I just tested them out.  The MC 2.7 dongle works fine with Xpress 5.8, but the 2.6 Dongle doesn't, so that's a new feature.

How far back do you think I can go and where could I get the legacy software?

-Spencer

when I was in school in the late 90's the only NLE they had at my school was Media 100 and I still turned out fine

When I was in school, I had a Rivas Splicer and a Steenbeck  - It was rough fending off the Brontosauruses and the T-Rexes while I cut, but I survived too.

But in order for a product to dominate the market, it helps a lot to establish product loyalty early.  It's not impossible to skip from one platform to another, but it really slows things down.  I find when I'm in front of a Final Cut workstation, I hit the wrong keystrokes because I'm in Avid mode.  And it takes time to learn a new piece of software.  I had no problem going from 3/4" to flatbed to Avid, but I bithched and moaned about going to Media 100, and then I bitched and moaned when learning Premiere, and then I bitched and moaned when going to Speed Razor, and then I bitched and moaned when I went to Fast, and then back to an entirely reformatted Premiere Pro and then of course I bitched and moaned while learning Final Cut.

That's a lot of bitching and moaning:)

Most of my students want to get their films DONE and not have to worry about learning new programs.  They learn the one they are taught and try to keep loyal to that.  I also find that they make excuses "Ahhh... My software is better.  why should I learn this other stuff?" 

Does this lack of desire to learn new software mean they will have less successful editing careers.  Probably.  But most editing stations aren't bought by the editors, but rather by the producers who hire them.  When they choose to buy something, they often go for what they are familiar and happy with - and what's cheaper or has a bigger buzz about.  Then they go and hire editors who can work on that station.  This means that many newly created businesses are running Final Cut.  I teach editing to a wide variety of students.  Most of them are not going to become editors.  But a lot of them will be making the decision on which software to buy.

-Spencer

Ssnygg:

I teach editing to a wide variety of students.  Most of them are not going to become editors. 

While I'm sure that's probably true, for the small percentage that WILL go on to desire a career as a professional editor, the more editing systems they are proficient on, the better their own personal marketability will definitely be, especially in the freelance market.

Ssnygg:

I just tested them out.  The MC 2.7 dongle works fine with Xpress 5.8, but the 2.6 Dongle doesn't, so that's a new feature.

Huh? That approach does not make sense, and your conclusion is wrong. Of course you cannot run x.8 software on an x.6 dongle, since that dongle would only be blessed to run anything x.6 or earlier.

I reckon:

-MC 2.8 and AXP 5.8 are each others equals in revision numbers (and core software)

-MC 2.7 and AXP 5.7 are each others equals in revision numbers (and core software)

-MC 2.6 and AXP 2.6 are each others equals in revision numbers (and core software)

-etc., etc.

-2/5.8 software runs on 2/5.7 dongles, since the x.8 software did not need a dongle upgrade (unlike some other upgrades, like 2/5.2 to x.5 and 2/5.6 to x.7)

So AXP x.n will run on MC x.n dongles. But an MC 2.6 dongle will of course not run any x.8 software (neither would an AXP 5.6 dongle run AXP 5.8). The other way around should work (MC 2.7 or 2.8 dongle on any prior USB dongled version of MC or AXP).

How far back do you think I can go

I haven't tested it, but on an MC 2.8 dongle, you should be able to run AXP 4.6 / MC 1.6 and higher (although MC 1.6 will probably not run without an Adrenaline box).

and where could I get the legacy software?

http://www.avid.com/onlinesupport/downloadcpr.asp, Click I Accept at the bottom, then surf to DNA Soft.

 Thanks for the link.  I'll download a bunch of different versions and test them out.

As for teaching multiple platforms, yeah, if I had all the time in the world, I would teach them a wide variety.  As it is, I have only one semester to teach them "Editing."  They can continue to edit their and other people's flms for a couple years while they are in school on their own, but we have only one dedicated class.  This is typical of film schools that give a BA.  In fact, when I went to NYU, I never even took a dedicated editing course of ANY kind. (But the basic concepts were explained in a sophomore level lab as a part of a directing class) This too is typical of a lot of film schools.  You can but are not required to take one or two editing classes.  This means that most producer/directors are only exposed to what the directing teacher taught them in a beginning production class and what other students exposed them to.

So what I do is focus on the concepts.  I base my teaching out of Avid, but also show them Final Cut, After Effects, Pro Tools and a music creation software (Acid.)  Many of these kids will already have some experience in either Avid or Final Cut (usually Final Cut).  In the classroom, I have both Final Cut and Avid.  They bring in their hard drives with their finished products and I fix it in front of them. (Or have them fix it).

When a kid makes a disparaging remark about one piece of software over another, I simply point ot that all products have their ups and downs and if you let yourself get frustrated instead of trying to figure out a work around, you are not going to be able to finish the task.  I will also intentionally point out how one piece of software does one thing better while another does something else better.

Hopefully, by exposing them to two editing platforms and concentrating on the concepts, I give them the idea that there's more than one way to skin a cat so they don't get tunnel vision.  Of course the downside of this is that they don't get to learn a lot of the little awesome tools that Avid or Final Cut or any of the other softwares have.

-Spencer