1 13 14 15 16 17 Previous Next 272 Replies Latest reply: Apr 18, 2012 2:12 PM by vp@apple Go to original post
  • 210. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    Penn-Ohio Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Wild Giles wrote:  Yes you can put 16GB Ram in the 2011 macbook pro's, check out the OWC site. . . .

    really?  when i ordered this new machine last week through apple leasing they said that 8gb was the max it would take :-(  what the ??

     

     

    Wild Giles wrote: . . . . Thunderbolt is difinitely the way to go for imac's and macbook pro's, up to 10x the speed of firewire 800. 10gbs vs 0.8gbs

    i would like to hear how someone using the PAGUSAS drives and this 10.0.3 issue are making out.  all that everyone is saying sounds like a back up somewhere and i just have a heard time believing that it is processor related IF '02 worked and if so, id pop for the extra thunderbolt drives to get FCP X

  • 211. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    montster Level 1 Level 1 (15 points)

    Re thunderbolt drive 10.03 It STILL RUNS LIKE YUGO. on 10.0.2 it runs like a Ferrari (well more like a camaro i guess lol

  • 212. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    Wild Giles Level 2 Level 2 (335 points)

    OWC(other World computing) lets you break the apple max, the real maximum is 96GB but no one is making a 48GB stick for macbook pro's yet. Like I said check out the OWC site, $280 for 16GB.

  • 213. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    Penn-Ohio Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Wild Giles wrote:

     

    OWC(other World computing) lets you break the apple max, the real maximum is 96GB but no one is making a 48GB stick for macbook pro's yet. Like I said check out the OWC site, $280 for 16GB.

    do you think that the 16gb will kick that much more better than the 8gb apple ram i purchased with the machine.  i have the 2.5ghz i7 with 8gb ram now.  i just got this machine a week ago.

  • 214. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    montster Level 1 Level 1 (15 points)

    Sounds like you have what I have.

     

    I have 8gb and it is blazing fast 10.0.2.

     

    And yours should be the same also.

     

    No amount of ram will solve 10.0,3 's problems. Its the update and that's it.

     

    Besides that, it doesnt release ram so gobble gobble hit the ceiling no matter if you got 32gb ram - thats evident everywhere. LESS than 8gb is looking for "issues" no matter what version but it was designed to blaze with 8gb on  a new MBP - just be sure you got fast drives which I think you do. I have TB drives.

     

    But yeah, it wont hurt either - but with your machine it SHOULD be tops you are going to get. Imagine Apple designed this app to be super slow with problems running the latest MBP on maxed out (official) ram? That doesnt even make sense for Apple!

  • 215. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    pagecrew Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    montster wrote:

     

    Sounds like you have what I have.

     

    I have 8gb and it is blazing fast 10.0.2.

     

    And yours should be the same also.

     

    No amount of ram will solve 10.0,3 's problems. Its the update and that's it.

     

    Besides that, it doesnt release ram so gobble gobble hit the ceiling no matter if you got 32gb ram - thats evident everywhere. LESS than 8gb is looking for "issues" no matter what version but it was designed to blaze with 8gb on  a new MBP - just be sure you got fast drives which I think you do. I have TB drives.

     

    But yeah, it wont hurt either - but with your machine it SHOULD be tops you are going to get. Imagine Apple designed this app to be super slow with problems running the latest MBP on maxed out (official) ram? That doesnt even make sense for Apple!

    Monster (or others) wondering if you are suggesting swapping out the internal drive (is it 5400) for a 7200? If so, which one are you using giving you "blazing fast" work in FCPX? I am going to try to go back to 10.0.2 before switching back to FCP7 or - Premiere- but first I want to attempt to do everything possible to trick out my laptop to be a productive editing station. I work too much on the road in cars, hotel rooms, tents in other countries, etc. I'm currently using a G-Raid mini 7200 external by firewire but maybe that is not where my speed issue is. I'm thinking I may have 3 problems editing (major lagging and sync issues) in FCPX with my late 2011 MBP:

    1. too little RAM at 4GB (have ordered extra from OWC)

    2. too slow Hard Drive internal????

    3. mistake to have upgraded to FCPX 10.0.3

     

    Thoughts?

  • 216. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    pagecrew Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    clarification on my MBP late 2011 - the internal HD is a Hitachi 7200 Rotational - so is a SSD with TRIM support from OWC better for intensive video editing? I realize Apple is not setting these machines up for pro video editing capabilities but can I...

  • 217. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    montster Level 1 Level 1 (15 points)

    brother Pagecrew!

     

    For what it's worth , here is what I have found to be the "real deal" things to do re. speeding up this Model T of an app (in reference to your system which sounds like my own).

     

    1. unless there is some absolute MUST reason to do it - use 10.0.2 and NOT 10.0.3. Right there, you have INCREASED your speed (stability, and a host of other things) by zero change in hardware. 10.0.3 has provided more "features" but introduced a new gear - called "reverse" as far as performance relative to 10.0.2.

     

    2. Advice like turn off wave form displays is hugely valid and a certainty. Run in PROXY until you are ready to "share". Run scopes only when needed to adjust. Keep your display to 50% or LESS while running in proxy for skimming and playback. Only load in those projects you MUST use for each session. Other things like pref trash advice etc they arent fixing root causes (coding) - dont ask me why but because a lot of people just lOVE to offer advice about something they know nothing about - "trash preferences" is like an echo that never ends. Sure, trash em - now what? lol . If someone has hardware issues etc. there are tons of suggestions that become redundant especially when there is nothing wrong with your system or YOU. Lets assume all is good on the hardware side - and that gawd forbid, there are coding issues you or I can do NOTHING about. BUT the first few lines I wrote in point 2 are definitely valid and make a diffrence.

     

    3. Run the fastest HD you can afford, and place EVERYTHING (app exempt - thats on your internal) on that EXTERNAL HD for editing. For example, I run all projects on  Thunderbolt drives and copy to lots of much cheaper USB simply for backups. But editing is ALWAYS on my fastest external drive and this MAKES A HUGGGGGGGE DIFFERENCE! (Internally I run on 7200 but even a 5400 is prob ok because it is sata and all your data is on external anyway). NOTE; Most of us think running a FIREWIRE 800 should provide fast performance but this is shockingly not the case after one has tried using Thunderbolts. Holy mackrel this made a MAJOR differnce in speed because for video editing this is even more prime than ram (assuming you got the minimum Maximum of 8gb). After running TB, FW800 is a slug.

     

     

    Soooooooo my good man, in summary to the above for sure you got to get 8gb (more if you want but my own experience tells me 8 is good to wake me up before you go go

     

    Re your internal...ahhhhh hmmmmmm.... wait on that one its only the app - you're not going to swap out media data on it so hang on before you throw away the cash for that.

     

    And point 3 of yours? You more than know my opinion on that!

     

    Any of this help?

  • 218. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    pagecrew Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    (btw I'm a sister monster :-)

    yea, your advice def helps - thanks. I'm doing most of the above but it was nice to tick it off from your clear post. will upgrade ram to 16GB. Trying to figure out where I can get a 10.0.2 since I bought the app via Apple download and then upgraded. Will make that a priority. Have found 10.0 - maybe that will do it. Looked at TB drives but figured I wouldn't find a portable solution there just yet and maybe it wasn't worth the investment till the price comes down but you sound like you're convinced that makes a huge diff so I will go back to that drawing board. I will post my results - hopefully with some next day shipping will get myself flying within the next few days.

  • 219. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    Rob A. Level 1 Level 1 (40 points)

    It's NOT the hardware, Adobe PP runs very fast on one of my MacBookPro with only 4GB RAM with 7200 rpm internal drive.

     

    But hey, if you want to waste money on hardware and keep tossing more $$$ to try to get FCPX 10.0.3 to work well go for it ... best of luck, you'll need it.

     

    Or as others have suggested, you can just start to disable everything to try to get FCPX 10.0.3 to work (defeats the purpose IMHO).

     

    Ultimately I think you'll be moving to Adobe PP like the rest of us, or back to FCP 7 -- I'm just trying to give you realistic solutions rather some unrealistic optimism.  Most "Pros" have moved on for obvious reasons, and seeing that 10.0.3 is  performance dog is yet more justification for moving away from Apple's horrible video editor called FCPX.

  • 220. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    Penn-Ohio Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    montster wrote:   Sounds like you have what I have.  I have 8gb and it is blazing fast 10.0.2.  And yours should be the same also.  No amount of ram will solve 10.0,3 's problems. Its the update and that's it. . . . .

    @ "montster" - i have the 5400 rpm drive on this 2.5ghz i7 with 8gb ram and researching if the 16gb ram will actually be better better since the double in ram is in the same two slots which means the slow down will be the bus.  that is, historically the best ram configuration in my macpro and all 6 of the pc's i had here at one time was when i had the smallest ram per socket with the highest total number i could get.  so not sure that 16gb over 8gb will be doulbe the "ram effect" just double the ram.  waiting to hear from some really great technical ppl on that.  the technical issue is "no matter how big the ram chip is, no more info can go in and out faster than the bus it is connected too.  that is, four lane traffic feeding a two lane highway is still a two lane result" from a tech guru that worked for microsoft and unix corps.

     

    @ "pagecrew" & "montster" - this much i know for sure regarding speed and performance and the new i7 2.5 ghz machine with 8gb mem AND fw800 . . i can easily stream and multicam perfectly and seamlessly in fcp7 (fcs3) without a hitch even hd stuff and effectively the performance is almost like my dual xeon 2.8ghz quad core macpro, i mean at one point yesterday editing all day on it i thought for a few minutes i was on the macpro and started to look on media2 and media3 drives when it hit me, "im on the mbp" :-)

     

    in closing, if i were to download fcpx to start learning it, i would NOT put any professional projects on it because at 2-4 projects per week that have to go out of the 5 macs at my office (1-3+ yr old mp, 1-2 yr old mbp, 2-1 yr old mbp, and 1 brand new) i would be in a serious slow down and cost me serious ppl (hourly) time.  even if it were my own work machine (which it will be eventually over this year) i would not risk anything slowing down anything.  time is money and performance is time.  slow is poor performance and poor performance equals higher costs.

     

    apple can EOL final cut pro but that doesn't mean i will. i did notice they removed the final cut pro formums unless i missed something?  as far as i can see you have to use the fcs forums for final cut now THAT i think is horrible.  even avid still has the 5 yr old EOL'd product forums alive cuz ppl are still using them.  now moves like that will move me back to avid in a heartbeat.  that is, the vendor turns my loyalty off, not me.  :-)

  • 221. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    BROOKLYNTREEZ Level 1 Level 1 (120 points)

    Its sad how I have 4 computers running 10.0.3 , 2 on Snow Leopard and 2 on Lion and I have NO problems at all. "Cutting through 1080p like butter". So take a deep breath and rethink your strategy. If your strategy is going to Adobe.. enjoy.

  • 222. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    Penn-Ohio Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Rob A. wrote:

     

    It's NOT the hardware, .... But hey, if you want to waste money on hardware and keep tossing more $$$ to try to get FCPX 10.0.3 to work well go for it ... best of luck, you'll need it. . . . . Or as others have suggested, you can just start to disable everything to try to get FCPX 10.0.3 to work (defeats the purpose IMHO).  Ultimately I think you'll be moving to Adobe PP like the rest of us, or back to FCP 7 ....

    here's great advice.  right on "Rob A." this is what i say, my fcp 7 smokes on the new mbp and if fcpx doesn't who needs it?  why get a cheap app then spend a grand getting it to work when one already has a smoking app that works fast on the new machines . . i mean blazing fast.  fcp7 runs so fast on my new i7 mac serveral times ive thought i was working on the dual 2.8gz quad core processor macpro im now gonna sell.

     

    and like you say "Rob A." why disable a perfectly great computer to get something to work and/or spend a lot of cash on gear to try to get it to work.  it's all trial and error.  better idea is let apple spend the money figuring it out, they made it then d/l the fix when its all through.  temporarily take the "loss" of the fcpx 10.0.3 for now and go back to the fcp7 REAL PERFORMANCE :-)  because for me 10.0.2 won't work at all . . 80+% of what i do is broadcast 3 camera or more with time tables that are unreasonable.  i get the material, its due shipped 3 days to 7 days from receipt or 50% cut in editing price AND miss that by 7 days and its another 50% cut and so on till im broke.  so down time . . slow down . . is $$$ to this kid . . no experimenting . . just performance that's my moto.

  • 223. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    Penn-Ohio Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    BROOKLYNTREEZ wrote:

     

    Its sad how I have 4 computers running 10.0.3 , 2 on Snow Leopard and 2 on Lion and I have NO problems at all. "Cutting through 1080p like butter". So take a deep breath and rethink your strategy. If your strategy is going to Adobe.. enjoy.

    LISTEN UP PPL . . here's someone i beeng waiting to hear from.  "BROOKLYNTREEZ" do tell.  explain your equipment and your workflow and/or your installs and/or upgrades to fcpx and/or if you had to "tweak" anything or change hardware.  im with you, lets see the thing work.  enlighten us chap, for one, id love to have fcpx BUT not at the expense of experimentation, failures, or slow downs . . AND . . do tell what kind of HD and if you do much muticam.  and thanks for the input.

  • 224. Re: 10.0.3 DISASTEROUS
    Luis Sequeira1 Level 5 Level 5 (5,625 points)

    FCP X "horrible"?!! Then by all means move away...

     

    There are obviously issues, but to me it is clear that: 10.0 was released before it was ready, (not unlike another 10.0 eleven years ago), 10.0.2 was a bit like some 10.2 almost ten years ago (that was "Jaguar", the first mac os x that was ready for permanent use instead of mac os 9).

     

    Now, some people are having serious problems with 10.0.3, but many are not. Actually, I find that it crashes a lot less than 10.0.2 on my mac. In seven months, FCP X has come to a state where perhaps it should have been in 10.0.

     

    Feature-wise, and workflow-wise, it is beginning to shed its grey uggly-duckling feathers and showing its swan features. I feel sorry for those who are suffering with the bugs, but this is not unlike the early days of mac os x. And boy was it worth it then, and it will be this time around.

1 13 14 15 16 17 Previous Next