Re: FCP X hardware performance

COW Forums : Apple FCPX or Not: The Debate

VIEW ALL • ADD A NEW POST • PRINT

Respond to this post • Return to posts index • Read entire thread

Re: FCP X hardware performance
by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:54:27 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "It is certainly apparent that whatever NLE is next, we are going to need some new hardware.

I guess the plan is working? ;)"

Although some would disagree with me (us?) FCPX is designed to sell hardware. It eats resources . . . probably another reason why I believe Apple will replace the MacPro with powerful computer.

Posts Index

Read Thread

Current Message Thread:

FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 2:04:45 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by olof ekbergh on Jun 2, 2012 at 2:18:45 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 2:41:44 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:10:58 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:54:27 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Bill Davis on Jun 3, 2012 at 1:01:39 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 3, 2012 at 1:49:03 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Bill Davis on Jun 3, 2012 at 2:02:22 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Hadley on Jun 4, 2012 at 1:20:05 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Chris Harlan on Jun 4, 2012 at 3:42:35 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Elias Huch on Jun 28, 2012 at 2:20:18 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Timothy Palmer-Benson on Jun 4, 2012 at 12:51:44 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by Mathieu Ghekiere on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:30:47 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:58:15 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 4:19:21 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 4:25:05 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 5:35:46 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 6:05:14 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 6:11:48 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 8:04:29 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 8:16:35 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by David Cherniack on Jun 2, 2012 at 8:26:09 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Lance Bachelder on Jun 4, 2012 at 2:16:19 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 4, 2012 at 11:16:59 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Lance Bachelder on Jun 6, 2012 at 12:13:12 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by David Cherniack on Jun 7, 2012 at 9:47:21 am
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 2, 2012 at 8:35:48 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 9:39:24 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Bret Williams on Jun 2, 2012 at 11:27:14 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 11:50:31 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 2, 2012 at 11:52:40 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 3, 2012 at 12:44:32 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Bernard Newnham on Jun 3, 2012 at 9:29:33 am
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 5:13:08 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 4, 2012 at 6:11:42 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 6:39:48 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 7:00:19 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 7:36:23 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 8:25:03 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 8:58:29 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 9:24:06 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 9:38:55 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 10:13:47 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 4, 2012 at 10:56:24 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Steve Connor on Jun 4, 2012 at 11:05:47 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Frank Gothmann on Jun 4, 2012 at 11:16:52 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 5, 2012 at 12:52:13 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 4, 2012 at 11:08:34 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 5, 2012 at 12:16:49 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 5, 2012 at 5:39:10 am
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Jeremy Garchow on Jun 5, 2012 at 4:11:34 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Walter Soyka on Jun 5, 2012 at 5:56:29 pm
- Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Garber on Jun 3, 2012 at 6:47:31 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Steve Connor on Jun 3, 2012 at 6:58:36 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Garber on Jun 3, 2012 at 7:02:30 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 3, 2012 at 7:05:32 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Garber on Jun 3, 2012 at 7:07:54 pm
        Re: FCP X hardware performance by Michael Garber on Jun 3, 2012 at 7:31:44 pm
  - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Mathieu Ghekiere on Jun 4, 2012 at 8:22:52 pm
    - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Craig Seeman on Jun 4, 2012 at 8:31:54 pm
      - Re: FCP X hardware performance by Oliver Peters on Jun 9, 2012 at 2:01:34 pm


	LOGIN TO REPLY

FORUMS • TUTORIALS • MAGAZINE • STOCKYARD • VIDEOS • PODCASTS • EVENTS • SERVICES • NEWSLETTER • NEWS • BLOGS