[Andrew Kimery]

[Shane Ross] “I’m in a multiseat Avid setup with EditShare, and love the project sharing capabilities and solid media management. My previous gig was Avid too, and remote workflow…I’d just send the project file or CUTS bin back to Virginia and they’d reconnect without any fuss or muss. “

This reminds that I always wished Media Managing in FCP was as useful as consolidating in MC. Once you MM something with handles in FCP it’s very hard to go back to the source again.

[Andrew Kimery]

You can’t multiclip a nest. As previous mentioned you could export out Cam B after you have synced it and essentially create a new master for Cam B and then sync that with Cam A plus the audio. Also as previously mentioned you could create a new a series of multiclips (one each time Cam B is rolling) but that is a somewhat involved process though a standard practice when it comes to prepping footage on reality shows.

[Andrew Kimery]

I wuv the internet.

[Andrew Kimery]

[Bill Davis] “Once upon a time it wasn’t a key part of the editing process at all. It was left to the field engineers to balance and shade the cameras to get them as “correct” as possible.”
In terms of things like ENG or EFP I would agree but in film-land post processing is as old as the medium itself.

With regards to large software suits, I feel like devs are fighting a never ending battle to give customers what they want while also trying to save customers from themselves. If you don’t add features then users won’t keep buying the software and you also run the risk of being a one trick pony and having that trick copied by your competitors. The more features you add though the more complicated the software gets (both as a user and dev) which can weigh down the software so then, as a dev, you might try and get multiple programs to seamlessly talk/roundtrip with each other and that just opens up a whole new can of worms.

Personally, I’m not worried about the size of a program or a suite as long as it meets my needs (which includes being stable and w/in my budget).

[Andrew Kimery]

Last time Apple shot down a ProApps rumor like this it was Jobs saying that the next version of FCP will be “awesome.” Just sayin’…

[Andrew Kimery]

[Michael Garber] “Effects, well, don’t work the way I want them to – but, they work! “

Yes, the way effects are handled has been one of the bigger things to readjust to. That certainly is an area where MC feels dated/constrained.

[Andrew Kimery]

[Rich Rubasch] “I have a reason a tower is a good thing….I have six of them in a rack. Everything is inside. I don’t have room for a pile of tethered devices strewn about the server room.”

I can think reasons to keep towers around too, but I’m not sure if Apple feels the same way…

[Andrew Kimery]

[Bill Davis] “I don’t think they EVER actually thought in terms of Primary and Secondary users except in the sense that they needed to bring primary functions on line before they tweaked the important but less critical elements that appeal to smaller segments of the market. Witness basic audio capabilities in V1 – verses Roles coming along later.”

You have to have a demographic in mind first before you can even start building the program and I think we can all agree that FCPX is aiming at a broader demographic than FCP Legend, Avid MC or Adobe PPro.

[Andrew Kimery]

[Bill Davis] “However, if the Thunderbolt roadmap develops through planned versions 2 and 3 (optical/copper hybrid and then full optical) the entire I/O pipeline will change”

ThB right now is certainly just a taste of what future versions will offer (though going full optical will mean no bus powered devices so I think copper will always be there if for no other reason than that). For a while now I’ve been speculating that Apple would offer something like a Mac Mini Pro with a number of ThB ports for expansion. A basic platform, if you will, and they’ll leave it up to third parties to built ThB compatible storage, PCI extenders, etc., for expansion. Sounds kinda familiar, no? And it would certainly lower Apple’s overhead from a manufacturing perspective to just offer a small ‘base unit’ and leave expansion up to after market gear.

[Andrew Kimery]

[Bill Davis] “Yeah, but if you have the choice between the horse and a tractor – you lose – and if you try to compete with the guy with a tractor with a horse, you’re likely to lose everything.”
Unless you are some place where fuel and/or spare parts are prohibitively expensive then draft animals still rule the fields. My point, which you partially reiterated, remains the same though. It’s not a one size fits all world like apparently misappropriated quips lead us to believe.

I agree with Michael Gissing that FCPX’s primary demographic was servered starting with the initial release and since then Apple has been spending time tending to it’s secondary market.