FORUMS: list search recent posts

Defending Apple

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
MIke Guidotti
Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 12:48:47 am

There are a lot of folks on here defending Apple. The real question is why isn't Apple defending itself? They could at least explain their decisions, and maybe even a glimpse at their road map for the future. Is that too much to ask all mighty Apple?


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 12:58:34 am

[MIke Guidotti] "The real question is why isn't Apple defending itself?"

Even if Apple decided to deliver a formal response to all of this (which would be very unusual for Apple, but did happen with, for instance, the iPhone 4 antenna firestorm last year), it's far too early; they'd need to take a week or two to figure out what they wanted to say.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

MIke Guidotti
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:00:02 am

They should have done that before they unleashed this beast on us.


Return to posts index


Scott Sheriff
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:07:02 am

[Chris Kenny] "they'd need to take a week or two to figure out what they wanted to say."

How hard could it be?

We f%$#ed up. FCS3 is now back in the store. We will continue to develop and sell FCP X for those that like it.

That took me less than :30.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com

I have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed...

"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:10:17 am

[Scott Sheriff] "How hard could it be?

We f%$#ed up. FCS3 is now back in the store. We will continue to develop and sell FCP X for those that like it.

That took me less than :30."


Major corporations don't work that way.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:22:13 am

Chris .. I mean ok .. A: how do you really know that?

and well i have to say it ..

B: are you apple's designated spokesman for this board? Because, well if you were, and no offense, but if you were, you could not work much any harder bud.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:26:19 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Chris .. I mean ok .. A: how do you really know that?"

For one thing, we saw it in action with Apple last year with the iPhone 4 antenna blowup.

[Aindreas Gallagher] "are you apple's designated spokesman for this board? Because, well if you were, and no offense, but if you were, you could not work much any harder bud."

I'm just someone who's seen enough of these Apple-related Internet firestorms (see above for one example of many) to be really annoyed that some other folks apparently haven't managed to develop any kind of sense of perspective with respect to this sort of thing. The apocalyptic rhetoric won't amont to much. It never does.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Peter Blumenstock
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:35:40 am

One things is a telephone that looses signal strenght. The other thing is the livelyhood of thousands of people and companies who have invested into Apple and FCP and who are having a major problem right now with thousands and thousands of dollars transitioning cost looming at the horizon. You cannot even start comparing the two.


Return to posts index

J Hussar
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:58:22 am

Actually attacking Apple is absolutely the right course if we want to see any decent features anytime soon.

If we all had your attitude we wouldn't see anything for years - if ever. We would be enablers for bad behavior.

Right now Apple is realizing they made a HUGE error. It's getting a lot of press about this debacle. Pulling the comments shows desperation on Apple's part - they thought the pros would just roll over, and guess what - they won't. I've put a lot of money into my system, I don't want to move to a different NLE, but I will if they don't add REAL pro features fast and show a dedication to pros - not doing that will show me I'm in a dead end. Long ago I used Media 100 - I never thought I would say this , but I am looking at their sell sheets.

Also you mention the iphone antennae blow up - well if we took you advice it never would have been fixed.

Apple blew it on this big time, and they ought to know it.



Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 2:10:40 am

[J Hussar] "Actually attacking Apple is absolutely the right course if we want to see any decent features anytime soon."

That only makes sense if Apple is clueless enough to believe that FCP X in its current form is a perfectly viable replacement for FCS3.

I can't bring myself to believe that for a second. I think it's far more likely that Apple knows exactly what's missing from FCP X, and is working on adding it... but saw no reason not to ship as soon as they had something useful to a decent number of users, even if it wasn't useful to all users yet. This would be consistent with past Apple practice.

By the way, the reviews are back. I suspect they were pulled temporarily just for Apple to have a chance to go through them.

[J Hussar] "Also you mention the iphone antennae blow up - well if we took you advice it never would have been fixed"

It never was fixed. Even the Verizon model has a similar issue. The whole thing was just blown way out of proportion, and once Apple made its case with comparisons to other phones, and tossed people some free bumpers for a while, it fizzled out. It's a classic illustration of the Internet's ability to generate huge quantities of smoke around very little fire.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

J Hussar
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 2:47:16 am

[Chris Kenny] "It never was fixed. Even the Verizon model has a similar issue. The whole thing was just blown way out of proportion, and once Apple made its case with comparisons to other phones, and tossed people some free bumpers for a while, it fizzled out. It's a classic illustration of the Internet's ability to generate huge quantities of smoke around very little fire."

Well, I imagine in iPhone 5 they won't have an antennae problem - I imagine that is getting a lot of scrutiny.
Also, and I forget who mentioned it, but the new quicktime came with many promises, and I still have to use quicktime 7 to generate useful files. No one bitched and nothing got fixed. Silence never works.

Apple does need to have their feet held to the fire, and leaving out importing v7 files is a huge issue! I can't tell you how many times I have to pull up an old job and then use it for the basis of a new iteration for clients. Starting from scratch is NOT viable. And if I have to start from scratch it will just make me go look at what other options I have for a modern, professional, NLE system.



Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 2:55:29 am

[J Hussar] "Also, and I forget who mentioned it, but the new quicktime came with many promises, and I still have to use quicktime 7 to generate useful files. No one bitched and nothing got fixed. Silence never works."

That's not really a good illustration of your point. The QuickTime X player app has such a limited feature set because Apple didn't have a fully-featured post-QuickTime media architecture to leverage for it. But Apple has been working on such a thing -- FCP X is actually the first significant app that uses it.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index


J Hussar
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 3:05:32 am

[Chris Kenny] "That's not really a good illustration of your point. The QuickTime X player app has such a limited feature set because Apple didn't have a fully-featured post-QuickTime media architecture to leverage for it. But Apple has been working on such a thing -- FCP X is actually the first significant app that uses it."


How's this from USA Today:

"I'm shocked," says Paul Harb of Beyond Creative Productions, who was co-editor on the recent films The Expendables and Rocky Balboa. "I've never seen a company take a piece of software, say this is the next evolution, and make it feel like 20 steps backward."


http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2011-06-21-final-cut-pro-apple-wednesday_n.htm



Apple has failed - I HOPE they fix it - I HOPE they make a credible statement, and fast. I have lots of money invested in FCP, but if it is going to be a toy editing system then forget it. I also HOPE I am wrong.



Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 3:09:12 am

This is all very familiar to anyone who remembers the OS 9 -> OS X transition.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 3:25:49 am

[Chris Kenny] "This is all very familiar to anyone who remembers the OS 9 -> OS X transition."

This is only familiar in that OS X was a major technological advance that was critical to the future of the platform, but that was unusable in the real world until its third major release.

Otherwise, this is the exact opposite of the OS 9 to OS X transition. Apple recognized what a big shift that was, and supported both operating systems in tandem during the transition.

Apple sold OS 9 and OS X side-by-side. OS X had Classic mode for years. OS X kept Carbon, so developers could easily move from OS 9 to OS X.

If the FCP7/FCPX transition were analogous to the OS9/OSX transition, FCS3 would still be on sale, FCPX would open FCP7 projects, and third-party developers would have been involved during FCPX's development.

Either Apple didn't know how big a deal the FCP7/FCPX transition would be, or they did know and didn't care. Either scenario suggests that they are out of touch with the professional post industry.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 3:30:29 am

[Walter Soyka] "If the FCP7/FCPX transition were analogous to the OS9/OSX transition, FCS3 would still be on sale, FCPX would open FCP7 projects, and third-party developers would have been involved during FCPX's development."

I agree FCS3 should remain on sale, but recall that it can run on the same system as FCP X. This is sufficient for a transition. Having FCP X open FCP 7 projects, now that I think it through, would be like demanding that OS X be able to run unmodified OS 9 apps natively.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 4:21:00 am

Chris, I have a lot of respect for you, both for sticking to your guns here, and for seeing the potential in FCPX amid all the negativity. Cheers for that, and thanks for some interesting discussion.

I must admit, though, I'm having a hard time understanding why you're trying to convince everyone that it's not that bad.

You and I agree that FCPX has some great features, and we agree that FCPX has tremendous potential for the future -- but it is simply not acceptable for the market leader to EOL their existing product and throw down a 1.0 release that flat out excludes many of the professionals that elevated Apple to their place in the market in the first place.


[Chris Kenny] "I agree FCS3 should remain on sale, but recall that it can run on the same system as FCP X. This is sufficient for a transition. Having FCP X open FCP 7 projects, now that I think it through, would be like demanding that OS X be able to run unmodified OS 9 apps natively."

In light of the Randy Ubillos thread above [link], and I assume you're suggesting that you can't build the connections for a magnetic timeline from an FCP7 project (or an EDL, for that matter).

You're probably right -- and that makes the problem way more serious than I initially thought.

If what you're proposing is true, Apple has just orphaned all our existing projects, and we will never see FCP project or EDL import, or XML-based round-trip with any external application. Very, very scary.

It also suggests that Apple doesn't realize (or care) how much we value continuity in our businesses.

For what it's worth, Apple shoehorned Classic into OS X, somewhat awkwardly running it in a VM. It was a hack, but it was worthwhile during the 9/X transition. I'd certainly give up the magnetic timeline in imported projects to have the ability to open older projects a few years from now when we're all running Mac OS 10.9 and FCP7 no longer installs or runs.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 4:56:06 am

[Walter Soyka] "You and I agree that FCPX has some great features, and we agree that FCPX has tremendous potential for the future -- but it is simply not acceptable for the market leader to EOL their existing product and throw down a 1.0 release that flat out excludes many of the professionals that elevated Apple to their place in the market in the first place."

So, Apple comes up with a radical new way to edit video, and... what? Never ships a product based on it, because it's not directly compatible with the old paradigm? That doesn't sound like Apple to me. The truth is, Apple is what is today in large part because the company has the guts to do things like EOL market-leading products when they think they can do something better. I get that people want the kind of innovation that flows from that, but without having to deal with any of the transition headaches it causes, but you just can't have both. If you want incrementalism there are lots of other choices. Personally, I feel it's extremely valuable for the industry to have a company that doesn't feel constrained by it.

[Walter Soyka] "If what you're proposing is true, Apple has just orphaned all our existing projects, and we will never see FCP project or EDL import, or XML-based round-trip with any external application. Very, very scary."

EDL might well be screwed here. Though frankly, the industry should be a little embarrassed it's still in use in the first place. Formats capable of carrying more data could be just fine, assuming third-party tools are willing to support a couple of key elements of the new approach -- and with Apple's market share they probably will be. Plus, if Apple really goes and does some of the Python stuff it looks like they might be doing, the kind of workflows that could enable would be so far beyond simple EDL/XML interchange that they could grow a whole new and radically different ecosystem around FCP X.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 5:43:28 am

[Chris Kenny] "So, Apple comes up with a radical new way to edit video, and... what? Never ships a product based on it, because it's not directly compatible with the old paradigm?"

Apple is not the first software company to completely re-engineer their internal data model for a product in order to provide amazing new features.

They might be the first market leader to do it with no apparent concern for the ability to handle legacy data.

I'd rather manually magnetize a timeline, re-connecting all the non-obvious connection points in an edit by hand, than not even have the option to import an old project at all. It may be tedious, but so is conforming an offline, and I've done enough of those. If manual magnetization is necessary, I'd do this, too.


[Chris Kenny] "EDL might well be screwed here. Though frankly, the industry should be a little embarrassed it's still in use in the first place."

I do agree that it's silly that EDL is still necessary some 40 years after its development -- but it is. An EDL is required for many broadcast deliverables (along with tape masters). If the global HDCAM shortage didn't get broadcasters to change their delivery specs, why should the emergence of EDL-less FCPX?

On some glorious day in the distant future, someone will export the very last EDL. In the short term, it's here and it's a legitimate professional need. Apple's arrogance will not change that overnight.


[Chris Kenny] "Formats capable of carrying more data could be just fine, assuming third-party tools are willing to support a couple of key elements of the new approach -- and with Apple's market share they probably will be. Plus, if Apple really goes and does some of the Python stuff it looks like they might be doing, the kind of workflows that could enable would be so far beyond simple EDL/XML interchange that they could grow a whole new and radically different ecosystem around FCP X."

The industry just did this exactly this with Apple -- look at how widely Final Cut Pro's proprietary XML was adopted.

By the way, AAF is an interchange format developed by an industry consortium specifically to handle interchange. Apple is conspicuously absent.

I am not suggesting that Apple should stop innovating. I am saying that they way they've chosen to innovate in a vacuum is disrespectful to the customers who gave FCP its legitimacy in the first place.

I've seen the Henry Ford "faster horse" quote thrown out a lot with respect to FCPX. I think it's important to note that both horses and cars used the same roads.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:54:55 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I'd rather manually magnetize a timeline, re-connecting all the non-obvious connection points in an edit by hand, than not even have the option to import an old project at all. It may be tedious, but so is conforming an offline, and I've done enough of those. If manual magnetization is necessary, I'd do this, too."

It's not quite that simple, though. FCP X doesn't have tracks you can stick clips onto, while you wait for the user to show up and explain what the connections should be. It literally doesn't have conventional tracks above the first. Some of the items on what is (visually) the "second track" are connected clips, and can't for instance, have transitions placed between them, because, since they're linked to their underlying clips, the timing relationships between them could change if those clips were moved or cut differently. Other items there are secondary storylines, which are effectively tracks that group a specific related set of clips... but don't run the full length of the sequence.

In order to emulate a normal multitrack editing app, as far as I can tell FCP X would have to import each track above the first as a storyline including all of the clips on that track and linked to the primary storyline at the first frame of the sequence. Unless I'm missing something, this seems to mean that with any sequence originated in FCP 7, there's no path to a sensible FCP X sequence. Any imported sequence would be perpetually stuck in, effectively, a sort of 'track emulation' mode in FCP X.

[Walter Soyka] "If the global HDCAM shortage didn't get broadcasters to change their delivery specs, why should the emergence of EDL-less FCPX?"

Apple thinks pretty long term. We are talking here about the company that, a decade ago, shipped their shiny new OS with a graphics engine so sophisticated that it took three years for hardware to show up that provided decent performance for it.

Anyway, in terms of deliverables, exporting EDLs shouldn't be a huge technical challenge, because you're going from a sequence format with more information to one with (much) less. And even with respect to importing EDLs, the single track case shouldn't be a huge technical challenge. It's really multitrack edits where things get tricky. The primary storyline in FCP X basically is a conventional track; it's the stuff you can layer on top of it that's not.

[Walter Soyka] "I've seen the Henry Ford "faster horse" quote thrown out a lot with respect to FCPX. I think it's important to note that both horses and cars used the same roads.
"


Not as much as you might think. Read up on the motivations for creating the US interstate highway system. It was, in significant part, a reaction to some military efforts (most famously in 1919) to determine how easily troops could be moved cross-country by motor vehicle, which discovered that the answer was "not very".

Cars also, it's worth pointing out, required significant new national infrastructure in the form of gasoline production and distribution facilities.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 2:24:11 pm

Chris, respectfully, I think we are veering off a bit here. I'm trying to make a couple very broad points here about continuity and infrastructure. We are disagreeing about the details, but do we also disagree about the main ideas?

[Chris Kenny] "In order to emulate a normal multitrack editing app, as far as I can tell FCP X would have to import each track above the first as a storyline including all of the clips on that track and linked to the primary storyline at the first frame of the sequence. Unless I'm missing something, this seems to mean that with any sequence originated in FCP 7, there's no path to a sensible FCP X sequence. Any imported sequence would be perpetually stuck in, effectively, a sort of 'track emulation' mode in FCP X."

That would be fine by me. I don't care what they have to do to make it work.

The key point is that a degree of backward compatibility is necessary. FCPX is not just a product -- it's a de facto part of the FCP platform. This "clean break" disrupts the platform and the users that helped to build it.


[Chris Kenny] "Apple thinks pretty long term. We are talking here about the company that, a decade ago, shipped their shiny new OS with a graphics engine so sophisticated that it took three years for hardware to show up that provided decent performance for it."

You see apparently see that as a positive here, but I see that as a negative. Apple could have designed a more gradual roadmap that would have made OS X a bit more usable up front.

Do you want to wait three years for FCPX to get back to where FCP7 was in some respects when it was EOLed?


[Chris Kenny] "[about roads] Read up on the motivations for creating the US interstate highway system. It was, in significant part, a reaction to some military efforts (most famously in 1919) to determine how easily troops could be moved cross-country by motor vehicle, which discovered that the answer was "not very". Cars also, it's worth pointing out, required significant new national infrastructure in the form of gasoline production and distribution facilities."

Naturally, as motor vehicles become dominant over horse-drawn vehicles, the infrastructure had to change to favor them. My point was that cars were "backwards compatible" at "launch." They acknowledged and worked within the existing infrastructure of the day, then grew WITH that infrastructure.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 2:31:27 pm

[Walter Soyka] "The key point is that a degree of backward compatibility is necessary. FCPX is not just a product -- it's a de facto part of the FCP platform. This "clean break" disrupts the platform and the users that helped to build it."

But given these fundamentally different approaches, in my opinion the way to provide backwards compatibility is to simply have people keep using FCP 7 with old projects. The way OS X allowed people to keep using OS 9 apps, but didn't try to make them 'native'.

[Walter Soyka] "You see apparently see that as a positive here, but I see that as a negative."

I see it as something that has certain costs, but fundamentally enables Apple to do more interesting things, sooner.

[Walter Soyka] "Do you want to wait three years for FCPX to get back to where FCP7 was in some respects when it was EOLed?"

I don't think most missing features will take that long.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Ted Levy
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 4:29:09 am

Boy, those are great points.


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 5:36:32 am

I strongly agree with Walter Soyka, and I wonder what Chris Kenny's agenda is on this forum.

As I have stated in almost every thread pertaining to the issues, the problem is NOT FCPX. It looks cool, and I have lobbied for a new editing paradigm to replace the tired "Source-Record" metaphor left over from tape editing in the 1980s. So Apple has begun that shift to newer ways of working. And frankly, if they DO intend FCPX to be a strictly prosumer app, and decide NEVER to add the pro features we're arguing over, so be it. That's their business model. Fine. We don't have to buy it or use it.

EXCEPT, they have taken the actual pro app that works off the market! On the same day! How can you possibly apologize or excuse that and call yourself a pro anything?

As I have been pointing out elsewhere, we have no assurance, and very little reason to believe that "FCP7 will live on" as Larry Jordan said on his site. Why? Because, first of all, you can no longer even acquire a legal copy! The sellers on eBay are unauthorized vendors, and how do you know they are not simply using those serial numbers and then selling you the hard copies for a tidy profit?

Secondly, when in the history of software have you ever seen anyone post regular updates for discontinued products? Have you never had an issue with FCS when upgrading to a new OS? Doesn't anyone recall the quirkly behavior many of us had when the ProKit 6.01 update was released (intended to be mainly Logic Pro fixes), that caused Compressor issues? That was a common enough problem that Jon Chappell posted a workaround on his digitalrebellion site.

Why do you have faith that FCP v7.0.3 will work flawlessly in Lion and beyond, while we wait for months or years in hopes that FCPX will eventually open our archived FCP7 projects, and do all the pro things we need?

The point here is that they took the app we want to use off the market. Until Apple assures us in writing that we can keep editing in FCP7 indefinitely, or until they bring FCPX up to its pro functionality... why shouldn't we be worried?

Why shouldn't we be annoyed that, after a decade of investing in Apple software, upgrades, new hardware every 2.5 years and incessant training -- that it now looks like we may have to kiss our work goodbye and start over on another pro platform?


Return to posts index

ben g unguren
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 8:15:08 pm

[Chris Kenny] "I think it's far more likely that Apple knows exactly what's missing from FCP X, and is working on adding it... but saw no reason not to ship as soon as they had something useful to a decent number of users, even if it wasn't useful to all users yet. This would be consistent with past Apple practice."

In other words:
PUT YOUR TRUST
IN APPLE

In other words:
PUT YOUR [career, funds, facilities, future, reputation]
IN APPLE

All is well. Apple will take care of you, wherever they are. Now back to bed, everyone, off you go....



Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 24, 2011 at 2:53:00 pm

[ben g unguren] "In other words:
PUT YOUR [career, funds, facilities, future, reputation]
IN APPLE"


It's more like "If you a tool that already works, that you've been using for a long time and like, and you see promise in a new tool from the same vendor, then maybe you shouldn't abandon that vendor a couple of days after that new tool ships just because it doesn't have all the features you need yet".

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Sohrab Sandhu
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 2:49:19 am

[Chris Kenny] "Major corporations don't work that way."

I don't know where you get this idea from. In fact major corporation do employ such PR strategies for damage control.

It might be that Apple does not believe in it because they think they are too big to be concerned. But you know what, nobody in the history of mankind has stayed on the top forever.

Sohrab

2.66 GHz 8-core, ATI Radeon HD 4870,
FCS 3, AJA Kona Lhi



"The creative person wants to be a know-it-all. He wants to know about all kinds of things: ancient history, nineteenth-century mathematics, current manufacturing techniques, flower arranging, and hog futures. Because he never knows when these ideas might come together to form a new idea. It may happen six minutes later or six months, or six years down the road. But he has faith that it will happen." -- Carl Ally


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 2:59:39 am

[Sohrab Sandhu] "I don't know where you get this idea from. In fact major corporation do employ such PR strategies for damage control."

But they rarely do so quickly, unless something has exploded and killed a bunch of people. Sometimes it takes a while even then. In most cases, it's much more important to say the right thing than to respond immediately.

Look, I'm not sure why people are being to argumentative with respect to this issue. My only point was that if Apple does respond (which they probably won't), it's too early to expect that response yet. The lag time last year with the iPhone 4 antenna issue (which was far more critical to Apple's bottom line) is essentially conclusive evidence on this point.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Clayton Burkhart
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:07:51 am

[MIke Guidotti] "There are a lot of folks on here defending Apple."

Who's defending Apple? About 99% of the posts here are negative on this one.

Rightfully so, I might add.


Return to posts index

Andrew Corneles
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:13:30 am

nicedissolve.com seems to be pretty red-centric, doesn't the lack of native r3d support give you a little pause for defense?


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:49:15 am

[Andrew Corneles] "nicedissolve.com seems to be pretty red-centric, doesn't the lack of native r3d support give you a little pause for defense?"

Hey, something of substance to discuss.

Well, we've done fairly extensive workflow testing, and come to the conclusion that native R3D support in an offline editing application is not all that useful, at least for us. Most of our Red projects are indie features. We handle dailies and online editing/color, but things typically get edited on a system belonging to the editor or the production -- usually without a RedRocket, which means performance sucks with native R3D. Plus, the files are much larger than necessary for an offline edit, and even bigger with Epic.

It makes editors' lives much easier if we just process everything through our Rocket and hand them ProRes or DNxHD transcodes for the offline.

Mind you, we do need OMF export, a few more audio output options, XML (or some replacement), and video I/O to seriously adopt FCP X. But native R3D support? Meh. Not unless FCP X also gains color grading capabilities to rival DaVinci Resolve's. Then we'd be interested in having full access to raw data there, because we could online in it. (I would consider this rather unlikely, obviously.)

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Peter Blumenstock
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:57:05 am

FCP had great color grading capabilities. It was called Color, used to cost 20.000 bucks and Apple simply flushed it down the toilet.


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 2:01:04 am

[Chris Kenny] "Hey, something of substance to discuss."

"FCPX sux :( :( :( adobe here i come :) :) :) " isn't substance enough for you?


Return to posts index

James Daugherty
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:20:40 am

This is going to be a great example of what a company should do versus what Apple will do.
I am a reformed political consultant and if Apple doesn't get a handle on this it is going to be worse than the Weinerss wiener scandal.

The Customer is always right.. because he/she pays your salary.

Apple should do the following.

1. Put Final Cut Pro Studio 3.0 back up for purchase.
2. Admit there is a problem.
3. Reaffirm that you will support Final Cut Pro 7


and most off all be nice.

The people you are disrespecting are not your employees they are customers who want to give you money. They buy, iphones and ipads and they own lot and lots of Apple stock.

The next meeting of our user group is going to be interesting. I may have to get a metal detector.

James Daugherty
President of SDFCPUG.com


Return to posts index

James Daugherty
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 1:45:41 am

This is going to be a great example of what a company should do versus what Apple will do.
I am a reformed political consultant and if Apple doesn't get a handle on this it is going to be worse than the Weiner's wiener scandal.

The Customer is always right.. because he/she pays your salary.

Apple should do the following.

1. Put Final Cut Pro Studio 3.0 back up for purchase.
2. Admit there is a problem.
3. Reaffirm that you will support Final Cut Pro 7


and most off all be nice.

The people you are disrespecting are not your employees they are customers who want to give you money. They buy, iphones and ipads and they own lot and lots of Apple stock.

The next meeting of our user group is going to be interesting. I may have to get a metal detector.

James Daugherty
President SDFCPUG.com


Return to posts index

Pierre Jasmin
Re: Defending Apple
on Jun 23, 2011 at 3:32:15 am

I like this one (it's almost not OT)

http://gawker.com/5809978/listen-to-richard-dreyfuss-make-apple-sound-evil



Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]