I want to cut on Air in the water

>>so that I can create a more unique look that I can charge more for,<<

What do you mean, Chuck? Can you give examples?

As a business owner there are really only a few ways that I can improve my profitability, create a look -- a concept for an add campaign, a character I can animate like the Coca Cola bears from Rythm and Hues, color correction or composite effect that producers or advertising agencies for example would pay more money.

I can create a workflow that enables me to work more efficiently. With the increased availability of "data" digital tools (IT workflow) there's also an increase in the need to manage the huge amounts of data being generated. Whether that's archiving completed projects, transfering data in and out of edit bays or distributing data across multiple processors for encoding etc..

Obviously I can downsize to cut expenses, something that happens way too often for a lot of companies.

Although these different approaches are not mutually exclusive of one anther, they can be antithetical to each other. Most facilities that specialize in creating a look or a character are notoriously inefficient. Many whose business model depends on being more efficient [the amount of projects they can push through a facility] generally lack the creative team to develop a competitive custom look or effect.

Apple introduced, launched and subsequently recalled FCP Server, a tool that could conceivably help us with this growing need to manage data and hopefully enable facilities to take advantage of economies of scale. By making your facility more efficient you should have more time to be creative.

The problem is that I have no doubt that the MacBook Air will fly off the Apple store shelves [pun intended]. And unfortunately the more they sell the longer it will take them to develop tools like FCP Server, more cost effective shared file systems and HD support in DVDStudioPro.

The more consumer electronics (iTunes, iPhones, iPods and now the air) Apple sells the more pressure Steve Jobs will be under to manage their share holder value by developing those products at the expense of the types of tools and services professional content creators need.
None of the technology from the pro applications has been implemented or has anything to do with the viability of these new products.

All of this is happening at a time when HD is really beginning to gain traction.

But I'm not really sure what FCP Studio could offer that would help you create a look that you can't do right now. Most of the great stuff comes from the editor/compositor/graphic designer/musicians/whatever, not the actual gear. Aside from Lord of the Rings (a lot of which was composited on Shake, which is now, what, $400? from Apple) I can't think of much that you can't already do, given the time, money an talent.

I personally think Apple is doing OK - having just incorporated Color in the hundreds of dollar upgrade, which in its original form was around $25,000 to buy. Also Motion has semi-freddo 3D, Soundtrack lets you remove clicks, pops and background hum, DVDSP lets you save thousands on authoring and obviously this is just the tiny tip of the iceberg of what you can do with the suite.

I'll bet if stuff was released faster, there would be people in here complaining that they don't have time to learn all the new apps and Apple should just leave things as they are.

So, consumer scmoomer. I don't really care what they release outside here - I'm still busy learning this lot!

Your missing the point, Chuck. Ultimately it's the Artist...not the gear. The gear does what you tell it to do.

...and HD is already off and running so those that don't keep up will most certainly fall by the wayside.

FWIW...I always thought Apple should have a "Pro" division dedicated to us... the Pro Users.

When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

For me the " its the artist, not the equipment" argument doesn't hold water. I'm not talking about art, I'm talking about making money.

In order to meet the increased demand in of the growing HD market, facilities must be more flexible and be able to operate far more efficiently than they have in the past. Improved efficiency of the order of magnitude required for HD production cannot be accomplished by implementing incremental changes to the existing SD video workflows.

The standard definition production infrastructure and traditional technologies do not offer the flexibility and efficiency necessary to cost-effectively produce HD content to fill the distribution bandwidth under development.

Jude, even in your reply you state that "there's not much you can't already do, given the time, money an talent." That statement has a lot to do with why there's been a huge consolidation of post production companies [or many of them just going out of business here in CA]. The point isn't to spend as much money as you can, the point is to make as much profit as possible. Obviously the longer you take to accomplish something the less profit.

This consolidation has resulted in editors more or less competing for the same customer and each being overwhelmingly aimed at accomplishing the same function without significant competitive differentiation. While many editors go to great lengths to tout their "artistic" differences, they are still basically competing within the same marketplace for the same customers with the same technology in much the same way with little or no competitive differentiation.

In fact its worse than that, for many the only differentiation is the price and some editors are willing to bend over on the price driving out any potential profitability.

Sorry for rambling, I'm tired. My only point in all of this was to express my disappointment at the progress Apple has made in the past two years and I was really hoping they would have something significant to announce at MacWorld.

Yeah but I disagree - I think the FCP suite has moved in leaps and bounds in the last few years. Maybe for your workflow it hasn't but for mine it certainly has.

And I'm still not sure what it is you want - something to do with HD is all I get. Being able to make more profit from HD?

I was actually wondering after the Air was released if the whole question of BlueRay v HDDVD is going to be moot before they manage to release it. The time Apple started releasing machines without floppy disks, it was at the beginning of the end for floppies. And a 40 GB DVD is kind of scary, given the lifespan of the disks. Maybe DVDs are about to be old news altogether, and solid state is going to take over, making HD a whole new kettle of bananas.

Some thought the Cube was sexy too. Air is less than MacBook features at nearly MacBookPro price.
It's not like the iPhone at all. iPhone had nothing else like it, at least from Apple. A 13.3" MacBook at $1099 or a 15" MacBookPro at $1999 make more sense for size/feature/price.

The Air well sell to those who feel small size trumps all other features or they like the "design" sex appeal. Apple generally mixes practical with design and that's what makes their products great compared to competitors. Air fails on "practical" for the most part IMHO. It might have a successful niche and maybe that's what Apple believes but it's not an iPhone or an iTouch or an iPod. All those had leading practical elements.

To me, Air is like a great concept car. A technological wonder but not quite yet the consumer product most would want.

Michael Horton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This wont work for us but when you see it and hold
> it you understand the price. You are paying for
> art more than anything. It is sexy. I really like
> it.

Apple continues to make amazing leap forwards for the Pro.
Look at the new MacPros!
FCP supported the Sony PMW-EX1 XDCAM camera from the get go with a free update to FCP 6 with codec, easy setups and Sony's release of an XDCAM transfer tool (also free) which works as stand alone or FCP plugin.

Where Apple is falling down is on Blu-ray support. No build to order option but maybe the markup makes it impractical with burners down below $600 (think of Apple's typical RAM and HardDrive BTO markups). I'm not sure were OS support is yet (native Burn utility) but one can use Toast for Data and one must use Adobe Encore for Blu-ray Video. I really think at least basic implementation of Blu-ray video should have been in Apple DVDStudioPro by this point. Although this is not the stuff of recent MacWorlds (conusmer show).

I am disappointed by AppleTV though. I wish it supported 1080p30 (or even 1080i60, 720p60, 720p30). It's still limited to 720p24. If AppleTV supported other HD sizes and frame rates I could use it for client screenings or presentation delivery and not need Blu-ray. Apple CLAIMS disc is dead but they don't offer a file deliver box that goes beyond 720p24 yet. THIS could have happened at MacWorld. A consumer who spent a premium on a 1080p HDTV set over a 720p HDTV will NOT see that advantage with AppleTV.

Apple TV2 is improved but it's still not the file delivery box to compete with Blu-ray