-
Why does Panic and Paranoia Rule some “Pros”?
-
I’ll look for your app.
You don’t have to state your point again for me. You’ve officially bullied me into submission.
-
[Herb Sevush] “I’m not playing word games I’m simply using words precisely. Adobe did a total 64 bit re-write on Premiere Pro and it was most definitely NOT “an entirely new ap.” When Avid does it’s re-write I will bet your bottom dollar that it will not be “an entirely new app.” “
No. People keep saying this. I’ve addressed this several times. Moving to 64-bit does not require rewriting an app. It requires taking your existing codebase (probably mostly cross-platform C++ for Premiere and Media Composer), and making it “64-bit clean”, which mostly consists of making sure it doesn’t make 32-bit dependent assumptions about handling memory, and doesn’t call libraries that aren’t 32-bit clean.
Adobe did not rewrite Premiere to make it 64-bit. They did rewrite Premiere back in 2003, and it was fairly messy.
The reason Apple had to actually rewrite FCP was not (just) to move it to 64-bit, but to move it away from QuickTime and Carbon, which it was heavily dependent on.
[Herb Sevush] “How? They’ve EOL’d all support for FCP7.”
They’ve stopped selling new copies. This is not the same thing as EOLing “all support”, or disbanding the maintenance team. Do you have a source that claims they’ve done the latter?
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Dave LaRonde] “Really? I just had to open a project from two years ago. I’m currently cutting a spot together and it needs a little color correction. This same spot is going to run on a local cable system, and I have to put it on Beta SP tape for them.
Do you believe a majority of current FCP users deliver work for broadcast?
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
No. People keep saying this… Adobe did not rewrite Premiere to make it 64-bit.
People don’t say this, Adobe calls it a re-write. And while it may not be a re-write from a programmers point of view, it was a re-write from a user’s point of view.
And while this is purely speculation on my part, my guess is Avid will keep their user base in mind when they do whatever-it-is-you-want-to-call-it in the future.
They’ve stopped selling new copies. This is not the same thing as EOLing “all support”, or disbanding the maintenance team. Do you have a source that claims they’ve done the latter?
No. Do you have a source that claims they haven’t? I’m not asking that facetiously, it would be very reassuring to think that they will actually do FCP maintenance upgrades for Lion. I could wait even longer to switch. That would be good news indeed.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
[Chris Kenny] “People keep making statements like this without providing specifics. How is FCP X imprecise? Yes, dragging ranges is not the most precise way to mark in and out points. But scrubbing is a really fast way to find something in a pile of footage, and J/K/L and I/O still work when you need precision. There are quite a few commands for trimming in the timeline with similar accuracy, including some FCP 7 lacked.
I really not trying to be a jerk here, but having used the app, I have no literally idea what you’re referring to with this criticism.”
You don’t see basic need to have the canvas and the viewer up at the same time when picking points?
-
[Herb Sevush] “People don’t say this, Adobe calls it a re-write. And while it may not be a re-write from a programmers point of view, it was a re-write from a user’s point of view. “
I thought the whole point you were making was that it wasn’t a rewrite from a user’s point of view….
[Herb Sevush] “And while this is purely speculation on my part, my guess is Avid will keep their user base in mind when they do whatever-it-is-you-want-to-call-it in the future.”
Yes, they will. And look at what this approach to the market has gotten them. They’ve got an NLE that has lost market share continuously over the last decade, largely because it’s interface — which they can never change very much because their existing users would flip out — is unappealing to new editors. They’re also the last to go 64-bit, and even once they do, they’ll still be lagging Adobe and Apple with respect to other (frankly more important) technical features, such as GPU utilization. Oh, and because Media Composer appeals to a smaller market, Avid has to charge substantially more for it.
I’m extremely confused as to why so many people seem to be holding up Avid as a model for Apple to follow.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Christian Kinnard] “You don’t see basic need to have the canvas and the viewer up at the same time when picking points?”
Not especially, no.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
There is not a panic, nor is it paranoia, it is anger. Anger over the investment in a set of tools that has just been given this status: EOL. There was no warning, no ability to plan. A shell game was played on the “upgrade” to the product.
Some of us made the decision to see what Apple was going to do, we did that out of brand loyalty. This time Apple has gone too far. Shake is gone, Soundtrack is gone, Color is gone DVD SP is gone. (where was the blu ray upgrade on that? It’s been 2 years right?)
Now if we wish to move forward we are going to be asked to re-invest more money with 3rd party vendors to fill the gaps. Why? We purchased a suite of tools. A suite of tools we honestly should not have to purchase again from 3rd party vendors to ensure compatibility. A 2.4 billion dollar collective investment,, that said we trusted them with our business, and we were willing to use their product to help us make a living. That was just spit on. To ensure better profits from the app store.
Make no mistake it is not about paranoia, nor is it panic. I am an apple fan for a lot of years, Jobs has been one of my real life heroes. People can’t risk their businesses on things like this. Make no mistake, this time they really did act like a bunch of appholes! -
[Dave LaRonde] “I only know for sure about where I live, so let me do some counting…
We run seven seats, the CBS affiliate in town has about four, the NBC affiliate has a couple-three, two area production companies have about five, the cable company has three, I think, and my buddy from my church choir runs FCP, too.
That’s about 23 FCP seats that I know of, all used for broadcast production, all with tape decks, all in a town with a population of 130,000: lil’ ol’ market 80-something Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
“Um… I’m pretty sure I don’t actually need to explain to you that, as someone in a specific market segment, it’s not especially surprising or revealing that you know other people in that same market segment.
[Dave LaRonde] “Earlier I told you to take the rose-colored glasses. Now I’m telling you to take off the blinders.”
The vast, vast majority of current FCP users are doing event/corporate/web work. This is not sensibly disputable. I’ve been pointing it out for a couple of weeks now in contexts in which people have substantial move to disagree with it, in fact, and you’re the first person to do so.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
I thought the whole point you were making was that it wasn’t a rewrite from a user’s point of view….
Chris, now you’ve made a joke with some fine word play, good for you.
They’ve got an NLE that has lost market share continuously over the last decade
Well Apple has just reversed that trend.
largely because it’s interface — which they can never change very much because their existing users would flip out — is unappealing to new editors.
It was always unappealing to me. I used to edit on EMC, the original competitor to Avid, and then on discreet Edit*, my favorite all time NLE. If they had lasted and kept their basic interface I’d be happy as a clam. If Apple would have kept it’s interface i would have been happy as well. It isn’t the lack of change that makes their interface unpleasant, it’s always been more than a bit stodgy.
They’re also the last to go 64-bit, and even once they do, they’ll still be lagging Adobe and Apple with respect to other (frankly more important) technical features, such as GPU utilization.
This is where we fundamentally disagree – the phrase “(frankly more important) technical features.”
Again, it’s important to remember that the context of all this is FCPX’s suitability for the “pro” market, and by that I mean broadcast / film. After all that’s who’s on this forum.
For me, and many others here, technical features are not more important than consistency, dependability under pressure, and the ability to play nicely with others. I need things to work, I want them to work fast. To paraphrase – You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you just might find you get what you need — such as multi-cam and backwards compatibility. I’ll get that from Avid. Which is why they still rule the roost in this area, declining market share, stodgy interface and all.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up