-
Spreading Rumors
-
well thats all fine but when I say you made a strawman I mean you made this statement:
[Andy Neil] “the people saying that Apple isn’t planning on adding multicam back in, or any true “professional” features because they are only interested in making gadgets and toys?”
the first part …”the people saying that Apple isn’t planning on adding multicam back in..” is an unstated argument, nobody made this point to you or anyone else on this thread, you’re refuting something unstated in order to make the person you are arguing against seem more unreaonable.
then you put it together with this, “….or any true “professional” features because they are only interested in making gadgets and toys?” which is just a vague hyperbolic statement of the other sides illogical thinking as you see it.
so then putting these together you have created a false and invalid position for the person you are arguing against, which you then proceed to knock down in your post.that’s knocking down a strawman. we all do it. I’ve probably done it oodles of times here, but it’s still a strawman, which is pretty invalid as an argued position.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Craig Seeman] “Apple spoke
https://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/
https://alex4d.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/notes-from-apples-london-pro-briefin...”Craig,
Were the links you provided above designed to show that Apple has defined their strategy for their uncertain customers?
If that was your intent, I don’t think the point is well exemplified by those two posts, especially in the case of the Apple Rep whose nine points are mentioned in the Alex4D blog. Of the nine points made, many are already MIA (missing in action), and that has (IMO) served only to inflame Apple’s audience, not to mollify them. At least I know it has that affect on me…
In particular, numbers 1 & 2 below, XML support (the “hooks”) and the ability for enterprise customers to buy new seats of FCP 7, have both touted quite heavily all over, yet neither has been delivered or mentioned again by anyone from Apple. One of the first rules of sales is, “Always deliver more than you promise.” Apple is consistently failing in that regard, and so the few statements they have made are IMO exacerbating the very issues they were designed to quell.
1. FCP XML in/out is coming via 3rd party soon…no FCP 6/7 support project support coming ever it seems…
2. Ability to buy FCP7 licenses for enterprise deployments coming in the next few weeks…
3. FCPX EDL import/export coming soon…
4. FCPX AJA plugins coming soon for tape capture and layback…capture straight into FCPX bins.
5. XSAN support for FCPX coming in the next few weeks…
6. FCPX Broadcast video output via #Blackmagic & @AJAVideo coming soon…
7. Additional codec support for FCPX via 3rd Parties coming soon…
8. Customizable sequence TC in FCPX for master exports coming soon…
9. Some FCPX updates will be free some will cost…
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comDon’t miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “so then putting these together you have created a false and invalid position for the person you are arguing against, which you then proceed to knock down in your post.”
No offense, I but I completely disagree with your assessment. Mainly because you are selectively omitting parts of my post that refute your claim that I’m propping up a straw man.
Yes, I said, “people saying that Apple isn’t planning on adding multicam back in, or any true “professional” features because they are only interested in making gadgets and toys”. I also said, “There is as much truth to any of that as there is to those saying that FCPX will have all the pro features back by the end of the year.”
What I’m doing is using hyperbole on both sides of an issue (one that I’m not defending OR attacking) to demonstrate that the argument itself has gotten a little ridiculous. The only argument my post intended to make was that Mike was being disingenuous in his post by feigning non-partiality in one sentence and then being terribly partial in the next.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[David Roth Weiss] “many are already MIA (missing in action), and that has (IMO) served only to inflame Apple’s audience, not to mollify them.”
I agree. People wanted Apple to speak. They spoke even if it included information that would make some people unhappy. At least they’re were blunt honest on those points. I suspect that might mean they’re blunt honest on the others as well but anything can be “selective truth.”
[David Roth Weiss] “the ability for enterprise customers to buy new seats of FCP 7”
I was told by one facility owner they were able to do just that. I can’t verify that independently but that’s what I was told in person.
[David Roth Weiss] “Of the nine points made, many are already MIA (missing in action”
Apple said update coming in “the summer” so I expect we’ll know what’s there by late September. I have heard from a couple of developers which might indicate Apple is late on the APIs but that’s one reason why developers hate to give dates. I also believe FCPX was released in an “incomplete” state but can only speculate why the timing was what it was.
[David Roth Weiss] “One of the first rules of sales is, “Always deliver more than you promise.” Apple is consistently failing in that regard, and so the few statements they have made are IMO exacerbating the very issues they were designed to quell. “
And I’ve said that Apple’s marketing has been pretty bad regarding how FCPX has been handled. I think it’s pretty much a damned if you do and damned if you don’t at the moment for the marketing dept which is why that’s fallen silent.
They were accused of many things and people demanded that they speak. They did. Maybe it’s not all good news but they did speak. We’ll just have to wait to see what’s delivered on the first update. We’ll have to wait to hear more from developers regarding the APIs.
As to what’s delivered, programers need the time that they need and sometimes things take more time than anticipated… which is why they don’t like giving dates.
-
mmmmm.
Where’s your derision for the people saying that Apple isn’t planning on adding multicam back in, or any true “professional” features because they are only interested in making gadgets and toys? You know, the vast majority of posters. There is as much truth to any of that as there is to those saying that FCPX will have all the pro features back by the end of the year.
you’re still saying that he should apportion equal derision to those who say that apple isn’t planning to add multicam back in, as he should to those on the other side who say that FCPX will be restored to professional health by the end of the year.
as you say: “Where’s your derision for the people saying that Apple isn’t planning on adding multicam back in..?”
he can’t have derision for them – they don’t exist.
the point is that when you posit the multicam statement, you’re using it as an example of ludicrous statements which he chooses to ignore from his own end. You’re not positing it as a false exmple used by the other side – in effect – you sort of became the other side positing false arguments when you said it. Nobody has said multicam is not coming back in.
And now, continuing my voyage of pretending to know argument lore, I will read from a cookbook backwards..
By and large I agree with what you’re saying, but lets face it, at this point nearly everyone in this forum is knee deep in mud, covered in dry clay, throwing wide punches, breathing heavily and thinking long and hard about a hot shower and a cup of coffee. the cow just had to rename this forum into a one off editors panel episode of the jerry springer show after all…
we may all be beyond redemption.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “he can’t have derision for them – they don’t exist.”
That is why I said it was hyperbole. Just as the OTHER quote was hyperbole. No one is saying that FCP X will be fixed by the end of the year.
However, by calling those on one side of the FCP debate, “fanboys” and “apologists”, Mike is most definitely showing his colors. I only asked that he show equal snark with the “haters” and “Avid shills”.
True, no one is saying that multicam isn’t coming back, but there is this exchange:
Jonathan Dortch“(Multicam will) be back, probably done by some combo of multiple range selectors and the compound clip system.”
[TImothy Auld] “I’m glad you’re confident it’s coming back, Jonathan. In my experience that is not how Apple operates.”
Perhaps not outright saying it, but certainly expressing cynicism about it’s return. And then there’s this:
Lance Bachelder“FCPX will NEVER be widely adapted in the pro world – it’s complete crap.”
The hyperbole I used was to illustrate the divide in satirical fashion. The “derision” I was asking Mike to apportion was for the “FCPX complainer” side of the debate. Not specifically to people who said, “multicam isn’t coming back.”
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
Andy, you are continually stretching that point until it has broken and snapped back to hit you in the face.
Your statement was not true and based in ignorance of what has been said here. Own up.
-
[Gary Huff] “Andy, you are continually stretching that point until it has broken and snapped back to hit you in the face.
Your statement was not true and based in ignorance of what has been said here. Own up.”
And you Gary seem incapable of making a precise statement. What “point” are you accusing me of stretching? What statement have I made that you feel is “based in ignorance”?
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
The statement that people have said that Apple will not be implementing multicam. You stated it as a fact, and it is not. Now instead of owning up to it, you’ve come up with a convoluted explanation to save face that sounds completely ridiculous.
You made an assumption, and you were wrong.
-
I said it was hyperbole, which it was. That IS “owning up to it”. It was also grouped with another ridiculous statement from the “pro FCP X” debate, but you just seem to ignore that because it doesn’t help you.
I never stated it as a fact. There are no quotes on the statement. You are simply reading into it what you want.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up