http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/

Seems to confirm my fears that all OS's are moving towards a more smartphone-like interface/experience. The new 'defender' is interesting though, looks suspiciously like an anti-malware utility...

--------------------
http://www.williammorrismusic.com

Actually, contrary to your fears, I've been quite reassured as to Apple's position on Macs and OSX.

Have a read of John Gruber's report:
http://daringfireball.net/2012/02/mountain_lion

I think Apple are doing the right thing in general, and I'm pleased to hear that Macs and OS X are still important - they haven't just got bored of computers in favour of the whizz-bang touch devices. And I think they have a far better, and more consistent approach than Microsoft's Windows strategy...

Quote Will_m:

---

The new 'defender' is interesting though, looks suspiciously like an anti-malware utility...

---

Looks suspiciously like an attempt to build an even higher wall round the garden to me, very much in support of the business model of the Mac App Store, so that developers _have_ to sell their software via Apple.

Mikey, gatekeeper is more about security than walling in - the only 'viruses' that have hit the Mac have been unsigned things that prompt for your password. This will block that. It's less about locking in, and more about reassuring people that they are on top of the small amount of malware out there. And it's acknowledging that as the OSX platform is doing well, it will soon be a serious target for virus writers - the last thing Apple need is the same sort of problems that MS have.

Interesting approach though - some good 'consolidation' type features rather than anything new. And as they all use iCloud to sync, it seems that if you buy into the Apple way of doing things, you get a nice integrated experience. And finally a sensible use for an Apple TV!



--------------------
Veni, Vidi, Aesculi
(I came, I saw, I conkered)

Quote Will_m:

---

http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/

Seems to confirm my fears that all OS's are moving towards a more smartphone-like interface/experience..

---

Sure it does: Confirmation bias

Quote johnny h:

---

Quote Will_m:

---

http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/

Seems to confirm my fears that all OS's are moving towards a more smartphone-like interface/experience..

---

Sure it does: Confirmation bias

---

Agree with that.

Here's a article regarding pro/creative users...

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2012/02/what-mountain-lion-will-probably-mea n-to-you-as-pro-creative-users/

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/earwighoney

Quote johnny h:

---

Quote Will_m:

---

http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/

Seems to confirm my fears that all OS's are moving towards a more smartphone-like interface/experience..

---

Sure it does: Confirmation bias

---

The actual marketing for ML is that it takes inspiration from the Ipad, so I'm not sure how saying it has a more smartphone/tablet like experience shows any bias. Maybe reading my post and deducing what you have shows confirmation bias?

Not to be too negative but it is often more useful to discuss potential pitfalls than to just list things I like, for example the dovetailing of iOS and OS X means a yearly update cycle and forgive me but it seems audio developers are having enough trouble keeping updated as it is. Perhaps it would help to keep you engaged if I listed something I liked about the update, well the new 'reminders' app will help me remember not to start any discussions on the mac forum for fear of misinterpreting statements like "inspired by iPad".

--------------------
http://www.williammorrismusic.com

Quote Will_m:

---

Quote johnny h:

---

Quote Will_m:

---

http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/

Seems to confirm my fears that all OS's are moving towards a more smartphone-like interface/experience..

---

Sure it does: Confirmation bias

---

The actual marketing for ML is that it takes inspiration from the Ipad, so I'm not sure how saying it has a more smartphone/tablet like experience shows any bias. Maybe reading my post and deducing what you have shows confirmation bias?

Not to be too negative but it is often more useful to discuss potential pitfalls than to just list things I like, for example the dovetailing of iOS and OS X means a yearly update cycle and forgive me but it seems audio developers are having enough trouble keeping updated as it is. Perhaps it would help to keep you engaged if I listed something I liked about the update, well the new 'reminders' app will help me remember not to start any discussions on the mac forum for fear of misinterpreting statements like "inspired by iPad".

---

The sky is falling... abandon the Apple ship...get out while you can... all is lost ...

I haven't left Leopard yet!

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/richie-royale
http://www.mixcrate.com/richieroyale

Same here, and I see absolutely no need or point in doing so.

--------------------
PA stuff on FB

Quote johnny h:

---

The sky is falling... abandon the Apple ship...get out while you can... all is lost ...

---

Grow up johnny, I've made some valid points, which is evident from your sarcastic reply. I actually stated in my first post that my concern wasn't just about OS X but about new OS's in general. Although this new batch will likely make no difference to audio production its an indication of where development is going. Just ask Final Cut X users how they like their new iMovie version.

--------------------
http://www.williammorrismusic.com

Quote Will_m:

---

Just ask Final Cut X users how they like their new iMovie version.

---

A quick note here: Do you say that because you are an FCP user? Or is this just a generic viewpoint based on some internet griping where the first version was released? (we're now three versions on from that initial release).

Because, while it still has a few (major) shortcomings, FCPX is so so so much better in many ways than the crusty old, outdated FCP was. And it's just at the beginning of it's lifecycle - a few versions down the road and it's again going to be the app others are taking a *lot* of design cues from.

Range based keywording, smart keyword collections, automatic camera syncing, amazing multicam editing - there is so much good stuff in there where the ageing, Cocoa 32-bit legacy FCP was dreadful.

The majority of grumbling was A) omg they've killed the app I was heavily invested in, B) the new thing looks a bit like iMovie and doesn't yet do everything the old version did (so don't upgrade yet) and C) omg they've changed the editing workflow a bit and I don't like change, change is bad.

I loved the good things about FCP, but the awful things were incredibly frustrating. And FCPX is a rethink that fixes all of the awful things (but still hasn't yet got *everything* in there.)

I now return you to your regular program...

Edited by desmond (17/02/12 05:46 PM)

Quote caveman82:

---

Here's a article regarding pro/creative users...

http://createdigitalmusic.com/2012/02/what-mountain-lion-will-probably-mea n-to-you-as-pro-creative-users/

---

I read that (And responded there). It is reassuring, to a point. IE, this gatekeeper hoopla is really nothing to worry about.
But to me its fairly clear what concerns the pro/creative people. It's what Apple haven't done/said, rather than what they have. I don't see anything at all that would interest a pro/creative user.
Macs were generally thought of as THE creative tools of choice for making the content. Be it video or music, images etc etc. Now Apple are punting the Mac as the tool to sell and present that content to you, rather than selling you the best tool to create the content.
I mean really.. Is there anything in 10.8 what-so-ever that would interest a Logic user? Not that I see. But I do see all kinds of waffle about twitter integration and n00b friendly swipe gestures and bollocks like that.

Im still on 10.6.8 too. And i'll hold on to it until I have to upgrade, due to needing to keep my Apple email address. So I guess I'll have some choices to make in the summer eh!

--------------------
Paul

Quote desmond:

---

A quick note here: Do you say that because you are an FCP user? Or is this just a generic viewpoint based on some internet griping where the first version was released? (we're now three versions on from that initial release).

---

I understand what you mean, there was certainly a pretty big backlash upon its release but I think a lot of the uproar was justified, I don't do any video editing but work with a lot of editors and they all seem to tell me the same thing, some great workflow/interface improvements but some massive downsides that make it unusable in its current form. Not being able to load old projects was pretty high on the list but my biggest one was no OMF support as this was a feature that is pretty vital in my workflow. I understand there are workarounds but it seems like some of the pro features were sacrificed.

--------------------
http://www.williammorrismusic.com

Quote ~Paul:

---

Macs were generally thought of as THE creative tools of choice for making the content. Be it video or music, images etc etc. Now Apple are punting the Mac as the tool to sell and present that content to you, rather than selling you the best tool to create the content.

---

Yeah. But back in those old says, the pro creative market were probably the biggest market segment.

These days, like it or not, Apple are very much a consumer focused company, and are marketing accordingly. But marketing messages aren't reality, as we all know. "Buy another Mac - you can continue to run all the same software you're already running" isn't much of a value proposition..

So just because Apple's marketing department aren't really reaching to us, doesn't mean the products they make aren't useful, as we all know. It's just that the modern Apple is in many ways a very different Apple to how it used to be in the 90s.

Quote Will_m:

---

I understand what you mean, there was certainly a pretty big backlash upon its release but I think a lot of the uproar was justified,

---

Sure.

Quote Will_m:

---

I don't do any video editing but work with a lot of editors and they all seem to tell me the same thing, some great workflow/interface improvements but some massive downsides that make it unusable in its current form.

---

To some people, this was clearly the case. But their existing FCP licenses still work, so there's no immediate need to upgrade - check out the new version on the side, and over time, when it starts to be able to fullfill your needs, switch. If for whatever reason it is not a viable opion, then people can either stick with FCP for the time being, which is getting increasingly out of date, but eventually sooner or later they'll have to switch - and there's no doubt Premiere and Media Composer have gained users since the FCPX release.

However, Apple have also sold quite a lot of copies of FCPX, too...

Quote Will_m:

---

Not being able to load old projects was pretty high on the list but my biggest one was no OMF support as this was a feature that is pretty vital in my workflow. I understand there are workarounds but it seems like some of the pro features were sacrificed.

---

Sure, and we all have different features that are important to us. Remember, this is a ground up, complete rewrite from core architecture up - that's a massive design and development achievement, and resources are finite - even Apple's. It's simply not possible to do everything at once, so you have to prioritise. Sure, to some editors, they would demand that Apple's priorities be different, but it is what it is. And Apple seem to be working quite hard at releasing timely, free updates with major new features (which up to now, they had a policy of not doing - they'd only release bugfix and very minor feature updates, and leave the large new features to major releases - mostly starting with reasons of Sarbanes-Oxley).

Anyway, I don't want to threadjack too much (which I probably already have, but...)

And yes, I would have loved to be able to import FCP projects on release. At least we can now, with an inexpensive app...

Quote desmond:

---

leave the large new features to major releases - mostly starting with reasons of Sarbanes-Oxley

---

That always seemed weird - plenty of other companies seemed to manage to release significant new features as free updates. It just seemed to be Apple that didn't. I never knew whether to believe their citing of SOX or not.

Quote ~Paul:

---

Macs were generally thought of as THE creative tools of choice for making the content.

---

Well, that's how they were advertised. We disn't ALL fall for it :-)

No, we didn't all fall for it.
Some of us spent years of our lives hammering away at Windows, praying one day, it will actually work properly,
only to find each new OS is another labyrinth of stress inducing problems.

Even Win8 installer has a splash screen telling you - "you can now fix your Windows problems online, quicker than ever".
Really ?
What problems are these then ????

No, we didn't all fall for it, we just wised up and bought a bloody Mac because they WORK.

Lion, ML, FCP-X ?
Bring it on, it will be better than anything MS can do.

Quote Scope:

---

No, we didn't all fall for it.
Some of us spent years of our lives hammering away at Windows, praying one day, it will actually work properly,
only to find each new OS is another labyrinth of stress inducing problems.

Even Win8 installer has a splash screen telling you - "you can now fix your Windows problems online, quicker than ever".
Really ?
What problems are these then ????

No, we didn't all fall for it, we just wised up and bought a bloody Mac because they WORK.

Lion, ML, FCP-X ?
Bring it on, it will be better than anything MS can do.

---

Lots of people fall the specs trap: x.xx ghz processor xgb ram - cheaper on a pc = mac is a ripoff... no! You pay for the design, inside and out. Its not designed so you 'fix your problems online', its designed to just work, and in general it achieves this to a very high standard (far higher than any other operating system).

Its so nice to have all the inbuilt software to be such great quality too - chat, mail, safari, iphoto, pdf reader, iso manager etc. Its such a ballache to find this stuff for the pc and its normally not as good or you have to pay for it or put up with crappy ads. You really can just plug it in and its a great computer already. One of my PC owning friends has a newish printer, and has spent hours checking forums, reinstalling drivers etc but cannot get anything to print. I bring my Macbook over there, plug it in and its works immediately. No questions, no driver signing, no dire warnings. Just works, like the adverts say.

There's a queue of people waiting to slaughter Apple right, but their ridiculously massive growth and success over the last few years has left them waiting quite some time ...

> Lion, ML, FCP-X ?
Bring it on, it will be better than anything MS can do.

Unless you're bothered about audio performance in which case it'll perform as abysmally as every version of OsX has.

I use MacOS at home as I do prefer the interface. I just don't have this desperate desire to constantly bash other companies. Same as if I use keyboard x I don't have the need to bash keyboard y.


> One of my PC owning friends has a newish printer, and has spent hours checking forums, reinstalling drivers etc but cannot get anything to print. I bring my Macbook over there, plug it in and its works immediately. No questions, no driver signing, no dire warnings. Just works, like the adverts say.

Canon here with opposite experience. Windows machine all share flawlessly and print ok, Macs won't unless I connect with a cable every time and constantly loses connection. Spent ages checking forums same as your mate who has problems on PC.

We can all find examples of people with problems, it proves nothing.

Edited by Dishpan (18/02/12 11:45 PM)

Quote Dishpan:

---

> Lion, ML, FCP-X ?
Bring it on, it will be better than anything MS can do.

Unless you're bothered about audio performance in which case it'll perform as abysmally as every version of OsX has.

I use MacOS at home as I do prefer the interface. I just don't have this desperate desire to constantly bash other companies. Same as if I use keyboard x I don't have the need to bash keyboard y.


> One of my PC owning friends has a newish printer, and has spent hours checking forums, reinstalling drivers etc but cannot get anything to print. I bring my Macbook over there, plug it in and its works immediately. No questions, no driver signing, no dire warnings. Just works, like the adverts say.

Canon here with opposite experience. Windows machine all share flawlessly and print ok, Macs won't unless I connect with a cable every time and constantly loses connection. Spent ages checking forums same as your mate who has problems on PC.

We can all find examples of people with problems, it proves nothing.

---

One example yes, but given a hundred examples of general 'doing stuff' and its pretty clear what the better operating system is and what is more likely to 'just work'.

The audio performance is an issue - windows does seem to run low latency a little better, though logic seems to get around this problem perfectly well. This is why I'm still persisting with my archaic looking desktop machine. Im hoping the next MBP update will render it totally obsolete.

Let's not turn this thread into a Windows vs OSX debate, or religious war, eh?


We all know who won that one ages ago...; )

Quote desmond:

---

The majority of grumbling was A) omg they've killed the app I was heavily invested in, B) the new thing looks a bit like iMovie and doesn't yet do everything the old version did (so don't upgrade yet) and C) omg they've changed the editing workflow a bit and I don't like change, change is bad.

I now return you to your regular program...

---

Change is the only true evidence of life .......

--------------------
Strictly an amateur with some nice toys,

Quote desmond:

---

Let's not turn this thread into a Windows vs OSX debate, or religious war, eh?

---

You're a very naughty boy, Desmond :-)

--------------------
Cubase, guitars.

Edited by Kwackman (19/02/12 09:38 AM)

quote="desmond"]
The majority of grumbling was A) omg they've killed the app I was heavily invested in, B) the new thing looks a bit like iMovie and doesn't yet do everything the old version did (so don't upgrade yet) and C) omg they've changed the editing workflow a bit and I don't like change, change is bad.

---

It was only B) really, though. They released a "lite" version masquerading as an upgrade.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Quote desmond:

---

The majority of grumbling was A) omg they've killed the app I was heavily invested in, B) the new thing looks a bit like iMovie and doesn't yet do everything the old version did (so don't upgrade yet) and C) omg they've changed the editing workflow a bit and I don't like change, change is bad.

---

It was only B) really, though. They released a "lite" version masquerading as an upgrade.

---

They completely rewrote a very complicated application. They didn't suddenly stop the old one from working. They made a mistake in pulling the original final cut from the stores (a decision they quickly reversed), and that's it. Its not trivial to rewrite a complex application and include absolutely all features in the first edition. Right now it represents a massive upgrade. Have you ever actually used it or are you just rehashing some old and now irrelevant internet gripes?

Quote johnny h:

---

They completely rewrote a very complicated application. They didn't suddenly stop the old one from working. They made a mistake in pulling the original final cut from the stores (a decision they quickly reversed), and that's it. Its not trivial to rewrite a complex application and include absolutely all features in the first edition. Right now it represents a massive upgrade. Have you ever actually used it or are you just rehashing some old and now irrelevant internet gripes?

---

I'm not sure the gripes are irrelevant, to my knowledge there is still no support for OMF, other than third party add-ons, I think the wiser move would have been to take the time to make sure these features were implemented upon release. I know a bunch of people that walked away from Final Cut after seeing X. I know you can stick with the version you have but sooner or later upgrading will become necessary to progress and then you lose the features you used to have.

You have to think several years ahead because people invest huge amounts of time and money in particular systems, that's why its useful to try and interpret a companies focus and like it or not apple have swung quite dramatically in the last 8-9 years. Steve Jobs defined apple as 'a mobile communications company' and that to me is different to a computer company.

--------------------
http://www.williammorrismusic.com

Quote Will_m:

---

I'm not sure the gripes are irrelevant, to my knowledge there is still no support for OMF, other than third party add-ons, I think the wiser move would have been to take the time to make sure these features were implemented upon release. I know a bunch of people that walked away from Final Cut after seeing X. I know you can stick with the version you have but sooner or later upgrading will become necessary to progress and then you lose the features you used to have.

---

The thing is, many people *couldn't* even stick with FCP, because it was so old and outdated it couldn't support current hardware, 64-bit modes, more than 4GB of ram, more than one processor core. It *had* to be rewritten from scratch from an architectural standpoint *anyway*. And Apple made the decision that, seeing as we have to go back to basics anyway, let's take the opportunity to re-design an editing application based on 15 years of experience and the ability to take advantage of current and future machines, rather than just spend the effort re-implementing a core design made 10 years ago, when things were quite different.

Were some people caught in a bad place over the transition? - yes. That *always* happens with transitions (heck, I've seen Logic be abandoned to me on *three* previous generations of hardware). You can't please everyone all the time. But going forward, I think FCPX will end up being a *far* better and more productive application for most people, and Apple seem fairly committed to do that. And the people that don't like it will choose a different option - just as we always have done with our pro apps.

Quote Will_m:

---

You have to think several years ahead because people invest huge amounts of time and money in particular systems, that's why its useful to try and interpret a companies focus and like it or not apple have swung quite dramatically in the last 8-9 years.

---

Sure. And you could no longer do that with FCP as it was impossible to function well on modern hardware without a complete foundational back-to-basics re-achitect. Apple had to do something, so FCPX is what they did.

Their biggest (imo) mistake was the way they launched FCPX, more than anything.

Quote Will_m:

---

Steve Jobs defined apple as 'a mobile communications company' and that to me is different to a computer company.

---

I disagree with that. And I find it hard pressed to think that's something he would have said. Going back to the point of this thread, Apple's very recent press activity seems to be all pointing to say that "Don't think we don't care about the Mac, given the success of iOS devices. We very much do care about it and it's very important to Apple". Which from my point of view is a very welcome message.

Yes, it's a shame in some ways that the pro userbase is *tiny* compared to the consumer market. However, Apple still invest in developing their pro software, at affordable prices - and if they really weren't interested, they would be stopping that business - and that doesn't, to date, seem like it's happening.

Edited by desmond (19/02/12 02:05 PM)

It seems like this thread has gotten off topic,but it is still relevant.

As a sound editor who works with a lot of video editors, I assure you that there are MAJOR problems with FCPX and that cosmetics and the fact that it is different have nothing to do with it.

FCPX is designed, from the ground up, to be a complete working environment, one that is radically difficult to make workable with others, and that it basically ignores the fact that film-making is a collaborative process.

This is great for small-time videographers who want to do everything themselves. And I mean great.

But it is IMPOSSIBLE to use as part of a post-production team. FULL STOP.

These are the facts, and it is no accident that Adobe Premiere has had their best year ever due to this.

What makes me worried about the current Apple ethos is that it will be going in this direction, that collaboration between different platforms will become increasingly difficult as Apple tries to keep all work in their walled-garden. It's the "not-playing-well-with-others-on-purpose" aftertaste of the FCPX debacle that makes me wary.

And I've been using Apple machines since the Apple IIe...

Quote desmond:

---

However, Apple still invest in developing their pro software, at affordable prices - and if they really weren't interested, they would be stopping that business - and that doesn't, to date, seem like it's happening.

---

Isn't that the whole problem? We don't need Apple to provide the "definitive" software in every field. We need them to provide a reliable platform to run a diversity of applications, all capable of sharing data with others, on the same or another system.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Quote desmond:

---

However, Apple still invest in developing their pro software, at affordable prices - and if they really weren't interested, they would be stopping that business - and that doesn't, to date, seem like it's happening.

---

Isn't that the whole problem? We don't need Apple to provide the "definitive" software in every field. We need them to provide a reliable platform to run a diversity of applications, all capable of sharing data with others, on the same or another system.

---

Damn Apple for investing in pro software at affordable prices. How dare they?!

Quote desmond:

---

Sure. And you could no longer do that with FCP as it was impossible to function well on modern hardware without a complete foundational back-to-basics re-achitect. Apple had to do something, so FCPX is what they did.

---

I understand that it needed a re-write but why does that have to be at the expense of essential features? Surely its possible to rebuild a program and not take a backward step at the same time. They essentially took a program that could be used in a full post-production work-flow and made it a more stand-alone affair.

This seems to be aimed at a decidedly less pro market who work in much smaller teams and can handle all aspects of post within the one program, this only an advantage for some.

Quote Will_m:

---

Steve Jobs defined apple as 'a mobile communications company' and that to me is different to a computer company.

---

Quote desmond:

---

I disagree with that. And I find it hard pressed to think that's something he would have said. Going back to the point of this thread, Apple's very recent press activity seems to be all pointing to say that "Don't think we don't care about the Mac, given the success of iOS devices. We very much do care about it and it's very important to Apple". Which from my point of view is a very welcome message.

---

He said it at one of the very recent keynotes when talking about the iphone, basically going on to say apple were the now top mobile communications company in the world. I'm not saying they don't care about computing, just that the focus has certainly shifted.

--------------------
http://www.williammorrismusic.com

Quote Lukas Pearse:

---

FCPX is designed, from the ground up, to be a complete working environment, one that is radically difficult to make workable with others, and that it basically ignores the fact that film-making is a collaborative process.

---

Indeed - and I'm wrestling with this at the moment.

But, we all know that for some people, FCPX is not *yet* a viable platform. That doesn't mean it's always going to be like that. Ever use Final Cut Pro 1 or 2..? Yes, that was basically useless too...

Quote Will_m:

---

I understand that it needed a re-write but why does that have to be at the expense of essential features?

---

The FCP team do not have infinite resources, and cannot fully develop every feature they'd ever want and get it into your hands now.

Sure - they could have said "let's wait another year, and implement the next 20 features on our to-do list before we ship" - a year during which there would have been ever increasing panic that Apple are abandoning FCP and it's an old, dead product that doesn't work that well on current machines...

...or they could have said "Ok, this is what the feature set is going to be to meet a target to get a new platform out there now - it won't work for everybody, but it's great for many people, and for the pros they can see the direction we're going in, and start evaluating the software, given us feedback, so we can evolve it in the right direction".

Of course, you can take a cynical approach to everything (and many Apple watchers do) - but you guys should know it's impossible to do everything at once, quickly, and really well. I'm not particularly a fanboy, but I think they chose a strategy that broadly makes sense.

Remember, and we don't know how true this is, but rumours from inside Apple have suggested that FCPX was up until very close to release going to be called "Final Cut X" - indicating that they knew, and never intended this to be (yet) the post production version - hence why many of these essential high-end features are not in the current version - but the high-ups said "Make it Final Cut Pro X" for whatever reason - and that's been the slip up imo (if those reports are true).

Quote Will_m:

---

Surely its possible to rebuild a program and not take a backward step at the same time. They essentially took a program that could be used in a full post-production work-flow and made it a more stand-alone affair.

---

Well, they rewrote it from scratch, and spent a lot of effort on the core architecture, redesign and editing workflows, and haven't yet got to the high-end pro feature set yet. I'm pretty sure they will come, or else FCPX will stay "iMovie Pro" and the pros will all flip to Adobe/Avid. It's a process, and you can't skip to stage 12 without doing stages 1 to 11 first. Now, some people would argue that their development priorities should have been different, but it's easy to say that when something doesn't suit you and you aren't in possession of the facts.

But the architecture and the editing process has to come first - without that, it doesn't matter how sexy the collaborative and I/O features are, you have no application at all. Yes, Apple could have waited another few years, but the pro feedback will help shape the application and feature set, so they decided to get it into the hands of users now, rather than wait. ANd they will have to live with that decision - *personally* I think it was probably the right one, but others will no doubt disagree :shrugs:

And if you need those features, you can treat FCPX as if it doesn't exist for another year or two and carry on using FCP7, and *then* seen what FCPX was like at that time - it should have a lot more of the pro stuff in by then.

Anyway - we'll see how it shakes out. Already a lot of people who were massively grumbling about the first version are coming round to the "You know, there's features I still need, but it's actually pretty damn good..."

Quote Will_m:

---

He said it at one of the very recent keynotes when talking about the iphone, basically going on to say apple were the now top mobile communications company in the world. I'm not saying they don't care about computing, just that the focus has certainly shifted.

---

That's different. In that context, they are - but that's not *all* they are. That's not the same as a general statement suggesting Apple think of themselves as only that. It's part of their business, and a big part at that, but Apple think of themselves as far more than that...

Quote desmond:

---

The FCP team do not have infinite resources, and cannot fully develop every feature they'd ever want and get it into your hands now.

Sure - they could have said "let's wait another year, and implement the next 20 features on our to-do list before we ship" - a year during which there would have been ever increasing panic that Apple are abandoning FCP and it's an old, dead product that doesn't work that well on current machines...

...or they could have said "Ok, this is what the feature set is going to be to meet a target to get a new platform out there now - it won't work for everybody, but it's great for many people, and for the pros they can see the direction we're going in, and start evaluating the software, given us feedback, so we can evolve it in the right direction".

Of course, you can take a cynical approach to everything (and many Apple watchers do) - but you guys should know it's impossible to do everything at once, quickly, and really well. I'm not particularly a fanboy, but I think they chose a strategy that broadly makes sense.

---

I'm sure these aren't the only options, you say users would panic at waiting too long for a version with the pro features, why not say 'hey guys we are re-designing FCP, its going to take a while but we want it to be just right'. I know this would break the tradition of apple talking to their customers not at them but if you really look at that they did release it shows what was a priority. You can also say the development team has finite resources but that again is apples decision and they seem to have almost unlimited resources.

Quote desmond:

---

Yes, Apple could have waited another few years, but the pro feedback will help shape the application and feature set, so they decided to get it into the hands of users now, rather than wait.

---

Pretty much the only pro feedback I've heard is extremely negative, I seem to remember a certain review from the editors of the conan show doing the rounds.

Quote desmond:

---

That's different. In that context, they are - but that's not *all* they are. That's not the same as a general statement suggesting Apple think of themselves as only that. It's part of their business, and a big part at that, but Apple think of themselves as far more than that...

---

I wouldn't assume to know what apple thinks, I'm only going on what mr jobs said.

I only really started this thread to highlight the change in OS's and maybe the effect on music creation/production. Many seem to have seen this as an attack on apple and jumped into the path of the oncoming vehicle to save their master.I'm merely expressing an opinion on where I believe apple have decided to take their brand.

The next version of windows also has a huge focus on being suitable for mobile platforms and low power devices. Also in many of the music mags now there are many features devoted to music making on the ipad etc. I just see a general shift happening in how people make music. To me watching someone crush together some loops in garageband for ipad is the same as watching someone watching a movie on their phone, they just seem to be missing the point.

--------------------
http://www.williammorrismusic.com

Quote desmond:

---

I wouldn't assume to know what apple thinks, I'm only going on what mr jobs said.

I only really started this thread to highlight the change in OS's and maybe the effect on music creation/production. Many seem to have seen this as an attack on apple and jumped into the path of the oncoming vehicle to save their master.I'm merely expressing an opinion on where I believe apple have decided to take their brand.

The next version of windows also has a huge focus on being suitable for mobile platforms and low power devices. Also in many of the music mags now there are many features devoted to music making on the ipad etc. I just see a general shift happening in how people make music. To me watching someone crush together some loops in garageband for ipad is the same as watching someone watching a movie on their phone, they just seem to be missing the point.

---

Exactly what is your current mac lacking right now?

I'm skeptic.

Quote Will_m:

---

why not say 'hey guys we are re-designing FCP, its going to take a while but we want it to be just right'.

---

You want the moon on a stick, eh..?

Quote Will_m:

---

You can also say the development team has finite resources but that again is apples decision and they seem to have almost unlimited resources.

---

The whole company is doing well, but one of the reasons they are doing so well is how lean they run the whole operation. And it's not like you can just double the developers onto an existing project team and suddenly develop twice as fast - development doesn't work like that.

Quote Will_m:

---

I seem to remember a certain review from the editors of the conan show doing the rounds.

---

That wasn't a "review", it was a comedy sketch about the initial release.

Quote Will_m:

---

Many seem to have seen this as an attack on apple and jumped into the path of the oncoming vehicle to save their master.

---

Hardly. I don't see your opinions as an attack at all - and don't confuse expressing a conflicting opinion as a defence either - Apple make the decisions they make for their own reasons, and they affect each of us in different ways. Can't say I like them all, but I'm free to completely ignore Apple and do things differently if I so choose...

Quote Will_m:

---

I'm merely expressing an opinion on where I believe apple have decided to take their brand.

---

They've for sure massively expanded into the consumer area, where they simply weren't able to before. I think Steve has *always* had that market in mind, so actually I don't see much of a sea change here - the only difference is the size and success and consumer awareness of Apple these days - it's so large and visible, that we pro guys kinda stick our hands up at the back and shout "hey!!" with a tiny little voice and feel we aren't heard.

Quote Will_m:

---

The next version of windows also has a huge focus on being suitable for mobile platforms and low power devices. Also in many of the music mags now there are many features devoted to music making on the ipad etc. I just see a general shift happening in how people make music. To me watching someone crush together some loops in garageband for ipad is the same as watching someone watching a movie on their phone, they just seem to be missing the point.

---

Well, like it or not, progress halts for no one. I'm sure the older generation back in the 80's thought the same when computers started entering the workplaces and homes. Maybe you're just getting old..?

Quote desmond:

---

Quote Will_m:

---

The next version of windows also has a huge focus on being suitable for mobile platforms and low power devices. Also in many of the music mags now there are many features devoted to music making on the ipad etc. I just see a general shift happening in how people make music. To me watching someone crush together some loops in garageband for ipad is the same as watching someone watching a movie on their phone, they just seem to be missing the point.

---

Well, like it or not, progress halts for no one. I'm sure the older generation back in the 80's thought the same when computers started entering the workplaces and homes. Maybe you're just getting old..?

---

Sure. But progress towards WHAT? Apple have discovered and developed a huge market for a fully inegrated iWorld with all the gadgets sharing entertainment media (with suitable DRM, of course) and a full selection of easy-use applications at the GarageBand and iMovie level. By restricting choice they can, to an extent, make it all "just work". Why waste resources elsewhere? Would you?

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Sure. But progress towards WHAT? Apple have discovered and developed a huge market for a fully inegrated iWorld with all the gadgets sharing entertainment media (with suitable DRM, of course) and a full selection of easy-use applications at the GarageBand and iMovie level. By restricting choice they can, to an extent, make it all "just work". Why waste resources elsewhere? Would you?

---

That's a nothing statement.

And whilst everyone was up in arms about fcpx, some pro editors were busy doing business with it.

7 pro editors share their fcpx editing experiences

An insight from people who actually used it.

Quote Aftertouch:

---

And whilst everyone was up in arms about fcpx, some pro editors were busy doing business with it.

7 pro editors share their fcpx editing experiences

An insight from people who actually used it.

---

Even in the opening paragraphs there is much said about it being a somewhat closed experience:

"Since you are reading this on Philip Bloom’s blog, you are likely one of these media ‘master of all trades.’ Shooter, editor, mixer, colorist. You also likely know that last summer there was an earthquake in the non-linear editing world. What many had expected to be a long overdue update to Final Cut Pro, ended up being a full-scale application rewrite with a completely new interface – and many missing features. The feedback from editors was overwhelmingly negative. We editors aren’t exactly known for our sunny dispositions to start with but with FCP X, Apple unleashed a hornet’s nest of professional users who understandably felt confused and betrayed."

I'm not sure how finding 7 users who do like some of the features means that all the negatives and concerns are unfounded. The article also says that apple beta tested FCPX and despite feedback on lack of pro features went ahead anyway, again this just seems like telling the customer what they want.

"Despite feedback on their beta program for FCPX, Apple released their software without some of the pro features – OMF, Broadcast Monitoring and Edit to Tape functions."

At the end of the day it just depends on how you work, some editors have switched to premiere or avid, some stayed with their current version and others have upgraded. The topic was merely meant to start a discussion on the direction of music making, some have engaged and some seem rather defensive. I can see the benefits of an all-in-one solution but some things are just better shared, or at least given the option to.

--------------------
http://www.williammorrismusic.com

I see your point William. I just found it interesting that these seven and many other editors, who really gave fcpx a chance, found that although lacking in many areas (most of which already addressed in three timely updates), the world hadn't caved in and fcpx actually offers editors far more than what the naysayer had made out.

Quote Will_m:

---

I'm not sure how finding 7 users who do like some of the features means that all the negatives and concerns are unfounded.

---

We get your point, and it has merits as we have discussed. Some of us here have suggested the situation, from those of us invested in FCP with personal experience, isn't perhaps all quite as negative as the picture you painted, and explained why and gave you some links to positive feedback to back that up. Many of the things not implemented have now been implemented and the situation will improve I'm sure as the software matures. It's not perfect yet.

Logic 1 also didn't implement a lot of features that the previous Notator SL had - you just cannot do everything at once. However, look at where Logic has got to...

But we're now going around in circles, retreading the same ground, so let's not both repeat our points again, eh..?