Can Macbook Pro Retina Late 2103 Download Final Cut Pro

admin



Download PDF; Translate. MacBook Pro 15' Retina (Late 2013 Mid 2014) Battery. Twist to loosen or remove the bottle cap before you cut the applicator tip. I have a Macbook Pro Retina 13.3', 8GB RAM and 512GB Disk. I also have a Mac Pro eight core with 16GB RAM and a Apple 5770 graphics card. I use both for editing Final Cut Pro X V10.1. The MBPR is far, far faster than my Mac Pro. I suspect its because the 5770 is so old, a 660GTX is being ordered to replace the 5770. MacBook Pro Retina 13' 8GB 128 SSD 2.4ghz i5 Office Logic X Final Cut X. Apple MacBook Pro 13' Retina (2013) 3.0GHz i7 8GB 256GB SSD - Good Condition. 60 product ratings - STRONG Late 2013 Apple MacBook Pro 13' Retina 2.4GHz i5 4GB RAM 128GB + WNTY! C $33.79 shipping. 2014 Macbook Pro 2.4. A charged lithium-ion battery can create a dangerous and uncontrollable fire if accidentally punctured. If your battery is swollen, take extra precautions. Note: The solvent used to dissolve the battery adhesive can damage certain plastics, such as the MacBook Pro's plastic speaker enclosures. Take care when applying the solvent.

As a follow up to our rather controversial article on FCPX on a MacBook Air, we thought we would do a roundup of FCP.co readers' real life editing experiences on the combination.

The article that we published on the rendering problem with FCPX running on a MacBook Air certainly stirred up quite a bit of feeling in the community. It was interesting as the mail we received was split down the middle. Half criticised us for bashing the MBA and the other half praised us for not being 'complete Apple fanbois.' (Not our words or spelling we hasten to add!)

So we decided to contact everybody who had posted a comment or had emailed in saying they were editing on a MBA and asked them to share their thoughts and experiences.

First up is Tracy Evans from Tracy Evans Productions based in Houston, Texas.

I had been editing for several years on a Mac Pro. Last summer I started a Motion project on my MacBook Air and found it quite capable. Checking some benchmark results online, I was surprised to see that my 'little 11” exceeded the performance of my Pro in several categories.

Like many, I have struggled over the last year (or more) with the decision to buy or not to buy a beefier Pro. But even the crazy priced top-of-the-line ones did not benchmark fast enough to justify the cost. I would wait (and wait, and wait) for the next Pro.

So I switched my system, software, and hardware all at once over to the Air, leaving my old Mac Pro/Final Cut 7 system intact. I have never looked back.

My backpack-friendly editing system is now an 11” MacBook Air (Mid 2012, 2GHz i7, 8 GB RAM) and a few USB3 bus-powered drives. Editing 720p, and even 1080p, from those tiny little drives is a breeze. If the project is small enough, working straight from the flash drive is a dream. I don’t get much more than an hour or two of battery when pushing the system hard, but I'm usually plugged in so I am fully charged when need be.

My work desk is a constantly shifting spiderweb of USB3 cables and portable drives. When I am in the office I plug into a hub, a speaker system and a monitor. For a while I tried using a USB to HDMI for a third monitor. It works for the most part, but due to the processor hit I only use it for client meetings.

There is something satisfying about projects living on portable drives. It's a stress reliever just knowing I can grab a little box on the go that contains everything I might need for that client or project. Back-ups are easier too. I use SuperDuper to keep sparse disc images up to date on a desktop drive, then sneaker net the portable drive to our central Mac/Drobo system for on-line archival. At the end of the project I just pop the portable drive on the shelf, et voila; three redundant backups. Once every month or so, we backup the Drobo and move that disc offsite.

I have been so happy with the MBAir that I recently sold my giant home iMac. It was a great machine, but since my Air is always with me in my backpack, I stopped using the iMac. That's another plus; maintaining one mac instead of three (work, home, Air.)

Download

Sure, I will likely buy the new Mac Pro in December (or whenever), and it will be awesome working at super speed. The dual GPU setup is very exciting. The lack of internal drives? Doesn’t bother me. It will feel right at home in my spiderweb.

Matthew Celia has had a good experience editing music videos on his MacBook Air

I BTO'd my machine. It's a 13' MBA with 8GB ram (because you can't update later) and the i7 processor. The i7 is a good upgrade because it effectively doubles the cores because it supports hyperthreading. Great for churning through video. The HD is the 256GB SSD.

I've been editing a series of short 'music videos'. 10 bands, over 400 clips. I've been on the go, so I needed something portable to at least get a 1st pass done. I converted the footage to ProRes Proxy and work off a Seagate Backup Plus drive (1tb) connected via USB3.0. Far from the ideal hard drive, but fast enough. So far the program is quite snappy, with the skimming very responsive. The biggest downside (as has been mentioned) is the small screen size. But it's not the end of the world.

I did a quick test outputting one of the videos that was over 4 minutes. No rendering had been done. Switched the files back to original (all shot with Canon DSLRs) and hit output. From the time I hit save until the time the master file appeared it took 3:49. Not too shabby.

I was initially quite concerned that the machine would not be powerful enough for an FCPX edit, but I did not have the budget to afford the 15' MBP with the discrete graphics. The 13' MBP would be an option but it too doesn't have discrete graphics. Since FCPX is a graphics card hungry program, it made more sense for me to go with something that would also double as a field machine with it's insane battery life. So far, I have been pretty thrilled and surprised that this little laptop sometimes feels snappier than my 27' iMac!

And finally Ken Kreshtool told us about his rendering experiences.

I have an older Macbook Air 4GB (first of the 'wedge' generation, I think), so I decided to try your 'Far Far Away' test. (FCPX 10.0.8). I use the Air for all kinds of very-small-project edits, and never had it take very long to render anything.

I had a similar — but fundamentally different — experience from you. I started the 'Far, Far Away' render. It got bogged down somewhere between 50% and 60% done after about 5-10 minutes, with the rainbow pinwheel starting to happen everywhere. So I quit FCPX, which took about 2-3 full minutes (!), and restarted it. The render completed quickly, faster than 1% per second, so this second effort was under a minute. The whole process might have been quicker if I had quit and restarted FCPX when it first bogged down, but hey, it's hard to tell when exactly to give up and do a quit-and-restart.

The symptoms sound to me like FCPX is trying to do the whole danged render in RAM and it's just getting full. So then FCPX or the OS attempts a painfully slow form of memory swapping in order to try to keep going, or something. But when I asked FCPX to quit, the symptoms seem like FCPX is taking time to write whatever it has already rendered to disk, and is then ready to start with a fresh and open mind.

Now, quitting and restarting FCPX in the middle of a render is a pretty crude way of getting responsiveness. But it works on my Air. And in my very-small-project editing on my Air so far, I've never run into this before. The 'Far Far Away' render must be a whale!

We had other people comment that stopping and then restarting the render sped things up enormously. Also many people with 8GB of RAM experienced no problems at all.

As always, please feel free to add your MacBook Air editing story in the comments below.

On June 10, it will have been five years since Apple first showed off the iteration of the Mac Pro that has come to be known as The Trashcan.

To put that in a little context, it was the same WWDC keynote where iOS 7 and OS X Mavericks were introduced.

Introduction and Release

This section of the keynote wasn’t a full-blown product introduction, but rather a tease of what was to come:

After playing a very exciting video showing off the product, Phil Schiller quipped, “Can’t innovate anymore, my ass,” as he walked across the stage to applause. It was a push back against critics who were saying Apple had gotten lazy and its products stale.

A single look at this computer proved them wrong. The internals were built around what Schiller called a “unified thermal core.” It was all cooled by one large fan at the top. By being so large, Apple could spin it more slowly than the smaller fans found in other Macs, helping keep the machine quiet, even under load.

The machine was powered by Intel Xeons, coupled with all-Flash, PCIe-based storage and ECC RAM. Expansion was external via Thunderbolt 2 and its 20 Gbps throughput; gone were the internal PCI slots that helped defined Apple’s towers for so long..

The big story was on the graphics front. Every Mac Pro shipped with two AMD FirePro workstation GPUs. The Mac Pro could deliver seven teraflops of computing power thanks to those graphic cards and could push 4K external displays.

All of this technology was packed into a tiny chassis that was just an eighth the volume of the previous design. All of the ports were around the back, with labels that illuminated when the machine was turned around.

In October 2013, Apple gave additional details about the Mac Pro.

The machine started at $2999 with:

  • 3.7 GHz quad-core Xeon CPU
  • 12 GB RAM
  • Dual AMD FirePro with 2 GB VRAM
  • 256 GB SSD

A maxed out machine cost an eye-popping $10,000.

Beyond the tech, there was a story about the Mac Pro’s assembly. Apple was very proud of the fact that the machine was put together in the United States:

Customer Reaction

Once the machine started shipping at the end of the year, reviews started rolling in.

Dan Frakes at Macworld pointed out that the Mac Pro wasn’t always the fastest Mac in the room:

We published our first benchmarks of our review model, and the results were in some ways surprising: The eight-core 2013 Mac Pro was only 8 percent faster in our Speedmark 9 benchmark suite than a CTO 2013 iMac maxed out with a quad-core 3.5GHz Core i7 processor, a 3TB Fusion Drive, 8GB of RAM, and Nvidia GeForce GTX 780M graphics (a $2699 configuration). In the individual tests that make up our Speedmark benchmark, the iMac actually beat the new Mac Pro in a Finder test, the iMovie test, the iTunes test, the Aperture test, the Parallels test, and the Cinebench OpenGL test. It also beat the Mac Pro in GeekBench 3’s single-core benchmark.

However, the new Mac Pro handily beat the iMac—and every other Mac we’ve ever tested—in our Final Cut Pro X test, the iPhoto test, the HandBrake test, the Photoshop tests, the Cinebench CPU test, the Mathematica test, and several graphics-engine tests. It also crushed most other Macs in GeekBench 3’s multi-core benchmark.

These results came down to the massive multi-threading the Mac Pro was capable of, something that makes the iMac Pro stand out today.

David Girard at Ars Technica wrote this about the Mac Pro’s noise levels:

iFixit reported a ridiculously low noise level of 12dBA for the 4-core 2013 Mac Pro, so I’ll have to go with their measurements—I don’t own anything that can measure below 30dBa. I had to turn off my quiet Lacie 2big external RAID just to get an idea of what kind of noise it makes, and the drives are sitting much farther away. If you’re browsing the Web or doing something that isn’t pushing the CPU or GPUs, it’s almost completely silent. I had two of them on at one point and, because the monitors weren’t on, I didn’t know they weren’t asleep—the new Mac Pro is that quiet.

Anand Lal Shimpi wrote more about how that was possible:

The Mac Pro’s thermal core makes a lot of sense from an area efficiency standpoint as the chances that you have all three processors in the system (Xeon CPU + dual AMD FirePro GPUs) running at max speed at the same time is highly unlikely. By having all three players share one large heatsink Apple can optimize for the most likely usage scenarios where at most one processor is running at close to max TDP.

Unfortunately, that thermal balance is what would ultimately do this design in, but more on that in a minute.

In short, early reviews were all very similar. People were impressed with how much hardware Apple had packed into a small space, but most were skeptical that Thunderbolt 2 would take off as a meaningful way to expand the capabilities of the machine.

Stagnation and GPU Issues

Despite those reservations, the 2013 Mac Pro began to show up in video editing bays, on developers’ desks and behind monitors used by graphic designers, audio engineers and more.

2014 came and went without a revision to the machine, then 2015 did the same. In that time frame, the Retina iMac came out and complicated matters, as Marco Arment wrote:

The 5K Retina iMac is out, and it looks incredible so far on paper — so incredible that I’m seriously considering selling my new Mac Pro to get the Retina iMac instead. In fact, the case for the Mac Pro for anyone but advanced video editors, 3D modelers, and heavy OpenCL users is now weaker than ever.

That comment about OpenCL is an important one. Apple had bet big that executing computational tasks on the GPU was going to be a big deal, but it never really took off on the Mac. Maybe that was due to OpenCL itself, or the high cost of entry to the Mac Pro, but the truth is that the CPU remained the heart of most workflows for high-end Mac users.

As this was going on, Mac Pro customers started complaining of GPU failures. In February 2016, Apple opened a Repair Program for the machine, as Joe Rossignol reported:

Apple today launched a new Repair Extension Program that addresses video issues on some late 2013 Mac Pro models, according to an internal notice obtained by MacRumors.

Apple has determined that graphics cards in some late 2013 Mac Pros, manufactured between February 8, 2015 and April 11, 2015, may cause distorted video, no video, system instability, freezing, restarts, shut downs, or may prevent system start up.

Apple or an Apple Authorized Service Provider will repair eligible Mac Pro models affected by the video issues free of charge until May 30, 2018. Apple lists a turnaround time of about 3-5 days.

Ironically, that date just passed.

Even with the GPU issues, Apple failed to revise the computer in any way. Customers felt stranded without a path forward, and many opted for maxed-out Retina iMacs when their Mac Pros aged out.

A Thermal Corner

Then in April 2017, news broke that Apple was working on a new Mac Pro. John Gruber was there and wrote:

Let’s not beat around the bush. I have great news to share:

Apple is currently hard at work on a “completely rethought” Mac Pro, with a modular design that can accommodate high-end CPUs and big honking hot-running GPUs, and which should make it easier for Apple to update with new components on a regular basis. They’re also working on Apple-branded pro displays to go with them.

Here’s a bit from Apple’s Craig Federighi via TechCrunch:

I think we designed ourselves into a bit of a thermal corner, if you will. We designed a system that we thought with the kind of GPUs that at the time we thought we needed, and that we thought we could well serve with a two GPU architecture… that that was the thermal limit we needed, or the thermal capacity we needed. But workloads didn’t materialize to fit that as broadly as we hoped.

Being able to put larger single GPUs required a different system architecture and more thermal capacity than that system was designed to accommodate. And so it became fairly difficult to adjust. At the same time, so many of our customers were moving to iMac that we saw a path to address many, many more of those that were finding themselves limited by Mac Pro through a next generation iMac. And really put a lot of our energy behind that. While that [upgraded iMac] system is going to be fantastic for a huge number of customers — we want to do more.

That “upgraded iMac” is the iMac Pro, a multi-threaded monster trapped in the expansion-less iMac chassis.

The Present and Future

We now know that the new Mac Pro is a product destined for release in 2019, thanks to a report by Matthew Panzarino, who met with Apple a year after the Mac Round Table event:

Can Macbook Pro Retina Late 2103 Download Final Cut Pro X

After an initial recap in what they’d done over the past year, including MacBooks and the iMac Pro, I was given the day’s first piece of news: the long-awaited Mac Pro update will not arrive before 2019.

When we got the news that it wouldn’t arrive in 2017, there was some implicit messaging that 2018 was not guaranteed either (we were told “not this year,” but not “definitely next year”). This time around, Boger was succinct: the promised Mac Pro will be a 2019 product.

“We want to be transparent and communicate openly with our pro community, so we want them to know that the Mac Pro is a 2019 product. It’s not something for this year.” In addition to transparency for pro customers, there’s also a larger fiscal reason behind it.

Can Macbook Pro Retina Late 2103 Download Final Cut Pro 2020

“We know that there’s a lot of customers today that are making purchase decisions on the iMac Pro and whether or not they should wait for the Mac Pro,” says Boger.

While I appreciate Apple’s honesty about the process of building the next Mac Pro, there is a frustration around why designing what may essentially be a tower PC is taking so long.

As the world waits for a new Mac Pro, the Trashcan hasn’t gone away.

At the same time as the Mac Round Table, the machine saw a significant price drop. Gone was the 4-core system, with the 6-core and 8-core SKUs coming down in price to hit that $2,999 entry price point. This meant that a maxed out Mac Pro with a 12-core Xeon, 64GB RAM, 1TB flash SSD, and dual AMD FirePro D700 GPUs was now $6,999 instead of $9,599 like before.

As I write this, the Mac Pro is still on Apple’s website, and can still be purchased.

That blows my mind a little. The iMac Pro outscores the Trashcan on Geekbench in both single and multi-core benchmarks.

Can Macbook Pro Retina Late 2103 Download Final Cut Pro For Free

I have to imagine Apple is bleeding money on building this computer today. It has to be on sale still to meet the needs of corporate customers who have standardized on the machine. Maybe there are still customers whose workflows are built around the OpenCL power that still resides under its black aluminum skin. Maybe the Apple.com team lost the password needed to edit that part of the company’s website.

Can Macbook Pro Retina Late 2103 Download Final Cut Professional

Whatever the case, the 2013 Mac Pro is something pretty uncommon in terms of modern-day Apple: a high-profile failure.