Go ask Apple why they keep putting out multicam capabilities in their marketing material. Just telling you like it is whether you like it or not. They see market growth there. Sorry you don't get that part. Maybe you need an MBA to understand it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is the new Mac Pro a failure?
- Thread starter drnebulous
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Go ask Apple why they keep putting out multicam capabilities in their marketing material. Just telling you like it is whether you like it or not. They see market growth there. Sorry you don't get that part. Maybe you need an MBA to understand it.
Says the guy who has how many posts in this thread? Do you even own one? lol
Coming from you, I'll take it as a complement.
Great. So do I. My experience tells me Apple is marketing these to a new generation. A group that is interested in portable power. And into multicam capabilities. Just like the their website states.
You're right. Apple is truly on to something here by actually mentioning one of its program's features. Truly groundbreaking marketing work there. Why has no other company done this ever?
Multicam has been a feature of Final Cut and other NLEs for years. And it has been in all of their marketing materials as well.
----------
Please enlighten us on your experience.
Because on one hand you argue that Apple is gearing this towards a whole new generation, a generation that isn't the demographic for a $3000+ computer. After all, you don't need a $3000+ computer to do any of these things. Why do you think almost all of the FCPX screenshots are on an iMac or Mac Pro? Then when pressed on the issue of cost and this new generation, your response is, "oh that doesn't matter to me since mine is a tax writeoff." How is that relevant? And then there's the polo shirt iphone nonsense.
Dang dude. I know it's been around. Doesn't mean every possible consumer does. Is this so hard for you to understand. Believe it or not, but sometimes marketing is used to teach the consumers. Usually in the introduction phase of a product. The same phase the newly redesigned MacPro is in.
Ultrafast PCIe-based flash storage means fast project loading and incredible multi-stream 4K playback, allowing you to edit Multicam Clips with up to 16 angles of 4K video.
A one-off line included on the product page doesn't exactly scream aggressive marketing to me. I simply don't know where you're seeing this as some push to inform the average consumer on what multicam editing is.
maybe comprehension is your problem....
"a merger that delivers the breathtaking capability to run 8 picture-in-picture streams of 4K video at once in Final Cut Pro X (or many more streams of HD video). Combine that with the power to drive up to three 4K displays and process multiple layers of complex effects in real time, and you have a video editing powerhouse."
"With HDMI output, you can even use a 4K TV as an external monitor for Final Cut Pro X. "
"Final Cut Pro X. Now optimized for Mac Pro.
The new version of Final Cut Pro X has been engineered to take advantage of the 4K capabilities of the Mac Pro. The dual workstation-class GPUs in Mac Pro accelerate effects, optical flow analysis, video export and virtually everything else you do in Final Cut Pro. Ultrafast PCIe-based flash storage means fast project loading and incredible multi-stream 4K playback, allowing you to edit Multicam Clips with up to 16 angles of 4K video. And Final Cut Pro X has been so perfectly tuned to take advantage of the new Mac Pro, you can work in 4K in real time without rendering. (Take a minute to let that slowly sink in.)"
----------
Exactly, But not everyone had all these HD cameras back then. So a new market/potential has emerged.
What's my "personal fantasy" here? I'm honestly confused by your comments. You seem to be defending Apple's approach to the new Mac Pro but then denigrating the audience you see using it.
As for what I'd say to your face, it'd be exactly what I said here. Are you going to intimidate me with your presence or something?
Yes, there's a reading comprehension problem but it's not where you think. Count the number of times you see "4K" in the quotes you've provided. Then count the number of times you see "Multicam" in the quotes you've provided. Then tell me what Apple is emphasizing with their marketing material.
I have no idea how you think I'm denigrating any audience here. If anything, I'm saying anyone has the talent to use these things. And some people only think pros should have them. Not me.
So I suggest you brush up on your reading and comprehension.
Face it. You're the one that got all crude in your no argument statement. That usually means there's not much there behind the screen.
And this was not said nor implied once in this thread. So it truly does seem as though the reading comprehension is on your end.
Of course they mention 4k all over the place. Why wouldn't they want a brand new product associated with the latest technology...that really isn't even out yet. More importantly, what does that say about the nMP using HD technology? Have you checked out the prices of anything 4k? Pretty expensive. Cameras run around 2k.
It's funny how some of you seem to think Apple only wants to sell these to the Pros. When they want this to appeal to as many people as possible.
----------
Good comeback.
Have you checked out the prices of anything 4k? Pretty expensive. Cameras run around 2k.
It's funny how some of you seem to think Apple only wants to sell these to the Pros. When they want this to appeal to as many people as possible.
Congratulations! You have successfully worked through your comprehension problem.
Have you checked out the prices of anything 4k? Pretty expensive. Cameras run around 2k.
It's funny how some of you seem to think Apple only wants to sell these to the Pros. When they want this to appeal to as many people as possible.
----------
Good comeback.
Ok so now it's completely clear you're just talking out of your ass. No point in continuing on.
Some of you needed to drop out of this conversation several posts ago. And some of you need to get over the fact that the nMP might not be right for you. It's time to move on.
All I really said was the new design was an attempt to make this product appeal to a larger/growing market segment. And go back and look at the complete asinine comments I received for saying that.
Go back and look at the comments I received for saying they're pushing multicam technology. I mean seriously. You work in a field and don't even understand the direction it's heading!? That must be tough. It doesn't matter how long it's been around because now it's being pushed along with this product. It's right there on the website. You won't find multicam/FCPX language anywhere on the iMac site.
I may only be a hobbyist when it comes to the nMP, but I consider my self a Pro when it comes to business. And some of the "know everything message board types" keep responding with some of the dumbest crap. --nMP isn't a success, scenarios where production capacity equals one.... I mean really. You read the website to them and then they just continue to make up more crap to prove some stupid message board superiority.
Better wake up in life before it's too late.
All I really said was the new design was an attempt to make this product appeal to a larger/growing market segment. And go back and look at the complete asinine comments I received for saying that.
Go back and look at the comments I received for saying they're pushing multicam technology. I mean seriously. You work in a field and don't even understand the direction it's heading!? That must be tough. It doesn't matter how long it's been around because now it's being pushed along with this product. It's right there on the website. You won't find multicam/FCPX language anywhere on the iMac site.
I may only be a hobbyist when it comes to the nMP, but I consider my self a Pro when it comes to business. And some of the "know everything message board types" keep responding with some of the dumbest crap. --nMP isn't a success, scenarios where production capacity equals one.... I mean really. You read the website to them and then they just continue to make up more crap to prove some stupid message board superiority.
Better wake up in life before it's too late.
They've been pushing it since 2005. It was the flagship feature in FCP 5. It was a novel addition to a prosumer software back then. Pretty stunned they're still leaning on it as a marketing point really.
OMG THE MAC PRO CAN EDIT VIDEO.....FROM...MORE...THAN.....ONE...CAMERA.
Mind blowing.
It's a way for them to keep appealing to new audiences. It might be been there and done that for you...but to the next potential nMP user it might be a new thing.
The way I see it. The real "Pro" consumer is a really small market. The quasi pro/hobbyist market is much larger. They're basically marketing this as a Video rig...just like they have gaming rigs.
Sure, that's fine, I can see that.
I think the relevance to this conversation is the Mac Pro offers zero advantage over an iMac for that workflow. Both machines can offer the same level of performance for 1080p multi cam editing. One is much cheaper than the other.
The new Mac Pro is pretty clearly aimed at the pro market, even more than the old one. You can buy a Mac Pro as a non-pro. Is it an efficient use of money? Not really. Is that fine if you really want the Mac Pro? Sure.
Once agin. The whole need argument really doesn't apply. It only makes sense to you and your taste. Do you wear name brand clothing or is your closet full of generic?
The point behind marketing is to generate a need for a product. Not to pretend only a very small group needs it or should buy it. And like it or not this thing has been designed and marketed to a whole new generation/way of thinking. Basically even says as much in the first paragraph on the website.
I don't believe it is a failure at all.
It would only be a failure if it failed to perform your specifically needed functions.
Which then I would push the blame to the buyer, if someone bought any computer, regardless or price without researching what functions it can do but then expecting it to perform in a different way than intended. This is a failure of the buyer. Not the computer.
It was built to be used in certain ways. If those ways are not your ways then you buy a computer that suits your needs not your wants. This is the only way someone is going to be happy with their purchase.
It would only be a failure if it failed to perform your specifically needed functions.
Which then I would push the blame to the buyer, if someone bought any computer, regardless or price without researching what functions it can do but then expecting it to perform in a different way than intended. This is a failure of the buyer. Not the computer.
It was built to be used in certain ways. If those ways are not your ways then you buy a computer that suits your needs not your wants. This is the only way someone is going to be happy with their purchase.
- Status