Okay, I relented and installed Lion on my MacBook Pro. I followed the advice of various people on the net and copied the OS X DMG file to a bootable DVD disc image and performed a totally clean install from scratch.
First impressions are pretty good actually. It is pretty damn fast, and doesn't feel bloated like Snow Leopard. There are some useful additions to the capabilities of Quick Look, and Quicktime seems to have gained a few extras too, although nowhere near as extensive as most of us would like.
Most changes are very subtle. The thing that resumes apps where they left off is a pain, but luckily can be switched off. The inverse scrolling to match iOS devices is also a bit of a pain too, especially if you have to move between different machines. This too can be turned off.
The Aqua interface has undergone some tweaks too, and looks a bit more sleek as a result.
I haven't had anything like a chance to use it properly yet, but so far it looks and feels good.
One thing that I wanted to test out was FCP6. Many had advised that it wouldn't run because the installer uses Rosetta. Simple solution to that problem, don't use the installer! I migrated it from my OS backup disk and so far it seems to be working, though I need to do more testing. I can't imagine my MXO will work with it though.
"To boldly go-----"
Not got Snow Leopard yet which will need if I get FCP X. Only this machine so no room, or ability, to experiment.
Ron
Not got Snow Leopard yet which will need if I get FCP X. Only this machine so no room, or ability, to experiment.
Its an expense, but you could install it on an external drive to play around with it.
.....and Quicktime seems to have gained a few extras too, although nowhere near as extensive as most of us would like....
Does Quicktime X(Lion version) have an Export menu?
.....I can't imagine my MXO will work with it though.
I have an MXO. Please let us know!
It does have an export menu, though the options are still limited. You don't get a choice of codec that I can see, so I'm not sure exactly what stuff is exported as!
Will let you know about the MXO, but I don't think that it will work. I think Matrox have said as much.
"To boldly go-----"Not got Snow Leopard yet which will need if I get FCP X. Only this machine so no room, or ability, to experiment.
Ron
Hi Ron,
We are going to be changing a 27inch iMac shortly - is our outgoing one of any interest to you? :)
Give me a call if so
Chris
Hi Ron,We are going to be changing a 27inch iMac shortly - is our outgoing one of any interest to you? :)
Give me a call if so
Chris
Thanks Chris but my next Mac purchase, some time away I fear, will be a Macbook Pro,
Ron
Does Quicktime X(Lion version) have an Export menu?
Hi
...if you were hoping for the wealth of export options available in QuickTime Player Pro 7, you’ll be disappointed.
http://www.macworld.com/article/161216/2011/07/lion_quicktime_preview.html
Hi
...if you were hoping for the wealth of export options available in QuickTime Player Pro 7, you’ll be disappointed.
I was. I am. Sigh. :( Thanks anyway, Paul.
Hi
To be fair Compressor from the App Store isn't any more expensive than the old QT Pro + MPEG2 component upgrade to QT was.
Its noteworthy that all that 'editing' - clip splitting and rearranging - is going on within a QT X (= AVFoundation) movie file.
No 'editing application' like iMovie or FCP in sight.
Just as the very powerful MPEG Streamclip was just a GUI and toolset for QuickTime, the new FCP X may not be more than GUI + tools for AV Foundation.
That's my take on why FCP X can never import FCP 7 projects, since it would be OS X (= AV Foundation) that would need to 'import' the project data otherwise FCP X's GUI would have nothing to display.
does the new Compressor work? Seems like it has had really bad reviews, even compared to FCP X
Hi
Don't know about its performance - I've not heard anything about problems.
People complain that it still 32-bit. but that's inevitable whilst its dealing with legacy 32-bit QT codecs - old QT has to be discontinued/broken for a fully 64-bit version.
There would be even more uproar if Apple had done that...
One thing that I wanted to test out was FCP6. Many had advised that it wouldn't run because the installer uses Rosetta. Simple solution to that problem, don't use the installer! I migrated it from my OS backup disk and so far it seems to be working, though I need to do more testing. I can't imagine my MXO will work with it though.
That's great to hear simon,
Would I assume that if you were upgrading a snow leopard machine with FCS2 installed then it would all work fine on Lion. My major concern is DVD studio pro as it had been EOL'd
Reading between the lines of what is being said here, does this mean that when QuickTime is dropped in favour of AV foundation that Premiere 5.5 will not be able to access the legacy codecs either, so Premiere will also be left behind when OS 10.8 arrives?
Just got a couple of emails from Matrox with links to download new driver that supports Lion and FCP7 for MXO 1 and MXO 2. D
...when QuickTime is dropped in favour of AV foundation that Premiere 5.5 will not be able to access the legacy codecs either...
Hi
Adobe have written their own 64-bit Mercury engine to handle modern file formats natively. They have their own QT export/import add-on, and only this will need to be recoded - a relatively minor thing I would guess.
Thanks Paul, that does make Premiere the front leader at the moment then. I'm going to have to give it some serious consideration as I can't see how FCX is going to get back to where I need it to be.
I am wondering about this too. This list published by Adobe makes me wonder if Apple are being deliberately difficult about this (or at least: deliberately unhelpful) to Adobe - to suppress the migration from FCP to Premiere? (Luckily, Premiere Pro is one of the least affected.)
In my view, it will do more than that: it might not only encourage the migration not only from FCP to something else, but also worse: migration away from Macs entirely. There, I've said it. Conspiracy? Moi?
Martin, I believe that a migration away from Mac is inevitable for any serious professional user. I also believe that Apple is keen to engineer this - they want to be shot of that entire market, so they can fully concentrate on the mass, consumer market. Their figures show how that makes perfect sense.
Mac pros will soon be a memory (maybe after one more iteration), as there is no software that Apple makes (after the death of FCP) that requires them. There will be no incentive for Apple to make them if the software does not exist to sell them.
I'm already working out my migration strategy. I'm just glad that I've got 3 years or so to plan and learn before taking the plunge (assuming my current system doesn't kill itself before then). D
I honestly don't think Apple want shot of the pro market I just think they believe it needs a shunt (not saying they're right, just what I see) Pro markets move at a snails pace and I honestly believe Apple are trying to stir it. With the introduction of Thunderbolt and the power of the iMacs I don't think they see pros NEED aMac Pro only that they want it. Time will tell but Apple I think want the Pro market (why else would they take over NAB) I just think they are trying to redefine it and the tools needed.
Bold, Arrogant or Naive, it's one of the three
I hope you are right, John (my sense of aesthetics means I don't relish a pc making a mess of my beautiful system rack)!
The way they have handled FCPX is unquestionably arrogant, but I don't believe they are remotely naive. They know what facilities are essential to high-end post production, what capabilities are so important to professional editing that their absence renders any software without them utterly useless. So their decree that FCPX does not need to support legacy projects, does not need to allow external monitoring and has no need of collaborative workflows is absolutely calculated and sends a very clear message that Apple is out of the market for production houses and anyone else who needs to match them or work with them.
Interesting thing about NAB was that Apple has not taken part in the official expo for several years now, their presentation was only to the FCP User Group in a separate, affiliated, event.
I just don't see how that general approach to a market says anything other than 'bye'! D
So their decree that FCPX does not need to support legacy projects, does not need to allow external monitoring and has no need of collaborative workflows is absolutely calculated...
Hi
i) Legacy projects:
QuickTime has (in Apple's opinion) reached the end of its (inherently 32-bit) lifespan.
The move forward into AV Foundation throws away not just QT, but also most of the programming structure that went with it - including all the 'bought' applications: FCP, DVD Studio Pro, Livetype, Shake, Color, CinemaTools etc. All these are unworkable in the new world of OS X's core foundations. Final Cut Server has donated some of its organs to the new Core Data underpinnings of FCP X, but the other programs I've listed are gone - with their projects for the most part beyond recovery.
ii) External monitoring:
FCP X has some of the most sophisticated software videoscopes and analytical tools seen so far. To what end?
Colorsync.
Coloursync is an end-to-end colour management scheme for digital video and graphics programming. FCP X fully supports Colorsync. So matched to a fully calibrated monitor then video can be colour-balanced as well as with the old SDI/component external monitoring.
A different monitor is needed of course, and the new one probably wont necessarily be much cheaper. But it will do the job.
Two caveats: OS X is only 8-bit, and FCP X relies on Core Video and Core Animation for is output.
But only the most expensive monitors available can properly resolve 10-bit video.
Secondly Interlaced workflows are seemingly not catered for in the new scheme of things, though FCP X can handle and pass-through fields.
iii) Collaborative workflows:
As I've said the Core Data essence of FCP X has had Final Cut Server grafted into it. There is no reason that collaborative workflows could not be fully supported in future.
In its essence the Cloud is one huge collaborative endeavour.
"The truth is in the Cloud" is Steve Jobs' current mantra.
To get at that 'truth' will most likely require future 'purges' of old universalities :(