Don't call me Final Cut Pro "Ex" !

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,902
1,164
Washington DC
Really?

The went from OS 9 to OS X and made us all call that OS-ex for the past decade. "10" would have made sense there and they didn't even do it. And now the Final Cut people think we're just going to get over that and forget it? (Not to mention, forget about FC numbers 8 & 9?)

I like Final Cut X, really, I do, but I get the sense that the people who made it are just a little tone-deaf to the rest of the word. This is yet another example.

Good find, though, OP. I do find this amusing, although not in the way they probably intended.
 
Comment

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,902
1,164
Washington DC
Fixed that for you.
Really? Non-pros don't get annoyed when you stop selling the old version of software the very day you come out with a new one that won't open old files?

I would have thought that would be annoying to anyone. That any computer user would say 'hey, if it's not backwards compatible, how about you keep selling the old one a little longer?'

That's a professionals-only complaint? Why would that not be something anyone would say?
 
Comment

WRP

macrumors 6502a
Jul 20, 2011
510
2
Boston
Really? Non-pros don't get annoyed when you stop selling the old version of software the very day you come out with a new one that won't open old files?

I would have thought that would be annoying to anyone. That any computer user would say 'hey, if it's not backwards compatible, how about you keep selling the old one a little longer?'

That's a professionals-only complaint? Why would that not be something anyone would say?
FCS3 is still available. I had to buy a copy a few weeks ago.

Another tired, whining, "professional" who is quickly being left behind.
I work for a 400 person worldwide company and this is my trade. I know pretty much everyone in Boston who works in this trade professionally. I know many people in LA and NY who work in this trade full time professionally. Not a single one has ever used FCP X for a professional job. Not a single one. Even my old professor in college who wrote one of the first books about editing on FCP has switched the whole department from FCP. That's saying something.
 
Comment

juice

macrumors newbie
Sep 27, 2007
23
0
Really?

The went from OS 9 to OS X and made us all call that OS-ex for the past decade. "10" would have made sense there and they didn't even do it. And now the Final Cut people think we're just going to get over that and forget it? (Not to mention, forget about FC numbers 8 & 9?)

I like Final Cut X, really, I do, but I get the sense that the people who made it are just a little tone-deaf to the rest of the word. This is yet another example.

Good find, though, OP. I do find this amusing, although not in the way they probably intended.
Uhm... OS X is pronounced "OS Ten" or am I missing something from history that you are referring to?. Go into terminal and type "say OS X" and you'll see.
 
Comment

nuckinfutz

macrumors 603
Original poster
Jul 3, 2002
5,504
314
Middle Earth
I think Apple should have done parallel development of FCP 7 (small feature additions and fixes) and built up FCPX (Ten)

The cold turkey approach wasn't ideal although FCPX does seem to be advancing at a more rapid pace.
 
Comment

WRP

macrumors 6502a
Jul 20, 2011
510
2
Boston
I think Apple should have done parallel development of FCP 7 (small feature additions and fixes) and built up FCPX (Ten)
agreed. But FCP7 still has plenty of life left in it. I don't foresee anything stopping me from using it for many many years to come (why I had no problem buying another copy for another station a few weeks ago). The only possibility would be certain codec compatibility but I would probably be transcoding it anyway so that is of little consequence.

Personally there is not a single feature in FCP X (yes I own it too) that I want or need in FCP 7. But there is plenty in FCP 7 that I want and need in X that I don't have.
 
Comment

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,902
1,164
Washington DC
FCS3 is still available. I had to buy a copy a few weeks ago.
You were only able to do that because people complained when they took it off the market. If Apple had stuck to their plan you wouldn't have been able to buy it a few weeks ago.

It's sure nice that you can personally benefit from the complainers' actions and then still come back and deride them for complaining.


It's always been "OS ten", not "OS ex"
I stand corrected, then! I hear 'ex' so much I hadn't realized none of those people saying it were actually Apple.

I still stand by my other points though...that much of the FCX "problems" were really just communication problems, not software problems. With slightly better PR the whole thing could have gone down differently.
 
Comment

NY Guitarist

macrumors 65816
Mar 21, 2011
1,228
780
It doesn't matter what you call it.

Autodesk Smoke 2013 has integrated NLE and VFX workflow and will leave all other apps looking antiquated, in my opinion. It is what I, and many colleagues, hoped Apple would do with FCP and Shake. It would be hard to call Smoke anything other than "PRO".

Sure it costs money, but it will definitely be on my workstation.

I sure hope that workstation will be a new Mac Pro, but I'm not betting the farm on it.
 
Comment

handsome pete

macrumors 68000
Aug 15, 2008
1,720
255
agreed. But FCP7 still has plenty of life left in it. I don't foresee anything stopping me from using it for many many years to come (why I had no problem buying another copy for another station a few weeks ago). The only possibility would be certain codec compatibility but I would probably be transcoding it anyway so that is of little consequence.

Personally there is not a single feature in FCP X (yes I own it too) that I want or need in FCP 7. But there is plenty in FCP 7 that I want and need in X that I don't have.
In my opinion FCP7 was already showing its age well before the debut of FCPX, which is what I think caused most of the negativity surrounding it. FCP7 is certainly just as useable today as it was a year ago. But that's the problem. All of the other platforms had already passed it and they continue to widen the gap.

I still work on FCP7 everyday, but I certainly don't see that being the case "many" years from now (at least for me). I'm highly tempted to take up Avid on their Symphony offer.
 
Comment

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,368
119
Los Angeles
FCS3 is still available. I had to buy a copy a few weeks ago.



I work for a 400 person worldwide company and this is my trade.
I thought it was only available for existing enterprise customers (which is why you were able to get another copy)?


Lethal
 
Comment

fox10078

macrumors 6502
Nov 6, 2009
467
86
I just spent the past month using it. Its really intuitive I like it a lot, and its good davinci works with it. With the improvements over the next few months I think its going to be really good.
 
Comment

WRP

macrumors 6502a
Jul 20, 2011
510
2
Boston
It doesn't matter what you call it.

Autodesk Smoke 2013 has integrated NLE and VFX workflow and will leave all other apps looking antiquated, in my opinion. It is what I, and many colleagues, hoped Apple would do with FCP and Shake. It would be hard to call Smoke anything other than "PRO".

Sure it costs money, but it will definitely be on my workstation.

I sure hope that workstation will be a new Mac Pro, but I'm not betting the farm on it.
I have used smoke and flame since 2004 (when they were Discreet). Most truly BIG pro houses use either that or Avid. Specially autodesk for working with major render farms.

In my opinion FCP7 was already showing its age well before the debut of FCPX, which is what I think caused most of the negativity surrounding it. FCP7 is certainly just as useable today as it was a year ago. But that's the problem. All of the other platforms had already passed it and they continue to widen the gap.

I still work on FCP7 everyday, but I certainly don't see that being the case "many" years from now (at least for me). I'm highly tempted to take up Avid on their Symphony offer.
Showing its age sure. But here's the thing (IMHO). I can edit 16 streams of realtime r3d footage multiclipped simultaneously. NLE's are NOT processor intensive and their is zero reason for me to move to anything else at the moment. Sure it doesn't handle h.264 very well but you shouldn't be working in that anyway. In the last 8 years I have not found a single project where FCP was not able to handle. Sure, there were workarounds here and there but ultimately it is a tool.

All my post work is a combo between AE and FCP. Sure I would prefer a better way to roundtrip into AE and back (thankfully I'm a beta tester for BorisFX and "Transfer AE" has helped me out a lot) but honestly I can't see how FCP X would be beneficial in any way. Sure Symphony may be better overall, but it's dough. Switching every seat to symphony, rebuying every plugin suite, ect just makes zero sense for anyone at this time.

I thought it was only available for existing enterprise customers (which is why you were able to get another copy)?


Lethal
Nope. All you have to do is call Apple and give them the sku. Anyone can do it. I had to use my corporate card and nothing was asked about our status.

----------

I just spent the past month using it. Its really intuitive I like it a lot, and its good davinci works with it. With the improvements over the next few months I think its going to be really good.
And there's the kicker. In a few months it MAY be good. That's not support for current pro users. I bought it day one personally and tried to like it. I really did. But it's utter **** in a real world environment of production. Sure, laying down dailies may be ok but for real editing it is garbage.

I'm happy people like it, I really am. But I'm not enough of a fanboy to not point out its glaring problems and lack of functionality in a professional workflow.
 
Last edited:
Comment

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,368
119
Los Angeles
Personally there is not a single feature in FCP X (yes I own it too) that I want or need in FCP 7. But there is plenty in FCP 7 that I want and need in X that I don't have.
You wouldn't want any of the back-end improvements like superior RAM, CPU and GPU utilization? Multiclips that don't have to all be the same frame rate, frame size and codec? Background rendering and transcoding? Improved metadata and search features?

Gimme things like that plus the features and front end of FCP classic and I'd be pretty dang happy.
 
Comment

WRP

macrumors 6502a
Jul 20, 2011
510
2
Boston
You wouldn't want any of the back-end improvements like superior RAM, CPU and GPU utilization? Multiclips that don't have to all be the same frame rate, frame size and codec? Background rendering and transcoding? Improved metadata and search features?

Gimme things like that plus the features and front end of FCP classic and I'd be pretty dang happy.
Yes I would like that but I don't NEED that. I get paid regardless how long it takes for those things, in fact moreso.

I have actually found it more lucrative to double book things based on while my machine is transcoding one job I am working on another. Machine time is paid so the slower it works it is actually more beneficial ;)

FCP 7 doesn't slow down my creativity one bit but FCP X does.
 
Comment

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,617
438
Redondo Beach, California
...
I work for a 400 person worldwide company and this is my trade. I know pretty much everyone in Boston who works in this trade professionally. I know many people in LA and NY who work in this trade full time professionally. Not a single one has ever used FCP X for a professional job. Not a single one. Even my old professor in college who wrote one of the first books about editing on FCP has switched the whole department from FCP. That's saying something.
You just explained WHY Apples does not have to care one hoot about you. 400 people??? That is nothing. Aple can afford to loose 400 customers. All the money those 400 people would spend keeps all of maybe two engineers employed by Apple.

Seriously, lets say each of those 400 people spends $1,000 of Apple software every year. That adds up to $400,000. If you live in "silicone valley" California and own a home, have a family and a car and hope to send a kid to school. You need to make at a minimum $120K per year and that is a reasonable pay for a mid-level engineer. Add on payrol taxes, company overhead (cost of the building, utilities, trash hauling, vacation pay health insurances and so on..) and at will cost Apple $200K per year to keep an engineer. But it taks a LOT more then two guys to maintain a product like FCP. A LOT more.

So Apple makes more money if they simply dump the pros and forget about them.

So now, tell again way Apple needs to care about 400 professionals? A few years mm=back Apple figure out that that are MANY more people who like to sit on the sofa and watch TV then there are people who make stuff. Why not sell products to the larger crowd?
 
Comment

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,368
119
Los Angeles
Yes I would like that but I don't NEED that. I get paid regardless how long it takes for those things, in fact moreso.
Must be nice to work w/cushy deadlines. ;)

My last gig was mainly short form but with many same-day deadlines so the workflow was geared towards speed (even shaving off 10% from render & export times was huge). My current gig is a feature doc so while I don't have to worry about same-day deadlines now I've got huge timelines that take hours to render or export.

If I could work w/o needing to render and export things instantaneously I'd be a happy camper. To me it's just dead time that eats into my time to be able to polish the edit. If I'm on a 4hr deadline and it takes 30min to render for the final watch down and another 30min to export that means I've only got 3hrs to actually work on it.


Lethal
 
Comment

fox10078

macrumors 6502
Nov 6, 2009
467
86
And there's the kicker. In a few months it MAY be good. That's not support for current pro users. I bought it day one personally and tried to like it. I really did. But it's utter **** in a real world environment of production. Sure, laying down dailies may be ok but for real editing it is garbage.

I'm happy people like it, I really am. But I'm not enough of a fanboy to not point out its glaring problems and lack of functionality in a professional workflow.
Oh ok I'll let everyone know at my work that our workflow isnt professional, since we have managed to work it in. And I'll let my clients know those projects werent "real edits" better give them their money back...
 
Comment

MovieCutter

macrumors 68040
May 3, 2005
3,342
2
Washington, DC
You wouldn't want any of the back-end improvements like superior RAM, CPU and GPU utilization? Multiclips that don't have to all be the same frame rate, frame size and codec? Background rendering and transcoding? Improved metadata and search features?

Gimme things like that plus the features and front end of FCP classic and I'd be pretty dang happy.
That's all I wanted in a FCP7 upgrade...that's all. But noooOOOOoooo...

----------

Another tired, whining, "professional" who is quickly being left behind.
Another useless contribution to a conversation about an industry and trade you know nothing about.
 
Comment

WRP

macrumors 6502a
Jul 20, 2011
510
2
Boston
You just explained WHY Apples does not have to care one hoot about you. 400 people??? That is nothing. Aple can afford to loose 400 customers. All the money those 400 people would spend keeps all of maybe two engineers employed by Apple.

Seriously, lets say each of those 400 people spends $1,000 of Apple software every year. That adds up to $400,000. If you live in "silicone valley" California and own a home, have a family and a car and hope to send a kid to school. You need to make at a minimum $120K per year and that is a reasonable pay for a mid-level engineer. Add on payrol taxes, company overhead (cost of the building, utilities, trash hauling, vacation pay health insurances and so on..) and at will cost Apple $200K per year to keep an engineer. But it taks a LOT more then two guys to maintain a product like FCP. A LOT more.

So Apple makes more money if they simply dump the pros and forget about them.

So now, tell again way Apple needs to care about 400 professionals? A few years mm=back Apple figure out that that are MANY more people who like to sit on the sofa and watch TV then there are people who make stuff. Why not sell products to the larger crowd?
That's 400 people in one small company.

Must be nice to work w/cushy deadlines. ;)

My last gig was mainly short form but with many same-day deadlines so the workflow was geared towards speed (even shaving off 10% from render & export times was huge). My current gig is a feature doc so while I don't have to worry about same-day deadlines now I've got huge timelines that take hours to render or export.

If I could work w/o needing to render and export things instantaneously I'd be a happy camper. To me it's just dead time that eats into my time to be able to polish the edit. If I'm on a 4hr deadline and it takes 30min to render for the final watch down and another 30min to export that means I've only got 3hrs to actually work on it.


Lethal
I concur. But again, having to rebuy plugin packages optimized for FCP X (which don't exist because apple is an idiot with sharing its products as usual), having to deal with its short comings etc isn't a priority for us. We can continue to just go with it.

And like I said, I'm sure it works for dailies and such. A 4 hour turnaround doesn't sound like a very intense edit. I bet imovie would work for something that takes 4 hours. I'm talking about real editing :p

Oh ok I'll let everyone know at my work that our workflow isnt professional, since we have managed to work it in. And I'll let my clients know those projects werent "real edits" better give them their money back...
Here's the thing genius... you can dig a hole with a spoon. Because one person digs a hole with a spoon doesn't mean the professionals on the front end loaders aren't doing a quicker, better job.

Good luck sharing your projects with anyone else. Ohh, you've never had to do that? Pass a project to someone, somewhere else and reconnect media? Ever heard of an EDL? XML? Cool man, I'm glad you can make a living off using children's tools, it's all good. I assume your interns love it!

I'm sure your clients are stoked on you butting two clips together and calling it editing.

And here's the thing no one is understanding. I'm the biggest apologetic person for Apple of all time. I am the typical fanboy that got the iphone day 1 (ordered it online day 1) got the original ipad, have 6 old towers in my closet because I refuse to get rid of them going back to very early classic OS, etc. But this is the last straw. I can't hold my nose and say it is OK anymore. It just isn't. It's rubbish in ALMOST everyway compared to software that is 5 years old.
 
Last edited:
Comment

Keebler

macrumors 68030
Jun 20, 2005
2,944
191
Canada
You just explained WHY Apples does not have to care one hoot about you. 400 people??? That is nothing. Aple can afford to loose 400 customers. All the money those 400 people would spend keeps all of maybe two engineers employed by Apple.

Seriously, lets say each of those 400 people spends $1,000 of Apple software every year. That adds up to $400,000. If you live in "silicone valley" California and own a home, have a family and a car and hope to send a kid to school. You need to make at a minimum $120K per year and that is a reasonable pay for a mid-level engineer. Add on payrol taxes, company overhead (cost of the building, utilities, trash hauling, vacation pay health insurances and so on..) and at will cost Apple $200K per year to keep an engineer. But it taks a LOT more then two guys to maintain a product like FCP. A LOT more.

So Apple makes more money if they simply dump the pros and forget about them.

So now, tell again way Apple needs to care about 400 professionals? A few years mm=back Apple figure out that that are MANY more people who like to sit on the sofa and watch TV then there are people who make stuff. Why not sell products to the larger crowd?
Wow. I couldn't respectfully disagree more.

Chris, Apple should care about the pros - no matter if it's 10 or 400 or 1000 employees.

Who kept Apple afloat over those lean years? The TV watching sofa folks or the professionals?

We could argue the mathematics of how much each employee would spend, but you forget to include the very critical trickle down effect on purchasing hardware (Apple and 3rd party Apple related products) - iPhones, iPads, monitors, macs etc..etc..

Then add the halo effect of those professionals talking to their buddies and family members etc..etc.. - heck, my 7 Macs, 3 iPads, 3 iPhones, 2 iPod Touches, 3 Apple displays over the years were ALL b/c a buddy of mine in the entertainment industry told me to buy a mac b/c the folks editing in his sphere, were using Macs. For Apple software, I'd say it's between $2000 and $2500.

Then I'd take the number of people who have bought Macs partly b/c of seeing my office flowing so efficiently etc.. There's been quite a few.

Now maybe those friends would have bought Macs on their own, but I would say the majority are because of my buddy convincing me to get a Mac and then those folks saw me happily working away.

Sure, that's not going to be in the 1000s of people buying Apple products, but I'm ONE guy (and to be honest, not a 'professional' editor as I don't edit anything for broadcast or otherwise....video transfers etc...).

It's hypothetical to think, but let's say Apple bites the bullet on updating FCX to make it that editing leader. So people stop buying Mac Pros to edit in FCX and buy Windows PCs instead. Then the Windows Tablet is out and hey, great tools to related to those editing tools are released so instead of iPads, it's Win8 tablets being purchased and then hey, let's buy a Windows phone instead b/c it all works together better. I might be crazy or might I be on to something?

In my opinion, Apple does need to care what the pros out there think.

I also believe Apple realizes it given some of the feature requests implemented since FCX's release (which the pros were shocked at not being included in FCX). They are listening.

Then again, I watched 4 games of soccer in the pouring rain so maybe I'm just really tired and didn't quite understand your post :)
 
Comment

fox10078

macrumors 6502
Nov 6, 2009
467
86
Here's the thing genius... you can dig a hole with a spoon. Because one person digs a hole with a spoon doesn't mean the professionals on the front end loaders aren't doing a quicker, better job.

Good luck sharing your projects with anyone else. Ohh, you've never had to do that? Pass a project to someone, somewhere else and reconnect media? Ever heard of an EDL? XML? Cool man, I'm glad you can make a living off using children's tools, it's all good. I assume your interns love it!

I'm sure your clients are stoked on you butting two clips together and calling it editing.

We have our files stored on a XSAN so that any workstation in the office can edit the projects as needed, and then once its locked It's sent to a colorist using Davinci and a sound guy using Pro Tools and to the effects team for any AE needs.

And thanks for the insult at the end, no need to get so worked up over a piece of software, and honestly man, if all i was doing was butting clips together it wouldn't matter what program I was using it would be *****...

If it doesn't work for you theres nothing wrong with that it's excellent that FCP7 still meets all your needs. Our IT department and higher ups tested X for months before introducing it to us and felt it worked with what we are doing.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.