* I do have problems reading the black text on the dark grey background of bins. I am aware that I can set for each individual bin the background color, which helps a lot, BUT needs to be done over and over again for each bin in each new project. AND, the background of the project bin CAN NOT be changed, which is very bad, since there are all the bins, effects,...

* It is very difficult to import AVCHD files, since:

--> There is a bug which causes MC5 to hang during import

--> there is no way to distinguish whether MC5 hangs or is still working. We need on the import window 'Importing file x of xxx' because it can - on long files take days to import, as the import window shows values going up to tens of hours.

--> The Error : "Exception:Fatal_Error, msg:Assertion failed: CMError_No_Error == cmErr, file:...\...\src\Consumers\Imports\AvchdVideoImpConsumer.cpp, line:1018" needs to be fixed

*** just to say somethinhg Positive: yes I have the feeling that I am working a bit faster/easier with MC5 than Liquid

Thank you for reading

Lembit

Larry Rubin:

The reasons given are primarily the comparative costs of hardware and network infrastructure

Larry, not trying to be smart, but, how is that related to this thread?

Job ter Burg:

Larry, not trying to be smart, but, how is that related to this thread?

As a follow up to this post, on page one of this thread. The point is, there ARE other alternatives to large scale Avid systems, especially as it relates to newsgathering and broadcasting operations. We will be monitoring these developments very closely here at the Pentagon Channel. This is a warning signal that Avid no longer has a "lock", if you will, on these systems, and has to take the competition seriously.

Larry Rubin:

As a follow up to this post, on page one of this thread. The point is, there ARE other alternatives to large scale Avid systems, especially as it relates to newsgathering and broadcasting operations. We will be monitoring these developments very closely here at the Pentagon Channel. This is a warning signal that Avid no longer has a "lock", if you will, on these systems, and has to take the competition seriously.

Larry, having listened to Avid's earnings conference calls, it seems to me that China and the Middle East are the areas where the company sees real growth opportunities for its editing, media management and storage solutions.

I don't mean to say that they are ignoring the domestic or European markets. As I obviously don't know what their strategies are or how their client conversations go.

camoscato:

I don't see a difference between 4.0.5.13 and 4.0.6, and I know you had a reason, but I can't remember what it was

Dear Carl,

I believe it is important to explain my view carefully here. I hope I find the right words.

First of all I want to make clear that I'm not interested at this point in time to view the issue from a legal perspective and/or (small) letters in a license agreement or disclaimer that comes with a patch. My problem is related to the trust I have in Avid and how this trust results in an decision to invest in upgrades and new products from Avid.

The first point when deciding to upgrade/expand is the functional enhancement it brings and how this improves our market position. In simple words: produce more content more efficiently. So the functional extras new versions of MC bring, for example compatibility with new formats, can be arguments to invest in upgrades. Also faster performance through more efficient use of the hardware, for example better use of GPU or compatibility with a 64 bit OS giving access to much more memory, and compatibility with more hardware can be arguments to invest. But it is important that Avid want these functional enhancements as functionally correct and reliable as possible. Nobody benefits from a faster Media composer that crashes every 30 minutes... yes this is an exaggeration.  For this to be a reality Avid has its products go through an extensive test cycle. Still an error is always possible and almost all of the products I bought for the past 15 years were at some point updated/patched to fix problems. In almost all cases, except once with version 2.1.6 of MC adrenaline, was this a process where functionality and stability were always improved.

But some time ago things started changing IMHO. With the introduction of MXF compatibility (for me in MC2.7) Avid started introducing partial functional enhancements. It was possible to import MXF files from a XDCAM deck but it was not possible to export back. Later with the release of MC 3.5 the term "end to end" XDCAM functionality was introduced, effectively admitting that in the previous versions an "end to somewhere in the middle" functionality existed. Was this a mayor issue...???  Well I accepted that development needed to be paid and that functionality needed time to grow into a 100% thought through functional workflow, especially if it needs to be 99,99% reliable.

With the introduction of AMA things were a lot better. AMA was the first step in a new functionality that was implemented very well. And in MC5 Avid improved AMA further by making it compatible with more formats. But in MC5 for the first time ever Avid introduced also functional changes that removed old proven functionality while the new functionality is not 100% functional/reliable.  We have discussed this many times here on the forums.

Again I believe Avid needs time to complete development so MC5 becomes as functional reliable as all the previous versions. For that to become a reality Avid needs MC5 to go through an extensive test cycle in other words a full version release. When I ask Avid if they will commit to a "end of patching" full version release, the answer is simply NO!!! That means that they can leave MC5 in any functional state they wish, going on to the next version. That is why I find it important that the final version of any release should not be a patch but a full version. The "untested" fixes need to be "tested" at some point. I do understand that functionally there might not be a single bit different in the code between 4.0.5.13 and 4.0.6, except the version number. 

Todd called MC or the smart tool a "work in progress" if I remember right in this thread. But if the "work in progress" also removes functionality without committing to, at some point in time, finishing those "works in progress", this could theoretically be a never ending process of breaking down functionality in MC without the security of supplying viable alternatives at some point in the future.

Bottom line: I believe a lot of users will, like me, remain with 4.0.5.13 or lower and wait for things to settle. When MC 5.5 comes out I will definitely wait at least 6 months before I ever use it in any "16 hours a day 7 days a week 365 days per year" environment. The functionality in the next version needs to prove itself in the field before I even think about an upgrade and that was never the case until recently. That trust Avid lost in my case!

Larry

Did you see this link:

http://dv.com/article/101146

 

Larry Rubin:

A VERY IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT TO REPORT:

Gannett Corporation (owner of WUSA TV9, CBS Affiliate in Washington, DC), has officially dumped Avid. Five stations including WXIA in Atlanta have now moved over to a BitCentral platform with ENPS. The edit platform is Edius. Another 5 this year I believe. This from the Senior Technology Manager at Gannett.

Avid, are you paying attention??????

Sometimes announcements like this are not relevant at all and could mislead to wrong conclusion

Example from real life : The tv station X chose a a french studio camera instead of the traditional japonese manufacturer.

Conclusion: the french camera is much better. Reality: The frech camera was discounted  50% off the street price. 

Saylur:

Larry

Did you see this link:

http://dv.com/article/101146

Yes I did, Mike. Very interesting indeed, but our workflow here at TPC is more centered around gathering source material from all over the world via satellite and fiber feeds, and ingesting in realtime into our Interplay/Unity database for editing at our production facility for roll ins to daily live to air broadcasts. We do have shooters that go on location and carry back or feed XDCAM material to us for package edits, but that's not the mainstay of our workload. So in that sense, I don't think the Hearst/CS 5 model would be that good a fit for us, at least not at this time. Thank you very much for the link and the info.

@Bucur: We will be looking very carefully at what Gannett is doing and see how successful they are with it.

 

bucur.marian:

 Conclusion: the french camera is much better. Reality: The frech camera was discoounted a 50% off the street price. 

Ahhh, but price is still a good reason for people to switch cameras.

In other words, I don't think folks are making the argument that other products are "better", but rather that other products are very competitive in many ways, and Avid is dropping the ball a little.

You can't argue that Avid is very much losing the price battle vs. its competitors. Thats a reality that exists. I like Avid, and yet, I can get a really great NLE for 1/3 the price, with most of the same features.

If Avid doesn't pay attention to price, and - more importantly - its customers, then they will switch. They HAVE switched.

I switched to Vegas - then came back when MC5 and the MX02 came out. But I may leave Avid again someday. It just depends on whether or not they listen to their customers needs.

Larry Rubin:

Avid, are you paying attention??????

…Hi Larry: Yup. The writing's on the wall ! I sincerely hope Avid does take note. I have been told by Avid representatives at the last Montreal Avid Symposium that it doesn't make any sense at this late date for them to concentrate on dead formats, like HDV, even though the last time I checked HDV is in use heavily by international news correspondents while the enemy is often shooting at the camera operators ! Please correct me if I am in error on this. Having made this point, how can I get across to Avid that its view of the media format landscape does not jive with the reality of the post environment as we're experiencing it every day. I find it so damn frustrating that naivety could so strongly inform them. I wish I could make them believe me, as I sincerely get the impression they do not.

Mark Job

Larry Rubin:

This is a warning signal that Avid no longer has a "lock", if you will, on these systems, and has to take the competition seriously.

I am by no means the Pentagon Channel. But I do have 10 Avid systems and 13 employees who were required to know or be willing to learn Avid before they were hired.  Many of the younger kids were only familiar with FCP from school. The reason I resisted switching over, and was willing to pay the higher prices for Avid hardware and software, was the sheer speed that is acheivable on Avid vs. FCP - that is, until MC5. I have backed all of my systems down to MC4, and I have three that are earlier, and that's where I'll stay until I'm forced to make the decision to switch. MC5 slows me to a crawl - no, a stop. I simply cannot work with it due to the changes and loss of functionality already described in this, and many other threads. I now have to take a serious look at alternatives to Avid - in the event that market conditions force me to switch. I don't want to! I love working on Avid pre-MC5. I wish I could take advantage of all the great new things in Version 5, but I just can't. It breaks my heart . .

IThe Comoetition>

 

I understand the patch issues it sucks bigtime. But what are you guys thinking? The competition has exactly the same tools that avid is trying to implement so why not wait till avid implemnts them. If you leave you will have exactly what you do not want in avid plus more, plus horrible media management.

The only constant in life is change and that appl'y to avid as well as its users.

 

cheers

Ric

does that mean the grass really is NOT greener? 

Ric:

The competition has exactly the same tools that avid is trying to implement so why not wait till avid implemnts them.

..Hi Comoetion: Well, that's just the point isn't it ? Folks have been waiting and waiting over a period of years in some cases (Canon 24 F HDV Source TC Capture ?) for changes and fixes which have never come ! How long should one wait ? The competition has excellent media management (PP CS5).

Ric:

If you leave you will have exactly what you do not want in avid plus more, plus horrible media management.

….You mean the ability to use 3rd party I/O hardware for capture and output ? Perhaps you are referring to the incredible audio tools in affordable Vegas Pro 10 ? Maybe you mean the built in Dolby Digital Audio Encoder for wonderful DVD and Blu-ray authoring in Vegas Pro ? Perhaps you are referring to all the wonderful levels of *Realtime Features* which don't require expensive hardware to operate ?

Ric:

The only constant in life is change and that appl'y to avid as well as its users.

……..NAB is in roughly 60 days is it not ? This will be the cut off point for me. The announcements better be stellar or we're gone from anything new as far as Avid upgrades or new purchases from Avid forever !

Mark Job

 

Hi Mark,

Mark Job:

NAB is in roughly 60 days is it not ? This will be the cut off point for me. The announcements better be stellar or we're gone from anything new as far as Avid upgrades or new purchases from Avid forever !

You're getting soft in your old age; your deadlines used to have a much greater sense of urgency.  

February 27, 2008

laptopeditor:

Is this supposed to be the new Avid ??? This is a leap year, so February has 29 days and not the usual 28. As far as I'm concerned, this company has 48 hours to impress me, or I may begin to re-examine my company's investments in post production apps ! Avid, don't pull my chain!