PDA

View Full Version : Final Cut Studio 3?



Bryan
04-22-2009, 08:19 AM
Any word on this at NAB? Is Apple even at the convention?

I'm waiting for FCP native AVC support.

FatDaddy
04-22-2009, 08:42 AM
The big Final Cut user group meet up is tonight (I think) and that is the place any announcements will be made (so they say) and no Apple is not officially there.

puredrifting
04-22-2009, 08:50 AM
Considering that the FCPUG Supermeet took place last night and nobody has posted anything and the Apple website has not been updated, I would surmise that there was no FCS3 announcement.

Bummer!

Dan

manglerBMX
04-22-2009, 08:53 AM
rumor sites are speculating WWDC, which is june 8th i believe.

jamesc
04-22-2009, 10:15 AM
It's either WWDC '09 or NAB '10. Most people believe that FCS is being ported from Carbon to Cocoa so that FCS3 will take advantage of all the performance gains Snow Leopard has to offer.

The big question is whether or not Apple will play it safe and wait for a more mature/stable revision of Snow Leopard (NAB '10). OR, if the performance benefits of SL are so great to FCS3 (64 bit, OpenCL, better multicore, Quicktime enhancements), that they use FCS3 as the statistics beast and big driving factor to upgrade to Snow Leopard (WWDC '09).

I'm hoping that in this economy, it's the latter. Snow Leopard seems like a harder sell for consumers with it's minimal new features. But if it Apple puts up new graphs and demoes that FCS3 runs some 30% faster then FCS2 and is capable of seamless RT AVCHD playback, I imagine a stampede from higher end Apple users to upgrade. And all the positive reviews might trickle down to the consumer. That's my hope anyway :)

k2director
04-22-2009, 11:13 AM
There's no possible way Apple will wait until NAB 10. There's no possible gain that Snow Leopard compatibility could deliver that would be worth waiting another whole year to bring out FCS3. (3 years total since FCS 2) Competitors like Avid and Premiere are already looking reinvigorated lately, and Apple needs to have a product out soon. Apple knows this.

Expect to see something in the next month or two. Personally, I don't see Apple announcing FCS3 at the WWDC. That's going to be reservered for Snow Leopard and the new iPhone, most likely. I think we'll hear about FCS before then.

Demistate
04-22-2009, 01:32 PM
Snow Leopard seems like a harder sell for consumers with it's minimal new features.


Are you kidding me? Apple switching to gamma 2.2 is paramount and if quicktime is fixed that means no more QuickTime Gamma shift. The headaches we all have to bear with to deal with Quicktime Gamma shift are worth $100 piece of software.

Ryanwar7
04-22-2009, 03:46 PM
Are you kidding me? Apple switching to gamma 2.2 is paramount and if quicktime is fixed that means no more QuickTime Gamma shift. The headaches we all have to bear with to deal with Quicktime Gamma shift are worth $100 piece of software.

Pardon me if I am wrong, but I think he was talking about the lack of consumer and possibly prosumer market features. I wouldn't be surprised if a super majority of the people who buy a copy of mac os x have no idea what gamma even means, let alone the benefits that not having to deal with it would be.

I think by lack of features, he is talking about leopard boasting 500 new features such as time machine and similar features. Although Snow Leopard will be a sweet OS, it will be hard to give it the appeal to the masses that Leopard had.

Cheers,
Ryan

bikefilms
04-22-2009, 04:42 PM
I think Apple will preview FCS4, but then use Time Machine to take us back to FCS3.

Today at a major broadcaster I sat down next to a Powermac G4 suite. Digi-Beta tapes piled high. If FCS3 is to be "Intel-only" as some have speculated, I think the broadcasters will be up in arms. Maybe the nail in some broadcasters coffins?

-Andrew

Carlos Corral
04-22-2009, 05:54 PM
I think Apple will preview FCS4, but then use Time Machine to take us back to FCS3.

Today at a major broadcaster I sat down next to a Powermac G4 suite. Digi-Beta tapes piled high. If FCS3 is to be "Intel-only" as some have speculated, I think the broadcasters will be up in arms. Maybe the nail in some broadcasters coffins?

-Andrew

I thought the whole purpose of Intel Macs was to get off the PowerPC processor. :Drogar-Shock(DBG):

Justyn
04-22-2009, 10:00 PM
Carlos... I think you are totally right. FCP already is disabled a couple of things on PowerPC and the writing is on the fall. Apple and it's 3rd party vendors are NOT really going to support or develop for PowerPC. It's a dino and I hate that idea too.. but it's on borrowed time.

I would like to think as some of you do.. and quite frankly having an upgraded FCP would be cool. if only they gave us native P2 and AVCHD editing. That would be enough to make me upgrade... and having a few more RT things.. bingo.


FCP has such a marketshare that it's not going anywhere. It's solid and more people are converting over to it than jumping ship. If I were AVID, I'd be even more worried about their overpriced machines...

RichardVClark
04-22-2009, 10:19 PM
I think Apple will preview FCS4, but then use Time Machine to take us back to FCS3.

Today at a major broadcaster I sat down next to a Powermac G4 suite. Digi-Beta tapes piled high. If FCS3 is to be "Intel-only" as some have speculated, I think the broadcasters will be up in arms. Maybe the nail in some broadcasters coffins?

-Andrew


lol I agree with the FCS joke, but I think that most broadcasters (from my experience) still use AVID. Not to mention a G4 will need upgraded to do any HD editing.

Intel-only products are the next logical step. Coding for both platforms takes money and resources that will only balloon the cost of the suite. At some point Apple will not support power pc. It's coming. Either this upgrade or next.

cheezweezl
04-23-2009, 12:50 AM
I thought the whole purpose of Intel Macs was to get off the PowerPC processor. :Drogar-Shock(DBG):

i don't think so. i think the reason apple switched to intel was purely financial. the jump from g5 to xeon was the weakest performance improvement i have ever seen with apple. i have been in the mac world for a long time. in comparison, my jumps from 603 to 604e, from 604e to g3, from g3 to g4, and from g4 to g5 were all mind blowing and had me giggling like a schoolgirl each and every time. my jump from quad g5 to 8 core xeon was extremely subtle. no giggling......

proffit
04-23-2009, 02:55 AM
FCP has such a marketshare that it's not going anywhere. It's solid and more people are converting over to it than jumping ship. If I were AVID, I'd be even more worried about their overpriced machines...


I think these days no video manufacturer, be it software or hardware, can rest on their reputation for more than 2 years max. Because things are developing so fast and new innovations are made everyday.

Maybe FCS users -and more importantly: new young users- are not looking towards Avid, but for Adobe products instead. CS4 is not a bad product... Also I have to say as an ex-Avid user, the new Avid strategy, pricing and development towards more open media isn't looking all that bad. Compared to what it used to be.
Of course I'm waiting for FCS3.

puredrifting
04-23-2009, 06:54 AM
If I spend that much to upgrade, I want to giggle!

Dan

ChipG
04-23-2009, 07:12 AM
Also I have to say as an ex-Avid user, the new Avid strategy, pricing and development towards more open media isn't looking all that bad. Compared to what it used to be.
Of course I'm waiting for FCS3.

Did you see this press release from Avid a couple days ago? This is really good for FCP editors who don't want to learn Avid but want the big studio jobs along side the Avid guys. Good for Avid to do this!

http://www.avid.com/us/pressroom/fcp-qualified-unity.aspx

Carlos Corral
04-23-2009, 07:22 AM
i don't think so. i think the reason apple switched to intel was purely financial. the jump from g5 to xeon was the weakest performance improvement i have ever seen with apple. i have been in the mac world for a long time. in comparison, my jumps from 603 to 604e, from 604e to g3, from g3 to g4, and from g4 to g5 were all mind blowing and had me giggling like a schoolgirl each and every time. my jump from quad g5 to 8 core xeon was extremely subtle. no giggling......

I upgraded from a PC to a Quad-Core MacPro. I had all sorts of giggles :love4:

cheezweezl
04-23-2009, 11:16 AM
I upgraded from a PC to a Quad-Core MacPro. I had all sorts of giggles :love4:

well, yeah!!!

but seriously, back in the day you could add ram and actually see a performance improvement. back then you could manually assign the amount of ram each app got. you could manage your own resources. it wasn't as friendly to beginners but way more solid for pro's. this is all pre-osx. then they started making ipods, and the slick osx interface replaced flexibilty for advanced users.

i'm not bashing apple. i mean despite all my gripes, it still beats running windows. just that ever since steve jobs took over, the os has slowly been dumbed down and made more friendly for novices. great for product sales but lame for guys who know how a computer works and want the control.

in a perfect world, apple would develop a "pro" version of osx. skip the crazy animated hoopla, time machine, dashboard, and all the other slick crap that takes up resources and give the power back to the stuff that matters to pro's.

or maybe i'm just a grumpy a**hole.....

ok, i'm done bitching.

alpi69
04-23-2009, 11:37 AM
cheez, I am all with you. OSX is a dumb OS that tries to make an ipod out of a powermachine. Apple seems to slowly leave all the pro-tools to themselves and concentrates on selling phones and musicplayers (with a much easier profit). Basically they try to do what MS promised.

If you look at FCS2 and all the flaws it has, it is incredible they still get away with it. I have a quadcore-windows machine that encodes just like a octacore apple.....with freeware.

they urgently need to get Motion, FCP and Compressor up to date, they need BluRay support, they need real multiprocessor speed......there is a lot of work and I hope June 8th it is done.

cheezweezl
04-23-2009, 11:58 AM
they urgently need to get Motion, FCP and Compressor up to date, they need BluRay support, they need real multiprocessor speed......there is a lot of work and I hope June 8th it is done.

don't count on it.....

do count on being disappointed and frustrated.

at some point, apple may flake out enough to send the pro's elsewhere. linux? i don't care. if the software and performance is there then so am i....

Demangone
04-23-2009, 12:26 PM
I was hoping for the FCS3 upgrade at the end of April, but I've heard the whispers of a June release coinciding with WWDC. The thing with the powerpc vs intel processors is I don't think the current software takes full advantage of what the multicore processors have to offer. There are some benchmarks posted on barefeats.com that essentially say you're better off with a quad core nehalem machine than you are with an octo core if you're using legacy software or have no intention to upgrade in the near future. The nehalem processors are the first set that really excite me about what Intel is doing. I notice huge differences in performance between my G4, G5, and intel machines. I think Snow Leopard and a 64 bit version of FCS3 will make your Intel machines fly and everything will make sense.

ullanta
04-23-2009, 12:37 PM
i don't think so. i think the reason apple switched to intel was purely financial. the jump from g5 to xeon was the weakest performance improvement i have ever seen with apple. i have been in the mac world for a long time. in comparison, my jumps from 603 to 604e, from 604e to g3, from g3 to g4, and from g4 to g5 were all mind blowing and had me giggling like a schoolgirl each and every time. my jump from quad g5 to 8 core xeon was extremely subtle. no giggling......

You have to go one more step back... when Apple switched from 68k architecture to PowerPC, performance for most things slipped backwards.... for a little while.

Apple makes these switches with eyes a few years down the road, and seems to be (I think smartly) willing to take a performance hit in the short run in order to gain a smooth transition (read: pretty much full backwards compatibility). The G5 to the first Intel macs was a small change... but G5s have gone and are going nowhere. G5 to a current Mac? Even a second generation Intel Mac? No comparison.

bikefilms
04-23-2009, 12:41 PM
... I think Snow Leopard and a 64 bit version of FCS3 will make your Intel machines fly and everything will make sense.

I totally agree with you. For professional compositors or music producers, the added horsepower will be nice.

I'd like to see 64 bit technology help with Media Cataloging. Something inbetween OSX's Cover Flow and Final Cut Server would be nice.

-andrew

David Saraceno
04-23-2009, 01:11 PM
cheez, I am all with you. OSX is a dumb OS that tries to make an ipod out of a powermachine.

Apple seems to slowly leave all the pro-tools to themselves and concentrates on selling phones and musicplayers (with a much easier profit).

Basically they try to do what MS promised.

If you look at FCS2 and all the flaws it has, it is incredible they still get away with it.

I have a quadcore-windows machine that encodes just like a octacore apple.....with freeware.

Geez.

Can't we leave the NLE wars for some other web site?

Justyn
04-23-2009, 09:06 PM
I do remember the nightmares that extensions caused though. When it worked it was great and when it didn't it was horrible. I had to have an extension set for Toast all by itself as it wouldn't work with anything else and when conflicts came up, it was a total nightmare to have the extension set turned on and that.


I perfer to stick to the act of cutting and geting onto my work and I keep the techie stuff to other people and frankly don't get caught up in too much on that end. I know what works and keep on keeping on.


Avid would have to do something to stay competitive. The major boys are holding true to their investments but I'm not them, and most of my peeps big and small are on FCP. If you were around and bought a high priced avid back in the day, you might still be on it.. but considering bang for the buck there's so many more options these days both on PC and Mac..


I do agree that it's more about what works for ya and sticking with it. I don't want to learn other platforms.. I just want to get the friggin work done.

cheezweezl
04-23-2009, 11:31 PM
You have to go one more step back... when Apple switched from 68k architecture to PowerPC, performance for most things slipped backwards.... for a little while.

Apple makes these switches with eyes a few years down the road, and seems to be (I think smartly) willing to take a performance hit in the short run in order to gain a smooth transition (read: pretty much full backwards compatibility). The G5 to the first Intel macs was a small change... but G5s have gone and are going nowhere. G5 to a current Mac? Even a second generation Intel Mac? No comparison.

i think we disagree here. i forgot about the jump from 68k to ppc. i jumped from a performa 68k to a powermac 7500 which was a 601(ppc) 100mhz processor. huge diff from the performa. then later on i swapped out the processor in the 7500 (remember when you could do that?) to a 604e 150mhz. boom!!!! then g3 boom!!! g4 boom!!! g5 boom!!!! mac pro meh.... i'm not talking first gen either. i know apple well enough to wait for the bugs to get worked out. my 8 core has only just been updated here recently. i have the 8x 2.8ghz. yes i see a diff from my quad 2.5ghz g5 but subtle. not the kind of "wow" i have seen with every single mac upgrade i have ever done up till now.

am i still a mac fan? yes. as much so as i was 10 years ago? no.

i do have a working mac plus sitting in my living room. they are built to last.....


Geez.

Can't we leave the NLE wars for some other web site?

what NLE war? just talking about apple's biz practices. totally relevant.