-
Is FCPX the Othello of NLEs?
-
[Rob Mackintosh] “I don’t even mind paying to participate in a public beta program but a little more guidance from Apple would be nice.”
It certainly would, but Apple aren’t exactly known for being particularly helpful. I also think the outcry against FCPX seems to have made Apple close themselves down even more
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
-
[Oliver Peters] “I believe that’s correct. That’s still less time than Apple has been working on FCP X.
– Oliver”
True, but FCPX is an entirely new piece of software, Avid is new code, but fundamentally the same software.
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
-
[Steve Connor] “True, but FCPX is an entirely new piece of software, Avid is new code, but fundamentally the same software.”
True, but fundamentally there’s no difference. One requires QA from scratch. The other requires significant QA to check that the new code still works as it’s supposed to. The double-edged sword for Apple is that they are so tightly tied to the OS. Since Apple is very compartmentalized, there are some things ProApps can’t do until the OS is ready for them to proceed.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] ”
The design isn’t that you stop after 500 undos. It’s SUPPOSED to be the LAST 500 undos. If it works correctly, then the oldest is flushed out. Same as the 99 undos of FCP 7. As far as steps and versions, you need to duplicate your project for alternate or in-progress versions.”But you realize that it doesn’t work as it’s “supposed” to right?
It doesn’t keep any undo reserve.
I didn’t have to duplicate anything in 7 AND I had a Save and Save As function.
Simply, if you taketh that away, you’d better give a professional something as good or better, not the potential for disaster.There’s no way to know when it’s going to shut down, no monitor , no gauge, no flush as there is with Motion.
It’s a bug. -
[Jim Giberti] “But you realize that it doesn’t work as it’s “supposed” to right?”
Agreed. Although I haven’t personally run into the problem since I upgraded to OS 10.7.2. and FCP 10.0.2.
[Jim Giberti] “I didn’t have to duplicate anything in 7 AND I had a Save and Save As function.”
Different functions. Duplicate Sequence in FCP 7 = Duplicate Project in FCP X. There is no “project” file anymore like you had in FCP 7. This is an old and nonexistent concept.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “Different functions. Duplicate Sequence in FCP 7 = Duplicate Project in FCP X. There is no “project” file anymore like you had in FCP 7. This is an old and nonexistent concept”
Hey Oliver, We’re doing a lot of work in X so, of course, I understand the paradigm.
My simple point is that if I can’t Save a project I need to know that the little man that Apple decided would do that for me is actually doing it and not getting drunk at the local bar (I have employees for that).
We did, in fact, lose a lot of work on two occasions when X’s autosave failed and had to do Time Machine recoveries – literally the only option.
That ain’t professional development.
-
[Jim Giberti] “My simple point is that if I can’t Save a project I need to know that the little man that Apple decided would do that for me is actually doing it and not getting drunk at the local bar (I have employees for that).
We did, in fact, lose a lot of work on two occasions when X’s autosave failed and had to do Time Machine recoveries – literally the only option.
That ain’t professional development.”
I’m sure when they finally implement “versions’ this will solve the problem, hopefully with the next release
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
-
[Jim Giberti] “We did, in fact, lose a lot of work on two occasions when X’s autosave failed”
I wasn’t trying to talk down. I completely agree that it’s a bug that needs to be fixed ASAP. I am surprised that the TM actually had anything. Shouldn’t this have been the same saved version as you were actively working on? In other words, how can TM have something that wasn’t in your active project? If that in fact is the case, it seems to indicate a far worse problem than it would appear.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Steve Connor] “You mean you expected a piece of version 1.0 software to be more stable than a version 6.0 one?”
I actually expect all the software I buy to be stable.
They still charge for v1.0 products (or v10.0 per the splash screen); it should be merchantable. I understand why it may not be feature complete, but the features that are that really ought to work. Bugs that cause the loss of user data should be squashed before release.
Added onto this is the perception problem: FCPX may be a 1.0 product, but the FCP franchise moved beyond 1.0 ten years ago.
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 -
[Walter Soyka] “Added onto this is the perception problem: FCPX may be a 1.0 product, but the FCP franchise moved beyond 1.0 ten years ago.”
True, it should never have been called Final Cut
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up