yoak
Apr 12, 01:14 PM
+1
I posted it over in the other FCS thread after learning of the link here. Thanks
I posted it over in the other FCS thread after learning of the link here. Thanks
portishead
Apr 12, 12:35 PM
So wait,on the projects you're working on,is everyone using recorders to record direct to prores or do you enjoy having to waste time converting everything you get?
I almost never have to convert. All clients I work with require ProRes deliverables, and any tapeless material I get is ProRes. If I capture I use ProRes.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
I just delete any transitions before. It's not that hard.
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
I know trust me. I have a HUGE LIST of improvements, but overall FCP still works well for me for 90% of my projects.
I almost never have to convert. All clients I work with require ProRes deliverables, and any tapeless material I get is ProRes. If I capture I use ProRes.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
I just delete any transitions before. It's not that hard.
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
I know trust me. I have a HUGE LIST of improvements, but overall FCP still works well for me for 90% of my projects.
gugy
Aug 17, 12:17 PM
"Sixteen Core Tigerton Setup about $6,000" :eek:
I want one!
I want one!
ender land
Apr 27, 10:05 AM
I would have waited till after I was out of office.
But meh, this whole thing was so outrageously stupid and the total amount of press time and money spent on something relatively obvious (how the @#%$ would someone actually be allowed in the White House by the gov if they were not a citizen?) is just saddening.
But meh, this whole thing was so outrageously stupid and the total amount of press time and money spent on something relatively obvious (how the @#%$ would someone actually be allowed in the White House by the gov if they were not a citizen?) is just saddening.
Liske
Aug 21, 01:28 AM
Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.
What I most would like to know is how does the 2GHz Mac Pro stack up to the Quad G5.
And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.
What I most would like to know is how does the 2GHz Mac Pro stack up to the Quad G5.
And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......
Josias
Sep 19, 10:20 AM
I think any rumorsite reporting new MBP's after September 1st, should be taken down:p
What I really want for Apple to announce in the MBP is:
68 Wh battery on all (4.5 hrs sucks compared to MacBooks 6 hours)
FW800 on all (really should be there on a pro)
Magnetic latch (so cool!:D)
Merom (of course)
DL SuperDrive (I'm not using it, but I think it is required for a pro machine)
Many people say the X1600 is too slow to take advantage of 256 MB? WTF?:p
So my friends 128 MB Radeon 9000 could just as well be 32 MB?
I think Apple should consider putting 256 MB on all models, X1600 Pro in low end, and X1800 in hi-end.
I'm not saying I need this stuff, but this is what I'd like for Apple to release.
What I really want for Apple to announce in the MBP is:
68 Wh battery on all (4.5 hrs sucks compared to MacBooks 6 hours)
FW800 on all (really should be there on a pro)
Magnetic latch (so cool!:D)
Merom (of course)
DL SuperDrive (I'm not using it, but I think it is required for a pro machine)
Many people say the X1600 is too slow to take advantage of 256 MB? WTF?:p
So my friends 128 MB Radeon 9000 could just as well be 32 MB?
I think Apple should consider putting 256 MB on all models, X1600 Pro in low end, and X1800 in hi-end.
I'm not saying I need this stuff, but this is what I'd like for Apple to release.
greenstork
Jul 14, 04:14 PM
I'm salivating for a new desktop as I have been limping along with my dual 1GHz mirrored drive door (wind tunnel) for the past few years. I'll likely buy a middle to top end Mac Pro as soon as they are released and although I'd love a dual woodcrest, I'll be happy too with a single conroe.
On a related note (rant)...
I think Apple is shooting themselves in the foot not coming out with some sort of digital media center / DVR. Along with a computer and television, it's the one electronic appliance that I cannot live without. The playing field is so ripe too -- TiVo is just establishing itself with cable companies and moving out of satellite, cable company DVR's suck, there is no easy ability to rip a DVD to your computer and put it in a library, there is no easy to use set top box option to buy movies.
Think about DAPs when the iPod came out, it's the same landscape. Sure, there were digital audio players that all paled in comparison to the iPod. I think Apple has that same opportunity with a media center/DVR.
The problem, I presume, is that the MPAA & broadcast association would never let it happen. Apple will never be granted permissions to sell movies if they come up with a device to rip DVD's or record television.
One can always hope. I know Apple could make a device that absolutely blows away everything that's out there right now, and it seems short sighted to not develop a product that begins to merge computers and television, this merger is inevitable. So while everyone's going off about FW800 ports in front and the location of the power supply, I'm wondering where the TV tuner and CableCard slots are.
On a related note (rant)...
I think Apple is shooting themselves in the foot not coming out with some sort of digital media center / DVR. Along with a computer and television, it's the one electronic appliance that I cannot live without. The playing field is so ripe too -- TiVo is just establishing itself with cable companies and moving out of satellite, cable company DVR's suck, there is no easy ability to rip a DVD to your computer and put it in a library, there is no easy to use set top box option to buy movies.
Think about DAPs when the iPod came out, it's the same landscape. Sure, there were digital audio players that all paled in comparison to the iPod. I think Apple has that same opportunity with a media center/DVR.
The problem, I presume, is that the MPAA & broadcast association would never let it happen. Apple will never be granted permissions to sell movies if they come up with a device to rip DVD's or record television.
One can always hope. I know Apple could make a device that absolutely blows away everything that's out there right now, and it seems short sighted to not develop a product that begins to merge computers and television, this merger is inevitable. So while everyone's going off about FW800 ports in front and the location of the power supply, I'm wondering where the TV tuner and CableCard slots are.
Spoe
Apr 19, 03:43 PM
Apple Q3/09: 7 million devices and 17.1% marketshare
Apple Q3/10: 13.4 million devices (almost doubled!) but 16.7% marketshare.
Nokia Q3/09: 18 million devices and 44% marketshare
Nokia Q3/10: 29 million devices (+ 11 million!) but only 36% marketshare
So Apple sold 6.5 million more units but lost 0.4% marketshare.
Ya, right.
The iPhone is both gaining and losing market share, depending on what you mean by market share.
Do you mean what percentage of devices sold or what percentage of devices in use?
By the first measure, iPhone is slightly losing (by an amount that almost seems like it could be a statistical fluke -- it's basically flat) market share. By the other, it's still gaining market share (again by a pretty small amount).
And then, you get into comparing statistical reports from different sources. Lie, damned lies, and statistics, you know.
About the only certainty is it's debatable whether the iPhone is really losing market share and beyond that, whether Android is growing at the expense of the iPhone.
Apple Q3/10: 13.4 million devices (almost doubled!) but 16.7% marketshare.
Nokia Q3/09: 18 million devices and 44% marketshare
Nokia Q3/10: 29 million devices (+ 11 million!) but only 36% marketshare
So Apple sold 6.5 million more units but lost 0.4% marketshare.
Ya, right.
The iPhone is both gaining and losing market share, depending on what you mean by market share.
Do you mean what percentage of devices sold or what percentage of devices in use?
By the first measure, iPhone is slightly losing (by an amount that almost seems like it could be a statistical fluke -- it's basically flat) market share. By the other, it's still gaining market share (again by a pretty small amount).
And then, you get into comparing statistical reports from different sources. Lie, damned lies, and statistics, you know.
About the only certainty is it's debatable whether the iPhone is really losing market share and beyond that, whether Android is growing at the expense of the iPhone.
bonehead
Nov 29, 03:23 AM
Wil universal get what they want?.. Apple is not totally powerless in this potential negotiation but i doubt steve has the power to laugh in their faces. Apple does not make music, it sells it. A seller can hardly laugh in the face of the producer of goods (or the gatekeeper of those goods). Want proof?.. walmart vs apple. Apple makes ipods.. Walmart refused to deal with apple the way apple wanted.. guess who lost in that battle.. walmart of course.. they are merely a seller, apple is the gatekeeper of ipods. The same is with the music studios.. apple is a seller, music companies are the gatekeepers. They can dictate who can and can't sell their music and while every corporation is motivated by profits.. they can always take their music and go home. Sure they lose but so does apple or they can make their music exclusively available only on microsoft service. You might not buy the music but you aren't 300 miliion americans. I gurantee apple does not want to be sitting by idly watching microsoft steal a market they grew. Naw, steve is not laughing in anyone's face.
Any record company is free to make their music exclusively available on a service that is incompatible with 75% of the mp3 players owned by those 300 million Americans but I don't think many will.
Any record company is free to make their music exclusively available on a service that is incompatible with 75% of the mp3 players owned by those 300 million Americans but I don't think many will.
rdowns
Apr 27, 09:20 AM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711155/posts?q=1&;page=101
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
Trump now wants to see and taste the after-birth before dropping the issue. :rolleyes:
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
Trump now wants to see and taste the after-birth before dropping the issue. :rolleyes:
guzhogi
Jul 15, 10:03 AM
I also wish Apple used standard ATX power supplies. That way, if you need a new power suply, you can get one from your local electronics store. I don't know if Apple already uses them, but I have a beige desktop G3 and the power supply on it is getting old and I have a bunch of extra stuff in it and the power supply can't handle it all. I've been told I can get one from a b&w G3, but going to a best buy or where ever and getting a new one I think would be a lot easier.
enda1
Jul 27, 01:37 PM
How long do you people think it will be before merom is put in the macbook?
Really want one befor i go back to college but it looks lokie i might have to splurge for an MBP instead.
Poor me....
Really want one befor i go back to college but it looks lokie i might have to splurge for an MBP instead.
Poor me....
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
BeefUK
Jul 27, 09:59 AM
Merom in a macbook is all I want, add in 2GB of RAM, and that'll do me. Although they'll be released in the MBP first............looks like more waiting for my first mac!!!:(
PLEASE PLEASE hurry, I wanna get rid of my PC. The case in like a wind turbine and the CRT monitor is like a heater!
PLEASE PLEASE hurry, I wanna get rid of my PC. The case in like a wind turbine and the CRT monitor is like a heater!
gibbz
Apr 27, 08:20 AM
Wow. That's surprising. This whole time people downplayed it because there was no evidence that apple was actually transmitting this data. It wasn't a big deal because the db file was local only. Now when Apple addresses it they had to not only admit that the file exists but that they actually were transmitting data.
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It is not surprising (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf) (pdf).
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
It is not surprising (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf) (pdf).
amols
Aug 27, 02:28 AM
I don't give a rat's A** about Santa Rosa. What I do give a Rat's A** about is that Easy Access HD Bay. The ability to have multiple 160 GB HDs standing by for different field purposes can make for revolutionary work flow procedures.
Exactly!! I did swap my MBP HD from 100GB (Seagate 5400.2) to 160GB (Seagate 5400.3) and almost cracked the top cover, not to mention destroyed the warranty (which I don't mind anyway). Its really funny that we can easily swap HD in MB but not in MBP. I hope they fix this in next release instead of silly Merom updates.
Exactly!! I did swap my MBP HD from 100GB (Seagate 5400.2) to 160GB (Seagate 5400.3) and almost cracked the top cover, not to mention destroyed the warranty (which I don't mind anyway). Its really funny that we can easily swap HD in MB but not in MBP. I hope they fix this in next release instead of silly Merom updates.
leekohler
Feb 28, 09:45 PM
Correct I have no idea what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
I seem to recall you agreeing with this post:
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
And by "living with" I mean having sex and having a family as well.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
I seem to recall you agreeing with this post:
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
And by "living with" I mean having sex and having a family as well.
archer75
Apr 5, 05:05 PM
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
They don't have to announce the new hardware there. It's very unlikely they would have an event to announce the hardware upgrade. But there's no reason a refresh can't take place that day.
There are many reports of supplies of imacs and minis drying up as of a week ago so a refresh is certainly imminent.
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
They don't have to announce the new hardware there. It's very unlikely they would have an event to announce the hardware upgrade. But there's no reason a refresh can't take place that day.
There are many reports of supplies of imacs and minis drying up as of a week ago so a refresh is certainly imminent.
Lone Deranger
Mar 26, 08:26 AM
...at least Microsoft, and I hate it, does a complete overhaul of everything; sometimes it fails, and sometimes it succeeds)
Not quite, W7 is still based on Win NT technology, dating back to 1993.
Not quite, W7 is still based on Win NT technology, dating back to 1993.
LC475
Apr 11, 06:49 PM
There's nothing to fear about Apple making FCP less than professional.
The thing to understand is that NLEs never change their basic structure of how editing works, i.e moving clips in the timeline, trimming, etc. Look at Avid - it hasn't changed much at all since the 90s because they know if they did, they would lose their base of users. Avid came in the early 90s, and FCP came in the late 90s. FCP is an improvement to the Avid idea of NLE editing, and it's a good improvement. That's one reason why it became popular. Sure, the GUI might change but the basic way of working will not. After Effects is a good example. The GUI looks totally different than it did on version 5, but you can still work basically the same.
I don't understand what people mean by FCP lagging behind Avid and Adobe. In the last couple years, FCP has been making strong gains in Hollywood. WB, 20th Fox, Paramount have all used FCP on major movies. I worked as an AE on one of them. Professionals like FCP, many movie editors I know like FCP, major post houses use it, and I'm sure after tomorrow we will like it even more.
If anything, FCP has become less of a consumer app and more of a professional one. Hollywood wouldn't have thought of using FCP in 1999 on version 1, but they're using it now. It's become more professional over the last ten years.
With the new technology of thunderbolt, 64bit support, and multithreading support, in addition to iPad support, we should see an awesome upgrade tomorrow.
The thing to understand is that NLEs never change their basic structure of how editing works, i.e moving clips in the timeline, trimming, etc. Look at Avid - it hasn't changed much at all since the 90s because they know if they did, they would lose their base of users. Avid came in the early 90s, and FCP came in the late 90s. FCP is an improvement to the Avid idea of NLE editing, and it's a good improvement. That's one reason why it became popular. Sure, the GUI might change but the basic way of working will not. After Effects is a good example. The GUI looks totally different than it did on version 5, but you can still work basically the same.
I don't understand what people mean by FCP lagging behind Avid and Adobe. In the last couple years, FCP has been making strong gains in Hollywood. WB, 20th Fox, Paramount have all used FCP on major movies. I worked as an AE on one of them. Professionals like FCP, many movie editors I know like FCP, major post houses use it, and I'm sure after tomorrow we will like it even more.
If anything, FCP has become less of a consumer app and more of a professional one. Hollywood wouldn't have thought of using FCP in 1999 on version 1, but they're using it now. It's become more professional over the last ten years.
With the new technology of thunderbolt, 64bit support, and multithreading support, in addition to iPad support, we should see an awesome upgrade tomorrow.
SiliconAddict
Jul 27, 03:29 PM
this blog was also written by jason o'grady, aka the PowerPage rumor site. his writing means nothing to me.
++
99.998% of what is posted on POwerPage is garbage. I love the crap about how he's against a buttonless iPOd because touching the screen would scratch it. o.O No Jason....touching the screen would smuge it. Unless you hands are as hard as sandpaper....anyways. PP is pretty much crap.
Nice news from intel, good for WWDC ...
... Apple will probably announce right before, since SJ said long ago no hard announcements at WWDC.
Of course he reverses A LOT :eek:
ARE PREPARED for the NASTY NEWS THAT COULD COME AT ANY TIME :eek: :eek:
MS will announce that they are dropping Mac development :eek: :eek: :eek: :mad:
DON'T YOU GET IT ...
... this is the plan Bill G., the NICE GUY, leaves MS with his CLOD BULLDOG in charge AND YOU GET WHAT YOU GET, Balmer cuts the Mac devision and probably a TON of other jobs too and then they announce their MP3 player and all sorts of services !!!
This way their player looks more credible then Apple, for a while anyway !!
If Apple was smart after all they would have hired me to test their spreadsheet app a long time ago, I am after all, the SPREADSHEET GOD :cool:
Dude. One word.....Decaf. :rolleyes:
++
99.998% of what is posted on POwerPage is garbage. I love the crap about how he's against a buttonless iPOd because touching the screen would scratch it. o.O No Jason....touching the screen would smuge it. Unless you hands are as hard as sandpaper....anyways. PP is pretty much crap.
Nice news from intel, good for WWDC ...
... Apple will probably announce right before, since SJ said long ago no hard announcements at WWDC.
Of course he reverses A LOT :eek:
ARE PREPARED for the NASTY NEWS THAT COULD COME AT ANY TIME :eek: :eek:
MS will announce that they are dropping Mac development :eek: :eek: :eek: :mad:
DON'T YOU GET IT ...
... this is the plan Bill G., the NICE GUY, leaves MS with his CLOD BULLDOG in charge AND YOU GET WHAT YOU GET, Balmer cuts the Mac devision and probably a TON of other jobs too and then they announce their MP3 player and all sorts of services !!!
This way their player looks more credible then Apple, for a while anyway !!
If Apple was smart after all they would have hired me to test their spreadsheet app a long time ago, I am after all, the SPREADSHEET GOD :cool:
Dude. One word.....Decaf. :rolleyes:
ugahairydawgs
Apr 8, 07:55 AM
Sources? Evidence? Easy to make cheap accusations, much harder to prove them.
When Apple's supply shortages at iPhone and iPad launches are as terrible as they have been, Apple is either 1.) inept at judging the demand for their product, #2.) inept at acquiring the components necessary to produce the quantity of product they need to meet demand or 3.) holding back supply to drum up demand.
I have a pretty hard time believing that #1 or #2 are true for company the size of Apple.
When Apple's supply shortages at iPhone and iPad launches are as terrible as they have been, Apple is either 1.) inept at judging the demand for their product, #2.) inept at acquiring the components necessary to produce the quantity of product they need to meet demand or 3.) holding back supply to drum up demand.
I have a pretty hard time believing that #1 or #2 are true for company the size of Apple.
spencers
Jun 15, 10:09 AM
Just called my local Radio Shack and left my information. They said they'd call me back at 12pm (CST) with a PIN number.
:D
I'm not eager to get the iPhone 4 on launch day. I just think the trade-in offer is pretty sweet. Sure, I could potentially get more $ for my 16GB 3GS, but I think the market will be saturated come June 24, plus it's much less of a hassle!
Unfortunately, I'm not eligible for fully subsidized pricing, so I'd be paying $400 for early upgrade. Doing the trade-in will bring me down to $200, so I'm fine with that!
:D
I'm not eager to get the iPhone 4 on launch day. I just think the trade-in offer is pretty sweet. Sure, I could potentially get more $ for my 16GB 3GS, but I think the market will be saturated come June 24, plus it's much less of a hassle!
Unfortunately, I'm not eligible for fully subsidized pricing, so I'd be paying $400 for early upgrade. Doing the trade-in will bring me down to $200, so I'm fine with that!
wpotere
Apr 28, 08:11 AM
Sad, pathetic, misguided
Speaking of which...
Speaking of which...
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق