![]() Pure performance, on the other hand, is measurable. How quickly you can edit a video from start to finish in either Premiere Pro or Final Cut is largely a matter of personal preference and familiarity with each application's quirks. Tests | Computers | Results | Key takeaways | Final thoughts But for all the head-to-head editing shootouts and 'why I switched' anecdotes from disgruntled Adobe and/or Apple users, what matters in the end is raw performance. They both have 'Pro' in the name, so according to Apple nomenclature rules they should both be excellent. But among video editors, especially the ones on YouTube, one scuffle comes up more than any other: Apple Final Cut Pro or Adobe Premiere Pro? Crunchy peanut butter or smooth? (Smooth). ![]() Mark my words.There are some debates that stand the test of time. I doubt it will take much longer for even the most clueless of zealots to just ship. Ironically, if Adobe doesn't effectively do exactly what APPLE did with FCP in 2011 (because they're not stupid), but with nearly their ENTIRE line of apps, which they could never afford to do, then they'll just plain get F***ED by the ever growing and vastly superior competition sooner than later. Nice try at making light of a factually crappy and hopeless situation. But hey, if you're REALLY LUCKY, that FCP X ripoff "Project Rush" may actually catch up in 3-5 years!! … even if FCP and others will STILL be 10 years ahead, but at least you can still tell yourself you're somehow clever and more "pro" for staying with Adobe! You just keep reading those crash logs!! □ "… users like me (who like Adobe’s ecosystem)"Īnyone desperate, indoctrinated and narrow-minded enough to fall for Adobe's pathetic Ponzi scheme for the line of increasingly inferior products can only be pitied to no end. Their relentless, feeble patchwork of apps all riddled with tiny bandaids all on top of each other is making it increasingly easier for the competition… very true! "It paves a future with competition in the market"Įr, yeah. still LIGHTYEARS away from FCP or even Resolve. In other words, if you're working with anything OTHER than crappy, highly compressed long GOP footage: don't bother. ![]() Of course there’s still eGPU support and a few other items that I’ll be holding out for soon. It paves a future with competition in the market, and means that users like me (who like Adobe’s ecosystem) don’t need to look elsewhere. I’m really relieved to see Adobe getting more out of Premiere Pro on macOS. Unfortunately Canon’s Raw Lite from the C200 isn’t included here, although I’ve personally not had huge problems with it. For Windows 10 users who have a “seventh generation (or later) Intel Core processors and Intel Graphics enabled” can expect to see a difference too.Īs far as other codecs go, both RED and Sony RAW/X-OCN ought to cause less issues. The release notes for the update explains that “hardware-accelerated H.264 and HEVC decoding on MacBook Pro and iMac Pro machines with macOS 10.13 will see performance improvements. It means that we have a sense of how bad it was before the update. Sure enough, it works like a charm! This is a wonderful comparison because not only is he comparing the previous version of Premiere Pro to the update, but he’s also testing it alongside two Alienware laptops. However, halfway through testing, Vong noticed that Adobe had released a new update for Premiere (12.1.2). This has been a problem for years now and the lack of optimization has caused users to switch to FCPX for the speed boost. It was struggling to keep up with the same timeline on a Windows laptop, and even Final Cut Pro X. Jason Vong was testing the latest MacBook Pro when he saw an obvious issue with Premiere Pro.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |