Apple KB Article: Final Cut Studio not supported on MacBook
This should really come as a shock to no one, but Final Cut Studio is not supported on the MacBook. Does this mean you can't install Final Cut on a MacBook? No, the install won't stop you, however, the experience won't be all that great. Since the MacBook sports an integrated video processor, which Apple says, doesn't support floating processing performance will be 'degraded' on a MacBook.Bottomline: if you're a video professional you should pony up the extra dough for a MacBook Pro.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
andy said 1:16PM on 5-21-2006
would still be interesting to here from anyone thats tried it out ????
Reply
archie4oz said 1:21PM on 5-21-2006
" Since the MacBook sports an integrated video processor, which Apple says, doesn't support floating processing performance will be 'degraded' on a MacBook."
This sounds like a load of crock to me... The only thing I can see needing GPU floating point processing is Motion perhaps, which leverages ARBfp. The GMA950 supports it. Now maybe Apple is simply stating that the GMA950s ARBfp performance is so minimal that the CPU paths are simply faster (a pair of 2GHz CPUs vs. a 333-400MHz 4-pipe fragment processor engine? You decide...).
Reply
Michael Strck said 1:23PM on 5-21-2006
So a high-end video editing solution doesn't run adequately on an aggressively priced consumer laptop? Shocking, indeed.
Reply
Rollo said 1:27PM on 5-21-2006
I've heard it's the same on the mac mini. Perhaps it's because the requirement for an AGP graphics card? Final Cut Express wouldn't work either if that's the case.....which is making me seriously wonder if I actually want a macbook.
Reply
Thayne Miller said 1:34PM on 5-21-2006
I just purchased a white 2.0Ghz macbook with a super drive and I just ordered a 2GB ram upgrade from newegg. I also have access to final cut studio through my work, so when I get the ram upgrade in I will test out performance and see if it's any worse than my old 12" powerbook G4.
Also, to anyone getting a macbook, 512MB ram just IS NOT ENOUGH! The system overall is actually quite sluggish if you have more than one or two apps open! I can tell it's purely a ram bottleneck since I see the spinning beach ball of death quite often (and I did a fresh install just to be sure.)
Reply
Pete said 1:38PM on 5-21-2006
I'd be interested to know how well Final Cut Express works on a Macbook. Anyone had any experience of this yet?
Reply
Ultim8Fury said 1:42PM on 5-21-2006
It's kind of a give away that if the software costs as much as the computer then you're going to have trouble running it.
That said I nearly had a heart attack when I saw this. I just ordered a 17" MBP and FCS I had a horrible moment before I realised it wasn't the Pro version you were talking about.
Reply
Matt said 2:02PM on 5-21-2006
yeah, I'm interested in knowing if FCE works, since I'm not pro enough to use (or pay for) FCS :)
Reply
Peter Kirn said 2:07PM on 5-21-2006
Obviously, the MacBook Pro is a better choice for editing, because of the GPU (for some operations) and the larger screen (for everything).
But I find this puzzling, and I honestly can't agree with Apple. Final Cut worked just fine on previous laptops that were far *less* capable than the MacBook, and Apple touted the PowerBook G4 as a mobile editing machine, not to mention their consumer machines as a means of editing HD video in iMovie.
I don't think it's just "marketing", because there's certainly some truth in saying the MacBook isn't an optimal FCS machine. But I do think that, if you don't have the extra cash for a MacBook Pro, you could supplement a desktop computer with a $1000 MacBook for occasional edits and on-the-go digitizing and be quite happy. And it would still be a big, worthy upgrade if you have an aging 800MHz PowerBook. I'm sure many, many of Apple's customers are ignoring the most GPU-dependent app Motion, and could sacrifice some real-time previews for mobility before they get back to their studio machines.
Of course, if you are planning on running Motion, I'd forget it on the MacBook -- it'll just be painful. MBP is another story.
Reply
Leemo said 2:15PM on 5-21-2006
Well I've been using Final Cut Pro, Motion, Logic and Aperture since the MacBook's came out on my 2ghz White one with 2gb of Ram - and they all run amazingly well, no slower than they did on my iMac.
Methinks Apple just wants people to think they *need* the MacBook Pro.
-Leemo
Reply
Enoch Lai said 2:59PM on 5-21-2006
Leemo did you just "run" motion or did you create a large project in motion with multiple video files running and particles in the background? Because I've done several motion projects on my dualcore Powermac G5 with a NVIDIA GeForce 6600, and it does lag occasionally due to the realtime rendering. That's why I'm not surprised that apple would say final cut pro studio would not run well on the macbook pro's integrated video. As for final cut pro, if you're just editing video and not adding a bunch of filters, I wouldn't see why it wouldn't run fine on a macbook. Same with DVD studio pro and Soundtrack pro. The only software I would forsee having problems on a macbook would be motion and of course shake when it goes universal.
Reply
Brad said 3:00PM on 5-21-2006
Leemo: You got 2GB of RAM. That's how you're able to run it. But most people don't upgrade their computer and buy the stock configuration.
Reply
XLM said 3:07PM on 5-21-2006
@9
"Well I've been using Final Cut Pro, Motion, Logic and Aperture since the MacBook's came out on my 2ghz White one with 2gb of Ram - and they all run amazingly well,"
Sorry to say it but I just got to play with Motion on a Black MacBook w/ 2 gb of RAM and it does not run amazingly well.
Built a very simple DV comp and at seemed to run fine, but then I threw on a filter or two and the speed was down to 3fps. This was a very very basic comp. I can see why it's not supported.
Reply
Chris said 3:40PM on 5-21-2006
I can totally - 100% understand Motion not working up to scratch. However, FCP5 isn?t actually using the GPU a whole lot - Its CPU intensive, and the MacBook is just as capable there.
If you have an FCS licence and intend using it for the FCP5 functionality, then you will have few problems on a MacBook.
Reply
b said 3:40PM on 5-21-2006
I'm sure Final Cut Express will run fine on the MacBooks
why bother with FCP
Reply
Tess said 3:47PM on 5-21-2006
Thank goodness somebody's paying attention to this issue of running Final Cut Pro and Final Cut Studio on the Macbooks, the Macbook Pros, and the 12-inch Powerbook.
Eagerly awaiting more verdicts re: these three models!
Having scoured the Web for hours/days, I've concluded that I'm not alone in wanting two perhaps (??) incompatible things:(1) lightweight/true portability (without this, one eventually starts leaving ponderous, overheating laptops at home) and (2) at least adequate video editing capacity while on the road.
Reply
Chris said 3:53PM on 5-21-2006
I'm with you on those points Tess(14)!
Reply
Peter said 4:08PM on 5-21-2006
If you look at the KB article in question, it pretty much backs up everything said in the comments here:
"Note: The integrated graphics processor in the MacBook does not permit float processing in Motion and will result in degraded performance and other issues in Motion and other Final Cut Studio applications." (emphasis added)
It looks like everything but Motion will run acceptably on the MacBook, but Motion's incompatibility means that the whole suite is "incompatible".
Reply
Matt said 4:44PM on 5-21-2006
I have a 2ghz white MackBook with 1.2 gigs of ram... It is very very fast and is running all of my pro apps just fine. I will say when i only had 512 in it that I almost took the laptop back, it was that slow on 512. As long as you get 1 to 2 gigs, this puppy is going to be more than enough. I am very satisfied now that I have more ram in it.
Reply
Tess said 5:28PM on 5-21-2006
Wow thanks, Matt--I was about to go blind looking for answers on this problem after seeing the announcement re: Final Cut on Macbook. (I bought a new 12 inch Powerbook 4 days before the Macbook came out--before buying I expressly asked the Apple salesmen (4, in two different Apple stores in MA and VA) if a smaller version of the Macbook Pro might be coming out soon, since the 17-inch Pro, while it appeared best suited for video editing, burned my hand when I touched it and seemed to weigh as much as I do. To this question I observed lots of shrugs, shuffling of feet and nervous eye twitches...maybe they all had the same sinus problem...or maybe...)
At any rate, your experience solidifies quite a bit my rational sense that I should exchange my new Powerbook for the mid-level Macbook; I wonder if others on this page will get similar results.
Nonetheless, t will be painful indeed on an (irrational?) aesthetic level to let this sleek little featherweight silver machine leave my hands. It's really a gem, but suddenly "vintage"/discontinued, poor thing. I guess this is just the price one has to pay...Not to mention the dashed 10% "restocking" fee.
Reply