Why doesn't iMovie use ProRes 422 or native instead of AIC

Does anybody know why apple still uses AIC to transcode all captured video streams instead of ProRes 422? And why does it transcode in the first place? Why can't they use the native HDV or AVCHD streams?
I know that using native HDV, and especially AVCHD, loads the processor with all the decoding, but it should at least be an option for high-end machines. HDV editing on FCP works fine and the storage requirements go down to between 1/3 and 1/8 of what it is with AIC and ProRes.
I think the ideal workflow would be to capture in the native format, edit in the native format when no re-compression is necessary and only render to ProRes when effects/titles/filters are applied.
Is it just too much development work or is there an architectural consideration from the development group to force everything through AIC for some reason?
Is it a licensing issue? Does Apple pay royalties for ProRes for every FCP sale? Would it be prohibitively expensive to distribute ProRes with iLife?
Obviously only someone from the iMovie group would be able to answer all of these questions but we may be able to gather some insights from the community to get a better picture.

I understand that the iMovie and FCP teams at Apple have been, hitherto, completely independent.
FCP was bought in - under a different original name - and tweaked from its original incarnation before being offered as 'Final Cut Pro' by Apple. See the section marked "History" in this Wikipedia article.
iMovie, however, was written long ago to Steve Jobs' specifications by Glenn Reid as a simple video editor for amateurs.
The ProRes codec appears to have been created separately from the Apple Intermediate Codec of iMovie ..probably because of different programmers' responsibilities for the separate programs ..although, under the 'Terms of Use', we're not supposed to speculate here in Apple Discussions.
HDV and AVCHD, being extremely 'compressed' methods of storing video, similar to the MPEG-2 format used for squeezing long movies onto small DVDs, cannot be edited 'frame-accurately' directly, as most of the video frames rely on data stored in other frames for their content. In other words, the 1st frame of fifteen frames contains a whole frame's worth of data, but the next 14 contain only differences between the first frame of a group and the subsequent frames.
So there needs to be a method to 'unscramble' or extract the data from the next few frames after the first of each group, in order to reconstitute the rest of the frames for editing them.
AIC is the method used in iMovie. ProRes is the method chosen for FCP.
It's interesting, though, that Randy Ubillos, now 'Chief Architect - Video Applications' at Apple, and the "onlie true begetter" of what later became Final Cut Pro, was the man who demonstrated iMovie '09 at last month's MacWorld Keynote. So if Randy's on hand to explain how to use iMovie, and created the new-style iMovie, then maybe we'll see some more convergence occur. (..iMovie has already taken on board FCP's "instant rendering", so that we no longer have to wait for transitions to be rendered within iMovie, but can see the results immediately. iMovie's real "behind the scenes" rendering now takes place during export, after after editing's finished..)

Similar Messages

  • Why doesn't Apple use 7200RPM hard drives??

    People seem to upgrade their MacBooks to faster drives with no problems, so why doesn't Apple use or at least offer faster drives in the MacBook?
    SH

    It's an entry level laptop - so you get an entry
    level drive to work perfectly well with it.
    And I **love it**!!!! Other than the plastics and case design (how often have I griped about THAT) that houses the electronics, this computer is simply awesome!
    MacBook - 4H621 - 2.0 Gbyte RAM, Parallels VM,   Mac OS X (10.4.8)   G4 Tower, Atari ST with Mac Plus emulator, Dell 8400 Tower, Dell D600 laptop

  • How to transfer XDCAM from EX1 using ProRes 422

    Ok, I'm starting to think a little above my pay-grade here, but:
    My understanding is that I can directly import XDCAM files shot on a Sony EX1 by placing the SxS card in my MBP express card slot and using Sony's transfer application. However, I want to transcode to ProRes 422 because the timeline will contain P2 footage from an HVX200.
    Does the ProRes 422 step require the EX1 camera itself to be connected via firewire, or can I transcode using just the cards? If I transfer using the native codec but edit in a ProRes 422 timeline, can I edit both the P2 and XDCAM footage just as well as if they had been transcoded on transfer?
    Any advice welcome. Tnx!

    There is no direct file based XDCAM EX to ProRes ingest method in FCP. You can import the footage directly into FCP using Sony's XDCAM Transfer app or through FCP's own Log and Transfer interface when using Sony's PDZK-LT1 FCP Log and Transfer plugin. Either way, its just a rewrap of the native media into an FCP friendly Quicktime wrapper.
    If you want to transcode to ProRes for edit then you need to either transcode the imported clips using FCP's Media Manager > Recompress option (or some other post capture transcode method/software eg Compressor, MPEG Streamclip etc) or capture the media directly as ProRes using the camera's baseband output together with a suitable I/O device attached to your Mac.
    Can you edit the XDCAM footage directly in a ProRes timeline? Absolutely ... obviously it will not be as render free / fluid as if you were editing in a native timeline, but depending on the power of you Mac it should offer no real issue. I know many who always edit with their camera native media such as XDCAM HD/EX and HDV directly in a ProRes timeline as a matter of course.
    Hope it helps
    Andy

  • If OWC SSD drives are so good, why doesn't Apple use them?

    I see a lot of positive reviews for OWC SSD drives, but I am curious as to why Apple does not use them if they are so good.
    Any thoughts?

    All SSD's are not created equal. Further it's been shown that the NAND chips are NOT the critical factor, even the controller chips (SandForce vs Marvel, etc) aren't the sole speed determinant of speed as with identical NAND and controllers firmware plays a significant role.
    Apple's first SSD's in MBA were very slow, the 2010 MBA SSDs were much faster (nearing 200MB/s), but still well below what was the top of the line of last years SSDs. This year's generation of SSDs are just showing up capable of 500+MB/s. I haven't seen a review of the 2011 MBP SSDs, but I'd imaging they're on par with last years.
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/3991/apples-2010-macbook-air-11-13inch-reviewed/4
    The point of all this is to say, there are now very high end and very low end SSDs on the market, and huge price differentials... since Apple doesn't detail the specs of bundled drives we won't know until someone publishes benchmarks.
    More info in general: http://www.anandtech.com/tag/storage
    This years top drives so far:
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4186/ocz-vertex-3-preview-the-first-client-focused -sf2200
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4202/the-intel-ssd-510-review

  • Why doesn't SAP use SAPUI5 for this and that

    This is my personal opinion about this topic! Again and again I stumble about this and now I want to share some of my thoughts about this topic. I want to share this from a point of view, when I was not a SAP Employee - I worked at a SAP Partner company - because this best reflects the view from the outside.
    1. SAP "wants" us to use SAPUI5
    I don't think that "wants" is the right word - the right word is offers! In terms of: hey now even included in your license and open sourced (because you wanted it so). Look - we build sooo many Fiori apps with it - and put in some great enterprise features (right to left, accessibility, translation, ...) and it is responsive. So if you want to build Fiori-like "apps" - there you go - this is your technology to go! This is what I understood.
    I was very very very happy that it was build with open standards. But the main point for me another thing - (because I worked with Sybase Unwired Platform and SAP Mobile Platform) OMG an open data protocol!!! OData FTW! I could use ANY front-end technology and consume SAP data - the protocol is REST based - a dream came true. And so I did - yes I played around with Sencha Touch and OData, I used data.js and used it in a standard HTML5 application. We played around with an iOS application we already had and consumed the data. I feed the data into d3.js. I prototyped around with SAPUI5 and I have build apps with it. Brilliant, so I could choose whatever UI technology I wanted.
    I always had the feeling, that SAPUI5 was meant for B2E applications - and building many of that - and they should look and feel the same and I can theme the apps. I can use it when I want to make my applications SAP like - so that the user thinks the apps are all the same and everything fits nicely into the Fiori launchpad - great if you want to build partner apps. In my ex company we won a SAP Pinnacle Award - for a native iOS app, no SAPUI5 in sight - but we have received an award, so SAP did not "want us" to use SAPUI5 ;-)
    2. Is it the right UI technology for everything?
    At my ex-company I was dealing with mobile applications and web apps. I always knew that I get the best user experience when I write a real native application and if you want it to look like in a very specific way with awesome UI --> you would not do it with a write-once-run-everywhere HTML5 super-styled wrapped (phone gap/cordova) app - you would write the apps for the specific platform and it should feel like it was written for the platform. SAP offered us the SAP Fiori Client that I could enhance the user experience for the Fiori apps, but I was never told to use SAPUI5 it for everything.
    The same discussion goes on with: why was the new SAP website not build with SAPUI5, or the UX Explorer (eat your own dog food), or a useful internal app - why Angular, or the other way around why do we even use SAPUI5 and not Angular JS itself. Back to the past - SAP did never tell me to build a website with it, or to build something tiny and small with it (a widget) - or to enhance parts of a website with it - or to build something super-specific with it.
    And yes maybe the UI in a mobile app was not SAPUI5 but do you know if it uses Gateway with OData or the SAP Mobile Platform, was the API managed with Apigee, was HCI involved in getting the data from different sources, was it maybe wrapped with SAP Mobile Secure, did it maybe use a HANA backend or some of its features (predictions, text analytics, ...) - are some backend parts maybe hosted on HCP - who knows? So yeah, maybe other SAP technology was involved which you don't see, but in the end it made your life simpler.
    Instead of arguing around why this and that was used for this and that - can we save our energy and instead look at the result - which is all what counts - that it was the right UI technology with the right user interface which makes the user happy? I stated something like - does Google use AngularJS for everything? Nope. They offer us something great we can use. Right, maybe AngularJS is not as important for Google like SAPUI5 is for us. But we have something with which we can build our day-to-day business apps with and we do so.
    3. We missed great opportunity in not using SAPUI5 for this and that
    Let's think about how projects are going: you want something, you look at the costs, you choose most efficient option. Yes this could mean reusing an existing native application which was written long ago and you pimped it up. Or you had outsourced it to a company which wrote a similar app. Or you bought the source code. Or you have some cheap internal staff which could do it (students, trainee), or you could outsource it cheaply. Or all you have is people with experience in this and that technology. Or it must look in a very very specific way (because marketing says so) and you go native. Or it maybe should even differentiate itself and should look NOT like a Fiori app. And no - I don't think - this is my employees view - we are not for example an event app producer. We normally build business applications. And I don't think that we can write an app from scratch "just" for an event in a certain technology. Yes it would be nice if this and that would use SAPUI5, I think if it would be possible in terms of time and costs and UI wishes and hundreds of other factors we would do it with SAPUI5.
    Working at the partner SAP showed me over 50 Fiori apps, now hundreds of Fiori apps are released. SAP now showed that SAPUI5 is going big with S/4HANA. We have seen the Simple Finance solution. I was walking around at the CeBIT this year and I was impressed myself which cool apps and screens have been shown with SAPUI5. I used the SAPUI5 app on a Samsung Smart Watch myself. The SAP Web IDE itself is built with SAPUI5 in its heart. I don't need any other "proves" that SAPUI5 is great. I have seen great use cases for it, but I also know myself when I would use other stuff.
    4. My conclusion
    There is never every anything which can cover all different use cases. One-size-fits-all clothes also does not fit for everyone even if it says so. If someone creates something great don't judge it by the UI technology. Judge it by the experience and the value it creates. There are reasons why this and that was chosen. Use what fits your needs best with your requirements. Make the end user happy!

    Hey Denise,
    Thanks for pulling this discussion into SCN. Makes it much easier to discuss compared to Twitter. But I also have to apologize in the beginning that my answer now exceeds 140 characters by 50 times.
    Let me share my thoughts and personal opinion as well. I will try to look at it from a strategic point of view, as you – as the technical UI5 expert - have already covered the technical perspective.
    SAP recommends using SAPUI5 where it fits to customers’ requirements
    Let me begin with a clear statement from my perspective: It makes no sense that SAP takes customer decisions.
    Of course, customers expect SAP to help them with their strategies and decisions and of course we are helping. But at the end, the decisions have to be taken by the customer who needs to take the specific conditions of the company into account. The most important condition in the context of UX is the end user. But we shouldn't forget the business strategy as the most important influence factor. I’m not saying that technical decisions are completely unimportant, but I would like to point out that other things are more important for a company.
    As a result, it wouldn't make a lot of sense if SAP would just want every customer to use SAPUI5. To me, customers need recommendations leading to solutions that satisfy their needs and requirements.
    There is not that one UI technology that serves all needs
    This headline might be a challenging statement and I can already imagine reactions to it. But in fact I can confirm this sentence easily. You always have to combine different technologies. Some of them are from SAP others not. The selection and combination of these technologies is different from customer to customer because the requirements are different. There are still reasons to use Web Dynpro ABAP and I’m still recommending SAP NetWeaver Business Client, POWL (Power Lists), WDA Chips, FPM based on the given environment of the customer. And obviously there are also reasons for UI5.
    SAP already proves the usage of SAPUI5
    In general, I see two different use cases here: Developing custom applications vs. adopting applications from SAP.
    In the one case, customers want recommendations on development environments and UI technologies that consider their development requirements and existing conditions (e.g. existing skills, given implementations). SAPUI5 is a great UI technology and there are some special aspects that make the decision obviously easy. If I want to create simple business applications that can be connected with my SAP system easily, especially in combination under responsive conditions on multiple devices and targeted for casual and/or occasional users UI5 might be the right choice for many.  Exactly this pattern is what many customers are searching for these days. So, the recommendation for UI5 comes quite often.
    Whether or not SAP proves the usage of SAPUI5 in their own world is to me more connected to the use case where customers want to adopt SAP applications. And in deed, SAP is using SAPUI5. There are hundreds of SAP Fiori applications that have been built with SAPUI5 and there have been a lot of other applications developed using SAPUI5, too. And again, there is a huge need for applications for casual and/or occasional users, so that’s a big reason for SAP to create such applications.
    Websites vs. Business Applications
    This discussion was triggered by some statements in twitter, that SAP sites such as sap.com, SAP UX Explorer or the latest mobile conference app are not developed using UI5. Actually I see these to be websites but not business applications. I have never told a customer to build a website in UI5 and I would continue to do so.
    Maybe we need to discuss the difference between a website and a business application. I guess it is not easy to find a common understanding here, as the borderlines between several worlds have disappeared in the last years.
    Some years ago it was more or less easy to differ between:
    Native desktop applications running on a specific desktop OS
    Native mobile applications running on a specific mobile OS
    Browser-based applications running in specific browsers
    Websites, basically running on many browsers
    In the first three categories we saw business applications. 1 and 2 were selected especially when specific functions of the device and OS where needed to be accessed (for example the camera of the mobile device, the fast rendering capability of the desktop). 3 was also used for business applications but in most cases on desktop browsers.
    Today, one can develop browser-based applications that look like native applications and even can access the devices like native applications. Responsive design breaks the borderlines even more. Now, browser-based content can be rendered perfectly on a desktop browser as well as on a mobile phone and a user might even not be able to judge whether it was originally intended to be developed for the one or the other.
    So maybe there is no big difference anymore between websites and browser-based applications. But there is still a difference between browser-based applications and browser-based business applications, where additional requirements such as integration into business systems are drivers. Here I see SAPUI5 as a very cool UI technology.
    That’s just my 2 (personal) cents,
    JJ

  • Why doesn't iMovie have Aperture as a dropdown choice for photos?  I don't have iPhoto, but it's the only choice I see.  I am using iMovie 11 in Mountain Lion.

    This is frustrating.  I don't want to buy iPhoto as well and have another database of my photos eating up SSD space on my MBP.  I have tried dragging photos into my project from Aperture, and that doesn't work either. 

    I get Aperture as an option in mine. You just click on the Photo Browser in the Middle Toolbar in iMovie. Aperture should be an option.
    First make sure you are looking in the right place, as shown in these pictures.
    If you are and it still does not work for you, try trashing the preferences - as explained here.
    https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-4061

  • Why doesn't iMovie HD import MPEG2 files?

    Dear Discussion Group,
    Can you please tell me why iMovie HD imports MPEG4 files, but not MPEG2 files?
    It would appear that the DV8 camcorders have been withdrawn from the marketplace, with the exception of miniDV, and there are only a few models of them available.
    In their place are miniDVD and Hard Drive Digital camcorders, the vast majority og which record in the MPEG2 format, not MPEG4!
    The industry leader, Sony, doesn't make a single digital camcorder that upports MPEG4.
    So, why does Apple support this newer technology in iMovie HD? Will there be support in future releases of iMovie?
    Owen Cobb

    Only the iMovie product manager at Apple can really answer that question. Maybe the next upgrade will add this feature. On the PC, the consumer video editing app Adobe Premiere Elements 1.0 didn't support MPEG-2 editing either, but added it in version 2.0, and improved it with 3.0.
    QuickTimeKirk said:
    iMovie is a DV editing app. Not an MPEG-2 convert to DV Stream and then edit app.
    That only applies to iMovie, not iMovie HD. When you capture from a HD miniDV camcorders with iMovie HD, it does exactly that: convert the MPEG-2 stream and then edit it. HD miniDV camcorders record in MPEG-2 to fit 1 hour of HD video onto the same 1 hour miniDV tapes that are used for SD camcorders. The limitation is that iMovie HD supports this only for HD camcorders with Firewire connections.
    Clemmons Kid said:
    The industry leader, Sony, doesn't make a single digital camcorder that upports MPEG4.
    I just checked on the Sony website, and found 6 HD camcorders that record in AVCHD (which is MPEG-4), to either hard disk, DVD, or flash memory.

  • Why Doesn't iMovie '08 allow QuickTime/.mov to be imported

    I've been reading about others who have been unable to import .mov files into iMovie '08. Very frustrating indeed.
    With all due respect, the solutions/answers that are being posted are extremely "techy" for the layman. Come On! This isn't Final Cut Pro. Furthermore, the bottom line answer is - you can't import .mov files. Earlier versions of iMovie were much more user friendly and allowed you to accomplish this task. I know that I had no problems dragging a .mov file to the clip window in earlier versions of iMovie. Why is this now such a problem? This is a major oversight in Apple's development of iMovie that needs to be resolved.
    I believe that it's truly unacceptable to require loyal Apple users to revert back to earlier versions of iMovie to accomplish this task.
    I demand that Apple get on this and fix it!

    With all due respect, the solutions/answers that are being posted are extremely "techy" for the layman.
    It is no more "techy" to expect a layman to know what kind of data is stored in a file container (MOV) than it is to expect a consumer to know what kind of media (tape, HDD, DVD, memory card, etc.) is used to store his files on a camcorder. In short, if this too much trouble or beyond the capability of the potential camcorder purchaser, then it is likely the individual should not be shopping for a camcorder in the first place. In a similar manner, if you do not understand what kinds of files your editor can edit, you should probably not be using that editor.
    Furthermore, the bottom line answer is - you can't import .mov files.
    Since August of 2007 millions of MOV clips have been imported by hundreds of thousands of users.
    Earlier versions of iMovie were much more user friendly and allowed you to accomplish this task. I know that I had no problems dragging a .mov file to the clip window in earlier versions of iMovie. Why is this now such a problem?
    This is the crux of your problem. All previous versions of iMovie performed or attempted to perform an automatic conversion of non-edit compatible, fully supported QT compression formats to edit compatible compression formats as part of the import process. iMovie '08 does not do this. iMovie '08 can edit DV, AIC, Motion-JPEG, Photo-JPEG, as well as, supported profiles of MPEG-4 or H.264 content. The application assumes that if you import a DV file that you want to edit the file natively in DV. So it does not arbitrarily convert the file to one of the other compression formats behind your back as iMovie HD might do. If this auto conversion process is what you value most in your editor or you don't know and don't care what types of files can be edited, then download and use your free copy of iMovie HD v6.0.4 which is readily available to all iLife '08 owners. iMovie '08 is simply "not for everyone" and even the people who use it will admit that it is not the best tool for all projects.
    This is a major oversight in Apple's development of iMovie that needs to be resolved... I believe that it's truly unacceptable to require loyal Apple users to revert back to earlier versions of iMovie to accomplish this task... I demand that Apple get on this and fix it!
    You consider this an "oversight." That's your opinion. I disagree and firmly believe the application does what they wanted it to do. But this is beside the point. There is no "reverting back to earlier versions of iMovie" since the iMovie '08 application is not an update or upgrade of any previous "version" but rather a totally new editing concept with all new code and a totally different look that "just happens to share the iMovie name." This is also not the forum to use to "demand" changes to an Apple product. Use the application's built-in "Provide iMovie Feedback" menu option to access the official form in which you may express your dissatisfaction, submit an enhancement request, or make a "bug report."
    I personally prefer the ability to edit multiple forms of content within a single project but if you don't, you could always request a compromise of sorts. To wit, you could simply request that an additional import module be added which allows users be given the option to designate a specific project format (e.g., DV, AIC, M-JPEG, Photo-JPEG, MPEG-4, or H.264) and have any content not already in that compression format be automatically converted to that format in much the same manner as the current version of iMovie HD does. However, this does seem to defeat the purpose of being able to do "native" edits in multiple formats within a single project and I suspect you will likely then complain about the time it takes to convert to some of the format choices or object to the default settings employed for QT file level conversion.

  • Why doesn't imovie 6 recognize MOV or DV files?

    When trying to import MOV files into imovie 'error unknown' is the response
    If then converting these MOV files to DV I get this response...The file could not be imported: QuickTime couldn’t parse it: -39. ?
    Does anyone why this is happening?
    I just wanna paste together 5 clips so I can open them in Logic and compose.
    Ta

    Thanks for the extra information catspaw - enjoy your overseas trip!
    Sarah - I haven't tried this myself, but you may be able to open the clips in QuickTime Pro then join them together as one movie. If you have Garageband, you may be able to open the combined movie in that program and then compose your music. I think Garageband Help explains how to score a movie in that program - I've not done it myself.
    If you only have QuickTime Player you will need to upgrade to the Pro version. Instructions for joining movies together are included in QuickTime Help. Here is an extract:
    "+With QuickTime Pro, you can easily add one movie to another to make one longer movie.+
    +To combine two movies:+
    +In QuickTime Player, choose Edit > Select All to select the entire contents of the first movie.+
    +Choose Edit > Copy, then open the second movie.+
    +Move the playhead to the point at which you want to insert the movie (usually the very beginning or end of the original movie), and choose Edit > Paste.+
    +Choose File > Save As to name and save the new movie.+"
    Sarah, you mentioned in your first post in this thread that you were going to use Logic, then compose. This lead me to the possibility of using Garageband after first combining the movies in QuickTime Pro. iMovie HD 6 is normally the ideal vehicle for putting together a movie and then scoring in Garageband, but as you appear to be having problems with iMovie perhaps QuickTime Pro will do the trick!
    In another post, it was mentioned that iMovie '08 could import "Photo-JPEG" files (among others). If all else fails, and if you don't already have a copy, it might be worth getting iLife '08. If you still have a copy of the original Photo-JPEG clips, iMovie '08 may solve your import problems. I will check out that other post and post the link back shortly.
    John

  • Why doesn't iMovie 10 import anything

    I have wasted an evening trying to import a DV movie, Then I tried an .avi movie. then a Quick Time movie into iMovie 10 . It rejected all of them!
    So in desparation I have gone back to using 9.09. What is wrong. . .

    Only the iMovie product manager at Apple can really answer that question. Maybe the next upgrade will add this feature. On the PC, the consumer video editing app Adobe Premiere Elements 1.0 didn't support MPEG-2 editing either, but added it in version 2.0, and improved it with 3.0.
    QuickTimeKirk said:
    iMovie is a DV editing app. Not an MPEG-2 convert to DV Stream and then edit app.
    That only applies to iMovie, not iMovie HD. When you capture from a HD miniDV camcorders with iMovie HD, it does exactly that: convert the MPEG-2 stream and then edit it. HD miniDV camcorders record in MPEG-2 to fit 1 hour of HD video onto the same 1 hour miniDV tapes that are used for SD camcorders. The limitation is that iMovie HD supports this only for HD camcorders with Firewire connections.
    Clemmons Kid said:
    The industry leader, Sony, doesn't make a single digital camcorder that upports MPEG4.
    I just checked on the Sony website, and found 6 HD camcorders that record in AVCHD (which is MPEG-4), to either hard disk, DVD, or flash memory.

  • Why doesn't iTunes use track names on burned cd's instead of querying Gracenote?

    I run a recording studio and burn cd's of original music for clients. Sometimes when those clients open their cd in itunes, titles and artist names with no connection whatsoever to their music are displayed. Why does itunes not just use the titles burned with the cd instead of automatically querying Gracenote and arbitrarily assigning incorrect titles and artists to the disc? I have even imported such a disc into itunes, changed the titles and artist name, created a new playlist with those songs, and burned a disc from that corrected playlist, only to have it come up wrong again when the new disc is opened in itunes. This needs to be fixed. Some of those clients use the burned discs as booking demos, and having another artist's name and song titles come up causes confusion and embarassment.

    ed2345,
    No need for you to be an a-hole.
    Fair enough, although you are better off getting that feedback from me than from one of your clients who puts 2 and 2 together. 
    I clearly stated that quite often these were unfinished projects, often with working titles that may or may not be the final title.
    What you "clearly stated" is that your clients are having "confusion and embarassment."  Is that not sufficient for you to get those discs into the database?
    ....if the names haven't changed will Gracenote accept a submission of the same titles but different running times from the same artist and delete the old one?
    If the running times are different, it will look like a different CD to Gracenote.  If the CD is not the final version, you should append its title with "Demo" or "Work in Progress" or a similar indication that will distinguish it from the final "real" version.
    You may have a misimpression about Gracenote.  Yes, they are authoritative about commercial CDs, but they have also opened their DB for submissions to any hobbyist with iTunes and a burner.  They have tons of such things in their database.  There is absolutely no need for you to avoid putting your stuff in there.  In fact, since iTunes cannot read CD Text, there is currently no way other than Gracenote to solve the iTunes problem which brought you to this Forum.

  • Why doesn't printing use the default printer?

    I have two main printers to use at home and whenever I print a web page, Firefox automatically prints using the non-default printer. If I select the default printer from the drop down list, it works fine. I shouldn't have to select the default printer every time I want to print.

    Note that NONE of the replies answer the original question.
    The key word in the question is "'''Why'''" and "default printer" refers to the system's default printer.
    Why does Firefox behave differently than any other Win app when it comes to printing, ALWAYS use the system's default printer UNLESS the user changes it (''and NOT memorize the choice'').
    To put it another way, '''Firefox should NOT always use the last printer selected'''.
    '''This non-standard printing behavior should be changed.'''

  • Why doesn't iMovie import video directly from the iPhone 3GS

    We here quite frequently that Apple offers a better overall experience than the competition because they make the whole widget... I was SHOCKED to discover that iMovie will NOT recognize my iPhone 3GS... Doesn't Apple make both products and their OS's (Yes, I know they make both)?
    iMovie imports video from my FLip HD just fine... This is very disappointing... And yes, I figured out how to do it... Import it to iPhoto, export it as a .mov and import it to iMovie... This is crazy, Apple!

    What I find shocking is that if you open iMovie and select "Import from Camera..." the iPhone doesn't show up.
    For further clarification, I have turned off the option to open iPhoto or Image Capture automatically when a camera is attached. I don't that option to import photos from my camera because they are automatically imported to my computer via the eye-fi card in my camera.
    I do expect that when I open iMovie manually and select to "Import from Camera..." that the iPhone will be recognized as a camera. My FLip mino HD is recognized and it is awkward to then have to open iPhoto, import the movies, export the movies and then import them to iMovie to modify them and move them to my Apple TV.
    I have provided Apple my Feedback on both their iPhone and iMovie sites.

  • Why doesn't Labview use (Macromedi​a) Flash for building controls?

    When working with Labview you have a lot of options, but even although "everything" seems covered, I wonder wether this will still be true in the future when more complex and flexible interfaces have to be developed?
    (I had a vision That's why, to me it seems good if Labview would "broaden it's horizons"
    and look around to which software-standards it could conform/can adopt.

    It sounds like trying to attach wings to a Mercedes in order to make it fly.
    ... anyway, I don't think that you can complain that LV it's not enlarging the number of USEFUL technologies included ...
    ... and a better idea is for Macromedia to include a LV Player ... :-)

  • Why doesn't Aperture use iPhoto's date logic?

    This is how image date logic works in iPhoto. This image date value is used in queries and sorts.
    1. Image date is stored in database.
    2. Initial value taken from image metadata if available.
    3. If image metadata not available, use file date.
    4. User can edit database date (does not change file header).
    This is how it seems to work in Aperture 1.5
    1. Image date is stored in database.
    2. Initial value taken from iPhoto database if import from iPhoto.
    3. If not import from iPhoto, initial value taken from image metadata if available.
    4. If image metadata not available, use file date.
    5. User CANNOT edit database date.
    I was shocked (really, I'm still stunned) that Aperture 1.5 still does not equal iPhoto's date management capabilities. Since Aperture is a Pro application it's reasonable to have several date fields, but one of them should behave like iPhoto. That metadata field should be useable in queries/filters, sorts, display, book printing, etc. It should be the default date metadata element for all date related operations.
    Please note, it's fine that Aperture does not muck with image file (exif) metadata -- that's dangerous. EXIF is a quasi-standard badly implemented.
    So now, my question. Why?
    Aperture 1.5 was a huge update. They fixed much more than I thought was possible. It could have been labeled Aperture 3.0. Offering it free to users was a genuine apology, gratefully accepted I'm sure. It took all my strength of will not to order it immediately, waiting instead for the initial reviews to come in.
    So there had to be a reason Aperture's Product Manager, Joe Schorr, had not to implement iPhoto's image date behavior. Something he'd thought carefully about.
    What was it?

    Perhaps it's just that they don't have infinite resources ?
    The big deal (for me) was that they can "import" files but leave them on the filesystem. In true Apple fashion though, they took the extra steps of allowing management of the images within the application (consolidate and relocate). Perhaps the knock-on effects of all the things they did implement prevented them from doing other things...
    We see Apple as a corporate entity, master of its domain, all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful within the confines of an Infinite Loop. In reality it's a bunch of people who only have a fixed number of hours in the day to work. Someone takes the decision that X is more important than Y and Y is dropped for this release - it's that simple IMHO.
    In any event, I'd like to know how many people worked on Aperture 1.5 - the difference between the Aperture update and the Lightroom update was huge! Do they have lots more engineers/QA, or did they just get more done in the same time-frame ?
    -=C=-
    Mac Pro   Mac OS X (10.4.7)  

Maybe you are looking for