Crazy question but Will FCP ever be PC compatible ?
- Thread starter JoeJITSU
- Start date
- Status
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
Well, I'm a never-say-never kind of guy.
And I'm saying never.
And I'm saying never.
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
Blaine, where'd you get that picture of my sister?
I worked with an editor who had a, edit room with the feel of a mad scientist lab. His edit machine was in a climate controlled box, his machine had more wires and peripherals and somewhere in the room he had a ton of vinyl albums. Very wacky.
He once was telling me about working in Avid, and how he carries his USB dongle for Avid on his key chain he travels for work. I jokingly asked him where the dongle for Final Cut was... and with a grin he pointed to the G5 in the climate controlled box.
Its very, very, very unlikely. For a while the price point of final cut was far below an avid system, until you factored in the cost of a machine. And that's what Apple does; it sells turnkey solutions for different industries, including video editing. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot if they put final cut on windows. Plus, it'd look a lot like Premier
Safari was ported to windows, IMHO, for a different purpose... to increase its share of the browser market to enable developers to justify the time invested in making sure their coding worked with the browser. When I was in college and had a 12 inch Powerbook G4, none of my university's web based student services worked for Safari. These days its a different story.
He once was telling me about working in Avid, and how he carries his USB dongle for Avid on his key chain he travels for work. I jokingly asked him where the dongle for Final Cut was... and with a grin he pointed to the G5 in the climate controlled box.
Its very, very, very unlikely. For a while the price point of final cut was far below an avid system, until you factored in the cost of a machine. And that's what Apple does; it sells turnkey solutions for different industries, including video editing. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot if they put final cut on windows. Plus, it'd look a lot like Premier
Safari was ported to windows, IMHO, for a different purpose... to increase its share of the browser market to enable developers to justify the time invested in making sure their coding worked with the browser. When I was in college and had a 12 inch Powerbook G4, none of my university's web based student services worked for Safari. These days its a different story.
Apple is primarily a hardware company, so no. The reason they bought Final Cut in the first place was so that they could make it Mac-only, requiring video editors who wanted to use it to buy their computers.
Like Grim said, Safari was ported (just like iTunes and Quicktime) because Apple only stand to benefit from their software being more widely accepted. More people using Safari means more people supporting their web browser, benefiting Macs more than PCs (because PCs already have browsers that will work just fine). People aren't going to buy a Mac to use Safari, but editors are likely to buy one to use Final Cut Pro.
Basically, if you're on a PC - either use Premiere Pro (which is identical, anyway), Avid - or just install MacOSX on it anyway.
Like Grim said, Safari was ported (just like iTunes and Quicktime) because Apple only stand to benefit from their software being more widely accepted. More people using Safari means more people supporting their web browser, benefiting Macs more than PCs (because PCs already have browsers that will work just fine). People aren't going to buy a Mac to use Safari, but editors are likely to buy one to use Final Cut Pro.
Basically, if you're on a PC - either use Premiere Pro (which is identical, anyway), Avid - or just install MacOSX on it anyway.
NoahK
Hottie Mod
Never, ever. 
Though technically a Mac Pro *is* a PC so there you go. But I assume you actually meant- Windows-compatible. And nope, that won't happen.
Also if you *really* think Premiere is 'identical' then why don't you ever see it in use on major TV shows, movies, etc. It's an Avid/FCP world as far as the pros are concerned. That's meant as no slight against Premiere but calling it identical to FCP would be like saying a Hyundai is identical to a Ferrari. Sure they both are vehicles with 4 tires, an engine and a steering wheel. But are they the same thing- um no.
Noah
Though technically a Mac Pro *is* a PC so there you go. But I assume you actually meant- Windows-compatible. And nope, that won't happen. Also if you *really* think Premiere is 'identical' then why don't you ever see it in use on major TV shows, movies, etc. It's an Avid/FCP world as far as the pros are concerned. That's meant as no slight against Premiere but calling it identical to FCP would be like saying a Hyundai is identical to a Ferrari. Sure they both are vehicles with 4 tires, an engine and a steering wheel. But are they the same thing- um no.
Noah
8string
Well-known member
Nope. But put a Virtual Machine (or use Boot Camp) and you will have both worlds on one box. Still more expensive than buying two machines,but it will work on both OSs. Remember, these are only tools. Apple has a very compelling toolset on FCP. I use both them and Vegas. Vegas is *much simpler* to do similar tasks. But I would be foolish to think I could not know FCP for collaborative situations. So just give up and give in. Two OS's, two sets of tools. Apple will likely never port FCP to Windows. What economic reason would they have? By the way, Noah, do you have a 'personal relationship' with your "hottie mod" or do you only see her on off days? (G)
sam alcoff
Member
It's scheduled the day after never ever ever ever.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that Shake (v 2.5) initially ran on Windows and Linux. Apple bought Shake. Windows versions disappeared and Linux was supported for a while (at a very high cost). As we know, Shake was eventually ported 100% to MAC and finally killed by Apple. Keep in mind, Apple is basically a hardware company. If you think about it, Apple actually sells their ProApps relatively cheap. The reason being (at least until recently) you needed a very big dongle to run their Apps, namely a MAC computer. I can't see them changing that business model any time soon. So, I would be very surprised to see any of Apple's ProApps ported to Windows.
Safari was ported to windows since iTunes depends on Safari as a browser for Apple TV movie DVD extra content.
Also, although I've posted this before.
Aside from Final Cut itself, not a Single application inside FCP Studio 2 or 3 was written by Apple, it was purchased and every one those acquisitions dropped support for alternative platforms like Linux, BSD or Windows (Logic/Sound Track Pro, Shake, Color, DVD Studio) to name a few - and no Apple did not invent Gestures for the iPhone either, they acquired it after a successful demo at one of the Wired Mags conferences from some company.
Apple is ranked as one of the least transparent, and unethical large company in the IT industry. Their mobile device success jointly their content store success made them bail on everyone who is not an iPhone App developer - including developers, creative people from print, music, film and video, their certified service providers outside of their employ of the apple professional services arm, etc.. etc.. etc...
In recent new Adobe CEO wrote a public petition against Apple, - Steve Jobs himself said he does not give a damn.
Last edited:
What do these "comments" about Apple's IT ranking, its approach to iPhone development, and the actions of Jobs or Adobe's CEO about iPhones, have to do with a possible PC version of FCS3?
Last edited:
No need to get defensive about FCP - just point out some significant differences in editing between the two pieces of software. I, for one, don't see any.
If I was, for example, to say FCP is identical to AVID - you would have a point. I don't think you do here. FCP and Premiere Pro are just too similar.
adkimery
Veteran
FCP actually came from Macromedia. Motion, while derived from some Shake technology, is home grown from Apple I think. Not that that changes the point you are making about Apple's typical MO.
Not to speak for DJ, but I think he mentioned it just to show other examples of the corporate culture at Apple and the 'walled garden' that they want to draw all of their customers into.
-Andrew
Shane Ross
Veteran
Motion was also acquired. The company that made it is Santa Monica based, and is still there. They didn't relocate to Cupertino.
I didn't know there was a study commissioned that ranked the various "large companies" on the basis of how "ethical" they are. Is there some ethical consortium that sets the standards, and Apple didn't join?
Or does some federal or state agency do the rankings? Any chance someone can view that list? Wonder if other large companies are there as well?
Just about every company out there has its good and bad points, conduct, behavior, and reputation.
Apple is in the business, as a publicly owned company, to make money.
It seems to be doing its job pretty well.
Or does some federal or state agency do the rankings? Any chance someone can view that list? Wonder if other large companies are there as well?
Just about every company out there has its good and bad points, conduct, behavior, and reputation.
Apple is in the business, as a publicly owned company, to make money.
It seems to be doing its job pretty well.
Last edited:
Everything. People who supported the company when they did not have an iPhone to peddle with a content store to boot, are now left in the dark, or did I miss something about FCS3 full being $300 below it's original $1299 price point, or Logic being $500 less than Logic 7 cost. They are not a profit center anymore like they used to be, everyone having this type of discussion at one point or another points out in one way or another that
1) Final Cut Pro can only run on Apple Computers.
2) Apple is in the business of selling Computers (with it's own OS)
3) Thefore FCP will never show up on PC as Apple will loose MacPro, iMac, MBP, MacMini sales
4) See Point 1
^--- this discussion was used to refer to Logic 7 with XS key, by users who did not know eMagic ever existed, etc.. etc.. etc... Insert any other App that ran under Mac OS only,
that apple acquired the IPR for.
Fallacy of this statement, which would have been sort-of-true before the last WWDC where the iPhone was announced.
Apple, Inc. is no longer in the business of selling Computers, at least not their primary business model.
They are in the Content and Mobile device business and in the hoarding IPR business.
Hence severing ties with Adobe who pound for pound supported Apple as a hardware platform in the Pre iPhone days.
Or did I miss something when X-Serve RAID got replaced by a 3'd party product from Promise Technologies?
Or when Shake commited suicide at Apple's hands?
Widespread destruction of Firewire to please Intel?
Fallacy is, your average laptop/gadget buyer will go and buy an HP, Dell, etc... as they simply have a smaller sticker price.
FCP however will never be a "rain-fall" of sales for Apple on the PC platform, due to lack of audience (customers).
Apple simply does not want to spend money on a "loosing" product to port it over. All the video codecs in FCS3 are intel optimized,
so they will run equivalently on Windows 7 and will need minimal adjustment (before it was bigger leap in the PowerPC days).
Apple like a good business as you've pointed out would rather a customer not buy a FCS3 license for PC, but rather buy an iPhone 4 and a iPad and Apple TV.
I've seen apple specifically pull out of big hardware business, which they incidentally used to feature on their website as the "BBC Going Tapeless Video"
Or their "success" story with Walter Murch and the 2K projector for FCS3 release.. Or the Leverage RED ONE all Apple Post - "success" video?
Those dupe the public into believing that Apple's people did not construct these, using ample amounts of hand-holding from Apple professional services for those particular "success" stories. Reality is, to construct one of these "success" stories would cost you SO MUCH MONEY, that it would be cheaper and faster with alternative vendors for big business. Most people in simply say _PASS_ to the bill of materials Apple furnishes them with, it's too much and too costly and the lock in factor is so high that even AVID cannot top that. - If you got 7 edit bays, 4 graphics guys and some etc... etc... the ROI on the product suites they are failing to invest into to develop further becomes rather low, albeit its initial cheap price tags. At some point it becomes like a discussion of whether to shoot onto FILM or Varicam, if you're putting $1mil in front of the lens, the cost of film an processing becomes moot at those budget levels, so someone in the ORG finally says, look if we're spending this much money, why not just buy the gold standard AVID and if we're looking to save money, doesn't that premiere stuff with MXO work just as good for what we need?
The only people that are fooled by these "success" videos are lone-gun, one man show shooters/editors, as their price of admission is rather low, until the they step into something above their pay-grade. And even they don't represent the accurate target market for FCS3, as 1/2 of them don't own a license, or over license it across multiple machines.
Apple would rather sell one million people a $200 product, then sell 1,000 editors a $3,000 product, the writing is on the wall, release of FCS3 for PC would sell what, Another 1,000 copies, if that, since die-hard FCP fanatics are still going to use all the devices OSX has to offer and not switch platforms, the the loss will be in "finally" open Quicktime, and not the toy version you get for your Windows 7 Box.
Basically the right statement would be, Apple firmly believes there is no money in porting FCP to Windows or Linux for that Matter, or even Darwin or BSD.
As there will be no sales to justify the expense, not so that you'd keep buying 5K worth of Mac Pro + AJA boards with Apple Golden Platinum Apple care if you wanted to use FCP.
And further more, there is hard core precedent as to why Apple is doing all this.
1) SGI - Pioneers of their time, selling highly integrated OS, Hardware and Alias Wavefront <- Subchepter 11 (Purchased by Rackable Systems re-renamed SGI, Inc)
2) Sun Microsystems - Acquired by Oracle - I've seen SunOS installs with real-time imaging capabilities for MRI machies one can only dream of back in the day.
3) HP dumping HPUX and going with iTanum
4) Poor iTanum sales
5) IBM refactoring their Power RISC prosessiors, (back end deal with Intel - SGI tried this, but to soon)
6) DEC Alpha which invented this multi-core business in the firstplace, IPR bought by Compaq/HP sold to Intel
7) Ubiquitious adoption of Linux which supposedly is free into closed systems like DaVinci and Discreet
8) AVID's across the board uniform performance on both Mac and PC platforms for their Flagship AVID systems and the Protools line of products.
All these companies sold powerful processing and complete solutions, Apple does not want to be in that game anymore.
XGrid, lagging behind, abandoned due to GPU assist and multicore i7 processors.
XSan, barely there (developed by ADIC), being killed by Unity and EMC and STONE.
Qmaster - barely working, bugs everywhere... unreliable.
If you watched Jobs keynote on why Intel, not a word of it mentioned anything but PowerPC Processing per AMP of electicity (which anyone who knows about processing can attest to is a outright boldface lie, any processor that needs to do processing, no matter how efficient it is at it, needs power, a lot of power, so this is why a laptop CPU based on identical technology cannot outperform an identical desktop or server grade cpu, those need a lot more watts - with power comes cooling. - talk to anyone who overclocked their PC to 4.0GHZ) Just because Intel CPU's were more well designed, did not mean that IBM Power (PowerPC) new generation chips would not outperform Xeons or Core2Duos.
however modern Quad setups have even a bigger PSU requirement, whilst AMD cpu's are being install in Cray supercomputer clusters. Methinks a real-time color correctin app would run way faster on a 50 Playstation 3 cluster grid, than accross 10 XServes, so would products like FCP Server that need QMaster to render Motion JPG proxies for the
Java based access control client (multipaltform).
Basically the statement should be, Apple does not give a damn enough to port FCS3 to PC, not that it won't due to loss of potential hardware sales to clone vendors.
Why did they care about iTunes or Safari... they need those for their PC based itunes/iphone/ipad customers.
Anything else I contribute to this thread as *proof* of what you might think is a far fetched theory would violate several non-disclosure agreements.
All I'll say is that the rest of the "creative" companies have a 50/50 market share between mac and PC users, like AVID, Adobe etc... (Aside from Thomson Grass Valley, Discreet, and DaVinci, now BlackMagic) who opted for the embedded os model. So they are forced to put out products for both platforms.
The only reason you can play ProRes 422 on PC is due to AVID putting out a DNAxHD multiplafrom coded free-o-charge which worked with both.
Apple is failing big on integration and multiplafrom support, while also failing big at mid-sized hardware sales, its either server grade or laptop.
Their last attempt at this is Mac Mini Server, since not alot of people can afford a machine room to run OpenDirectory on.
And following Apple's legacy of keeping customers in the dark, I will bet money there is an experimental version of FCP for Windows Vista or Windows 7 somewhere in their labs right now - (According to them they ran OSX on Intel for 5 years.)
(RANT OFF..)
Last edited:
You mean when Adobe announced it was primarily Windows only when Apple was in its death throws about ten years ago?
Adobe must have lost some support pounds in that transition to Windows priority.
Then it abandoned Premiere Mac, provided Mac versions of Windows software 6 to 9 months later, or not at all. Or skipped versions of some software, like Photoshop Elements for the Mac altogether.
Adobe started primarily as a font company. Remember the whole Postscript proprietary licensing it advanced? Remember when Helvetica ran $800.00?
I think it’s a little un-realistic to expect to huge companies like Apple and Adobe to always walk step in step with each other. Their priorities and business objectives don’t always line up and are sometimes at odds with each other (i.e flash on the iPhone). This became especially apparent when Apple starting selling record numbers of Macs. With their user base growing in leaps and bounds, making sure that Adobe was kept “in the know” became less and less crucial.
Beyond that, Apple's share of the app market for ipad/pod/phone is about 1% of its total profit. In other words, the app store sells hardware to run the apps on.
Same with the pro apps.
Given that Apple cpu sales are soaring, not certain what this discussion is all about. The fact that the mobile market is selling more means exactly that. It is just a better profit market right.
Look at Panasonic. It sells everything from cams to toasters.
Kinda of think this has nothing to do with dvxuser, and should be in the Cafe, if at all.
Last edited:
- Status