing against FCP-X – you’re now practicing what I think can best be labeled as a personal vendetta against it.
In my personal estimation, this thread deep sixes whatever credibility you might have to write about FCP-X and be taken seriously.
I know you’re a working professional editor, and I’m not questioning your skills or your experience.
But I am questioning you on the issue of personal bias and judgement when it comes specifically to Final Cut Pro X.
I believe that this has revealed that your opinions about FCP-X are based on pre-conceptions, emotion and stubbornness, and that those run so strong in you about this individual topic that you can’t even acknowledge a truth when it’s presented to you in a very fundamental, factual form.
“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
-
[Bill Davis] “But I am questioning you on the issue of personal bias and judgement when it comes specifically to Final Cut Pro X.”
Sure, I’ll cop to personal bias – biased against FCPX as a replacement that doesn’t work for me or virtually the entire ecosystem of professional editors I interface with, vs. a mature enterprise app that did work for me and for the ecosystem of professional editors I interface with. I doubt there are many human beings on the planet other than yourself who would suggest that’s anything but fair and righteous.
The fact that FCPX does work for you, and that you constantly write material that reflects your personal biases, means that whatever you may say or write about me actually pertains to you as well, just that we simply disagree on the side of the discussion we happen to take on the matter at hand.
Call me when FCPX or some other Apple app fills the niche formerly occupied by FCP, but until then don’t bother me with all your carp (a stinky fish) about this pretender to the throne.
Now, away with you please, I have some reality to deal with.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up