-
New MacPro closer to reality?
-
-
Chris,
On the hardware side of things, sorry I haven’t been privy to all the conversations around here. Understanding why Apple waits for native on-chip support is beyond me technically- I just recognize that it’s something they seem to do. And perhaps as someone in a thread a couple months ago said, perhaps Apple felt like they’d rather not encourage people to buy in 2012 when they knew the “next big thing’ was coming in 2013. Who knows?
Unquestionably Apple’s openness about FCPX so far has been in response to it’s poor start. Frankly I still think they could and should be doing more on the outreach side. My personal belief is that FCPX has a harder PR battle to fight than technical.
As to “remaining legacy features”. You’re right on mixing- I think Roles is only a half-there solution at this stage (but one which I think will hold huge benefits once fully implemented). The other is collaborative workflow, which was more FinalCutServer, but it’s an area I think many still hold as a limitation vs legacy FCP. Tighter Motion integration needs to return as well. Those are the major areas, I think.
-
[Marcus Moore] “The other is collaborative workflow, which was more FinalCutServer, but it’s an area I think many still hold as a limitation vs legacy FCP. Tighter Motion integration needs to return as well. Those are the major areas, I think.”
Stupid me. Yes, of course. I agree with both of those. Good point.
-
[Marcus Moore] ” perhaps Apple felt like they’d rather not encourage people to buy in 2012 when they knew the “next big thing’ was coming in 2013. Who knows?”
That is the funniest thing I’ve read on this forum all year.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
When it comes to Mac Pros I think it’s absolutely true.
Apple does not want people buying non Thunderbolt Macs. The lose of sales from the lack of new Mac Pros is inconsequential. They don’t want to support old technology and they don’t want you to buy a non Thunderbolt computer that you will keep in service for 3-6 years. -
[Craig Seeman] “Apple does not want people buying non Thunderbolt Macs. The lose of sales from the lack of new Mac Pros is inconsequential. They don’t want to support old technology and they don’t want you to buy a non Thunderbolt computer that you will keep in service for 3-6 years.”
Then why the half-assed update a few months ago and why are they still selling 2010s? The only thing their lack of a decent upgrade has caused in my case is the hesitation to buy any workstation from them in the future.
This is exactly like your assertion that FCP7 was eol’d because of licensing issues – and your refusal to back off this claim when they suddenly started selling it again after all the blowback. If they had licensing issues then they wouldn’t have sold any more copies; if they don’t watn to support old technology then they would stop selling 2010 MacPros, one of which they very happily sold me a few months ago. You don’t get to have it both ways.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “Then why the half-assed update a few months ago and why are they still selling 2010s?”
??? Because they don’t want you to buy one unless you must as a short term solution (your last MacPro blew up for example). They’re keeping a supply chain open with last revisions of that hardware.
[Herb Sevush] “This is exactly like your assertion that FCP7 was eol’d because of licensing issues – and your refusal to back off this claim when they suddenly started selling it again after all the blowback.”
Licensing may have allowed to sell it without any commercial promotion and their may have been some cost to them for doing that. We don’t know the terms of the license but some may allow one to service pre-existing customers.
-
[Craig Seeman] “??? Because they don’t want you to buy one unless you must as a short term solution (your last MacPro blew up for example). “
That’s funny because I don’t remember them asking me why I was buying it, they just seemed happy to take my money. The last I looked they had MacPro’s on display at my local Apple store, which is an interesting way of discouraging purchasers.
[Craig Seeman] ” We don’t know the terms of the license but some may allow one to service pre-existing customers.”
Which would matter if they were only selling to pre-existing customers but they weren’t.
Craig you can have your theories, since no one on this forum knows the truth, but your reasoning is as contorted as the path of Oswald’s magic bullet.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “The last I looked they had MacPro’s on display at my local Apple store,”
I’ve been to four. In every case a single model in the back corner. Simply there to let people know if they need one. Very few people do, I’d expect given the price and the dated technology. In retail that would be discouraging purchases. It’s there for those who MUST have one due to configuration issues not yet addressed.
[Herb Sevush] “but your reasoning is as contorted as the path of Oswald’s magic bullet.”
So my reasoning is now the official theory, despite its controversy?
Licensing is the lone FCP7 assassin then. -
It wasn’t my original assertion, so I take no credit for your guffaws.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up