|
|
Posted by William Davis on 07/01/06 19:59
In article <acCdnUHGKohMkzjZnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
Rick Merrill <rick0.merrill@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> Mr. Tapeguy wrote:
>
> > Rick Merrill wrote:
> >
> >>Mr. Tapeguy wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>... FCP
> >>>and Avid have no substantially different learning curve unless someone
> >>>is familiar with one and not the other. If anything, it is more
> >>>common that I hear FCP is more intuitive but regardless, it is my
> >>>belief that they are not substantially different. ...
> >>
> >>How can you judge the "learning curve" based on what you "hear" and
> >>"believe?" Not that we don't all do the same thing, but you feel so
> >>strongly about your subjective guesses that you impugn the other guy
> >>saying, "you've made a statement that makes absolutely no sense."
> >
> >
> > That's easy. I have worked a little with Avid and a little with FCP
> > and I talk to Avid and FCP editors every day. Therefore not basing my
> > statement solely on the basis of ONE opinion, mine or anyone else's,
> > but rather the broad spectrum of opinion I gather from experienced Avid
> > and FCP editors. This has a great deal of similarity to the issues I
> > have with Docs blanket statements that Apple is not what it represents.
> >
> > Still you have a point. With apologies to Doc, perhaps saying "your
> > statement makes no sense" was too strong. I will retract that and say
> > I am very skeptical because I have NEVER run into a description of the
> > comparative learning curve between Avid and FCP that remotely compared.
> >
> > I have never insisted that Doc is making his story up but there are
> > some simple truths about Apple that can't be denied. Overall they are
> > rated consistently #1 in lowest rate of repairs, #1 in customer
> > satisfaction and they rate highly in many categories. I don't believe
> > they would have the market share they have in video, audio and graphics
> > if their solutions consistently didn't work or were substantially more
> > difficult to learn than everyone else's.
> >
> > I hear critiques of Final Cut all the time and they have never included
> > "it just doesn't work" or "boy it sure was difficult to learn" outside
> > of the newsgroups.
> >
> > As I've said before, maybe you buy a Honda or Toyota and it's
> > constantly in the shop. Does that mean all Toyotas and Hondas are crap
> > and the salesmen lied to you when they said they made the best car?
> >
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > http://www.pro-tape.com
> >
>
> Ok.
>
> I have a question of my very own: Can Any Apple product handle MXF files!?
Via translation (Flip4Mac) and recent announcements (Apple/Sony announce
XDCAM drivers for FCP) pretty much.
From Apple's web site last week:
Final Cut Pro is First NLE to Support Native XDCAM HD Editing
Sony is introducing a new transfer software for use with the Mac OS X
v10.4 "Tiger" that provides native interoperability between Sony's XDCAM
HD Professional Disc system and Apple's Final Cut Pro nonlinear editing
software. The software will be available free of charge online from
www.sony.com/xdcamhd and will be demonstrated by both companies during a
12-city tour that begins today.
XDCAM is MXF at it's core.
I'm not particularly surprised that Apple might have been a bit
reluctant to rev all their products to parse MXF data natively
considering the HUGE investment they made in inventing and supporting
Quicktime.
I have a very limited understanding of the technologies, but from what
I've read, MXF is essentially just a non-Apple branded "re-invention" of
EXACTLY what Quicktime has been doing flawlessly for a long, long time.
Still, The Apple/Sony XDCAM announcement and current joint roadshow is a
pretty clear sign that MXF and Apple will play nice together.
[Back to original message]
|