FCPX 11

With the addiction to updates, that many don't like to admit they have, I wonder what will FCPX 11 be like. The trying decimals in the current updates and versions, although numerically insignificant, do hold some weight in their features and fixes.
So I ask whats 11 going to be about?

I have to admit I am quite happy with the current setup, its just that nagging infatuation with updates that lingers.

Well for starters it will probably be FCP XI, since FCP XII would be the 12th version. Personally, I think they'll just get rid of the storyline all together, we'll just place clips on a 3D crystal globe and spin it around to play it back. :woohoo:

Funny you should say that.... FCPX 11 will read our minds....hahahaha.....

Apple has put themselves in such a trap : we always expect miracles with every update, with every iPhone, with every Apple thing....

There will probably never be a version 11. Just as the OS is called OS X 10.10.1, FCPX will probably always be 10.2, 10.3, until you get to 10.10 and 10.11. I know the numbering scheme makes no sense whatsoever, but Apple chose not to go from OS X 10.9.5 to OS X 11.0, but to go to 10.10.0.

ohh right forgot about the new name "FCP XI" I stand corrected.....

Im just used to referring to the software as FCPX it became a word/noun for me.....

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

Tom, Unless the "elevens" are being saved for some huge paradigm shift. :blush: :evil:

Can I be the first to call it Final Cut Pro X Eye?

:woohoo:

Tom Wolsky wrote: … I know the numbering scheme makes no sense whatsoever, ….

hear, hear!! :lol:

In the hobbyist corner, Apple had that stunt, to follow iMovie06 with iMovie08 - which had the internal version number #7. And last year, iMovie10 (vers. #10) FOLLOWED iMovie11 (vers. #9 ) ... :silly:
So, Cupertino mixed version# with 'year of appearance', but never dared to call iMovie-b a 'iMovieX' = which would have indicated , it is a from-the-ground-new therefor different application, just sharing the name of the old one.

With FCPX, it looked like, Mr Schiller's men have learned: FCPX is the products name, plus a version number... .01., .02, .03, .... but, why the hack the prefix 10?? FC/pro stopped with 7… so, if there's any scheme, it should be 'FCPX 8.01', shouldn't it??

crrrrazy ...

in my lil' world, the actual version should be named FCPX (product name), 1.14 (int. vers.#), done.

It doesn't look like, Apple gave the 'big' upgrades 'big' names, upgrades are upgrades; and due to the 'free and via AppStore'-policy, there's very lil' need from Apple, to indicate 'major versions', in theory, all using FCPX do use the same version - the latest...

I agree that the numbering of iMovie versions got confusing, but that is in part because of lazyness on writers' part. In fact version 7 of iMovie was NOT iMovie 8, it was iMovie'08 - clearly indicating that the suffix was referring to a year. But then people starting "simplifying" and confusing arose.
Also, it is to note that in years prior, iMovie was part of iLife, which was numbered by year - which at the time made a lot of sense, since different applications in the same bundle had their own different version numbers.

What I DON'T agree with, is that calling something 10.10 is crazy. It is not. This is the tenth "minor" version of the tenth "major" version of something. The "." is not like a decimal point, it is a separator - otherwise there could not be a 10.10.1 with two points.

Think of it like chapter.section.subsection in a book - who says a chapter cannot have ten or more sections in it?!
I am now looking at a formula in a discrete mathematics book which is numbered 4.50 - not four and a half, but the 50th formula of chapter 4...

Lichinho has it correct. The version numbering system is standard software engineering version numbering. In custom apps (enterprise/industrial level stuff) it is not unusual to see a version number such as 8.40.31. Whole number is major updates that effect the GUI, core functionality, etc. First decimal are feature adds, last decimal are bug fixes, "roughly". But yeah, the version numbering of FCP hasn't been messy or confused at all. Totally logical. Versions 8 and 9 were simply never released to the public (and never finished from what I'm told).

Like OSX, FCPX is now the brand name. And as Tom suggests- we have many more years of 10.2, 10.3, 10.4 ahead of us. Right now, we aren't even getting thru a major point update a year. 10.0-10.1 took 2.5 years. We're already a year into 10.1 development with no 10.2 in sight... So this numbering scheme could last well more than the "10 year plan" Apple initially talked about when X was released.

BIG jumps, are few and far between. When Apple leaves OSX behind, it will be as major a shift as OS9 to OSX, or FCP7 to FCPX. I'll let their marketing department worry about what comes after X...

Good point that the numbering system is not a mathematical decimal. That sure seems right.

But maybe, just maybe the new version will be called FCPX Yellowstone and the numbers just go out the window.

Although I have to agree that everybody always just uses the newest version, I'm sure they are concerned with branding new products that may include a huge change in the software or some kind of marketing push associated to FCPX.

So I'll just go with FCPX Yellowstone as the next version.

peteramwiggins wrote: Can I be the first to call it Final Cut Pro X Eye?

eye eye Peter

peteramwiggins wrote: Can I be the first to call it Final Cut Pro X Eye?

This would be awesome. There's actually an old JVC videogame system called the X'Eye.

I am still stick on the FCP7 and I am not going to update it anymore. I just get used to this version and the function is totally meet my needs.

and the verdict is out

(in order for it to be 11 its going to have to do our dry cleaning)

Forget the numbers...how about FCPZ to go along with OSZ !

As I point out in my review of the FCPX update , the version numbers make perfect sense. 10.0.x were make for Snow Leopard, 10.1.x were made for Mavericks, 10.2.x are being made for Yosemite. The first number is the product version (or brand name). The first decimal place indicates with OS X version it is developed for. The second decimal place indicates which update for that OS X version it is. Very logical, very simple, not complicated or mysterious. So there's no need for an FCPX 11 until the application gets a total bottom up re-write. Like when we went from 7 to X (8 and 9 existed, and were dropped from development before public release).

FCPX 11 will be developed exclusively to edit 'Spinal Tap 2'.