FCPX update held up by new MBPs?

Is the general thinking that the next FCPX update is being held up by unreleased MacBook Pro's?

If the rumours of the OLED strip are true no doubt FCPX will be one of the first applications to use it. This would also explain why we haven't seen an update for months even if its ready to go - as we know people would take apart the code and discover support for an unreleased feature?

I could see Apple planning a Mac Pro & FCPX simultaneous announcement but I would be shocked if the new MBP had anything to do with an FCPX update. Even though you can certainly edit on a laptop, that isn't a machine that's designed for serious editing (either power or screen real estate wise).

---> Jarrod

Jarrod,

Maybe I'm the oddball here, but the 2015 retina MacBook Pro is my main work machine. I create motion graphics, edit 4K commercials and design all day long without issue. Not designed for serious editing? I have no idea what made you think that. When the retina MacBook Pro was first released, Apple showed it off with a "new version of FCPX" designed for retina screens. It was the first time you could edit 1080p and see all the pixels of the video and interface at the same time.

I think we will see FCPX along side the new MacBook Pro. Perhaps a Mac Pro as well.

Davechap -That's my thinking exactly.

The Retina MBP has been used numerous times to showcase fcpx. Many more times then the Mac Pro. I too edit 4K content regularly on a mid 2012 MBP (the first Retina model). Even the FCPX webpage page shows it running on a MBP (or it did, I haven't checked recently). If the MBP isn't designed for serious editing I don't know what is?

I know you can edit on one. I've edited many times over the years with my MBP (both HD & 4K).

My point is that if Apple wants to highlight software for a new Mac Pro update, then FCPX would be it. It's the software of theirs that utilizes the most computational horsepower (except maybe Motion). It would just seem strange to me for them to hold up releasing FCPX until their high end laptop update comes out instead of their high end desktop machine update.

I guess time will tell.

---> Jarrod

I edit on a 2013 retina macbook pro 13 inch with 8GB RAM, that was all I could afford at the time, and if Apple is to be serious about hardware, and there is no indication they are, given that every mac laptop has to be ordered custom, that is you have to order more RAM at point of purchase, not easily able to add later.

That is the biggest problem I have, hard drives, both SSD and non SSD, and RAM, fail, if you travel a lot, the laptop will be subject to more abuse than if left on a desk, I would have thought that how great the old version was, the silver keyboard version, you could mod that as you pleased, add more RAM, change hard drives, that was what I really loved, it felt "pro" that is it was up to you, so smaller shops, start out on a entry level mac with 1 or 2GB RAM, and as income improved, you upped the RAM.

There seems a huge disconnect between Apple and RAM suppliers, leave the RAM slots a standard size, and improve RAM on board design going forward, so that over a period, you could add more powerful RAM in the same slot size, so from a single 1 GB RAM "stick" you could as ability of chip designers improved, move up to 32 or more GB on a single RAM "stick".

The cost of RAM would be pricy as you increase in size, to be expected given the complexity, but no, Apple destroyed this by hold soldering in RAM, destroying any chance to upgrade post purchase.

2nd Apple made the specs of FCPX way way too low, 8GB!! More like a minimum of 32GB, my 8GB RAM soon reaches saturation, becomes slow...I convinced the local reseller here to change my mac from the 4GB I bought to the 8GB, lucky to dodge the "open box" fine they levy, and was upgraded to the 8GB, but 8 is way not enough!!!

If Apple is serious about a new laptop in 2016, it has to start at a base of at least 16GB one slot RAM to 2 slots of 16GB RAM, MINIMUM!!!!

MsJustine wrote: …If Apple is serious about a new laptop in 2016, it has to start at a base of at least 16GB one slot RAM to 2 slots of 16GB RAM, MINIMUM!!!!

Believe it or not:
there are highly professional users of MBp, who NOT edit video on their machines.-
And don't want to pay the extras, someone else demands as minimum …

CBlakeston wrote: Is the general thinking that the next FCPX update is being held up by …

MBp and nMP should be best-case demoes for next FCPX, me too. Still not convinced about that yet-another-additional-input-method-strip-thingie …

What I would like to see, is a more dazzling rumour: Apple made GPUs.
The beasts inside millions of phones proof, Apple is no beginner in baking chips.

Imagine a GPU just made and optimized for FCPX ......
Unfortunately, MBp and nMP are not for video-editing only :lol:

For me it is simple, what was wrong with the old design that had the back cover where you could access the RAM? That was a great design, it meant you bought a laptop with basic RAM, then later upgraded. I never had a problem with the RAM, it was a well designed and useful thing.

Now the mac laptops are less functional, more expensive and for really a lesser design. The term "PRO" usually refers to professional, as in the same way you have domestic DIY tools, and you have professional/industrial tools, that are more rugged, have better features that most domestic users would not be using.

The same really should be about laptops, the macbook air, that is domestic, basic functionality, light and designed for a certain market, then the macbook pro should be more rugged, a bit bigger, like the old silver keyboard version, with the same access hatch at the bottom to replace RAM, 1 SSD built in, and the space provided for alter installation of a 2nd in the space left by the now obsolete super drive.

RAM would be basic, of a fixed width and height, this allows for a later upgrade post purchase, like we did before this version of macbook pro. That is my point, the previous version worked so well, when things broke, a couple of screws, and you could ditch the superdrive for a 2nd on board hard drive, up grade the RAM, change the fans, easy, no skills needed.

Now if I need 16GB of RAM, I basically toss this one I am using in the landfill and buy a new one...

MsJustine wrote: For me it is simple, ...

a) What has your hardware-dreamery to do with the topic of this thread (rhetoric Q, no answer needed)

MsJustine wrote: … it meant you bought a laptop with basic RAM, then later upgraded. …...

b) in professional use, you know and afford beforehand, what your needs of hardware are. Tinkering with the innards of a tool .....

MsJustine wrote: … macbook pro should be more rugged, a bit bigger, …...

c) tell this 3000 'field wokers' at Reuters, or 8000 at HP or …

MsJustine wrote: … what was wrong with the old design that had the back cover where you could access the RAM? ...

A hole in the case: less stablity, entrance for dust, dirt, humidity, lots of space for mechanics used maybe once in the lifetime of device instead for bigger battery used daily, .... list tbc.

back2topic.....

davechap wrote: ...the 2015 retina MacBook Pro is my main work machine. I create motion graphics, edit 4K commercials and design all day long without issue....

I have on my desk both a top-spec 2015 iMac 27 and top-spec 2015 MBP, with FCPX on both. The MBP is an amazing laptop, however (for me) the editing experience on the iMac is much better. It is faster, the screen is much larger and the fans don't spin up *nearly* as much. The fans in my MBP spin up at the slightest touch.

If you need a portable video editing machine the MBP is great for that. But for fixed-location editing, the iMac (for me) is a lot more comfortable and effective. This is also influenced by our documentary group having shot only 4k for the last 1.5 years. That is such a burden on any computer that even my top-spec 2015 iMac 27 is not really fast enough.

Ironically I tend to use my MacBook Air in the field more than the MBP. Work styles differ but in the field I am too busy producing or shooting to edit much, and my laptop is mainly used to copy files, check footage or at most cut a daily. The MBA is so much lighter and thinner than the MBP that if I don't absolutely need the MBP I take the MBA.

Apple's iMac lineup can push people to the MBP in certain cases. E.g, if you don't have the space for an iMac 27, you are stuck with the iMac 21.5, which doesn't even have a discrete GPU in the highest configuration, and only 512GB SSD max. The CPU is a little faster than the MBP (depending on how you count the turbo mode), but there's an argument the MBP is a better video editing machine than a top-spec iMac 21.5.

If Apple significantly overhauls the new MBP and doesn't push up the iMac 21.5 equally or more, than people will be driven further toward the MBP.

Yes, I knew what I needed before hand, a top specced macbook pro, my bank balance did not allow for that, I bought the best I could afford at the time.

When I bought my first macbook pro, the silver keyboard version, I was so happy with this, until I found out it was the ndvidia graphics card dodge version, but anyway, the thing I liked about this, was the ability to change the RAM, and so on, this was a brilliant concept, that and the snap off power connector...love this.

Now hard soldered RAM, if a RAM module goes off the range, a R26 000 laptop is landfill, and that is just bad, Apple, bad!!

RAM, like eggs, milk, and cheese, goes off...but unlike eggs, milk and cheese, you cannot replace!!! again Apple bad!!!

The OP asked…
"Is the general thinking that the next FCPX update is being held up by unreleased MacBook Pro's?"

IMHO absolutely not!
It was held up by waiting for macOS Sierra 10.12.x.
FCPX 10.3 will be tied to Sierra compatible only computers. It is not the hardware, but the OS where I think Apple delayed the release.
Hope I'm right so we'll get FCPX update soon, not wait for the release of new models of computer.
I do think however, that the new models of computers will have hardware that new features in FCPX will take advantage of.
Now the question of will the new models of computers be delayed till say Kabylake processors are readily available. Just starting to see some versions of Kabylake being available. Or will Apple release new models based on Skylake?
MacPros oh my The server xeons are really behind the times. Apple is dependent on Intel for the CPUs and Intel has been having lots of delays.
The various model of chips support various standards natively, like TB3, USB3.1 gen 2, HDMI and more. Apple had to cobble together the 2013 MP with custom logic boards and daughter boards to get the features it wanted like TB2. So what the new MPs will come with will be interesting.

Anyway, I believe FCPX was waiting for Sierra so I'm guessing Oct 12th announcement
BTW don't hold your breath.

Happy Computing, Greg
p.s. MsJ Get over it, OK

In my recollection Apple has never done that before with a pro app release. It was always been compatible with the new OS and at least the previous OS.

The 12th would be good for me, but please, please not the 10th.

Hi Tom
Indeed Apple has required only the latest OS for FCPX updates.
FCPX 10.2.0 for example, had the Minimum requirement of the then current OS Yosemite and even required the 10.10.2 updated version. Not the first time either.
This had to do with the underlying frameworks/Libraries/etc… that were included in various OS releases but are not present in earlier OS releases.
This is why I am excited by the possibilities I see in the new underlying OS changes available in both El Capitan and now in Sierra. There are certainly many possibilities for new features that relate only to Sierra that I at least hope Apple will make happen in a new update to FCPX.
This is why I think investigating what is happening in the developer side and watching WWDC videos helps in guessing what may come to future releases.
New sharing and extension of app resources come to mind.
Power of LogicPro as extension/shared assets maybe?? Be really sweet.
I am actually surprised that Apple did not take create an update specifically tailored to EC and to some new hardware features that are already available. Like "Force Touch/aka 3D touch". Been available on latest computer and Magic Track pads for awhile now, but no corresponding "touch" feature in FCPX. Isn't this available in iMovie???
I'm more interested in how "assets" in Core Foundation frameworks can be divided, assigned, distributed/shared and what that may bring.
We really haven't seen "Metal" integrated into FCPX/Motion.
Apple has made several "Acquisitions" of smaller companies that have intellectual properties for things like facial recognition/morphing. Some 3D apps. Will this be merged to FCPX. Hope so.

Anyway, will stand by my guess that FCPX will most likely require Sierra 10.12.X as minimum.
But who knows, maybe only require EC??

Happy Editing Tom,
Greg

10.2 was released nine months after Yosemite. I don't think the next version of FCP will require an OS that's a month old. If it's down to frameworks and libraries, and this is based on what was shown at NAB in April, then it's not going to be based solely on an OS that was still in alpha at that time.

I suspect the new MacBook Pro was meant for release much earlier in the year and that a new FCPX update is tied to one or more features for it like the rumoured OLED strip. But the MBPs were delayed for whatever reason.. delaying the update.. Maybe some Sierra underpinnings are baked in too. Who wouldn't like to see FCPX switch to Metal for rendering

CBlakeston wrote: …a new FCPX update is tied to one or more features for it like the rumoured OLED strip. …

sorry, but that strip-thingie is no reason to hold back 10_3 - who has such a device? just future owners of a new MBp. What about iMac users? MP users? Me & and my mini???

I stay with my assumption - GPU.
if its a break-out-box, piggypacked to a new display, or, after spending some time googling, a soldered-in GPU-chip/'G1'

Lots of indication: acquiring Imagination Technologies, aquisiton of a 'prototype chip bakery' nearby Cupertino, hardware people like Johny Srouji pop-up public, all those iPhone chips A and W and wotever, finally 'covering' hardware with a Metal layer (= simple thought: when switching from AMD to G1, APIs stay same, 'just' internal new foundations), etc etc.

And when going public with FCPX10_3, code-diggers like Alex Gollner would instantly identify evidence of forthcoming hardware ....

... you read it here first!
(disclaimer: just wild speculation! no insights! everything mentioned public avail!)

Will FCPX require Sierra..I would suggest yes

Why the delay? I am only assuming Apple are working on bug fixes, such as the timecode window debacle.

Is FCPX held up by new hardware? I think that would be a very bad idea, but who knows??? :S

New features I am really keen to see introduced? Some sort of mixer, and my idea about connection points linked to markers [this being an option, say cmd+ctrl+q].

If it is 12 or 14 October, that is just a few weeks away...Waited so long...just hope 10.2.3 is not the last update

Tom Wolsky wrote: … The 12th would be good for me, but please, please not the 10th.

puzzled on that one… why is Wednesday better than Monday??? :blink:

… and shouldn't it be Tuesday anyhow?? … LOL