Marcus Moore
Forum Replies Created
-
Functionally it was also much more simplistic than iMovie11, which as you point out was Oct. 2010 (I thought it was out before FCPX, but thought I saw differently at Wikipedia)
In the end it’s semantics. FCPX evolved from the same pool of ideas as iMovie ’08. Whether they were born in a product called “iMovie” or (as I have heard) Ubilis’ proto “FirstCut” program.
People rally against iMoviePro because of the negative connotations. And it’s lazy criticism. I personally don’t care where the ideas came from as long as they’re good ones.
-
If PP is now FCP8- where’s the new PremierPro?!
And Avid is still Avid. How boring! 😉
-
If they didn’t have some stuff right, I hope I’d have had the common sense to move on at this point.
As it is, logging (definitely) and cutting (mostly) are improvements in my mind.
-
While iMovie ’09 debuted this interface, look at it today and it’s a VERY stripped down version of the basic concept. iMovie 11 is much closer, but at that point FCPX had already been released.
Simply the amount of time between FCP7’s release in 2009 and FCPX illustrates the extended development process it went thru. Carbon to Cocoa, 64bit (which it just missed the boat on, since Logic made to 64bit before the 64bit Carbon initiative was killed), AVFoundation (which iMovie for Mac hadn’t moved to until the new one released just last month).
I just can’t reconcile all of this background legwork with the idea that they STARTED with a consumer concept and scaled it up to FCPX, vs they started with a new way of editing, and the consumer version just got out the door first.
-
Barefeats has done this before, by sending out for benchmark results to, I guess, people they know with different hardware configurations.
Of all the benchmarks so far, the one’s on Apple’s own MacPro performance page are the most seemingly relevant to me. Especially because they appear to have been done using the upcoming software (with whatever improvements that will bring)
-
I think that’s the key- first shown.
Just like what Alex points to- I think the relationship is much more symbiotic- and that it took much longer to get FCPX out the door. FCPX was a much bigger coding job, which is why they likely didn’t bother (or aborted early) the 32bit Carbon version of X (or FirstCut or whatever it was at that very early stage)
-
FCPX shared no code with iMovie.
-
Great stuff as usual from Alex.
It seems like a new Project/Event structure is a lock at this point.
Very exciting. I’d go cross-eyed trying to look for this stuff…
-
Some more detailed CPU performance estimates across all 4 processor options.
https://www.primatelabs.com/blog/2013/11/estimating-mac-pro-performance/
While I’m very likely to go for the highest end GPUs for obvious reasons, the CPU is the place where I’d love to save a bit of money. Depending on how well parallelized FCPX and Motion are, the 8-core with the higher clock speed might be the better bet.
-
Nothing too surprising. What you’d expect when compared to the 8-core version from last month. The 12-core version was benchmarked using a different version of Geekbench, so we don’t have a strict comparison for that one yet.
Through truthfully, I think the application task specific performance figures on Apple’s MacPro site are much more useful than the raw benchmark scores.
If I had to bet, I’d say that whenever the Apple online store goes down for the “later in November” launch of the Retina iPad mini- I think it will also bring the full configuration ordering and ship date for the MacPro.