FCPX 10.0.1 is out

Is FCPX showing as installed in your Purchased tab?

My software:
Pro Maintenance Tools - Tools to keep Final Cut Studio, Final Cut Pro X, Avid Media Composer and Adobe Premiere Pro running smoothly and fix problems when they arise
Pro Media Tools - Edit QuickTime chapters and metadata, detect gamma shifts, edit markers, watch renders and more
More tools...

Steve
Try doing what the others are doing in this thread. That or just wait a day or 2 until its fixed which is a much wiser choice

Michael Horton
-------------------

I just have a feeling? and it might just be me? that the Broadcast-Quality Video Monitoring that is going to come out in early 2012, is only going to work through Thunderbolt? Again, that's just my paranoia

Russ Blaise Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just have a feeling? and it might just be
> me? that the Broadcast-Quality Video Monitoring
> that is going to come out in early 2012, is only
> going to work through Thunderbolt? Again, that's
> just my paranoia

Hmm but miniDisplay and Thunderbolt are no the same port. Video I/O uses Thunderbolt as well.
Are you thinking it should work another way?

AJA already has a thunderbolt device announced at IBC so I'm certain that the broadcast monitoring will be one way to achieve this. We're gonna have AJA at our Atlanta Cutters event in October and I'm anxious to see what this thing looks like.

I'm also pretty certain that some of the video cards that people own will also work with broadcast monitoring. It may not be every single one of those cards, but certainly newer cards like the Kona 3G I would expect to work. All depends on how much Apple works with the third party developers to get everything working smoothly like Avid and Adobe are doing with their products.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media
biscardicreative.com

I'm not really sure how things work but watching how Apple likes to eliminate features. I was thinking that External Video Monitoring might no longer work through, lets say the Matrox units and others. Which depends on an eSATA card.

But come to think of it... In Apple's very short statement about Broadcast-Quality Video Monitoring coming in early 2012, it never mentioned the word, "EXTERNAL". They could be thinking they can get Broadcast-Quality Video Monitoring through a second computer monitor. Just a guess.

It is certainly possible to get a color accurate signal out via Thunderbolt/Mini Display Port, and it would be to Apple's advantage if they do because they have a hand in Thunderbolt technology, and they may just do that. Problem is that seeing how the HP Dreamcolor is so fussy with video signals (you don't even send a video signal per se), and the fact that you cannot display interlacing on a computer monitor, it would be a bad move if Apple tried going down that path.



www.strypesinpost.com

Why all the hoopla about a .0.1 release that only sort of adds a couple of the many required features that should have been in the app from day one?

If any other company had released this app the editing community would have dismissed it outright as a non-professional app, and rightly so. I thought it was a joke when people called it iMovie Pro, but it really is. That would have been a smarter move on Apple's part in my opinion - release it as iMovie Pro as a hint to what FCP would become in a year or so. Then editors would be asking Apple when they could get their hands on the new FCpro version (with full functionality) instead of fracking them for releasing an unready and unfunctional app and killing off the suite of apps upon which they earn their livelihoods.

Yes there are cool aspects to FCPX. But it's still a car without a steering wheel at this point. An alpha release. Were there no beta testers or industry consultants on this development? I can't imagine any beta tester giving a thumbs up on it with so many missing features.

Has anyone from Apple been seen or heard from since this debacle started? A product manager, PR flak, VP, anyone? I can't get thru to anybody there; I review products and their media relations people don't respond. I'm sure I'm not the only journalist looking for some answers. You can't even find any Apple employee's emails online for cripes sake. They really need to send someone outside of their walled compound to explain what's going on, answer questions, take some heat, and open up a line of communication with their customers. If they even want us as customers that is. It's a sad situation.

You won't find too many arguments about that here, BigPete. Some, but not many.

Quote
Has anyone from Apple been seen or heard from since this debacle started?

Yes, Larry Jordan has.

>You won't find too many arguments about that here, BigPete. Some, but not many.

Looking at their 5 page white paper on their XML code, you'll be hard pressed to find any. Okay, here's one. It's not even alpha, it's a nightly build.



www.strypesinpost.com

XML documention is kinda rough at the moment. If you take the more or less empty pages into account it's only 18 pages (including title and disclaimer).
But it gives you the chance to convert FCPX stuff to a simplified XMEML version which could be used by other apps. Even to import basic things from other apps.


Andreas

Some workflow tools for FCP [www.spherico.com]
TitleExchange -- juggle titles within FCS, FCPX and many other apps.
[www.spherico.com]

Minus the cover and the appendix and disclaimers and empty pages, it is only 5 pages. Apple could have done this with EDL. Apologies if this is a harsh assessment, but it looks like the XML will go through LOTS of revisions before it is ready for release (even though it is already released).



www.strypesinpost.com

Gerard,

I wrote something similar on another thread, but my calculation wasn't as 'harsh' as yours - but finally you're right.
And as you mentioned in the other thread - 'EDL' is back somehow

Andreas

Some workflow tools for FCP [www.spherico.com]
TitleExchange -- juggle titles within FCS, FCPX and many other apps.
[www.spherico.com]

Russ Blaise Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
> Yes, Larry Jordan has.


Good info posted by Larry. But hardly the mea culpa from Apple that many were expecting, admitting that FCPX was rushed to market incomplete and unusable in professional environs.

Telling Larry that they're listening to user feedback is completely disingenuous. Have they not been listening to their FCP customers for the last 10 years? Seems so, since they so cavalierly tossed aside so many of the industry's methods and standards in favor of their ideas that weren't wanted and don't work.

FCPX should still be in beta testing. Instead, Apple shoved it onto the market, and they're making customers shell out $300 to be their beta testers. A known tactic of another software company of some renown based in Redmond, Washington.

One thing that's interesting is that this whole thing kind of proves that the 'fanboy' (or girl) label we used to get lumped with was unfounded. We loved Apple products when they were awesome. When they released something we all could see was rubbish, we panned it hard and loud. By definition a fanboy just loves and promotes anything released by their favourite company.

And that's good for the world of post production, because no matter how much we hate having to change, learn new gear, invest in new products against our will, we've proven to the market that we will if we feel we need to.

Good point Jude. I found myself shaking my head @ Apple for this one. I will still buy the machines & the stuff I love from Apple but when something stinks, I am not gonna buy it just because it's from Apple. I am not a Fanboy after all

When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

Why couldn't they have just added the speed, background rendering etc., to the existing product.. The one thing FCPX has going for it is it is very fast and can preview effects and transitions without rendering with ease. I am thinking of adding the Quadro 4800 with Premiere and hoping to get similar results..

Quote
Why couldn't they have just added the speed, background rendering etc., to the existing product.

Because it was an old code base started at Macromedia. Even if they endeavored to replicate the old UI it still would be a complete start from scratch. Given the development of Lion and the move to AV Foundation they took a look at everything. Since Apple is a company with an aggressive history towards UI, they felt they could come up with a better one than the old paradigm.

Personally I've wanted something like a trackless timeline since I started using Avid Media Composer in 1989 or thereabouts. FCPX is still very early in it's lifecycle but I like the direction they're going in and I think in a year or so, when the feature set catches up, it'll be an excellent NLE.

Big Pete,
You are very correct that the Apple PR reps have made themselves invisible. In the past, it was a bit difficult to get ahold of them but eventually, also as a writer/editor, I was successful. However, with the release of X, I found it nigh impossible. With the contacts I did have, I either would not get a return answer or be pushed off to someone else with no results. Meanwhile, the folk at Adobe have always bent over backwards to offer any assistance they could. That's how to create good relationships. Apple just doesn't seem to care.
Steve

steve-sharksdelight