Marcus Moore
Forum Replies Created
-
In a worst-case scenario, there are other options for getting this audio out of X. Xto7 and then export an OMF from Legacy.
I think if Apple is going to continue to let a 3rd party serve this functionality (and there’s no way to know if this is a long or short term plan), then it’s only a matter of time before other developers emerge. In fact, I’m fairly certain I’ve heard that more OMF exports options are on their way.
There IS a downside to 3rd party OMF export if there’s only one supplier- but I still see an upside where specific functionality can be updated on a faster schedule than FCPX itself.
Apple never would have pushed out 17 updates to FCPX in the last year to address Legacy to X project translation. But Philip Hodgetts and his team have been able to do just that.
-
I think Apple would love to double down on secrecy- but it didn’t seem to help them with the iPhone5 leaks.
Granted, the MacPro doesn’t have the same appeal for scoop-seekers as a new iPhone or iPad; which is likely how the new Retina MacbookPro and iMac were able to be released relatively unspoiled.
-
He said, she said. It could have been an honest mistake on the developers part, or it could have been Apple’s fault. We can’t know for sure.
I’m just saying that there’s a LOT of elements lining up here that put you in your current situation- the local guy’s boo-boo, the time difference, the (possibly) unpaid bills, the tight deadline you’re on.
The turnaround time for app approval is a problem, and perhaps as time goes on, Apple can instigate a process under which developers in good standing can earn a more expedient approval process for minor updates.
The problem seems to be that Apple has a lot to loose if they let something slip by, press-wise.
Do you know anyone else locally that can do the conversion?
-
I get it, I really do- but the developer screwed the pooch when they didn’t pay their bills. A developer enters into the MAS agreement knowing they system. If they don’t have a workaround for something like this happening that’s MAS agnostic, then it’s even more confusing that they didn’t keep up with their end of the deal.
-
It seems like you ran into a very specific set of circumstances that unfortunately lined up at the most inopportune time. If anything, it’s the developer’s fault here, not Apple. What’s Apple to do with a company not paying it’s bills?
I don’t think there’s anything more wrong here than if Adobe’s server went down and I couldn’t install a CreativeCloud app for a day. Things happen. No system is perfect.
-
Right, but not at the speeds most many PCIe cards require.
I’ve said before that if TB was available at the needed speeds, I think a modular product would probably be what we were getting.
But if we take Apple as true to it’s word that it will release a “really great” product for people who use MacPros, AND take for granted that Thunderbolt isn’t going to change substantially this year- then we’re sort of painted into a corner, aren’t we?
-
Agreed.
The assumption of a mini-tower has always seemed dubious to me. There’s little to no market segment between those already being served by an iMac, and those who need the power (relatively speaking) and expandability of a MacPro.
And I think we can all agree that once this new product is released, the MacPro as it exists today will go away- there’s no room for a 2-tier solution in the Big Iron space.
-
Actually it is. The next-gen Xeons arriving this year are due to have TB support as far as I know…
As for PCIe- Look, if Apple felt that the iMac was their new “Pro” machine they would have just said that by now and discontinued the MacPro. There’s no reason to have “refreshed” and kept the MacPro alive in 2012 unless it’s a stopgap for something in 2013. Thunderbolt as a I/O isn’t due to get a speed bump for at least another year if I remember correctly, and who knows how close that gets us to it actually being a PCIe replacement for the faster protocols. So I don’t see how PCIe isn’t in this new machine.
-
Exactly- this is why I don’t agree with this theory from Craig.
Thunderbolt expansion may be a viable solution when we can address those higher speeds (presumably at the 100GB/s optical stage), but for now it’s a way to bring SOME of those higher-end tasks to the iMac (broadcast monitoring for example). It’s also the I/O for displays, storage, audio gear– and the speeds do diminish as you lengthen the chain.
PCIe is I’m sure a technology that Apple would love to be done with, but there’s no viable alternative today.
-
I think it’s really important to bring up that quote, because you’re right, they DID NOT say they would be releasing a new MacPro, but “something” for those users….
My own logic on that statement reads that it’s something that does what an iMac doesn’t, because if it didn’t, then those users are ALREADY being served by an iMac.
The distinguishing features of a MacPro from an iMac are:
1. Server Class CPUs
2. PCI expansion.
3. Loads of RAM (beyond the 32GB that you can put in an iMac)
4. Access to the beefy GPUs that won’t fit in an iMac (really PCI expansion again)If this new product doesn’t address these elements in some fashion, then it has no reason for being, because otherwise it’s an iMac. And this machine isn’t just to serve video and audio pros, but for app developers as well, who’s work can also churn thru loads of processing power. So even if you question Apple’s commitment to Creative Pros, I think they’re commitment to App Developers is certainly easier to qualify- it’s obviously serving their greater interests.
Just my thoughts. I reserve the right to be horribly wrong.