My guess, based on the fact that Logic Pro and FCP, in the nicest way I can say this, haven't had any meaningful core upgrades in a while, is that they're planning some fairly major updates on macOS for both and the plan is to release them as new, subscription-only versions later this year.
Well, for a $200 app that was feature complete when I bought it, I am not at all sure what I'd want them to do with it. It'd be a really hard sell to go from almost a decade of "free and professional" to a subscription model- I'd much rather have them just keep maintaining the software exactly as is so I can use it when I buy my next MBP in 2026.
So I am a bit skeptical that your prediction is accurate. But I can't tell the future and I don't know folks at Apple so maybe you know something I don't.
You’re probably going to be pushed into it over time. Whether it’s because they will make it incompatible with newer plugins, or because they will make newer hardware incompatible with older Logic.
FWIW, I’m in your boat too. Logic is a PERFECT DAW for me the way it is. I would be so sad to have to switch to Reaper or something, and have to go hunt for plugins..
Logic is the only thing tying me to the Mac, so I guess that’s a plus.
On one hand, I do enough work that the price of Abelton (which is what I'd move to if that happened) isn't a big deal so unless there simply is no non-subscription tool I can use I'll be okay.
However, I remain hopeful. It's a 30 year old piece of software and my understanding of Apple's model for it is to drive hardware sales seems reasonable to me.
Are we talking about the same Logic Pro? https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203718 shows quite a lot of activity of the last 2 years. Idk what you consider a "meaningful core upgrade".
Those are just releases that improve/change some small workflow stuff, fix bugs, or add minor or niche features like "Spatial Audio mixing with Dolby Atmos" that Apple cares about more than most producers do. The change lists look huge, but if you lose closer its all minor stuff.
The last release with a meaningful core update was 10.5 (May 2020) - the one that introduced Live Loops, major new devices like the new sampler, etc.
If it was a regular company selling its software, 10.5 would have been a paid update/major new version, and 10.6 and 10.7 would have been point updates.
It's nice, but I wouldn't go that far. Professionals who mix for Dolby Atmos do it with a Dolby-approved system, not their Atmos-certified home theater or Airpods Pro. For the prosumer market, it's mostly a gimmick to promote Apple Music.
It's not necessarily a bad playback platform, but neither is an Xbox with 5.1 surround hooked up. Apple's commitment to surround sound is far from revolutionary.
Mind you, I'm still running Final Cut for video making. Hope I don't have to bail on that too. I'll keep running the version I have, but much like I don't use Adobe at all, I won't run such a program if I have to rent it.
Exception, XCode :D most certainly have to pay yearly for that! But I view it as paying for authorization as an Apple dev, not so much as 'for the app itself'.
Platforms are weird. I'm a Godot user, but have made a game on Unity and have downloaded the Unreal environment. There are circumstances where I have to give all those entities a cut of whatever I do (except Godot is MIT-licensed open source, so I'm not restricted by them very much at all).
It's a bit like paying for access to Apple's Gatekeeper system? Without their involvement, I can't circumvent their code signing systems, so in some ways it seems to me like it's a given that if I code for their platform, I'm expected to pay for access to their security system that checks my submissions for malware. I could code stuff purely on the Unix layer to run in Terminal or something like that, but then I would clearly be an outsider with no association with Apple's 'walled garden'. The cost of entry to being considered inside the 'walled garden' and safe to use, is not just willingness to have my code audited and code-signed if it's safe to run, it's also paying for engagement with those systems.
I feel like if Apple both did that and prohibited use of any other dev software, it would flip something for me and I would be adamantly against their practice. Since it's for access to a class of developer that's meant to be treated as privileged and Apple-approved, it doesn't bug me to pay $100 a year. I would be distressed if I had to cough up $1000, and if it was $10,000 a year I might not be able to continue the practice.
don't you also have to pay if you want to load your app on your device? (aka side-load) So yeah you could dev with the emulator for free, but even if the app is by you and only for you, you have to pay
Damn if you're not right. I stand corrected. I wonder why I thought I needed to mentally camel-case it? Is that what it was? Was it ever capitalized this way or have I been making it up this whole time?
I think it's Mandela Effect. I don't know of any other words that can have the letters 'Xc' in sequence in a capitalized word, so my brain must just reject the idea even though I've literally seen it over and over right in front of my eyes.
