I'm glad that FCP is finally getting an update but the world is not going to change as a result of it.

Apple's main concern is that they sell more Macs (increasing profit and some market share) and that will probably happen.

There are few paradigm shifts. Avid causing people to move from linear to NLE was a paradigm shift. On the other hand Apple's FCP was a market shift dropping the price of NLEs radically

Thunderbolt (and maybe FCPX's use of it) may be more important than other aspects of FCPX which, for many features, either match or makes some workflow improvements (maybe) compared to other NLEs. That's really not all that radical.

Hi Craig,

Sony is releasing a VAIO laptop with Thunderbolt fairly soon and is designed to compete with the MB Air (2.3 lbs, i7, SSD, Intel wireless display, AMD 1GB gpu, 8-16hr battery).

I agree with Ron about Apple/Jobs 'deciding what customers get'. In the Mac Pro, there are only 4 PCIe slots and only 8 ram slots. My HP Z800 has 12 ram slots and 6 PCIe slots (and one PCI). I see many high-end users (Smoke, Resolve) who must purchase another Mac Pro or a PCIe Expansion just so they can use both programs on a single Mac Pro. There is absolutely NO technical reason why Apple put only 4 PCIe slots. They do it to screw over their customers and force them to buy more Macs. This IS why I don't like Apple at all.

Back to FCPX: if I used a Mac Pro all the time, I would definitely buy FCPX. However, having used Premiere CS5 over the last year with its GPU acceleration, only way I'd change is having better GPU and playback acceleration. Also, the new AE CS5.5 has the coolest stabilization ever seen. With a decent camera (ie NOT DSLR), one doesn't need a dolly, jib or steadicam as much anymore. Heck, I don't need to buy the Kessler slider anymore after seeing how this works.

If that is how close you have to be then all NLE's I know fit the bill MAC or PC. Very little difference between the timelines on FCP, CS5, Vegas, Edius etc especially as most will allow color changes for tracks features , window layouts and short cut key functions. For the most used functions they can all be set up the same. I know I am on a PC but I have Vegas and Edius set up to work the same way so that I can just switch between them without thinking which one I am using. My Shuttle Pro V2 works exactly the same way for both . Window layouts across my two 24" monitors the same. One just does audio better, the other does multicam better with wider file format support and realtime speed.

Vegas and Edius work with native file formats and will run realtime from the timeline. Edius is more capable in this regard than Vegas.

Big advantage there over FCP !

Ron Evans

I hear what you're saying.

But multicam is barely important to me. The issue being while setting up a bunch of cameras is cheap and easy these days, the TIME required to manage, understand, log and futz with multiple cams mean production costs typically SOAR over traditional work. (Yeah, if you're working with volunteer crews and borrowed equipment, it's trivial - but I don't. For every camera I need an Op - a support package, increased craft services, more data storage cards, and a HOST of other cost-increasing crap.) And the GIANT problem for me is that in these days when everyone wants everything for next to nothing - Multicam usually increases the WORK by a factor of 10 while it virtually NEVER increases the budget by anywhere near the same amount.

So no thanks there. It's a tool I use rarely and hope to keep it that way since in my view, multi-cam shoots are generally a bottom line KILLER - not an enhancer.

As to the other aspects you mention, you've clearly established a workflow and hardware array that works well for you.

As have I.

They are different. But that's not very important at all.

For me, I value most the compatibility of working with the top industry standard. It means I have fewer hassles in post and delivery. Thats NOT to say any other system is inferior. Not at all.

But just as it's more difficult to get parts for an exotic car than a Chevy - it's equally a bit more difficult to work with broadcast stations and ad agencies and graphic artists and remote clients when you're using software that a smaller fraction of that industry uses.

I posted a story about that point in another thread. I was having trouble understanding the mostly arcane HD TV specs of an NBC affiliate for spot delivery a couple of months ago . I called the station editor and once he learned that we were both working in FCS he told me to "Ignore the published specs and just change these 3 settings burried in the menus — that's what I do when I do the station's promos."

Bingo. Problem solved. Attention back to something like customer service the REALLY matters in growing a business.

I've been a huge supporter of users groups over my entire career for exactly the same reason. Access to others with the same tools is INCREDIBLY important to me because the informal network of fellow users solves REAL PROBLEMS and it's in operation at night, and on weekends.

That has real business value to me. Tho I understand that you may see it differently.

For what it's worth.

Correct me if I am wrong but I do not think MAC's or most Mac's have eSata. That already gives a high speed interface for most applications on a PC at 3Gbps and some at 6Gbps just a little below Thunderbolt. Been on my PC for a couple of years with external drives effectively running as fast as the internals. Thunderbolt will be available general on the PC with the next Intel chip set so by the end of the year will be on everything I am sure.

Times are definitely changing in all categories. There was a time when true professional facilities really could deliver a product that was better than a one man outfit or an amateur. In the main that is no longer the case. For high end cinema or high end broadcast that is still true but for the most part an amateur can deliver the same stuff as someone who earns his living in video. This as a result of camera technology, computing technology and software. All have come down in price to the point that the equipment is not the bottleneck. It's talent. Once this point has been reached the type of equipment/software is not important it is the content delivered that counts. If there is one thing I agree with in this thread is that Apple are furthering this trend with the price of FCP X. It used to be that tape was the delivery format so having access to the correct decks and knowledge was important. Expensive facilities that created the divide for the pro facilities. Not anymore. Its files in a standard digital format or a disc both easily produced on a home computer.

Ron Evans

Steve, an Air competitor with Thunderbolt is OK but they'd really need a full laptop and desktop solution to compete.

The HP Z series in general is excellent. There are high end facilities that have several of them.

There are certainly individual computers better than various Macs. Every single component of FCP Studio (current) has a competitor that's better. Most facilities but together systems based on some totals and they live with some shortcomings for an overall improved workflow. That's what Apple focuses and wins on. It's why they have the Post market share they do.

Now if HP had Thunderbolt and if Avid or Adobe built turnkey systems with them and used a codec that was accepted by everyone (if DNxHD were as widely used as Apple ProRes for playback for example) they'd be able to compete . . . maybe.

You can always find any single piece of the Apple system and point to better. That's not how many if not most purchase decisions are made.

If 50% of the post market is Mac and 50% is Windows, HP only has a portion of that Windows market. You need to look at one computer for Thunderbolt (a Sony AIr competitor) another for more PCIe and RAM slots, a $4000 encoder if encoding to ProRes is important (Telestream Episode Engine). You can certainly extol Adobe but apparently many Windows facilities are Avid based even if they're using Adobe After Effects. Avid has hardware restrictions on input/output cards and is more expensive per seat and per upgrade. Adobe has Mercury with nVidia. So what whatever facility you build you either have a hodgepodge, and the troubles of moving projects around if needed, or you go with one and accept the limitations.

It's not about parts being "better," it's about easy system integration and Apple has lead with that. Thunderbolt will probably be across their entire line. You can pull a device from your MacPro and put it on your iMac or your MacBookPro all with the same NLE software for example. Lion will haver server built in so now any Mac in your system can be designated to that job if need be. Interchangeability of the parts makes it easy for a facility.

Of course an individual can put together whatever system they want and a killer HP Z800 with Adobe CS5 with a good nVidia card might be great but a MacPro with Thunderbolt and FCPX might be competitive and integrate better. The aforementioned HP system would blow the socks off of FCP7 for sure . . . but Apple is changing all that with a much larger market sharing making it easier to move that portion to newer systems and software.

One might hate the tight control and limitations of everything under one roof, computer, parts, NLE, etc. Apple is certainly a closed system but large numbers of very well versed technical people buy them and build facilities or small shops who may need to work with such facilities right from content creation to delivery. Someone might have a bigger better tree but Apple knows how to grow an effective forest.

Ron, any desktop Mac can have an eSata card added.

It's certainly been an issues with MacBook Pros though once Apple eliminated the Express port on the 15" MBP and left it on only the 17" MBP by late 2008/early 2009. I'll bet that's why MBPs got Thunderbolt first. Now all MBPs including the 13" MBP have Thunderbolt. iMacs were also at a disadvantage but that's about to change as well as they get Thunderbolt in the next few weeks (supply constraints indicate the update is imminent).

Slightly off topic, but I wanted to put this out before we get into a platform war...

To quote my friend, whatever gets the job done. I know, we love our NLEs of choice, and many of us probably won't ever change the other's mind, but I was chatting on Facebook with a friend who uses Vegas and Final Cut Pro (whichever is available to use), and he summed it up best with "Whatever gets the job done."

We can debate endlessly about which features were already present on what NLE, and the like, but ultimately, when I watch something on TV or a movie, I don't ever think about how it was edited, just that the editor and director (and their team) did a great job with the cutting.

It's similar to camera arguments... I am always surprised to learn a "lesser" camera is used to shoot a movie or show, and it blows me away how the right kind of talent (and crew, plus lights) can make even a so-called lesser camera look like 35mm or a RED.

One final thought... I was always surprised, when I taught film, to learn that some of our students were using plain ol' iMovie (this is circa 2004-07) to cut their little shorts, and it showed off their talent, not their NLE.

Heath

And not to add to the Windows vs. Apple debate, but a great friend of mine, who goes with fantastic Windows laptops and does some serious editing, recently got a virus and it's threatening to destroy/erase everything. He also has a Mac and told me she's considering buying Final Cut Pro X and moving to that platform from Adobe CS4 (which is/was on his PC laptop).

And this isn't a person who just carelessly downloads free music or anything; a client emailed him and the message had a virus, and it's wreaking havoc, even with the antivirus installed. I believe he had it off because the antivirus tends to slow the system down.

That's ultimately why I won't switch to Windows; now, if FCP wasn't being supported anymore, I'd likely switch to Premiere Pro CS5, since it's familiar and much easier to use than Avid.

heath

And not to add to the Windows vs. Apple debate, but a great friend of mine, who goes with fantastic Windows laptops and does some serious editing, recently got a virus and it's threatening to destroy/erase everything. He also has a Mac and told me she's considering buying Final Cut Pro X and moving to that platform from Adobe CS4 (which is/was on his PC laptop).

And this isn't a person who just carelessly downloads free music or anything; a client emailed him and the message had a virus, and it's wreaking havoc, even with the antivirus installed. I believe he had it off because the antivirus tends to slow the system down.

That's ultimately why I won't switch to Windows; now, if FCP wasn't being supported anymore, I'd likely switch to Premiere Pro CS5, since it's familiar and much easier to use than Avid.

heath

My business partner with his Dell desktop and laptops has never used anti-virus and has never had a problem (when I first learned he didn't use 'protection' hehe, I loaded up 3 programs to scan everything). He gets more email than several of us combined from his multiple businesses.

And on my HP Z800, I do not use any anti-virus on my 'work' partition and have not had a problem.

The emails with a virus are usually easily noticeable. Just opening an email does nothing; so, you would have to click on a link or download something without looking at what you are downloading (if it ends in '.exe', it is bad).

The common misconception that Macs are 'safer' is just not true anymore. The number of flaws and weaknesses in OSX are exponentially higher than Windows 7 x64. I know a woman who switched to an iMac because she thought it was 'safer' and last year, a keystroke spyware program was found after she realized her email accounts had been used by someone else in addition to mysterious credit card charges.

I know what someone will say to rebut this - hackers/attackers focus on Windows PCs and have not focused on Macs due to the much smaller market share. However, Apple's market share is growing fast and its just a matter of time before you must use anti-virus software, especially since Apple doesn't fix most of their weaknesses.

I don't mean to get off topic with the virus story, but that's why I personally stick with Macs. The reason I wrote it is because we started to discuss switching NLEs, which could also lead to switching OS's.

heath

I don't argue Macs are "better" than Windows PCs, not even that FCP is or FCPX will be a better NLE.

One can just look and Post market share and apparently a large portion use Mac and a large portion use FCP and I do think people have made and will continue to make this as a business decision.

My posts, I believe, have been about the industry and the market, not about my personal preference.

I will state that the above is not likely simply due to "marketing." The reasons why Macs are chosen are not likely insubstantial. The numbers are formidable and the decisions are practical.

I think anyone who practices safe computing can generally avoid viruses, trojans, etc.

I thought this was an interesting article this morning. Mac sales are up by 28%. I wonder if many of the new Mac owners will be tempted by a $299 FCP X over the installed iMovie? Maybe students?

Apple profit soars 95pc on record iPhone sales and strong demand for iPads and Macs | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/apple-profit-nearly-doubles/story-e6frg90o-1226042572955)

Craig, I've been enjoying your posts!

David, by Apple putting Aperture 3 (which was rumored to be iPhoto Pro, but instead just borrows some features, like Faces, Places, etc.) on the Mac App Store and lowering the price from $199 to $79, Apple is selling a lot of digital copies. I keep alluding to this because FCP is following the same path, from rumors (iMovie Pro) to digital only distribution, lower cost, etc.

heath

David, there are some very interesting "take aways" on the details posted at Macworld
Apple reports big gains in sales, profits for second quarter | Computers | MacUser | Macworld (http://www.macworld.com/article/159363/2011/04/apple_2q_earnings_2011.html)

Mac Laptop sales Q2 2010 Unit Sales 1796, Q2 2011 Unit Sales 2751
Q2 2011 is basically MBP Thunderbolt sales!
Desktop went down from 1147 to 1009 given the lack of any noteworthy hardware updates

Mac sales increased 28% quarter over quarter 2.9 million vs 3.76 million. This is also compared to 3% contraction in the PC market overall.

So Mac sales seem to be bucking the market trend in a big way and leading that is MBP with Thunderbolt. Please understand the significance of Thunderbolt whether you believe it helped drive sales or was simply coincidental. It opens the door for bigger sales for Thunderbolt video and storage device makers. I think David is correct in that these will be people tempted by $299 FCPX.

Although there's no demographics I wouldn't be surprised if Thunderbolt motivated a fair number of people in the Production/Post Production market to make the leap anticipated high end portability for their work.
Others may have just needed to update . . . and they'll just happen to already own a MBP ready to add a shinny new video or storage device if/when FCPX grabs their fancy.I'd guess you'll be getting students and pros toying with FCPX and buying Thunderbolt devices. This is how Apple's "ecosystem" works.

iMacs are coming with the next few weeks and, if they have Thunderbolt, you're going to see I jump there as well. For many, for the first time you'll get PCIe equivalent connector without having to be a "tower desktop." Again increase in market share and lower point of entry. A bunch more doors open for Video and Storage makers and a bunch more people who'll be downloading FCPX for $299.

My guess is that sometime around or after WWDC will come MacPros and those with clear pro intentions who have the highest likelihood of using Thunderbolt will be buying in . . . and throwing that $299 download of FCPX onto the . . .Apple cart so to speak.

Then there will be the Lion updates . . . also from the App store because it may unlock some additional power for FCPX (although this is admittedly speculative but I've heard that some of FCPX is Lion specific). This will make FCPX even more attractive for some if it's true.

Absolutely Apple is a closed system but people may be quite happy locked in a candy store.

Thunderbolt computer updates, FCPX, Lion are all deliberately timed and even the order of systems getting the Thunderbolt updates may be part of that. You can only do that when you have a controlled ecosystem where you make the hardware, the OS, the NLE.

BTW I can even make the analogy to the iOS and iTunes store selling iPhones and iPads. Maybe for another post.
I can also speculate what I'd do if I were Adobe, Avid, Sony. Maybe for another post. I don't think any of them would be as successful as Apple but they just have to be more successful then they have been to grow. Sony has the best chance of any other company to use the ecosystem model. Adobe and Avid are cross platform so they have no problem penetrating deeper into the Mac market.

Those sales figures are in the thousands on top of the number, so 2.7 million laptops were sold.

Heath

Jon from Digital Rebellion did a blog on Thunderbolt when it was announced with the new MacBook Pros:

Why Thunderbolt is a game-changer - Digital Rebellion Blog (http://www.digitalrebellion.com/blog/posts/why_thunderbolt_is_a_gamechanger.html)

"To me, this is a game-changer because these ports can become any type of port as long as you have an adapter, so Apple essentially added support for USB 3.0, eSATA and anything else you like in one go. Thunderbolt is a huge leap forward for professional users. Its power is in its versatility.

"It also means that laptops can finally rival desktops in I/O performance. As an example of the amount of throughput you'll be able to get on a laptop, Apple showed a demo of Final Cut Pro (http://fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/210-apple-press-demo-shows-thunderbolt-running-4-streams-uncompressed-hd-on-the-15q-in-fcp-peaking-at-600mbs) running four streams of uncompressed HD on the 15" MacBook Pro, peaking at 600MB/s."

heath

PVC posts some thoughts and comparisons of the overall look of FCP X to iMovie:

ProVideo Coalition.com: the EDITBLOG on PVC by Scott Simmons (http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/ssimmons/story/nearly_a_week_after_the_final_cut_pro_x_sneak_preview/P0/)

Also, I like what this person theorizes... that FCP X development was started in 2007, and iMovie '08 "jumped off" from that development:

http://blog.nicedissolve.com/2011/04/what-is-fcp-xs-relationship-to-imovie/

heath

This is a "must-read" article for any current and future FCP user; it points out exactly the potential gotchas that lurk in this ground-up rework of Final Cut.

Again, my best advice to those who use the Final Cut suite for a living is to WAIT several months AFTER it launches before jumping on this bandwagon. There are just too many things that might make this a non-starter if existing hardware/software/plug-in compatibilities become an issue.

Here's what I do whenever I have an upgrade or major changes in software:

-- Make an exact, bootable duplicate of my operating drive using Super Duper.
-- Do the install on either that drive or the current operating drive.

This way in case things go badly I can readily take a step backward and return to how things were. It's the ultimate "undo" button.

That is an interesting article from a FCP and MAC user. A little bias appears now and again but very to the point that a PC user like myself might comment. A possibility that hasn't been raised is whether FCP X is an additional product in the range between iMovie and a high end FCP. This is the norm in the PC world. Moviemaker comes free and isn't as good as iMovie, most NLE companies have a range of products from about $50 to the normal pro range above $700. Maybe Apple is adding a product in this mid range which might explain the download app store approach. This would be at a price point above the mid range PC applications but below the pro models. Is it an attempt to counter the possible inroads of Adobe Elements ?

Ron Evans

Scott's blog post on this is about one of the most sensible and detailed post I've read. I saw it the day he posted it as it's one the places I check daily.

He mirrors a lot of what I've been thinking as well as I put the pieces together.
The comment about this being FCP1 again is probably accurate. It matches my industry analysis that Avid 1989 had crummy pictures yet led the industry within a few years. FCP1 in 1999 was no Avid killer but so much about the workflow, within it's limited features set, was better than Avid (and I had been on Avid for 10 years at that point) and the price was so inexpensive, people could use it immediately and it grew into a big facility tool.

One key difference is that Apple's new distribution model allows for much faster growth. Without the disc, box and ship I can see them moving to faster releases. Maybe twice a year for major components and lots of little nifty ones in between.

As he experienced directly Apple certainly did talk to people afterwards, just not the larger audience. They want the feedback because the FCPX is still very much growing. Something will come out in June and I wouldn't be surprised if we see some major new stuff just 6 months later in December. The speed of update is purely speculative on my part but Apple's interaction with people and the new method of distribution concretely allows for it though.

His comments about iMovie and FCPX development timing also more or less match my thoughts. I'm not sure FCPX led but I do think they were more or less parallel. iMovie was Randy Ubillos' playground to work out the skeleton of the interface that would also be part of FCPX. It also created another part of the ecosystem model where someone could grow up from iMovie amateur to FCPX Pro editor. The 10 year old kid having fun will be able to be the 20 years taking the entry level position at a post facility. It wont be alien.

Even Scott's comment about FCPX not blowing away other NLEs matches my comments about any individual component in Apple's ecosystem, computer, NLE, etc might have a better piece out there. Apple just has a better ecosystem though. The new thinking in FCPX will fit in with a workflow which, over time, will be very big in efficiency and flexibility.

BTW I think why the "questions" issue is creating so much anxiety with FCPX, even more so than any other company that might do a sneak peek or small feature leak, is that Apple's key strength is their ecosystem and that ecosystem was the "thing" not shown or explained or even hinted at at the sneak peek.

BTW I think these are the best videos of the event. I believe they had access to the official camera. There's are head on shots. It's the clearest presentation of what Randy Ubillos was doing.

MacVideo - Editing - Features - Apple previews Final Cut Pro X (http://www.macvideo.tv/editing/features/index.cfm?articleId=3275005)

and these two interviews they did. The first one is Steve Martin who obviously is a beta tester (not simply someone who got the draw dropping Feb pre screening). He's the founder of Ripple Training and I suspect he's the one who will be releasing the "Apple approved" first training video. He is VERY GUARDED in his comments but his body language and hesitations and mental editing actually do reveal a lot.

The second one with Ned Soltz is noteworthy because given the publications he writes reviews for I have a hunch he's going to be one of those privy to writing one of the "first look" articles that hit the trades.

MacVideo - Editing - Interviews - Impressions of Final Cut Pro X: Steve Martin; Ned Soltz (http://www.macvideo.tv/editing/interviews/index.cfm?articleId=3274978)

Given the camera they got and who they interviewed, the above almost to be "Apple approved." I just don't think a beta tester who likely will do the training videos gets an interview unless Apple says OK. That's all speculation but this just seems a "cut above" what I've seen on other sites.

Ron,

I think FCP X will be as professional an app as FCP, Premiere Pro CS5.5, Avid Media Composer and all the others currently are.

I disagree with what the author said about cutting a feature on FCP 1.0... I used FCP 1.0 (and didn't upgrade for close to two years) to cut a feature shot on DV (XL-1), and never had any issues. The only problems were going to tape (I had to do LP on a Panasonic 80 minute tape), and I may have had to have 2 timelines, but it's been 10-11 years since I did that. I can't remember.

Lastly, I do think Randy and the team were developing FCP X and iMovie '08 sprang from it; I think it's a good, solid theory that it could be seen as a way to test it, per Chris Kenny's blog, Nice Dissolve.

Keep in mind that Scott had to really work hard to get the iMovie timeline to look like FCP X's.

heath

Well I guess if you were cutting a feature on DV that would work.
BTW didn't the Canon XL-1 have the sync issue in FCP due to the slight difference in audio sample clock? Apple had a plugin to fix that IIRC.
Media management was so badly implemented that it made FCP unusable for many professional jobs.
I vaguely remember a slew of time code handling issues as well.
I wouldn't have wanted to try to handle a DigiBeta deck with it either for various reasons.
Cinema Tools didn't come out 'till 2002 so handling film transfer time code things also presented issues if memory serves me (and it may not).
The Title Tool screamed Please Use Photoshop.

BTW interesting history on Wikipedia
Final Cut Pro - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Cut_Pro)
Here's the Broadcast and Film firsts

The first fully Broadcast quality, Worldwide Distributed TV show produced on Final Cut Pro was 2000's WOW! Women of Wrestling, using the Pinnacle CinéWave uncompressed video card.

In late 2001, the studio motion picture The Rules of Attraction was edited on beta versions of Final Cut Pro 3, proving to the film industry that successful 3:2 pulldown matchback to 24fps could be achieved with a "consumer" off-the-shelf product. Roger Avary, the film's director became the spokesperson for Final Cut Pro, appearing in print advertisements worldwide.

I'd say it was around FCP3 that Avid users could begin to consider moving to FCP if they didn't need specific Avid features that weren't well implemented, IMHO.

All very true, Craig, that's why I made it clear my film was DV. I thought the first major feature (indie?) was Steven Soderbergh's Full Frontal in 2002? I remember seeing ads from Canon for the XL-1, but I though FCP was used for the film. I also remember the Roger Avary ads that mentioned editing late at night at home, etc. It was nice to see those ads, since all the major films were (and are) cut on Avid.

I think FCP 3 was one of my most favorite versions, but FCP 4's user interface felt a little more like Avid, and that look stayed the same until FCP X, so 8 years. But the overall UI hasn't changed since 1999. (As an aside, FCP 2 was bad and unstable -- FCP 3 came out within months).

Craig, I never had any sync issues. Where I did have sync problems was later down the road... I had a short film with strange audio issues (low static is the best way to describe it), and we didn't have a mixer on set, just a boom mic. My friend in 2003 fixed it, and everything was fine; he used sound tools from a PC, not that it was an issue. Years later, I opened the movie in FCP 6 (from v. 3), and all his audio fixes slowly went out of sync. Not sure what happened, but v. 6 didn't agree with the way he saved it.

Heath

Although there's no demographics I wouldn't be surprised if Thunderbolt motivated a fair number of people in the Production/Post Production market to make the leap anticipated high end portability for their work.I seriously doubt than anybody bought a new MBP because they now have Thunderbolt not least because currently there are no Thunderbolt devices available for sale.

I seriously doubt than anybody bought a new MBP because they now have Thunderbolt not least because currently there are no Thunderbolt devices available for sale.

Thunderbolt motivated a lot of purchases. That was part of the reason the sales increase exceeded typical speed bump updates. There's always a bump up when there's a CPU speed update but this was larger. Video and storage companies made support announcements as soon as they came out. It was a targeted audience and they responded. I consult for a company that works with Blackmagic and Matrox and believe me there was a "buzz" coming from video users. They were all talking about things like, "wow won't be forced to get 17" with Express port" and "will I be able to gang 3 video input devices to go live 3 camera to a MBP" and on and on.The device were shown at NAB and should be on the market 8 -12 weeks (around the time FCPX goes on sale).

Matrox MXO2 with Thunderbolt
Matrox MXO2 Family for Mac - Convenient form factors (http://www.matrox.com/video/en/products/mac/mxo2_family/factors/)
Blackmagic Studio 3D with Thunder bolt
Blackmagic Design: UltraStudio 3D (http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/ultrastudio3d/)
Promise Pegasus RAID Storage
Pegasus Thunderbolt? Technology DAS (http://www.promise.com/storage/raid_series.aspx?region=en-US&m=574&rsn1=40&rsn3=47&statistic=pegasus)
Lacie Little Big Disk
LaCie - LaCie Little Big Disk featuring Thunderbolt Technology (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10549)


Generally people buy MacBookPROs over MacBooks because they're doing a bit more than word processing and iMovie.

Thanks to Heath and Craig for all of the excellent links.

... Steve Martin who obviously is a beta tester (not simply someone who got the draw dropping Feb pre screening). He's the founder of Ripple Training and I suspect he's the one who will be releasing the "Apple approved" first training video.

MacVideo - Editing - Interviews - Impressions of Final Cut Pro X: Steve Martin; Ned Soltz (http://www.macvideo.tv/editing/interviews/index.cfm?articleId=3274978)
... I just don't think a beta tester who likely will do the training videos gets an interview unless Apple says OK. That's all speculation but this just seems a "cut above" what I've seen on other sites.

Craig, to me this is the most significant interview I've seen concerning the upcoming FCP X release. I have pretty much every tutorial DVD (and now iTunes download) that Steve and Ripple Training have put out.

And I'm hoping that Steve has some sort of "Getting Up To Speed With The New FCP X" tutorial set coming out at the same time as the FCP X release.

What particularly struck me was when Steve said that Randy Ubillos was the original architect of Final Cut for Macromedia. He is the "Father of FCP". Then he became the architect of iMovie and is Chief Architect over FCP X. Steve believes that FCP X is the logical evolution of how Randy thinks editing should be done.

So I do like the fact that this is actually a visionary work and not merely a catch-up to Premiere Pro and the others who got well ahead of FCP during that seemingly interminable period of re-writing the code into 64 bit, etc.

Mind you, I have many concerns about FCP X and whether it still has many of the features I currently use and like (locking and unlocking of tracks comes immediately to mind). So my final judgement will be reserved until I try to use it for a few weeks.

But I must confess that I am looking forward to:
1/ Removing background audio noise at ingest. I do corporate training videos for one company that has the noisiest air conditioning in their offices. My current noise removal efforts in Soundtrack Pro tend to leave "gurgling" noises between the spoken words and then I have to manually go through and reduce the amplitude between each word. I attribute the "gurgling" to the sound being sampled at too low a bit depth (although I could be wrong about that). So I'm hoping that the new 64 bit FCP X will also sample the audio at 64 bits and be able to do a completely satisfactory background noise removal.
2/ Auto color matching.
3/ Instant Ken Burns effect built in to FCP.
4/ Background rendering.

I just hope that they all "work as advertised".

And I agree with Craig about Thunderbolt. In fact, if the soon-to-be-released new iMacs have Thunderbolt, it might be very tempting to pick one up along with FCP X. Now that FCP will be fully leveraging the multiple cores and the graphics card, a Quad-core Thunderbolt iMac with 1 GB Graphics card and at least 8GB RAM would really hit the sweet spot.

Generally people buy MacBookPROs over MacBooks because they're doing a bit more than word processing and iMovie. All the Mac laptops now are MBPs apart from the cheaper white plastic MacBook which apparently don't sell in vast numbers. The main reason that people are buying a MBP is that it is a super fast laptop (the fastest on the market at launch dunno if it's been superseded yet) of superlative quality, with a fabulous support network & that OS X & Mac sales are rising & grabbing market share from Windows.

Thunderbolt is a really nice feature to have but it's at least 3 months before any Thunderbolt devices will be shipping. Arguing that people are buying new MBPs because of Thunderbolt one might as well say they are buying them because FCP X will be available in June! I'm still not convinced by the argument that significant numbers of people are buying a MBP because of Thunderbolt. Video professionals are a pretty small segment of Apple's market. They just published their quarterly financials & although they don't break down the sales details too much but half of all the Mac sales in the past quarter were to people who had never owned a Mac before.

Nigel, processor speed generally has to be "useful" to drive sales.
Actually MacBooks are very popular. They didn't have an update though. That doesn't mean people spend extra money that they will see no difference in their work though.

MBPs have basically 3 things that MBs don't have.
Firewire Port
Speed (CPU/GPU) with the i7 processor.
Thunderbolt.

Firewire is not a motivating factor to upgrade of course. People who need it have it already.
Speed (which you mentioned) and Thunderbolt.
Two big markets for MBPs are Photographers who need the processing power to handle RAW photos with programs like PhotoShop and Post Production which is Editing (any Mac NLE), After Effects, ProTools.

Everyone faces the "when should I upgrade" dilemma at some point. Every new iteration of Macs is going to have speed as one part of the improvement. It doesn't really distinguish why now vs why not wait one more version. Usually it's the NEW useful thing that causes one to get make that jump. It's not that EVERYONE uses that criteria, it's that SOME DO. And THAT results in the number of people upgrading to be higher than other upgrade cycles. The MBP upgrade was abnormally high, even more so given the market as a whole was moving in the other direction, even more so still for first timers who needed reasons to get a MBP over a much less expensive Windows i7 laptop.

EVERY SINGLE MBP OWNER NOW HAS THUNDERBOLT. That's a big target for 3rd party developers. A significant portion of that target are Post people will be using that port (even if it's not the majority of MBP purchasers.

Post people who were facing that dilemma of "when to upgrade" likely jumped because Thunderbolt was something they KNEW they were going to use. They are the people who follow the lead announcement by the companies I mentioned above.

In my consulting work I had people contacting me asking specifically about Thunderbolt. My personal experience in my work follows my reasoning. LOTS OF POST PEOPLE UPGRADED BECAUSE OF THUNDERBOLT. Whatever portion of the total MBPs purchases I don't know but it was a LARGE movement amongst people who use laptops for post work. I'd add that some of those people were new Mac purchasers. Windows laptop post people who jumped to Mac because of Thunderbolt.

BTW, since there are lots of general questions about what is or isn't in the new FCPX, one of which was the inclusion of multicam.

Well if one looks at the pics of the interface:
FCP Pic1 (http://www.larryjordan.biz/assets/blog_images/FCP_Effects_big.jpg)
FCP Pic2 (http://www.larryjordan.biz/assets/blog_images/FCP_Hero_big.jpg)
FCP Pic3 (http://www.larryjordan.biz/assets/blog_images/FCP_ColorBoard_big.jpg)

You'll notice a button 3rd from the right above the timeline, which has a movie symbol with the number 2 on it. I bet you that this is the button for multicam.

I really find it hard to believe that Apple would take much if anything out of the new FCPX. However with that being said one of the things that I do see going away are tools for tape ingest ie. "Log and Capture." This is because Apple really seems to have been pushing the masses to move away from tape and focusing on digital content and deliver. So tape is obsolete to them.

Just a guess but this seems to have been Apple stance for the last couple of years.

I'm still not convinced by the argument that significant numbers of people are buying a MBP because of Thunderbolt.

Significant numbers? Perhaps not, but I know of a least one person who just sold
his MBP with the intent to buy the new one precisely because it's equipped with
Thunderbolt. So yes, some people are doing just that.

By the way, some changes to this thread: it has been moved from DVi News
to Final Cut Suite and it is a merger of two FCP X threads formerly known as
"Final Cut X Announced At NAB" and "Thoughts on new FCP X Sneak Peek"
along with portions of a third, "Apple insider reports new FCP at NAB."

This move is intended to consolidate and keep the discussion focused primarily
upon those folks who actually intend to buy and use it.

Thunderbolt is a game-changer, and I'm seriously considering picking up either a low-end 13" or 15" MBP (whichever I can afford, though with the 13", I'm getting a dual-core Intel processor), or even an iMac! I've only used an iMac at one point in my life, and that was in early 2008 as a review. It was better than I expected, because Apple was/is intent on giving huge performance in the iMac.

I have a Matrox MXO 2 that I can't use because I'm on a 2010 15" MBP without the ExpressCard/34 slot. The Thunderbolt-to-EC/34 adapter from Matrox will get me back in the game.

Heath

By the way, some changes to this thread: it has been moved from DVi News
to Final Cut Suite and it is a merger of two FCP X threads formerly known as
"Final Cut X Announced At NAB" and "Thoughts on new FCP X Sneak Peek"
along with portions of a third, "Apple insider reports new FCP at NAB."

This move is intended to consolidate and keep the discussion focused primarily
upon those folks who actually intend to buy and use it.

Thanks, Chris!

heath

While FCPX is making the most noise, Thunderbolt is going to have just as big, if not a bigger impact on video editors.

We have so many customers who are editing on an iMac. They love it. The form factor, the big screen, the ease of use. But they can't expand it. No ability to add I/O, no ability to add heavy duty RAID. Once iMacs with Thunderbolt become available I have no doubt in my mind that they will become the top choice for NLE workstations. For FCPX, Adobe or Avid editors.

Gary
Videoguys Blog - Videoguys NAB2011 Report, Part I: Apple's Final Cut Pro X Sneak Peak ? More Than Meets the Eye (http://goo.gl/mHw7V)

Gary,

I'd prefer to go with a Mac Pro; for years, I had a Mac laptop and a Mac tower, but my budget is tight enough that an iMac might be in my future. I want that big screen, etc. Then again, a solid MBP would be nice, too, but I don't want to sacrifice speed and screen space with a 13" MBP when I can get a 21.5" iMac, though I'd still be sacrificing speed. As of today, the quad-core iMac starts at $1999.

You're right, though -- Thunderbolt is the biggie!

Heath

I know of 2 editors who bought new MBP's because of Thunderbolt.
And one of them was a pretty hardcore Windows/Avid user, that already used FCP once in a while on a hackintosh, but now bought his first Mac.

Gary's right about the importance of Thunderbolt. I have scores more anecdotal stories (myself including almost like Heath) in the work that I do.
Thunderbolt will impact nearly EVERY Mac Avid, Premiere, After Effects, Pro Tools, etc user. It's not just FCPX.

Nigel, with 2 million FCP users and add the above programs, the majority of the Mac post industry has reason to move to Thunderbolt. Mac Pro users can probably wait the longest because they have PCIe card solutions in place but that's the very reason why I said the order of release is important. MBP and iMac potential purchases have the GREATEST MOTIVATION to buy Thunderbolt.

It's not that everyone buying an MBP or iMac "needs" Thunderbolt but everyone in the Post industry who does, is jumping. This is especially so if they need a laptop solution, hence MBP first.

Heath's story about the MXO2 is typical. Nigel, in the post market Thunderbolt may even equal or lead over the importance of the processor. I also have an MXO2 and I'm using it on my 2008 15" MBP which is only Core2Duo and was the last year the 15" model had the Express port. Having an i7 doesn't help me if I can't use my MXO2 and I didn't want to be forced to get a 17" with Express port because it's too big. I now not only have a 15" option but I can even consider 13" if I wanted.

This may even impact Windows laptops users as well. Devices such as Blackmagic Shuttle is not compatible with any laptop with USB3 or Express port with USB3 adaptor. People with Windows laptops and need of professional video I/O have limited options. Windows users may consider moving MacBookPros. Now they can consider any MBP with the choice of either Matrox or Blackmagic Thunderbolt I/O devices (and AJA is working on something as well).

I totally agree that Thunderbolt is a wonderful technology for the future but buying a MBP today because there will be Thunderbolt devices available in 3 months time seems a remarkable act of faith. It's not like there is a shortage of MBPs & if you don't grab one now there may not be any available when there actually are Thunderbolt devices available to go with them. I am sure that there will be iMacs with Thunderbolt soon & even Mac Pros in time. I just find it odd that you are talking as though these things are all available right now along with the whole Thunderbolt ecosystem of nifty fast devices. For example the Matrox MXO2 with Thunderbolt & their Thunderbolt to ExpressCard adapter are not even promised for delivery until July. People generally buy today what they need for their work today. So my prediction would be a rise in MBP sales in 3+ months when there really are devices to attach to the Thunderbolt socket (apart from displays using the mini-DisplayPort).

Here's some Thunderbolt technical stuff I learned at NAB that effects the PC side of the house:

Initially you will not see Thunderbolt add-in cards. The reason is that the Thunderbolt adapter would require more bandwidth then a single PCIe expansion slot can give - even a PCIe 16x graphics card slot! So in order to add Thunderbolt as an aftermarket and get all the goodness, you would need an adapter card that was actually two cards strapped together.

I've been pretty anti- Sandy Bridge. Many customers and tech blogs don;t get it. The Sandy Bridge chipset and motherboards share PCIe bandwidth. Each PCIe slot does not have it's own dedicated bandwidth. So if you were to add an MXO2 (or Kona) I/O card, and a RADI controller card and had a Big fast CUDA graphics card, you WILL hit bottlenecks. Sandy bridge was designed for Laptops and self contained computers (think iMac) that are NOT expandable.

Why would Intel cripple the total PCIe bandwidth for Sandy Bridge? Only thing that makes sense to me is Thunderbolt. Give it all the bandwidth it needs and let PCIe share whatever is left!

So our advice is skip Sandy Bridge. Wait for Thunderbolt enabled Intel Motherboards for Windows.

Sorry if the Thunderbolt discussion is hi-jacking the thread. I just see the hardware and software technology going hand-in-hand for a very exciting future for video editors.

Gary

I agree with Nigel on this.

With the '11 MBP, it is the first time Apple has used a quad-core CPU in a laptop. And these new Sandy Bridge quad-core CPUs are almost as fast as the Nehalem i7 desktop quad-core in the entry Mac Pro. I have never considered a MBP for exactly this reason because I could buy a Windows 7 laptop with a quad-core for the last few years for half the price of the 17" MBP. But now, the 'SB' i7 quad-core makes a great reason to buy a new MBP. Having Thunderbolt is just icing.

While Thunderbolt is great, many of the devices being made for it defeat the purpose of having a mobile solution. No one is going to take a multi-disk raid array around with them. I understand a small number of people buying due to TB but that means these people are also looking to spend thousands on new gear to use with it rather than use existing gear.

Again, I come back to the CPU upgrade being the most important factor. Now, you can have a MBP almost as fast as many newer Mac Pros and FASTER than many older Mac Pros (prior to i7). It would be crazy to rely on a dual-core computer no matter how great TB becomes.

However, I do believe TB is THE deciding factor when someone is comparing an entry Mac Pro to a MBP. The speed advantage of the Mac Pro is now irrelevant.

And yes, I totally agree that Thunderbolt is a game changer.

I just wonder what Apple will do now that most people won't NEED to buy expensive Mac Pros. After all, Mac Pros have a great profit margin. Although on the flip side, the entry cost for Apple with TB and i7 has decreased so more potential customers are available.

Nigel, there's nothing that's going to change about MBP hardware in the next three months. The prices aren't going to drop either. If there's need for a purchase there's absolutely no benefit in waiting until later in the same product life cycle to make a purchase. It's that people who would delay purchase to the NEXT product bump now have no reason to wait. They get the same computer today they'd get in July. Unless they're having financial issues one can purchase today.

Gary, interesting about the Sandy Bridge. Of course the first round of Thunderbolt devices are exactly those things that aren't expandable. MBP and probably iMac. I haven't checked Intel's roadmap but what you describe would impact MacPros most which will likely get Thunderbolt last. I don't know if Intel will be on to their next chips by then though.

You must have some belief as to one Intel will move past Sandy Bridge in order to say "wait until next year."
The reality though is that us folks who are professionals in post have no reason to wait especially in the laptop/iMac area. MacPros already have PCIe with various i/o cards and storage devices so they may not have an urgent need to jump to Thunderbolt unless it solves a specific problem.

The above is the very reason why I think Apple's computer updates are happening in the order they are. MBP is likely the largest proportional demand for Thunderbolt. iMac is a bit smaller but a good part of that market have nothing to do with Post. MacPro is the least because Thunderbolt would have to fill a need that one's current collection of PCIe cards don't.

Again the MXO2 is the perfect example. Thunderbolt means I can upgrade my laptop to a non Express port model. I don't need to upgrade my MacPro because the MXO2 already has a PCIe card.

BTW as the tie to FCPX, all the post people buying these MBPs may well buy FCPX given the $299 price. it's practically the price of a good plugin. Even if people are using Avid or Premiere on their new MBPs and FCPX may not yet have feature parity, FCPX could well be an adjunct offline tool for some projects given some of the features (and assuming things can get exported easily). This may well be in line with the comments from Apple in the Scott Simmons blog post. Even if FCPX isn't the tool for editing a feature it might be the tool for project organization and rough cut. Just like FCP1 wasn't and Avid killer but by FCP3 it began to compete. Getting that first copy of FCPX on all these systems makes the move upward in market share and "go to" tool that much easier over the next couple of years.

Basically Thunderbolt is growing the Mac market share (MBP and probably iMac) and FCPX can grow commensurately even though it's not the thing motivating the move.

I agree with Nigel on this.

While Thunderbolt is great, many of the devices being made for it defeat the purpose of having a mobile solution. No one is going to take a multi-disk raid array around with them. I understand a small number of people buying due to TB but that means these people are also looking to spend thousands on new gear to use with it rather than use existing gear.


I must travel in very different circles than you do. Heath's post is typical of what I'm hearing. Storage is only part of the equation. Video i/o on a laptop. The ability to handle multilayered streams of uncompressed or Apple ProRes on fast storage and throughput on location. The majority of laptop users don't need this. Conversely NEARLY ALL Post people using laptops NEED this.

Please keep in mind we're talking about the needs of the POST community here. It is also the very same people who will buy FCPX even if it isn't their main NLE at first. Again this is how Apple "ecosystem" marketing logic works.

We are getting off topic from the FCP X sneak peek, but I think it's valid to be excited about Thunderbolt products coming out soon. Firewire 800 and 400 ultimately was for video capture and external hard drives, and early on in the iPod's life, you charged and connected your iPod via Firewire.

I'm ready for something faster, something that will enable me to be able to avoid going to a Mac Pro (a $5000 or so proposition) and stay with a MacBook Pro or iMac, and still be able to use my MXO 2 box, and some faster storage solutions.

Plus, to be able to connect more than one device to a single port? Yes, please!

Okay, back on topic to FCP X.

heath

That FCPX brought us to a Thunderbolt discussion does have significance. I've seen this Thunderbolt from FCPX drift happen in other places as well. In the Apple ecosystem so much of this is tied closely together.

I think part of the frustration people are feeling is that while the ecosystem approach is integral to the value of FCPX for example, none of this was hinted at in the Sneak Peek.

I can certainly make what I believe is reasonable speculation but it's based on past history and not the Sneak Peek.

Some of my thoughts are:
Final Cut Server gets integrated in some fashion just as OS Server is going to be part of Lion rather than a separate product. That's assuming Apple and End Users both believe there's a need for it. I can't help but believe though that Apple isn't thinking of Facility even though people point to Sneak Peek as focused on "the one man(woman) band"

Thunderbolt as a network connection Wild speculation? That's a lot of useful bandwidth. I can see a whole new avenue of ingest which jives with the loss of direct tape ingest (which wasn't mentioned one way or the other during the Sneak Peek either). An editor and certainly one in a facility environment, really doesn't want to tie up an NLE for ingest when it should be used as an Editing station. They DID mention editing while files are coming in at the Sneak Peek.

In a facility environment you may want that all to come in through the server and have the Editor pick off the material while they keep editing. Even as a one man band, isn't it/ wasn't it a drag to tie up your computer for HOURS while you were ingesting a bunch of tapes. Even the Wedding editor would be ingesting DV tapes all day and while tape 1 was done in the first hour you had to keep the NLE tied up while you continued Log and Capture.

So imagine this even for the one man band. Your MacMini FCS Server Ingest box is pulling in what's left of your DV/HDV (and maybe your a little big band with your DigiBeta deck) sending out through its Thunderbolt port to your MacPro/iMac/MacBookPro FCPX box so you can start editing while the Mini continues to ingest. Of course that Thunderbolt pipe might be overkill for HDV but not for the Apple ProRes HQ files from your DigiBeta. Of course that big pipe has to move all that data for the 8 cameras you've got in multicam. OK this is a bit contrived but the point is the idea of a FC Server that can scale from home use to facility use so you can ingest and access files, multiple simultaneous, while your NLE keeps editing.

Alas all my own fantasy and even if it were to come to pass it may not be the first iteration of FCPX. I can't help but think Apple's looking at Enterprise/Facility level integration. Again keep in mind Apple wants you to buy more Macs and making the use of another Mac as a FC Server is yet one more hook into another Mac purchase. BTW on the facility level I can't help think that the MacPro will evolve at least in part, into the next Server. A box with several Thunderbolt ports that's thin enough to rack mount . . . but can be used as a desktop as well.

One might argue about the above but you'd only be arguing with my speculation but I just can't help but think FCPX is going to be part of a bigger piece . . . as Apple rethinks what went wrong with Xsan and Xserve.

The problem with FCPX discussion going in various directions is one thinks about ingest for example and then thinks about what that becomes especially when they do mention about editing while files are still ingesting.

I'm laughing out loud now. I just saw on 9 to 5 Mac regarding the next MacPro prototype

The new design is said to be narrower at just over 5-inches and a few inches shorter at around 19-inches. One of the reasons that Apple might be making this particular Mac Pro prototype smaller is because it is able to fit on to a standard server rack.

This possible new design could alleviate some of the system administrator distress caused by Apple’s discontinuation of the Xserve. The new machine is said to carry “stacked” drives with two drives per sled which will allow a higher drive density than what’s already out there. These stacks are not only built for conventional hard drives, but faster, more reliable SSDs in different configurations. The width of this system configuration is said to be 3U (U = 1.75 inches).

Beyond what we’ve heard, it would seem appropriate that these new Mac Pros would also have a Thunderbolt port and perhaps even BluRay options for the Final Cut Professionals.

FCPX server anyone?
I'll read you palm for $20 too. <grin>

Yeah I saw that rumor on other Mac rumor websites. The basic Mac Pro design goes back to summer 2003 when Steve Jobs announced the G5 Power Mac, so maybe an overall appearance update is in the cards.

heath

Huh? The exterior may look the same, but what's in that aluminum box is totally different. Even the layout of fans, power supply, drive bays & boards has changed completely. Heck, the power cord doesn't even plug into the same place!

Arnie,

I'm talking about the basic exterior design of the Mac Pro, which was highlighted in that 9to5Mac.com article:

"Looking at the Pro Mac design evolution, it is interesting to note that the Mac Pro’s current design first hit the market in the form of the Power Mac G5 in mid-2003. Nearly eight years after the Mac Pro’s current design debuted, Apple is toying with a re-designed version of the product."

The basic exterior design of the MacBook Pro goes back to the Titanium PowerBook in early 2001, and the MacBook's basic exterior design goes back to the iBook re-design in May 2001.

Heath

More slightly OT, but for what it's worth, I was chatting just before NAB on the phone with Phil Hodgetts (Intelligent Assistance )- who knows a thing or two about FCP hardware. He was recounting his impressions of what Thunderbolt truly means and suggested that while the first iteration (copper) of TB "merely" makes around a 10 fold increase in exterior connectivity bandwidth - the planned second implementation (copper plus optical) and even more so, the THIRD planned implementation (optical only) are designed to push those speeds up to something on the order of 100 times the current data flow.

Imagine, he said, taking a group of low cost Mac Mini's each with a few core processers, and with simple Thunderbold connectivity - creating something "plug and play" that functions precisely like a "mini-supercomputer" with Grand Central "traffic copping" work to 20, 30, or even 100 processors in your suite. Suddenly, computer performance could reach currently unimaginably levels of performance.

When you eliminate the bottlenecks of shoveling data through inefficient busses and rather have a viable ULTRA high speed plumbing system distributing data "core to core" — the entire computing GAME changes.

I came away from that chat with a new appreciation for just how game changing the Apple TB strategy might turn out to be to the future of Mac computing.

For what it's worth.

Bill, this is exactly why I think Final Cut Server is being "rethought" as well.

A device like Telestream Pipeline captures video and communicates via IP over Gigabit Ethernet to a server or FCP and Final Cut Pro can start editing a tape or live camera feed while it's still coming in.

Given that FCPX is going to be able to edit while background file ingest, it may be extended to ingest in general. Imagine what you could do with Thunderbolt on a server. Imagine several FCPX stations editing a multi-camera shoot while the tapes (or even the live camera feeds) are coming in.

On the flip side think of the distributive rendering capabilities with a bunch of those MacMinis via Thunderbolt pipes.

Philip Hodgetts is pretty good at understanding Final Cut's development thinking.

It's exactly the kind of conversation you had with him that leads me to believe there's something in the works regarding FCPX and FC Server "X" in some fashion. We might be a year away from it given that Thunderbolt really has to come out for the entire line, but it looks possible and sensible given Philip's comments.

my last experience with Final Cut Pro was in a video production class about a year and half ago. Would it help me to download iMovie 11 and practice with this?

my last experience with Final Cut Pro was in a video production class about a year and half ago. Would it help me to download iMovie 11 and practice with this?I think it could. People who use FCP likely don't use iMovie at all so know little about it & its functionality has come on in leaps & bounds in the last few years. I thought that FCP could really benefit from adopting the Event Browser & Precision Editor amongst other features of iMovie & from the look of FCP X that is exactly what they have done. It's still a very consumer oriented application though that mixes some clever & sophisticated editing functionality with some awfully cheesy templates & other features.

Ken Stone has a good review of the previous version iMovie '09 which highlights the main neat features iMovie 09 (http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/imovie_09_stone.html)

iMove only costs $14.99 from the App Store so it must be worth a whirl.