Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
55,040
17,421
In your Software Update, Apple has released Pro Application Support 1.1 as well as .0.1 updates to a number of their Final Cut Pro-related applications.

Details of the updates are provided here and include Cinema Tools 2.0.1 for FCP 4, Compressor 1.01, Final Cut Pro 4.01, LiveType 1.01 and SoundTrack 1.01.

The updates detailed are bug-fixes and performance improvements.

 

nutty

macrumors newbie
Apr 22, 2003
3
0
run software update again

and you get update to all the apps mentioned (except for DVDSP)

woohoo!:)
 

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Jun 28, 2002
3,848
1
North Central Colorado
I'm making an educated guess that if you don't own any of these products, the update doesn't show in your software update panel. A question for those of you that use these: are they noticably faster or improved on the immediate surface to your eyes, or is this more of an "under the hood" type of improvement?
 

bennyek

macrumors regular
Mar 10, 2002
203
0
The O.C.
Huge difference!!!

I have seen instant and significant improvements. I was in the middle of a project when I updated and I instantly saw huge improvements in the beachball episodes I was having. Everytime I applied a speed change or a filter I was getting a beachball for 15 seconds. Now I am speeding right through my project i was lagging on 5 minutes before this update. Bravo Apple!!!!
 

Chris Grande

macrumors 6502
Jun 17, 2003
250
120
I have these...and they didn't show up in my software update. Why you ask? Because I tried to be organized and put them in a folder called Final Cut. I had to move all of them out of that folder and into Applications for it to work. I hate this problem.
 

sachmo

macrumors newbie
Aug 12, 2003
4
0
Tennessee
Custom folders and auto update

If you want to orginize apps in custom folders use alias and leave the actual app in its default place. This way the auto update works and you have the folder structure you want.
 

iJon

macrumors 604
Feb 7, 2002
6,575
200
does anybody know if this is the update apple promised that would bring FCP 4 soundtrack to the same as the retail version.

iJon
 

mvc

macrumors 6502a
Jul 11, 2003
760
0
Outer-Roa
Originally posted by Chris Grande
I had to move all of them out of that folder and into Applications for it to work. I hate this problem.

That is profoundly annoying - seems stupid that OSX isn't refering to some master location file of some sort rather than checking default locations -how hard would it be? And so much more robust! :mad:
 

Chris Grande

macrumors 6502
Jun 17, 2003
250
120
Originally posted by mvc
That is profoundly annoying - seems stupid that OSX isn't refering to some master location file of some sort rather than checking default locations -how hard would it be? And so much more robust! :mad:

Thats the funny thing! OS X does have this with Launch Services. This is what allows programs to still work after you move them. Making them location independent.
 

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Jun 28, 2002
3,848
1
North Central Colorado
The tip about having the aliases in the applications folder is a good one - that way you can do your passive switch over for the app titles once, instead of having to move the whole application file to the application folder each time.
 

mvc

macrumors 6502a
Jul 11, 2003
760
0
Outer-Roa
Originally posted by Mudbug
The tip about having the aliases in the applications folder is a good one - that way you can do your passive switch over for the app titles once, instead of having to move the whole application file to the application folder each time.

Yeah, its good workaround, but a fix would be better. Anyone know if this is amended in Panther?
 

Daner

macrumors newbie
Aug 13, 2003
9
0
Wrong way around

Originally posted by Mudbug
The tip about having the aliases in the applications folder is a good one - that way you can do your passive switch over for the app titles once, instead of having to move the whole application file to the application folder each time.

Why is it so hard for some people just to leave the apps where OS X expects them to be? It is kind of like having all of your music files stored in your iTunes library, but having the ability to create unlimited playlists. Not so hard to live with now, is it?
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,601
694
Cork, Ireland.
Re: Wrong way around

Originally posted by Daner
Why is it so hard for some people just to leave the apps where OS X expects them to be? It is kind of like having all of your music files stored in your iTunes library, but having the ability to create unlimited playlists. Not so hard to live with now, is it?

It's still sloppy programming on Apple's part. People organise their programs and files the way they like, not the way Apple says they should. Apple should allow this flexability, this shouldn't be too difficult to fix!

Mike.
 

cubist

macrumors 68020
Jul 4, 2002
2,075
0
Muncie, Indiana
Re: Re: Wrong way around

Originally posted by whooleytoo
... People organise their programs and files the way they like, not the way Apple says they should. ...

Exactly, that is one of the fundamentals that defines what a Mac is.
 

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Jun 28, 2002
3,848
1
North Central Colorado
Re: Re: Wrong way around

Originally posted by whooleytoo
It's still sloppy programming on Apple's part. People organise their programs and files the way they like, not the way Apple says they should. Apple should allow this flexability, this shouldn't be too difficult to fix!

I disagree - it's not sloppy, it's the organized way they've come up with to try and provide the "average user" with a simple and elegant solution for keeping software current. You may not be the average user, and neither am I. I agree that there should be an alternative, a fix, or a patch provided for "advanced" users like most of the folks that browse these forums, but I feel in now way is it "sloppy" - in fact I think it's quite the opposite.
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,601
694
Cork, Ireland.
Re: Re: Re: Wrong way around

Originally posted by Mudbug
I disagree - it's not sloppy, it's the organized way they've come up with to try and provide the "average user" with a simple and elegant solution for keeping software current. You may not be the average user, and neither am I. I agree that there should be an alternative, a fix, or a patch provided for "advanced" users like most of the folks that browse these forums, but I feel in now way is it "sloppy" - in fact I think it's quite the opposite.

It would be very easy to keep track of Apple apps when they're moved, and upgrade them at whatever location the user puts them in. As it currently stands, these upgrades will just fail, quietly and with no indication of cause.

That is just lazy, sloppy programming - speaking as a Mac (and ex-Apple) programmer. Instead of the OS adapting to the user ("I'll find and update the apps wherever you put them"), this is a case of the user having to adapt to what the OS expects ("If you move the applications, I couldn't be bothered looking for them. And won't say why I failed..."). Microsoft would be proud..

Mike.
 

Postal

macrumors regular
Jun 22, 2002
124
0
Ottawa, ON, Canada
The main problem is just that some people need/want to have apps on separate hard drives. FCP4 the app doesn't take up all that much space on its own (1 GB, I think) but you'd better believe that the videos themselves will want as much space as possible. It's not always ideal to have to split the documents away from the app just to make sure that you can get updates properly.
 

Daner

macrumors newbie
Aug 13, 2003
9
0
Sloppy programming or not, can somebody please clarify why it is important to be able to store apps someplace other than in the Applications folder? There are so many ways to customize and personalize the user interface, I just can't figure out what incredible advantage we are missing out on by not being able to move and store apps wherever the heck we want to.

Or is it just that some of us got used to working that way pre-OS X and have found it difficult to adapt?


PS - I'm late to the party. Just started using the Mac in June.



June of 1984
:D
 

Daner

macrumors newbie
Aug 13, 2003
9
0
Originally posted by Postal
The main problem is just that some people need/want to have apps on separate hard drives. FCP4 the app doesn't take up all that much space on its own (1 GB, I think) but you'd better believe that the videos themselves will want as much space as possible. It's not always ideal to have to split the documents away from the app just to make sure that you can get updates properly.

I nearly always keep my video projects on a seperate partition or hard drive. Makes it easier to wipe it clean between jobs.
 

nutty

macrumors newbie
Apr 22, 2003
3
0
The Apps dont take up anywhere near a Gig of space. Soundtrack is only 30 megs

Anyway, Apple looks in the apps folder for a reason, they expect it to be there. The installer shouldnt have to search through 1000's of files when it knows where the item should be.
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,601
694
Cork, Ireland.
Originally posted by nutty
Anyway, Apple looks in the apps folder for a reason, they expect it to be there. The installer shouldnt have to search through 1000's of files when it knows where the item should be.

Apple has always advised against hard-coding the application location; most apps can and should be used from any location (bundles help this enormously). If apps can be launched from anywhere, they should also be updatable anywhere.

The upgrade process should search for preference files/plist to determine which Apple apps you have installed, download the updates, and then either provide a means of automatically searching for the executable, or at least dislpay a dialog to allow the user to search for it.

The current upgrade implementation is just laziness.

Mike.
 

nutty

macrumors newbie
Apr 22, 2003
3
0
lazyness?

no how about you'd have to test every freaking way a user could have their apps placed on their hard drive!

Hard coding the app to be in a directory for updating is very different from hard coding an app to be required to be in a folder for launch.

Think of the combinations of places a user could put the app, then times that by the number of OS's shipping/supported and times that by the number of hardware configs available for that app.

thats the test they would have to do for each update, so you'd be lucky to see an update every year for an app if at all.
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,601
694
Cork, Ireland.
Originally posted by nutty
thats the test they would have to do for each update, so you'd be lucky to see an update every year for an app if at all.

It's really not that difficult to implement.

When the installer runs, it checks for preferences/plists to build a list of installed Apple apps, downloads these updates, then updates them (if they're in the Applications folder) or puts up a "Find Application" dialog if they're not. I could code it in a day. Does Mr. Jobs read these forums? ;P

So you wouldn't have users confused why updates mysteriously aren't appearing in Software Update.

Mike.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.