Aindreas Gallagher
Forum Replies Created
-
oh yeah I diiiid call him a pompous ass. mmm. Well then after that my language went full blue off the rails and I got slapped down for it so..
You’re right on the move on thing – that really was my last, crazed, mecha dinoasaur spews lava, novella length, rant. Apple be apple and they’ve made the move, you’ll say that for them – they’re not afraid of making a move, and so no amount of clawing at them verbally is going to get them to turn around, however much you might really really wish it could. So then you stop clawing.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
hey – not at all, its just that I have indeed been slagging Randy Ubillos – and well, you were broadly critical of the tenor of the stuff being thrown at the designers of the software, so I thought I’d have one last go at explaining why his actions with the software annoyed me. And then I wrote about 20000 words on the topic, with about a third of it in italics. I know I’m like the boy who cried wolf – but that last diatribe pretty much states my position – thats pretty much the last of it for me. I swear said the boy who cried wolf – That expresses my personal position. you or anyone else will likely not get a heiffer like that from me again – I’d also say to you that this is a forum – “rambling discourse about the nature of professional applications”
welllll… a week after FCP changed utterly you are going to get a *bit* of that kind of thing – and really Ben its a forum, we’re kind of here to talk, occasionally to write too long pieces that nobody has to read – debate and express our views.I regret characterising your position as “everything is fine here now” – and please believe me it was not at all my intention to -well indeed I did not call you – a pompous ass. I really don’t think you are. Sure I hardly know you bud. Ubillos, with the position he took with the software and the buck stops there nature of his role- yes frankly, him i feel its fair to criticise – but I really didn’t mean to direct criticism or scorn at you – I was just responding to the sentence you wrote as it made me think about my slagging of him as the architect of the software.
peace and whatnot –
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
I kind of wonder about the ship at cupertino myself, some posters have made oblique reference to an awful lot of internal cupertino turf wars in the production of this software – with wildly diverging opinions on what this software was supposed to be. Which would explain its chimera qualities. They haven’t even gotten VAT receipts together for the EU market, or proper tax receipts for Australia, according to a poster below – barring anything else I think this software release feels like an executional fiasco, because it is a fiasco.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
yeah sorry, I just realised that reading back, guess it wasn’t fitting into my slam the software worldview.. ermm.. anyway, deleted the post. Alex lindsay is like jimmy stewart meets charlie brown in a post suite or something. I will not besmirch the man.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[edit] forget it – I actually cannot criticise alex lindsay. he’s a patently good guy.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
Really? Are you sure it does? What exactly has changed after that press release? Aren’t they saying basically the same kind of deflecting defense of the app that they were to pogue? And why in the hell didn’t they say they were restoring FCS 7 to the sales channel for even twelve months? As actually truly nearly everyone agrees, that one action would go a long way to mitigating the problems caused by the release of this software. The worst of it is – this is all we’re getting – essentially a restatement of their position. All the heat and light we generated in debate got us a pat press release. Not one person from apple will stand up and answer questions.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
-
well yes, that is precisely correct. editing software has remained largely the same, 3D software, when you think about it, has remained the same both in how it exposes functionality – four up view – transform and manipulation tools – and the degree of functionality it exposes – a lot.
Saying the same as the 1990s side steps an inescapable point – the software looks the same because the professional editing environment, no more than the professional 3D environment, or indeed the professional print environment, have complex requirements, exposing functionality for the artist to deliver across multiple markets and output mediums in a high pressure environment – that is what maintains the complexity of the software and the tried and tested conceptual underpinnings of the software it self: multiple tracks, a source, a viewer, all of these things have real world counterparts, and all of them predate the editing software itself. Placed within the software, they are the distillation of hard won thought.
It is, I would argue, the height of mind blowing hubris for apple to flush all of this down the toilet in search of ever more of the consumer market.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
but well – isn’t there another way to see it – we would have upgraded – for about what we’d pay for FCPX right? so they weren’t going to get 1299 a head out of us this time round – so when they built FCPX, which is as you say, in the walks like a duck talks like duck – it is consumer software, that even if they lost us, as I’m pretty sure they more or less knew they would, all they needed to replace the lost revenue from professionals is a roughly equivalent number of prosumers to enter the market – and then apple would have this new market created for itself – they’d be on new turf, like the nintendo wii or something. They must have sat down with calculations showing them how many prosumer customers they would need to generate to offset the software dying off as professional software – in that scenario they sort of only need 5% of their market to opt in to replace the upgrade cycle cash they would have got from us. thats why I think now that supermeet thing was so bogus – that wasn’t a presentation for us – they were kissing us on both cheeks – that was a presentation designed to get FCPX into the minds of the casual mac market – it was free publicity for what was going to become their new prosumer app. You’re right – Apple need to make money off this application and they don’t expect to make it from professionals, but if that upgrade stuff I just blurted up there is true – then the financial bar for success isn’t that high? Or I’m completely wrong, which wouldn’t be surprising, because my maths is usually godawful.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
if that’s an example of the bad, well that’s not too bad, with that and the rather crazy horsepower – besides – I can’t take in any AE comps at all at the minute..
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics