-
Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn’t.
-
[TImothy Auld] “Do I think they are evil? No. Do I think they are doing what is in the best interest of their shareholders? Yes.”
I find that argument morally questionable. There is always more money to be made in consumer markets. That doesn’t mean a company coding software for CT scan devices buggers off tomorrow to build Angry Birds for the iPad because it is in the better interest of their shareholders while patients are grilled thanks to buggy software. Yes, bad analogy. Lovin it and not apologetic about it.
Apple bought into the market, lured people to their platform because of subsidised software that competitors couldn’t offer at such cheap prices (and killed or almost killed a few smaller companies along the way) and then have lost interest. Were they ever really interested in it. Don’t think so. It was a means to an end at the time. The Moor has done his work – the Moor may go.
Is that evil? No, just “big corporate”. That doesn’t mean I have to like it, be apologetic about it or throw more money at them in the future. -
Like the law and justice who are at best distant cousins (this is not my line, I wish it were) Morality and corporate imperative are rarely intertwined.
“Farewell the tranquil mind; farewell content!” Othello
Tim
-
Apple lured us in and then let us down? Sounds pretty sad doesn’t it? We all made money over the years using Apple software and hardware (or at least I hope you did!) They handled one launch and an EOL badly and now they’re an evil empire.
You’re investment in Apple hardware and FCS3 still works, you can still charge for it, you can still do the same jobs with it, nothing has changed there. You also have a great choice in other NLE software to move to if you don’t like the direction Apple has taken, and that software is now cheaper (considerably so in Avids case) and better as a result of Apples decision to enter the Pro NLE space in the first place.
Steve Connor
“FCPX Agitator”
Adrenalin Television -
Indeed. I never felt “lured” by Apple. I bought in in 1999 because because I thought it would work for me in a couple of years. And it did. Quite well. But the point is I bought it back then for the same reasons that I think Apple has with bringing out X: Self interest. I think they are making a huge mistake for the long run in the way they are behaving at present, but as wiser people have always tried to tell me, you should never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the pig.
Tim
-
[Steve Connor] “Minchin is a genius!”
indeed, brother
-
[Steve Connor] “They handled one launch and an EOL badly and now they’re an evil empire.”
One launch and EOL?
Let’s see. Shake gone, FCP 7 gone, Color gone, DVDstudio Pro gone, XServe gone, FC Server gone.
As someone already pointed out, it all started years ago.
I don’t care if they made it cheaper. Anyone who runs a business and complains about the cost of CS5 should reconsider his business model as he should be able to recoup in two month at the very latest.I am not a one-man shop. The whole thing will cost me a good chunk of money. Yes, I made money with their products. I would have made the same without them… and it would have cost me less in the long run.
The “evil empire” thing has nothing to do with FCPX, that’s just lack of interest on their end. Opressive app store and itunes store policy plus other things is more like it but that’s a different story.
-
[TImothy Auld] “and “professional” to me means what you become when the check clears.”
And one of those clapping Orson Welles from me too.
-
[Walter Soyka] “If you didn’t already have Apple hardware and FCP7, would you really be buying iMacs and FCPX for all your professional work today?
“Let me answer this way.
Just shot a multi-cam reality show with my stedi-cam for a local station.
5 camera set-up
3 XD, one ex1 with the stedi and a gopro
Can’t jam TC with the ex1 or gopro
So…………………eic steps in with a strobe flash to match.
They use 7 and that’s how they get it done in post.
Now, what’s the problem? It’s a 13 hour day. we shot all day. Think about how many flashes we had to have.
How much space on the cards we used because we didn’t want to stop down and reflash every second.
With the stedi there were sections that I din’t shoot but then had to jump back in. In and out but not stop down. Keep running on a blank wall when I would have stopped. OK now plow through all that extra useless crap producer. waste time.
They are very good at what they do, and it will be a good looking show when they get done.
But with X…………..none of that.
I would sync all that stuff with sound.
Done.
OK, now show me why I should go back to the strobe.
-
[tony west] “But with X…………..none of that. I would sync all that stuff with sound. Done. OK, now show me why I should go back to the strobe.”
I agree with you that there are workflows where FCPX offers unique advantages over FCP7 et al, but I think that this example is a bit of a straw man. If sound is available, you shouldn’t go back to the strobe, ever. If you’re using FCP7, you should use PluralEyes in this workflow. Even if you’re using FCPX, you should consider PluralEyes.
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 -
But would that really work with X. Have you finished a five camera, diverse codec project with it? And I’m not even asking about VO, music, SFX. Have you done something of that nature on X? Longer than 5 or so minutes? I am not asking this to show anyone up. I recently looked at X for a project, did some tests and – even with the reliability issues aside – it was not up to the task. Have you finished and delivered to broadcast specs a project of a complex nature and a length of 22 minutes or so with X?
Tim
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up