Is Final Cut Pro going to be available on PC?

[tak1108]

It was Premiere 5.0 that drove me to the mac in the first place. It wasn't just buggy on mac, it was hell on PC as well. 5.0 would randomly delete files off the hard drive. 5.1a, b and c, were improvements, but I went on a search for a new editing app after that. i went to a lot of places on the PC, EditDV, Cinestream, Speed Razor with Matrox Hardware, etc. Then one day, Apple released a mac with a cheap DVD-R in it. 4 months before it was available anywhere else. I bought, and used it and made some money burning DVD's of projects before it was available elsewhere. Then I learned Final Cut and have been happy enough to stay.

If something else comes along and is better, I'll switch. But if it costs a lot of money, requires a poor OS or doesn't support what i need, it won't be worth it.

The short answer to the question though, is HELL NO. apple sells computers because FCP is a great editing application, not a great editing suite.

 

[toke lahti]

Then one day, Apple released a mac with a cheap DVD-R in it. 4 months before it was available anywhere else.

Back in the days Apple was the first to introduce new things like dvd-r.
Blu-ray drives will be in stores next month, but will Apple have it on their new macs?
No, they just downgraded their laptops to non dual-layer dvd's. Seems to be that they just consentrate on cheap consumer level now.

 

[David Saraceno]

No, they just downgraded their laptops to non dual-layer dvd's. Seems to be that they just consentrate on cheap consumer level now.

Not entirely correct. There is a lack of DL DVD burners that will fit in the 1-inch form factor of the new MBPs.

It's not a downgrade; it's the lack of that thin of a drive.

Have you looked at the current G5 Quad processor desktops? Do you consider those "cheap consumer level" production machines?

No offense intended, but this type of observation is just calculated to incite not contribute. C'mon, let's talk HVX200.

 

[The Machinist]

Downgraded?

Apple is offering the same SuperDrives they always have.

In addition I have not heard of any Blu-ray burnable drives being available next month. And the only Blu-ray players have been priced at a minimum of $500. Maybe you should hold yer horses before making a claim like that and wait a few months.

If blu-ray or HD-DVD burners were coming standard with Sony or Toshiba laptops or even desktops for that matter then maybe I'd say you have a point.

Instead your post seems like more of the kind of trolling that's been going on too frequently on this board.

 

[adkimery]

"Is Final Cut Pro going to be available on the PC?" Short answer: NEVER (other then maybe some hack that allows it to run in a light emulation environment in Windows and is NOT supported by Apple or a hack to get the whole OSX to run on non-Apple hardware, also not supported by Apple).



Adobe did not want to take Premiere out of the Mac market, and I know quite a few people who wanted to be able to use it on the Mac. Not only because they know it, but because for their specific application (animatics made from scanned storyboards) it was (and probably still is) the best program out there.

What Apple did is exactly the same as they have done to several other outside developers, no matter the harm to their consumers--let alone a vendor (such as Adobe and Avid) who Apple wouldn't have survived the lean years without.

Apple wants to own the high-end software market and is going about it in ways that make MS's wars over Office software and web browsers seem tame. Basically they are determined to create a market where you have to buy a Mac to run FCP or something else, and once you've made that step if you want another postproduction package you'll have to buy it from them (ala Shake and Garage Band).

They have been, for the last couple years now, actively working against Adobe and Avid (including ProTools) specifically. It is the worst in software, but even in hardware, Avid and other key hardware vendors have to find out about major revisions (PCI voltage a year or so ago in the middle of the G4 run I think it was, for example) because their customers buy a replacement or upgrade computer and it doesn't work.

On the software side, Apple does not have the long, developer-centric betas MS does, nor much documentation of changes made, nor much input from the outside. They have a general beta, and developers have found major surprise architectural changes between the last beta and the retail release which greatly impact their software. An Avid engineer told me about such a situation, forcing them to redo development to run under Tiger, meanwhile FCP was available practically day and date with Tiger. So the in-house developers find out everything they need and it gives them an unfair advantage against the competition.

This is why what used to be the premiere (no pun intended) applications on the Mac are now all developed first, and sometimes exclusively, on the PC. Now that they've finally got modern, fast CPUs in the Macs the only reason the Mac will have a poor choice of applications is Apple itself.

And that's just not something I can cotton to. Why not have choice? Why would I not want the possibility of jumping into Premiere or Avid (or the next big NEW thing) if something isn't doing what I need?

One more thing to consider, as soon as they bought Shake Apple discontinued the Windows version, even though it was popular. It's not about developing multiple versions--they continued the x86 Linux version. They're clearly out to use their control of the hardware and the OS to build monopolies, to restrict you wherever it's profitable to their products only. It was evil when MS tried it, why isn't it just as evil when Apple does it now?

Years ago Avid planned on discontinuing their Mac line, and the only thing that stopped them was the outcry from Mac-based Avid users. Apple owes Avid loyalty why? Anyway, it's all business.

When the Mac platform was floundering and developers were leaving it was business (the Mac was looking less and less like a viable platform). So Apple had to start producing more first party software as a matter of necessity. Now Apple is on the rise again and it's first party software is top notch so why shouldn't they keep pushing forward? It's still business, but there is just starting to be some role reversal.

Personally I'm loving it. Apple being "uppity" has forced a number of companies to get the lead out. I don't know about you, but I think the NLE market today looks a lot better than it did 6 or 7 years ago.

A key difference between MS and Apple is that Apple hasn't used it's presence as a market leader (ex. consumer digital audio) to unfairly hinder competitors. For example, Apple hasn't gone to retailers and said, "Hey, you better stop selling other MP3 players or else." But MS was guilty of going to PC makers and saying "Hey, you better stop pre-loading competitor's software or else."


-A

 

[David_M_Payne]

If I remember correctly Paul the Apple guy at the UCSF road show was asked if the new intel based FCP studio would work on non Apple machnes and he said it would. Does anybody who was there recall exactly what he said?

David

 

[doccutter]

I worked at adobe in 1998, when I left, I bought a beige g3 and motodv to use with Premiere, which I then used to edit my first feature. It was HELL. Several years later some folks who I used to work with came to my new job as an FCP instructor, and they asked me what Premiere needed to compete with FCP. I really liked those folks, but there wasn't much I could tell, them, they were two different animals entirely. Premiere was buggy as hell, deleted files, shifted timelines, etc. and FCP 1.2 just worked on the state of the art 400Mhz G3's we had. I believe folks if they say that Premiere Pro has repaired the major problems, but at our facility, we had avid, smoke, and FCP. Adobe would have to buy me a couple Varicams for me to venture back to Premiere, if only because the of the trauma that using Premiere caused. My 2 year-old powerbook edits DV great in the field, and I burn DVD's there too.

Oh yeah, I started on an Amiga 1000... Nice machine, too bad it was a commodore.

 

[toke lahti]

Not entirely correct. There is a lack of DL DVD burners that will fit in the 1-inch form factor of the new MBPs.

It's not a downgrade; it's the lack of that thin of a drive.

Have you looked at the current G5 Quad processor desktops? Do you consider those "cheap consumer level" production machines?

No offense intended, but this type of observation is just calculated to incite not contribute. C'mon, let's talk HVX200.

Downgraded?

Apple is offering the same SuperDrives they always have.

In addition I have not heard of any Blu-ray burnable drives being available next month. And the only Blu-ray players have been priced at a minimum of $500. Maybe you should hold yer horses before making a claim like that and wait a few months.

If blu-ray or HD-DVD burners were coming standard with Sony or Toshiba laptops or even desktops for that matter then maybe I'd say you have a point.

Instead your post seems like more of the kind of trolling that's been going on too frequently on this board.

Yep, anything against the dear Apple is trolling :dankk2:
This thread is about what Apple is going to do with FCP, so talking about Apple's hardware seems appropriate to me.
So lets talk about Apple in this thread and hvx200 in the others?

Last powerbooks do have DL superdrives, first macbooks don't. If that's not a downgrade then what is? I'm not so happy about leaving fw800 or pc-card off either.

Like I said Apple was the first back in the days, so why it would be same now, if they waited for sony or toshiba? Is there a reason why Apple can't be a leader in technology any more?

Let me clear my point of view: I think Apple hardware, Os X and other software is better than the others in many situations. I just think that they could do a whole lot better.

And yes, I do use Quad. So far Motion uses only one core and Compressor two cores, so I'm hoping we get an upgrade to FCP Studio at nab.

Btw, I think PowerMac's have the industry's biggest enclosures that offer space for only two hard drives inside by the design. That's funny! But not very functional. (Echoing voice of Jobs in the background: "If you need raid5, buy xRaid, we'll get more money...")
And quad is not the only four core system in the world. I don't know what would happen to Apple's hardware sales if they would allow Os X to be installed on any x86 system.

Ok, maybe I'm just a bit dissapointed about the new Mini, that still does not have dual display output. I would have wanted it to my htpc with small display for surfing and big screen for movies. Imacs are a bit expensive just for leasure use especially if you already have the displays...

 

[stabwound]

Great history background on FCP, Randy S.

Never having used FCP, I am certainly intrigued to check it out, and may consider switching to a Mac, if the PC doesn't come up with something similiar soon.

Thanks.

 

[David Saraceno]

Yep, anything against the dear Apple is trolling

Last powerbooks do have DL superdrives, first macbooks don't. If that's not a downgrade then what is? I'm not so happy about leaving fw800 or pc-card off either.

As I stated, there are no DL burners that thin to fit in the case.

If you want a DL burner, just buy a PowerBook G4.

This post is about FCP on Windows, not about Apple's hardware offerings.

 

[David Saraceno]

If I remember correctly Paul the Apple guy at the UCSF road show was asked if the new intel based FCP studio would work on non Apple machnes and he said it would. Does anybody who was there recall exactly what he said?

He may have been referring to the fact that many people are trying to install OS X Intel operating system on non Mac PCs.

Whether FCP will run on those machines is iffy to me.

 

[Berga]

Actually the problem is Adobe doesn't really like Apple that much anymore and doesn't want to compete on the Apple platform with Apple's own software. Essentially Adobe has halted development of any products for which Apple created a direct competitor. OTOH, Adobe is also creating similar competing products to Apple solutions for the PC platform. Now that Apple has Aperture, Adobe has "Darkroom". Adobe continues to make Photoshop for Mac because Apple has no competing software and they continue with After Effects because Shake is a lot more expensive. So, I guess I haven't figured out if Adobe and Apple really don't like each other, or if they are in kahootz on some level.

There is one more important issue. Premiere Pro was rewritten from the first class library as Encore is. Adobe does not want to take huge develpment cost for a software which could not get a fair competition.

As long as Photoshop and After Effects does rely on the code base they have today, Adobe will develop for both platforms. If someone of them need a major revision (such as premiere did) it will be a Windows only version.

 

[Berga]

Avid does edit 1080 mxf files from hvx200. You can even edit direct from the P2 cards.

 

[pkendall]

Yeah, they'll have it ready for the PC when hell freezes over or pigs fly which ever happens first.

 

[Mitch_Ives]

Since then, Final Cut and Premiere have been neck and neck in many ways,

Final Cut is a great program, though, I admit. I would be surprised if their next release integrates with Motion and their DVD authoring program like it does with it's audio program.

Okay, sorry, but at no point has Premiere been neck and neck with FCP...

Second, Motion is already integrated with FCP, as it Livetype and Soundtrack pro.

As for Adobe'sintegration, AE id RGB based not YUV and it's too damn slow compared to Red or Motion...

 

[Mitch_Ives]

Randy Ubillos and other members of the Final Cut Pro team originally created Premiere. They were then hired by Macromedia to create KeyGrip, built from the ground up as a more professional video editing program based on QuickTime.

Macromedia made a decision to be a web company instead of competing head-on with Adobe in every category and decided to find a buyer for their non-web applications, including KeyGrip, by 1998 renamed as Final Cut. Final Cut was shown in private room demonstrations as a 0.9 alpha at the NAB in 1998 after Macromedia pulled out of the main show floor.

At the demonstration both Mac and Windows versions were shown. The Mac version was working with a Truevision RTX dual stream real time card with limited real time effects. When no purchaser could be found Apple purchased the team as a defensive move. When Apple could not find a buyer in turn, it continued development work, focusing on adding FireWire/DV support and at NAB 199 Apple introduced Final Cut Pro.

With the introduction of FCP, Adobe Premiere market share plummented, since its ancient codebase had neither the features nor the design flair to compete. In 2003, Adobe introduced Premiere Pro as a Windows-only product with an entirely new codebase and many FCP-like features.

As someone who goes back to .9 beta on most Adobe apps, here's some additional info to add to the mythic lore. First, Premiere was developed as a multi-media program initially with no thought on video. As it was expanded into video, it became apparent that the intial design had imposed some challenges and limits to it's continued development. Sort of like building a house one room at a time.

The story goes that the team asked to start over with a fresh sheet of paper and the powers that be declined at Adobe. So, the team leaves Adobe and starts development on Key Grip. Macromedia enters the picture and changes the name to Final Cut. Some people were on the early beta team and saw both the Mac and PC versions.

So Macromedia discovers that video isn't their strong suit and decides to focus on the web. Media100 supposedly has first bid on it and in a spate of outright stupidity passes on it's purchase. Apple snaps it up immediately, drops the PC version, revises it substantially and adds the "Pro" moniker.

One shouldn't underestimate Apple's redesign of apps... anyone who saw the program that Apple bought and turned into DVDSP 1.0 can hardly recognize the original. When they bought Spruce, DVDSP 3.0 was far ahead of the old Spruce product interface wise...

 

[SPZ]

Am I the only one that had a good experience with Premiere 5?

Honestly, I had macs working with FCP on film school (g3's, at that time), and they where no match to my 800 hz P3 with a Pinnacle dv500. Everything worked great, and looked great. No rendering, multitracks, etc. It was a pain for me to switch from the a/b editing timeline to single line editing, but it had to be done. FCP seemed more of an animation and editing package all in one. In therms of real video editing, it was on the same level as Premiere. The titling capabilities of FCP where terrible. Untill today, I still prefer Premiere's titling. Livetype was a good addition, but doesn't offer the Äfter effectish" goodness of the most basic titles achievable in Premiere.

Being a FCP editor nowadays, but unbiased, I think that both are a lot closer nowadays then they where before. What Final Cut gives me is a LOT more options in therms of codecs and quality of its own Quicktime format. Editing uncompressed works very well on a Mac.

 

[Mitch_Ives]

FCP seemed more of an animation and editing package all in one. In therms of real video editing, it was on the same level as Premiere.

That statement contradicts itself. The fact that FCP had that power makes it a better editing system. hell, if all you're doing is cuts, iMovie works.

The titling capabilities of FCP where terrible. Untill today, I still prefer Premiere's titling. Livetype was a good addition, but doesn't offer the Äfter effectish" goodness of the most basic titles achievable in Premiere.

Sounds like you need to spend some more time with Livetype? Better yet, Motion. Of course you've totally overlooked the fact that the Boris titlers are vector based and can be scaled without degradation. I honestly don't understand people's obsession with AE... it's latin for RGB degradation and slower than molasses.

Being a FCP editor nowadays, but unbiased, I think that both are a lot closer nowadays then they where before. What Final Cut gives me is a LOT more options in therms of codecs and quality of its own Quicktime format. Editing uncompressed works very well on a Mac.

What FCP gives you is that and so much more... sounds like you don't really push FCP like some of the rest of us do. For a lot of us editing isn't just cutting anymore.

 

[BigMike]

Am I the only one that had a good experience with Premiere 5?

Honestly, I had macs working with FCP on film school (g3's, at that time), and they where no match to my 800 hz P3 with a Pinnacle dv500. Everything worked great, and looked great. No rendering, multitracks, etc. It was a pain for me to switch from the a/b editing timeline to single line editing, but it had to be done. FCP seemed more of an animation and editing package all in one. In therms of real video editing, it was on the same level as Premiere. The titling capabilities of FCP where terrible. Untill today, I still prefer Premiere's titling. Livetype was a good addition, but doesn't offer the Äfter effectish" goodness of the most basic titles achievable in Premiere.

Being a FCP editor nowadays, but unbiased, I think that both are a lot closer nowadays then they where before. What Final Cut gives me is a LOT more options in therms of codecs and quality of its own Quicktime format. Editing uncompressed works very well on a Mac.

That's exactly how I started! I was just happy to be able to edit on my computer at that time. The DV500 was a great product.

Premiere just got better with 6.0 and 6.5, then with the redesign to Premiere Pro they have built and excellent product. Both FCP and Premiere are excellent programs.

They are BOTH good programs.

 

[BigMike]

Oh! Hey, look! I'm a Senior Member now!

I'd like to thank the Academy for giving me the opportunity to post more than 100 stupid questions.

:2vrolijk_08: