Towards a better NLE

[Bill Davis]

I’ll challenge the use of “buggieness” as adiscriptor here.

It works consistently as designed.

It’s a RAM buffer that holds your most recent storylines, and as such, yes, loading new ones will eventually flush older ones – particularly if you work on very large and complex projects. In that case, you might not have as many alternates as you might like to switch between.

But if you do commercials, explainers, or similar short form videos of the type incredibly popular in lots of folks modern work, you might have EVERYTHING you need right now.

Buggy means the code doesn’t work as it’s designed.

This does.

Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Bill Davis] “Buggy means the code doesn’t work as it’s designed.”

Let’s say I load Sequence 5, then Sequence 4, then Sequence 3, then Sequence 2, and then Sequence 1.

In the history, I now have 5, 4, 3, and 2 lined up in the “reverse” history while looking at sequence 1.

If I step back to 4, and load sequence 10, sequence 3, 2, and 1 disappear from the history.

At that point, anything that was in the forward history is now gone.

It works great for web browsing, it does not work that well for navigating between sequences, UNLESS you constantly go the end of the history, and load a sequence. And then at that point, the order is now jumbled, unless of course, you load all the sequences, in reverse order, again.

So, sure, it’s not a bug, but it’s also kind of goofy and could be improved.

[Oliver Peters]

[Jeremy Garchow] “So, sure, it’s not a bug, but it’s also kind of goofy and could be improved.”

In my mind I would absolutely call this a bug that has never been addressed. Or it’s poor software design. Take your pick. Another issue I have is that FCPX also appears to randomly sort the view of files it sees on your hard drives when browsing media to import. Not ascending or descending, but random, unless you sort a column first. That, too, has been a long standing “bug” (or poor UI design).

– Oliver

Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com

[Oliver Peters]

[Bill Davis] “I’ll challenge the use of “buggieness” as adiscriptor here.”

See my response to Jeremy below. It’s either a bug or bad software design. I would prefer to give the ProApps team the benefit of the doubt and call it a bug ☺

– Oliver

Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com

[Steve Connor]

[Bill Davis] “It works consistently as designed.
“

I find the only consistent thing about it is that it’s consistently inconsistent.