PDA

View Full Version : Former Shake Product Designer: Apple Doesn't Care About Pro Market




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jun 28, 2011, 09:04 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/28/former-shake-product-designer-apple-doesnt-care-about-pro-market/)


Former Shake product designer Ron Brinkmann weighs in (http://digitalcomposting.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/x-vs-pro/) on Apple's Final Cut Pro X release. The latest release of Apple's video editing software has received much criticism from professionals due to absent features. Brinkmann was on the original team that developed Shake (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)) image compositing software prior to Apple's acquisition of the parent company. Brinkmann continued to work at Apple from 2002 until 2007 as Shake Product Designer.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/fcp2.png

(http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/fcp2.png)As Brinkmann explains, Shake was "entrenched in the top end of the visual effects industry" with most major motion pictures of the era using Shake in some fashion. After Apple acquired Shake in 2002 there was concern about the company not willing to cater to the market, and sure enough the entire software was end of life'd (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/06/21/end-of-shake-phenomenon-in-2008/) a few years later. Brinkmann bluntly sums up Apple's attitude towards professionals:And back then the same questions were being asked as now - "Doesn't Apple care about the professional market?"

In a word, no. Not really. Not enough to focus on it as a primary business.Brinkman goes on to explain that there are maybe 10,000 "high-end" editors in the world while the market for an easier to use more casual product is "at least an order of magnitude larger". The market size, however, isn't necessarily the only reason. Brinkmann offers an interesting anecdote about how the high end market tends to be 90% driven by product requests from the big customers. Apple doesn't work that way:After the acquisition I remember sitting in a roomful of Hollywood VFX pros where Steve told everybody point-blank that we/Apple were going to focus on giving them powerful tools that were far more cost-effective than what they were accustomed to... but that the relationship between them and Apple wasn't going to be something where they'd be driving product direction anymore. Didn't go over particularly well, incidentally, but I don't think that concerned Steve overmuch... :-)Apple's hierarchy is also described where easily demo-able features tend to be easier to promote within the organization. He goes on to say that in the case of FCP, Apple would rather introduce more easy to use features for the broader audience even if it means pushing out some items for high end editors.

Still, he is complimentary of Apple's products and describes them as an "incredible bargain in terms of price-performance", but that "if you're really a professional you shouldn't want to be reliant on software from a company like Apple." In the end, he says "your heart will be broken. Because they're not reliant on you."

Article Link: Former Shake Product Designer: Apple Doesn't Care About Pro Market (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/28/former-shake-product-designer-apple-doesnt-care-about-pro-market/)



akm3
Jun 28, 2011, 09:10 PM
I'm sure he's not mad at all about his baby being taken and discarded; that said I think his assessment is probably pretty accurate. Apple tries to make products that do 90% of what 90% of the market needs, and by focusing on doing those really well, they make great products, but they aren't for everyone.

NT1440
Jun 28, 2011, 09:12 PM
Uh...Steve says the same thing every keynote: We want to enable the masses to create their own content.

Are the declarations of a focus on the average joe not clear enough?

wonderspark
Jun 28, 2011, 09:13 PM
In the end, he says "your heart will be broken. Because they're not reliant on you."

That's all that needs to be said.

montycat
Jun 28, 2011, 09:14 PM
Say it isnt so……….:rolleyes:

slrandall
Jun 28, 2011, 09:17 PM
If I didn't know any better, I'd think at least 1,000 of those 10,000 had nothing better to do than post on these forums ... Perhaps people are misusing the "pro" qualification.

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 09:17 PM
Brinkmann NOT a Billionaire. Nuff said.

Publicly traded companies need more than "hey this is cool" to appease
shareholders that expect a return on their investment. Projects that don't
bring in the revenue/profits don't get the most attention.

Howardchief
Jun 28, 2011, 09:18 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I found this article very interesting as I just now explored the new Final Cut. Decided against buying it because it seems like a souped up iMovie and not something that works well with other software for some intense editing.

Very interesting commentary by the man.

w00t951
Jun 28, 2011, 09:18 PM
I really don't don't see why Apple screwed up so badly. They could have kept Final Cut Pro "Pro," and dumbed down Final Cut Express or maybe created a lite version of Final Cut Pro for the masses... This is a huge mistake.

arn
Jun 28, 2011, 09:21 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I found this article very interesting as I just now explored the new Final Cut. Decided against buying it because it seems like a souped up iMovie and not something that works well with other software for some intense editing.

Very interesting commentary by the man.

It was a very interesting read. But unless you are planning to be a professional editor, I don't think you'll run up against the limitations of FCP X.

arn

RebootD
Jun 28, 2011, 09:22 PM
In the end, he says "your heart will be broken. Because they're not reliant on you."

That's all that needs to be said.

Been feeling that since they ditched matte screens in 2007. Lion just reiterates his point by making OSX more "consumery".

I can foresee many professional creatives migrating back to windows within the next year or two once it's painfully obvious (and somehow it isn't yet) that Apple has moved on quite some time ago.

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 09:22 PM
Former "Shake" guy.. who is probably bitter that Apple never made a viable replacement for that product when they axed it.... Apple isn't interested in the "pro" market but they're interested in developing more users of FCE and iMovie into pro's by introducing FCPX....

The "Pro" market complainers need to THINK DIFFERENT, not Apple, cause FCPX is different..


I'm tired of the 10% nascent market of "Pro" whiners.... Apple has people who use their products, that can create a great video with the tools they have.. thats called innovation and creativity.

The "Pro" market relies or (relied) on Apple, Apple doesn't rely on them... And if the complaining "Pros" will be patient then they're version of what they think FCPX should be, will return soon... but Apple nor Myself will wait for the "Pros" to give there said blessing on the product...

Quite complaining and just Innovate, remember the guy who edited entire Hollywood blockbuster film on something equivalent to iMovie (but was really final cut) thats called innovation people!!

NT1440
Jun 28, 2011, 09:22 PM
I really don't don't see why Apple screwed up so badly. They could have kept Final Cut Pro "Pro," and dumbed down Final Cut Express or maybe created a lite version of Final Cut Pro for the masses... This is a huge mistake.

Yea, I'm sure they won't make millions from this product. :rolleyes:

Howardchief
Jun 28, 2011, 09:23 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I think I agree. I'm sure I would anway if I knew more about video. I'm audio trying to get into video. Certainly not a pro, but I like options.

arn
Jun 28, 2011, 09:23 PM
Former "Shake" guy.. who is probably bitter that Apple never made a viable replacement for that product when they axed it.... Apple isn't interested in the "pro" market but they're interested in developing more users of FCE and iMovie into pro's by introducing FCPX....


I think you are agreeing with him.

arn

orfeas0
Jun 28, 2011, 09:25 PM
Apple doesn't care about pro users, yet their computers (and every other product) is overpriced....At least spec-wise

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 09:25 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I found this article very interesting as I just now explored the new Final Cut. Decided against buying it because it seems like a souped up iMovie and not something that works well with other software for some intense editing.

Very interesting commentary by the man.

Well Nuke would would be just a souped up After Effects using the same logic. The complaints about FCPX mainly surround importing older projects from FCP7 and earlier, Multicam (which is coming) and being able to export OMF/AAF, XML and EDL for finishing.

Most Final Cut editors don't need all of these features. Steve was right...they're going to deliver features that most people need...not a small subset of Hollywood producers.

Apple doesn't care about pro users, yet their computers (and every other product) is overpriced....At least spec-wise

Every thought that the reality is more likely that you're simply underpaid? This isn't a slam on you but millions of users per quarter don't seem to be going through the same issue. Value is all perception.

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 09:29 PM
I think you are agreeing with him.

arn

Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on....

Wouldn't you agree that the "Pros" should just innovate with the tools they have? meaning just give FCPX a shoot, starting from scratch... I think the pro market needs to THINK DIFFERENT this time around, Not Apple.

hotcocoa
Jun 28, 2011, 09:31 PM
I still don't understand all the uproar. The fact that the product is new means that there will be a lot of missing features initially. Its like when the iPhone was first released. It lacked a huge number features that people wanted or needed, but the potential was there.

Why can't people keep using the old version until the new one is more mature?

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 09:32 PM
Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on....

Wouldn't you agree that the "Pros" should just innovate with the tools they have? meaning just give FCPX a shoot, starting from scratch... I think the pro market needs to THINK DIFFERENT this time around, Not Apple.

What's the end game? To "me" it's simply the final result where you look at the finished movie or whatever and it represents the vision in your head.

What I see when I read these complains from editors that feel like there is only a handful of acceptable paths to take to complete their story and that's sad.

I've noticed that people look for ways to fail far before they look for ways to succeed.

BornAgainMac
Jun 28, 2011, 09:32 PM
The pros should just use iMovie '08. :eek:

commander.data
Jun 28, 2011, 09:33 PM
Brinkmann NOT a Billionaire. Nuff said.

Publicly traded companies need more than "hey this is cool" to appease
shareholders that expect a return on their investment. Projects that don't
bring in the revenue/profits don't get the most attention.
I don't think what Brickmann said is necessarily opposed to what you are saying. In this case "hey this is cool" is the motto of publicly traded companies, except that mantra is directed at the broadest market possible, mostly consumer, where a few flashy selling points are very effective in driving sales.

I'm tired of the 10% nascent market of "Pro" whiners.... Apple has people who use their products, that can create a great video with the tools they have.. thats called innovation and creativity.
That's a good philosophy to have as long as Apple walks the fine line between enabling customers to excel because of their products vs. requiring their customers to excel in spite of their products.

arn
Jun 28, 2011, 09:34 PM
Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on....

Wouldn't you agree that the "Pros" should just innovate with the tools they have? meaning just give FCPX a shoot, starting from scratch... I think the pro market needs to THINK DIFFERENT this time around, Not Apple.

I'm no video editor. But the main problem isn't that people aren't willing to learn a new system. It's that they've excluded necessary features for certain high end pros.

Like support for multiple camera angles. I don't think simply going to one single camera is a solution for most TV/Broadcast/Film.

arn

RebootD
Jun 28, 2011, 09:34 PM
Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on....

Wouldn't you agree that the "Pros" should just innovate with the tools they have? meaning just give FCPX a shoot, starting from scratch... I think the pro market needs to THINK DIFFERENT this time around, Not Apple.

You have no idea what you're talking about obviously. Pro studios can no longer add seats if they don't have extra licenses around for the older Final Cut Pro/Studio because Apple, foolishly, EOL'd it when they released iMovie Pro. If you have 15-20 editors all working on projects together, that cannot be imported into iMovie Pro, then they are screwed.

Let the 90% have their 'suped up prosumer app but at least make FCS available for real pro's until they can afford to switch everyone over to AVID or Premiere.

swingerofbirch
Jun 28, 2011, 09:35 PM
I remember when Apple's focus was on making tools to empower people, tools for people who were going to change the world (their words). I wonder now if that was a stopgap PR move to appeal to their remaining customer base (creatives) as Apple got itself back in form to appeal to the Angry Birds computing segment (about 95% of the market). Their goal now seems to be to make computing as simple as appliances. Intuitiveness is not part of the equation anymore. I will say their products are simple and easy to use. But still, less intuitive. Less a blank slate, more an appliance that predicts what you want to do.

commander.data
Jun 28, 2011, 09:37 PM
I still don't understand all the uproar. The fact that the product is new means that there will be a lot of missing features initially. Its like when the iPhone was first released. It lacked a huge number features that people wanted or needed, but the potential was there.

Why can't people keep using the old version until the new one is more mature?
Part of the issue might be the Apple isn't as open to the past in their stance around Final Cut Pro X as they were in their previous software redesigns. For instance when iMovie '08 was redesigned and missing features, Apple offering the previous iMovie 6 for free alongside it so people can have the best of both worlds during the transition. Similarly, when Quicktime X was released with missing features, Quicktime 7 was/is offered concurrently to help fill the gap. There is no such move for Final Cut Pro X, with the entire previous Final Cut Pro Studio suite being discontinued.

sined13
Jun 28, 2011, 09:39 PM
I am Jack's total lack of surprise...

macsrcool1234
Jun 28, 2011, 09:39 PM
Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on....

Wouldn't you agree that the "Pros" should just innovate with the tools they have? meaning just give FCPX a shoot, starting from scratch... I think the pro market needs to THINK DIFFERENT this time around, Not Apple.

This is probably one of the worst posts i've seen on this board.

Editors have a job to do, that is to make a target video look a certain way...

No amount of "thinking different" is going to add features or capabilities that the software doesn't have.

Terrible post from somebody who clearly has never edited video before.

RebootD
Jun 28, 2011, 09:39 PM
They used the creative market to keep them afloat while their ship was sinking faster than the Titanic carrying a weight watchers convention for obese whales and tossed them aside once they got their **** together with the iphone/imac.

Now they don't need them/us so who cares if they release a half-arsed release and EOL the actual working version because now Dad can make really awesome home movies faster than ever before! WHOOPIE!

I remember when Apple's focus was on making tools to empower people, tools for people who were going to change the world (their words). I wonder now if that was a stopgap PR move to appeal to their remaining customer base (creatives) as Apple got itself back in form to appeal to the Angry Birds computing segment (about 95% of the market). Their goal now seems to be to make computing as simple as appliances. Intuitiveness is not part of the equation anymore. I will say their products are simple and easy to use. But still, less intuitive. Less a blank slate, more an appliance that predicts what you want to do.

Bafflefish
Jun 28, 2011, 09:40 PM
Every thought that the reality is more likely that you're simply underpaid? This isn't a slam on you but millions of users per quarter don't seem to be going through the same issue. Value is all perception.

To be fair, a lot of those "millions of users" are likely students who are using cash sources such as scholarships, student loans, etc. in order to finance that Mac purchase. I know a few friends who recently went back to school financed their computer purchases with student loan money (which isn't a bad thing, since some type of computer is generally needed these days).

Ultimately though, owning an Apple product isn't some indication of "class status".

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 09:41 PM
I'm no video editor. But the main problem isn't that people aren't willing to learn a new system. It's that they've excluded necessary features for certain high end pros.

Like support for multiple camera angles. I don't think simply going to one single camera is a solution for most TV/Broadcast/Film.

arn

Thats true and after reading the article, I understand now their (meaning pros issues) ....but Apple clearly wasn't trying to draw in the "Pro's" on this launch release, they tactfully strung them along believing that they "care" but FCPX in all honesty is geared towards the iMovie guy or girl who want to take it up a notch or two... That guy nailed it when he said steve's views about the pros.

SpinThis!
Jun 28, 2011, 09:42 PM
But the main problem isn't that people aren't willing to learn a new system. It's that they've excluded necessary features for certain high end pros.
Not just high-end pros that need multicam or OMF/EDL. A lot of the design decisions made in FCP just won't fly.

What are you supposed to do if you have multiple clients? FCPX shows you every event from everything you've worked on. What if you have a client in a room? You don't want other people (especially competitors) looking at someone else's assets. Short of pulling a hard drive for every client, FCPX just isn't useable.

And not importing old projects? That was the nail in the coffin for a lot of people.

These were a conscious design decisions from Apple.

SirHaakon
Jun 28, 2011, 09:43 PM
Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on...
Gotta love these kinds of posters.

TMay
Jun 28, 2011, 09:44 PM
With the release of many variations of dslr and lenses, and high quality flash memory based videocams, not to mention future mobile devices, "film" making moved to the masses. Let Avid and Adobe pick up the legacy and custom editing market.

FCX is going to be ubiquitous, except possibly with broadcast, advertising and feature film markets. It will sell lots of hardware for Apple.

For the pro's commenting, I have a difficult time understanding what is to be gained by arguing your case on a generic mac forum. Sure, it's an available venue, but in reality, I can't see it moving your case forward. More to the point, most of us "amateurs" aren't choosing sides, and I personally find Apple's stance pragmatic.

oldwatery
Jun 28, 2011, 09:44 PM
It was a very interesting read. But unless you are planning to be a professional editor, I don't think you'll run up against the limitations of FCP X.

arn

How about those of us who are already pros?
This IS about pros....and they are running up against massive limitations on this lame lite version.
Admit it (if you can) Apple has dumped on any pros out there whether in video or other spheres.
Now see how far they take this in the new post PC era.
To hear how they bought Shake only to bury it makes my blood boil.

RebootD
Jun 28, 2011, 09:46 PM
With the release of many variations of dslr and lenses, and high quality flash memory based videocams, not to mention future mobile devices, "film" making moved to the masses. Let Avid and Adobe pick up the legacy and custom editing market.

FCX is going to be ubiquitous, except possibly with broadcast, advertising and feature film markets. It will sell lots of hardware for Apple.

For the pro's commenting, I have a difficult time understanding what is to be gained by arguing your case on a generic mac forum. Sure, it's an available venue, but in reality, I can't see it moving your case forward. More to the point, most of us "amateurs" aren't choosing sides, and I personally find Apple's stance pragmatic.

Well maybe I just have gas and feel a bit cranky so I'm "letting off steam" as it were.

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 09:46 PM
I love reading the nostalgic responses here.

Final Cut Pro 7 and earlier. The interface was old and tired. You could learn what you needed to know but it just felt like stuff bolted on that sorta worked.

Now if I had built up braintrust in this app I too would be stressing FCPX. Any counselor will tell you that change causes stress in humans.

The trick is to realize this and continue to move forward. There's a recommendation that some people make to others "try taking a different route to work tomorrow, on that you've never taken before"

There's something exhilarating about changing one's path even if there's trepidation at first.

At this point FCPX isn't ready but it will be ready and the question that editors need to ask themselves is

"Will I be able to switch to Avid or Premiere and beat the young kid that stuck with FCPX and mastered it?"

Your competition isn't going to be afraid to learn and adapt and that could make you a dinosaur.

devilbond
Jun 28, 2011, 09:47 PM
"...if you're really a professional you shouldn't want to be reliant on software from a company like Apple."

It really is a shame. I'd like to be.

As a 15-year-veteran Editor that also works as a Compositor & Motion Designer, Final Cut Pro has been the only objective reason why I had to be on a Mac. Subjectively, OSX is my preferred platform (even though I find Cocoatech's Path Finder is far superior to Finder) but professionally, there's no longer a 'need' for me to be on a Mac.

Creative Suite, Nuke, Avid... they're all mostly platform agnostic.

With Apple again choosing to step further away from the professional community there is going to be a flow on effect of many editors, designers, compositors and especially Post Production studios and Broadcasters no longer needing to buy the $7K+ MacPro towers.

The professional market is a small percentage of Apple's bottom line overall customer base, but I'd say they come close to making up a majority of their high-end hardware sales.

I wonder if this in turn signals a future departure by Apple from MacPro towers altogether.

oldwatery
Jun 28, 2011, 09:48 PM
I still don't understand all the uproar. The fact that the product is new means that there will be a lot of missing features initially. Its like when the iPhone was first released. It lacked a huge number features that people wanted or needed, but the potential was there.

Why can't people keep using the old version until the new one is more mature?

Why can't you discuss subjects you know something about instead of cluttering up this thread with your amateur comments?
Add features later :confused:

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 09:49 PM
What's the end game? To "me" it's simply the final result where you look at the finished movie or whatever and it represents the vision in your head.

What I see when I read these complains from editors that feel like there is only a handful of acceptable paths to take to complete their story and that's sad.

I've noticed that people look for ways to fail far before they look for ways to succeed.

Thank You, someone who understands! :) and it is sad btw

You have no idea what you're talking about obviously. Pro studios can no longer add seats if they don't have extra licenses around for the older Final Cut Pro/Studio because Apple, foolishly, EOL'd it when they released iMovie Pro. If you have 15-20 editors all working on projects together, that cannot be imported into iMovie Pro, then they are screwed.

Let the 90% have their 'suped up prosumer app but at least make FCS available for real pro's until they can afford to switch everyone over to AVID or Premiere.

Sadly reboot, you need to "reboot" how you approach your work, whats wrong with thinking different?? okay a few or many features YOU or your colleagues use aren't there, so what?? I bet theirs someone who has the suite thats making things work and not complaining ... Go over to Avid, better yet why didn't you just start at avid? if you know apple isn;t reliant on your market, why stay with them?

This is probably one of the worst posts i've seen on this board.

Editors have a job to do, that is to make a target video look a certain way...

No amount of "thinking different" is going to add features or capabilities that the software doesn't have.

Terrible post from somebody who clearly has never edited video before.

You and rebootd should talk ;)

Gotta love these kinds of posters.

Hey at least I'm honest, and did re-read the article in its entirety.

swissmann
Jun 28, 2011, 09:50 PM
I always thought that a Pro was someone that got paid for what they do. I've made my living and supported my family editing video since 1999. I've never used XML, multicam, and realize I can finish my edits in FCP 7 and start new ones in FCPX.

Are there "pros" that are more capable than me. I'm sure there are. Do people need what FCPX doesn't offer. I'm sure there are - but I'm not one of them. Here's to the future of FCPX and to all the money I'm going to make with it.

arn
Jun 28, 2011, 09:50 PM
Admit it (if you can) Apple has dumped on any pros out there whether in video or other spheres.

Admit what? I already have. Pros should be very very worried.

yesterday:

http://twitter.com/#!/arnoldkim/status/85603714114662401
http://twitter.com/#!/arnoldkim/status/85603863687725056

arn

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 09:51 PM
Not just high-end pros that need multicam or OMF/EDL. A lot of the design decisions made in FCP just won't fly.

What are you supposed to do if you have multiple clients? FCPX shows you every event from everything you've worked on. What if you have a client in a room? You don't want other people (especially competitors) looking at someone else's assets. Short of pulling a hard drive for every client, FCPX just isn't useable.

And not importing old projects? That was the nail in the coffin for a lot of people.

These were a conscious design decisions from Apple.

I read that you can save data to external drives and that data doesn't show up unless the drive is mounted even more efficiently would be to have a large scale storage device with projects on volumes you simply mount or unmount as needed.

Lion is going to have XSAN clients and Lion Server will have XSAN Admin. There's going to be a way to manage files better. The folks commenting just don't understand how things have changed.

Is Apple going to suffer luddites? No. If it's a dealbreaker move on.

thejadedmonkey
Jun 28, 2011, 09:53 PM
Sounds about right. This only reaffirms my choice to go back to the PC and pick up the Adobe suit.

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 09:53 PM
How about those of us who are already pros?
This IS about pros....

"... if you're really a professional you shouldn't want to be reliant on software from a company like Apple."

It's simple and the writing is on the wall for the old stuck in the ways pro's... NOt even Larry Jordan complains or is whining this much (if at all)... Just move on then, or think different my friend :apple: ;)

oldwatery
Jun 28, 2011, 09:54 PM
I love reading the nostalgic responses here.

Final Cut Pro 7 and earlier. The interface was old and tired. You could learn what you needed to know but it just felt like stuff bolted on that sorta worked.

Now if I had built up braintrust in this app I too would be stressing FCPX. Any counselor will tell you that change causes stress in humans.

The trick is to realize this and continue to move forward. There's a recommendation that some people make to others "try taking a different route to work tomorrow, on that you've never taken before"

There's something exhilarating about changing one's path even if there's trepidation at first.

At this point FCPX isn't ready but it will be ready and the question that editors need to ask themselves is

"Will I be able to switch to Avid or Premiere and beat the young kid that stuck with FCPX and mastered it?"

Your competition isn't going to be afraid to learn and adapt and that could make you a dinosaur.

You just don't even understand what others are pissed about.
It's not a new way of working or some such thing.
It's all about not being able to do jobs at all because of the lack of basic tools and interfaces.
It's one thing to have to learn a new way to do something but completely another not being able to connect my HD or camera to my computer and get the data in there.

bdkennedy1
Jun 28, 2011, 09:55 PM
Then Apple better be careful. That kind of arrogance has put companies in hot water with stock holders.

In the end, he says "your heart will be broken. Because they're not reliant on you."

That's all that needs to be said.

RebootD
Jun 28, 2011, 09:55 PM
Sadly reboot, you need to "reboot" how you approach your work, whats wrong with thinking different?? okay a few or many features YOU or your colleagues use aren't there, so what?? I bet theirs someone who has the suite thats making things work and not complaining ... Go over to Avid, better yet why didn't you just start at avid? if you know apple isn;t reliant on your market, why stay with them?

So do you always completely ignore the points someone makes when debating a topic or do you like to spin nonsense adnausem?

I, and many others, are fine with the new direction of Final Cut and aren't afraid to learn it BUT if you took 5 seconds to pull your head out, and actually read comments, you'd know the real issue many have is the END OF LIFE OF FINAL CUT PRO/STUDIO.

Right now if a studio needs to add a seat they cannot purchase a legal copy of the older version to keep the ball rolling until Apple decides to actually add the features it cut for apparently no reason.

Reading + Comprehension = Your friends.

macsrcool1234
Jun 28, 2011, 09:55 PM
It's simple and the writing is on the wall for the old stuck in the ways pro's... NOt even Larry Jordan complains or is whining this much (if at all)... Just move on then, or think different my friend :apple: ;)

There's being a blind fanboy and there's ignorance.

You keep picking ignorance.

It's pretty laughable that somebody who has never edited video in his life telling others how to do their job. What do you do for a living? Should we tell you how to do it?

SpinThis!
Jun 28, 2011, 09:55 PM
The fact that the product is new means that there will be a lot of missing features initially. Its like when the iPhone was first released. It lacked a huge number features that people wanted or needed, but the potential was there. Why can't people keep using the old version until the new one is more mature?
Pros are tired of waiting on Apple. The transition from FCP for many actually started about 2 years ago when FCP 7 came out. A lot of people were expecting FCP at that point to be a more modern app, rewritten for 64-bit. What they got instead was a very minor upgrade. That lead a lot of rumor mills to speculate that Apple must be hard at work rewriting a lot of the app and that the next release would be "awesome."

Just under a year after FCP 7 shipped, CS5 came out beating Apple at their own game. That put most pros in a holding pattern and the most reasonable thing was to wait and to see what the rumor mill had it up its sleeve at NAB and more importantly what the final shipping version was. Of course we now know what Apple was really working on.

Telling pros to cut Apple some slack because it's a 1.0 release and wait a little longer and that their copy of FCP works just fine? How long exactly are people supposed to wait? Other tools are now out that do exactly what people wanted FCP to do. The last major release of FCP was really 4 years ago at version 6.

It's not hard to see why pros are frankly deciding to move their business elsewhere.

oldwatery
Jun 28, 2011, 09:57 PM
It's simple and the writing is on the wall for the old stuck in the ways pro's... NOt even Larry Jordan complains or is whining this much (if at all)... Just move on then, or think different my friend :apple: ;)

Old stuck in the way pros!
Go think different yourself....some of us have a living to earn and hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in our businesses.
While I don't expect or care if you give a damn you could at least acknowledge that there is another side to this coin.

DTphonehome
Jun 28, 2011, 09:57 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple really should spin off their pro division. Let then maintain a close working relationship with Apple, Inc., but they can design their own software, Mac Pros, Xserves, etc. Clearly Apple Consumer Electronics are no longer interested in the Pro market. Which is fine, they should just acknowledge reality and allow pros to get the tools they need elsewhere.

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 09:58 PM
I always thought that a Pro was someone that got paid for what they do. I've made my living and supported my family editing video since 1999. I've never used XML, multicam, and realize I can finish my edits in FCP 7 and start new ones in FCPX.

Are there "pros" that are more capable than me. I'm sure there are. Do people need what FCPX doesn't offer. I'm sure there are - but I'm not one of them. Here's to the future of FCPX and to all the money I'm going to make with it.

We need more, with you type of attitude :)... you clearly understand and prove my point about people making things work who are "Pros"

mdriftmeyer
Jun 28, 2011, 09:58 PM
So when all the updates come and people stop complaining about FCSX will MacRumors fall on their own sword and apologize for all the power Apple has added to this new vision?

I doubt it.

I find it ironic that the guy who whines about Shake makes such broad strokes about professional software when dozens of Apple Engineers spent considerable lengths of time over at PIXAR developing nothing but world class professional software for PIXAR's needs.

Sorry, but in reality there aren't tens of thousands of brilliant people in the world sitting on their hands waiting to be asked to develop software.

Apple is running 24/7 with dozens upon dozens of cutting edge projects and this guy clearly has no plans of ever asking to work around such an environment again, because I can guarantee you he just burned all his bridges with such claims.


Let’s talk economics first. There’s what, maybe 10,000 ‘high-end’ editors in the world? That’s probably being generous. But the number of people who would buy a powerful editing package that’s more cost-effective and easier to learn/use than anything else that’s out there? More. Lots more. So, a $1000 high-end product vs. a $300 product for a market that’s at least an order of magnitude larger. Clearly makes sense, even though I’d claim that the dollars involved are really just a drop in the bucket either way for Apple.


Really? 10,000? Try 100.

scottsjack
Jun 28, 2011, 09:59 PM
It is so entertaining to read the number of posts from Apple apologists even in a thread of less than two pages. Just damned entertaining in that Steve could have put a big "******* You Pros" banner on apple.com and the fanboys would still be advising us to wait just a few months because they haven't been abandoned. Ha!

As I've written elsewhere on MacRumors Forums working pros who think that Apple really cares about them need to see the light and move on. It's all about really good prosumer stuff and, of course, iToys.

FCP X is to iMovie what Aperture 3 is to iPhoto, a super-duper, 64-bit version that works faster, does more and has a lot more options. If you outgrow the basic one the really good version is available at a reasonable price.

That said FCP X doesn't look bad to me at all. My next Canon SLR body change will shoot 1080p video and X looks like the perfect way for me to get "professional enough for my use" results that goes beyond iMovie.

sined13
Jun 28, 2011, 09:59 PM
...The professional market is a small percentage of Apple's bottom line overall customer base, but I'd say they come close to making up a majority of their high-end hardware sales.

I wonder if this in turn signals a future departure by Apple from MacPro towers altogether.

Fully agree with you on this one. The days of the MacPro is coming to an end -- I'm referring to actual professional-level hardware, not "power consumer" machines.

Here's an interesting tidbit from a filmmaker (from 2010):

http://brookwillard.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/the-state-of-apples-professional-line/

acslater017
Jun 28, 2011, 10:00 PM
Been feeling that since they ditched matte screens in 2007. Lion just reiterates his point by making OSX more "consumery".

I can foresee many professional creatives migrating back to windows within the next year or two once it's painfully obvious (and somehow it isn't yet) that Apple has moved on quite some time ago.

I totally disagree with those who describe Lion as "dumbing down" or whatever. But I can't defend Final Cut Pro X's REMOVAL of features.

Lion adds Launchpad, but it doesn't take away other methods of launching apps. The Mac App Store is a great idea, but they don't prohibit you from installing apps through other means. Same for everything in Lion - there are new ways to do things, but it is 99% optional or IN ADDITION to pre-existing features.

Final Cut Pro X actually REMOVES features that were present in Final Cut 7. That's what I can't defend. I'm not against change, and I'm not against making things easier to use. I love most of the UI changes and new tools in FCPX. Some things simply require an open mind. But I absolutely can't defend the REMOVAL of features from the previous version. This is the same thing that they did in QuickTime X...

Most of the things they removed require far less UI/polish then the magnetic timeline, range-based keywording, etc. I have no idea what the little (yet important) things were left out...

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 10:01 PM
You just don't even understand what others are pissed about.
It's not a new way of working or some such thing.
It's all about not being able to do jobs at all because of the lack of basic tools and interfaces.
It's one thing to have to learn a new way to do something but completely another not being able to connect my HD or camera to my computer and get the data in there.

No oldwatery I undertand. I know that many of you cannot do you jobs in FCPX right now because you're under the demand of clients that simply MUSTS have their audio done in Pro Tools or their compositing done in Flame.

You guys deal in a cliquish industry where it matters what application environment is used regardless if whether that translates into a superior product in the end or not.

So knowing this ...it's easy to see why OMF/AAF, EDL and other connecting technologies are a must. Laying to tape is big too.

I suppose FCPX will deliver on most of these missing technologies where it makes sense. EOL'ing FCS was an interesting and aggressive move.

Good news is Larry Jordan was told that the point release schedule for FCPX will be perhaps semi annual with substantive updates. Expect fast evolution...that's the raison d'être of Cocoa.

Cheers

soLoredd
Jun 28, 2011, 10:02 PM
I always thought that a Pro was someone that got paid for what they do. I've made my living and supported my family editing video since 1999. I've never used XML, multicam, and realize I can finish my edits in FCP 7 and start new ones in FCPX.

Are there "pros" that are more capable than me. I'm sure there are. Do people need what FCPX doesn't offer. I'm sure there are - but I'm not one of them. Here's to the future of FCPX and to all the money I'm going to make with it.

I think the whole "pro" thing has gotten out of hand, really. Apple clearly is all about targeting the consumer/pro-sumer market and, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with that. I can understand the frustration because folks have entrenched themselves into the Apple world and have built entire workflows based on their software. But, I think the folks complaining are being naive into thinking Apple will always support them or remain committed to them.

I'd also take this guy's opinion with a grain of salt. It's easy to come out now and make comments like this because that is the overlying sentiment. But why didn't he come forth a year, two years, or five years ago?

Rustus Maximus
Jun 28, 2011, 10:04 PM
Gotta love these kinds of posters.

He did go back and read the article and actually thought differently™ about some things, cut iDisk some slack ;). At least he made the effort to educate himself. Most will just charge into the verbal fray regardless, the sword of "Personal Insult" (be sure to use quotes around whatever you're making fun of for extra sting) swinging wildy, and fanboy flavored kool-aid (now available in the app store in new lemon flavor, check the FCP X page for full details) spraying from their mouths with every syllable.

mambodancer
Jun 28, 2011, 10:05 PM
It was a very interesting read. But unless you are planning to be a professional editor, I don't think you'll run up against the limitations of FCP X.

arn

This is also inline with what Alex Lindsay of Pixel Corp said. This application is designed for the 10's or 100's of thousands of professional video editors. Not the top 1000 or 10000 or so.

dawnrazor
Jun 28, 2011, 10:05 PM
Time for AVID to jump in with a kick ass solution and we never have to deal with FCP again, oh wait - that's not going to happen now is it... Hmmm, apparently Premier is very good :eek:

arn
Jun 28, 2011, 10:06 PM
I'd also take this guy's opinion with a grain of salt. It's easy to come out now and make comments like this because that is the overlying sentiment. But why didn't he come forth a year, two years, or five years ago?

He was working at Apple 5 years ago.

arn

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 10:07 PM
I always thought that a Pro was someone that got paid for what they do. I've made my living and supported my family editing video since 1999. I've never used XML, multicam, and realize I can finish my edits in FCP 7 and start new ones in FCPX.

Are there "pros" that are more capable than me. I'm sure there are. Do people need what FCPX doesn't offer. I'm sure there are - but I'm not one of them. Here's to the future of FCPX and to all the money I'm going to make with it.


So do you always completely ignore the points someone makes when debating a topic or do you like to spin nonsense adnausem?

I, and many others, are fine with the new direction of Final Cut and aren't afraid to learn it BUT if you took 5 seconds to pull your head out, and actually read comments, you'd know the real issue many have is the END OF LIFE OF FINAL CUT PRO/STUDIO.

Right now if a studio needs to add a seat they cannot purchase a legal copy of the older version to keep the ball rolling until Apple decides to actually add the features it cut for apparently no reason.

Reading + Comprehension = Your friends.

I'm sure Apple clearly told many that if your working on FCP7 edits, finish that and start fresh with FCPX. Also if you have FCP7 then stick with it until you feel FCPX is ready for your work flow


There's being a blind fanboy and there's ignorance.

You keep picking ignorance.

It's pretty laughable that somebody who has never edited video in his life telling others how to do their job. What do you do for a living? Should we tell you how to do it?

I work in digital forensics. I doubt you can help me. I do edit movies btw... What was ignorant btw??


Old stuck in the way pros!
Go think different yourself....some of us have a living to earn and hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in our businesses.
While I don't expect or care if you give a damn you could at least acknowledge that there is another side to this coin.

There is another side to the coin, and the poster "swissman" whom I have his quote at the top shows that other side of the "Pro" market.... A bad business decision then is to rely on a company who doesn't view your market the way you do.... Apple knows what their doing with FCPX, just sit on FCP7 until you feel the need (if ever) to up grade... But Apple is moving the bar forward and higher in my opinion.

akac
Jun 28, 2011, 10:07 PM
This is probably one of the worst posts i've seen on this board.

Editors have a job to do, that is to make a target video look a certain way...

No amount of "thinking different" is going to add features or capabilities that the software doesn't have.

Terrible post from somebody who clearly has never edited video before.

Except that a good majority of the complaints about missing features are features that actually exist, but in a different way. So yes you have to think differently because the software deals with edits/video/audio differently.

I.e. to get to the same path, you have to use the software differently - a way that Steve and the rest believe are better.

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 10:08 PM
Final Cut Pro X actually REMOVES features that were present in Final Cut 7. That's what I can't defend. I'm not against change, and I'm not against making things easier to use. I love most of the UI changes and new tools in FCPX. Some things simply require an open mind. But I absolutely can't defend the REMOVAL of features from the previous version. This is the same thing that they did in QuickTime X...



You can't remove features if they were never there. FC7 is the last in a line of 32-bit only Quicktime based apps. FCPX is the ground floor of 64-bit AV Foundation based software. Every feature that FC7 had needed to be rewritten to support AV Foundation and other API. There is a disconnect between editors that thought FC7 was just a recompile away from 64-bit and Apple which said "we're deprecating Quicktime 32-Bit and Carbon 64 is dead" they did this what a couple years ago? The writing was on the wall...a vastly different Final Cut Pro was coming.

In rewriting an app it affords the opportunity to look at features and improved them during the process (like XML support) and knowing Apple they have a lot of stuff that simply didn't make the 1.0 revision that on the way.

jmille44
Jun 28, 2011, 10:09 PM
I was one of those who yelled so loud about the killing of imovie with plugin support back in the day. I was kicked off maccentral forums for slamming the editor who said the new imovie was great even though it left behind all my plugins and themes I had purchased. I told him he was a fool, got the life time ban for it.

Now I am thrilled about the new FCP X. This is what iMovie was going to be and with Motion, you can make your own themes. Love it.

FrankieTDouglas
Jun 28, 2011, 10:11 PM
Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on....

Wouldn't you agree that the "Pros" should just innovate with the tools they have? meaning just give FCPX a shoot, starting from scratch... I think the pro market needs to THINK DIFFERENT this time around, Not Apple.

The pros do innovate with the tools they have, but one thing you obviously need to understand is that software is just a tool. Your software does not drive your innovation, your ideas so. But software can become a hindrance to your ideas, especially if it no longer provides the basic functions needed to complete your goals.

soLoredd
Jun 28, 2011, 10:12 PM
Fully agree with you on this one. The days of the MacPro is coming to an end -- I'm referring to actual professional-level hardware, not "power consumer" machines.

Here's an interesting tidbit from a filmmaker (from 2010):

http://brookwillard.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/the-state-of-apples-professional-line/

This guy saw the writing on the wall well over a year ago. Great blogpost and should be read by everyone who continues to believe Apple is somehow in love with the pro market.

akac
Jun 28, 2011, 10:13 PM
Sounds about right. This only reaffirms my choice to go back to the PC and pick up the Adobe suit.

Then seriously what are you doing here? I feel sorry for anyone "going back to the PC". My gosh, I have so many people I work with that stay on PCs for some strange reason and even with the latest AntiVirus, latest Win7, etc.. they still constantly get viruses, constantly have to waste time maintaining their system rather than using it.

Just yesterday I had to deal with a new install of software on a PC and it reminded me why I love my Macs. Beyond the fact that the software exists on the Mac that I need (everything from Office to Adobe to many Mac only software), it just lets me do my thing without wasting my time.

slrandall
Jun 28, 2011, 10:14 PM
We need more, with you type of attitude :)... you clearly understand and prove my point about people making things work who are "Pros"

The problem is that there are professionals who need the features that this guy can get away without using.

Although I'm sure Apple is very pleased with this release of FCP [probably not the press, though] - because honestly, it is a huge upgrade: 64-bit, very intuitive interface, extremely fast - I think it's too early to tell if they're moving away from the professional market in this area. They may simply be providing a new framework in which they will once again be the predominant application for video editing. As for them discontinuing FCS 3, while it does suck for production companies, it's simply Apple pushing its new product and pushing it hard, the way Apple always does.

But it's far too early to say that Apple is moving away from the professional market. They've clearly released a product that, while extraordinary in many ways that aren't really being acknowledged, isn't enough for the most high-end professionals. But to do so while working on OS X Lion, iOS 5, the iCloud framework, and Xcode 4 [all huge releases this year] is still impressive.

Yes, FCP X needs work. And to you professionals who now have no tools from Apple to do what you could a week ago, I'm sorry. But let's not immediately say that this is the end, "iToys" are the company's future, and they don't care about any sort of high-end professional. This is the company that created the App Stores, spawned hundreds of new software firms, and gave thousands of developers the tools they needed to create amazing things.

So while FCP may not be ready yet - with apologies yet again to those few [very few, I don't know how this forum is so full of them] who needed something better immediately, or at least not a sudden recall of the old - it will probably innovate in and expand the market in years to come. The framework is done. Just watch what happens.

*LTD*
Jun 28, 2011, 10:14 PM
Except that a good majority of the complaints about missing features are features that actually exist, but in a different way.

You sure about that?

Shouldn't "it just works" = "it just works obviously"?

Because that's what characterizes Apple's other products.

If it's a better way, I'm sure the Pros would happily learn to adjust. But if these critical features are somehow hidden or function completely unintuitively, then we've got a problem.

If Apple is moving toward the prosumer market, then that's fine. More power to them. It's a wicked smart move. But it would be nice if they didn't pass this off as Pro-level software when the Pros themselves don't really want it. The problem is not with the software. FCPX is probably terrific. The problem lies in how Apple is targeting this.

Or It could be we're just taking it the wrong way and in a year the Pros will say "Apple really did know best!" That tends to happen with Applemas well. Just look at the iPad. But these top editors seem like a less-flexible bunch, for obvious reasons.

akac
Jun 28, 2011, 10:16 PM
You just don't even understand what others are pissed about.
It's not a new way of working or some such thing.
It's all about not being able to do jobs at all because of the lack of basic tools and interfaces.
It's one thing to have to learn a new way to do something but completely another not being able to connect my HD or camera to my computer and get the data in there.

Yes it is. Don't you get that FCPX is not FCP 7 + new UI/features? No its a brand new app that will take time to grow. Hopefully not too long. The mistake Apple made was not making FCPX. The mistake they made was that they didn't continue to sell FCP7 alongside FCPX so that they could position FCP7 as what you'd use if you need features X,Y, Z and need to continue working on old projects and FCPX would be the future.

Then they'd continue working on FCPX and get multi-cam and the other features that it needs to be a fully Pro app. But don't expect FCPX to import FCP7 projects. It very well may at some point, but I doubt it. Sometimes when you rethink an entire product suite trying to import data is just not going to work.

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 10:17 PM
The pros do innovate with the tools they have, but one thing you obviously need to understand is that software is just a tool. Your software does not drive your innovation, your ideas so. But software can become a hindrance to your ideas, especially if it no longer provides the basic functions needed to complete your goals.

ideas should always be bigger then your tools... imagine if the person who invented the wheel gave up, because he didn't have the right "tool" or how about the first airplane with the wright brothers, ideas trump all that my friend......


also here's a quote from the shake guy about how apple views the pros..

And really, from a company perspective high-end customers are a pain in the ass. Before Apple bought Shake, customer feedback drove about 90% of the features we’d put into the product. But that’s not how Apple rolls – for them a high end customers are high-bandwidth in terms of the attention they require relative to the revenue they return. After the acquisition I remember sitting in a roomful of Hollywood VFX pros where Steve told everybody point-blank that we/Apple were going to focus on giving them powerful tools that were far more cost-effective than what they were accustomed to… but that the relationship between them and Apple wasn’t going to be something where they’d be driving product direction anymore. Didn’t go over particularly well, incidentally, but I don’t think that concerned Steve overmuch… :-)

SirHaakon
Jun 28, 2011, 10:19 PM
Unless you are planning to be a professional editor, I don't think you'll run up against the limitations of FCP X.

arn
I'm sorry, I was under the impression the software was called Final Cut "Pro."

akac
Jun 28, 2011, 10:19 PM
You sure about that?

Shouldn't "it just works" = "it just works obviously"?

Not unless you've been trained for 10-15 years to do it "one way". That's why its called training. And FCP required training. Nearly nothing about FCP was obvious. At the very least you had to train yourself.


Because that's what characterizes Apple's other products.

Yup, and FCPX I believe does that too. Except to people who are trained to do something else.


If it's a better way, I'm sure the Pros would happily learn to adjust. But if these critical features are somehow hidden or function completely unintuitively, then we've got a problem.

No, but if I am used to having to do things manually and to do something manually I had to set a keyframe, and this option and that option and now none of that exists because to do the same thing I select my clip and pick the action - then yes, I'm sure the pros will adjust but in the meantime they are going to b***** and moan.

slrandall
Jun 28, 2011, 10:21 PM
And can we at least wait until the next MacPro update before we label it "dead"? One "under-the-hood-only" update doesn't mean a line is dead. Look at the iMac, MacbookPro, and the Air.

I do concede though, that if the MacPro isn't significantly updated with the next refresh, things aren't looking too good.

JDW
Jun 28, 2011, 10:22 PM
The pros should just use iMovie '08. :eek:
I see you said that rather tongue in cheek, but even non-Pros would prefer FCP X over iMovie 8 insofar as iMovie 8 is still brain-dead about file sizes larger than 2GB. Try it. You cannot import and edit anything over 2GB in iMovie. It's pathetic. And I am not even a Pro. I simply shoot HD video with my Lumix GF-1 and often need to edit a single file larger than 2GB. And no, I shouldn't be forced to break the file into multiple pieces or transcode it so it will fit within iMovies foolish 2GB filesize restriction.

Then again, I am speaking of the previous version FCP when it comes to file sizes. Has anyone tried opening a file larger than 2GB in FCP X?

Thanks.

nostaws
Jun 28, 2011, 10:23 PM
I think we are missing an important part of this FCP X debacle.

For what they do, Apple is a relatively small company. They have groups of programmers that finish one product then shift their focus onto another.

I don't think they have the resources (by choice?) to focus on a mature piece of software and make it better over time. Apple is consistently "re-inventing".

Think about their software. Very few applications are "mature."

Filemaker was spun off into their own semi-company. Microsoft has their Mac BU which essentially is the Office for Mac team. Consider how adobe takes their applications and develops them over time.

Final Cut Pro needs a group of programmers/engineers to focus in it and each update.

soLoredd
Jun 28, 2011, 10:23 PM
He was working at Apple 5 years ago.

arn

Granted, but it was pretty much in a lame duck capacity.

This whole "Apple isn't focusing on the pro market" discussion has been going on for years.

rhuber
Jun 28, 2011, 10:24 PM
I think the whole "pro" thing has gotten out of hand, really. Apple clearly is all about targeting the consumer/pro-sumer market and, in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with that. I can understand the frustration because folks have entrenched themselves into the Apple world and have built entire workflows based on their software. But, I think the folks complaining are being naive into thinking Apple will always support them or remain committed to them.

I'd also take this guy's opinion with a grain of salt. It's easy to come out now and make comments like this because that is the overlying sentiment. But why didn't he come forth a year, two years, or five years ago?

You also have to keep in mind that those pro's, in no small part, were somewhat responsible for the resurgence of apple computers. When mac was the go-to platform for professional video editors and graphic designers, colleges had row upon row of high-end macs to support them. Those students went on to use macs in their work and everyday lives. This also directly attributed to the reputation apple gained as a high level system for serious work. Now their philosophy is looking dangerously similar to the Walmart business model... high volume, mass market, fully outsourced. Yes, it does make me rethink apple as a serious system for work, which is a complete reverse of the campaign that brought them back to prime-time in the first place. I have to admit, when I look back to 1984 and see the room full of clones in white, it's not the PC market that comes to mind anymore... it's apple. And they do appear to be racing even faster down that track.

Also, remember that when apple started slacking off in the motion graphics department, and Adobe was not offering support for After Effects on Mac, editors flocked back to PC's, only to return once adobe began supporting Mac for AE. Why did they return? Because they loved working with FCP. People who use macs for serious work are in danger of running out of reasons to turn to apple. Schools, where apple successfully marketed HARD to put a mac at the hands of every students and turn the market around, are becoming hard pressed to justify the cost without the software that made the mac essential to that environment.

I think there is an overall picture here that is much bigger than it appears at first glance.

soLoredd
Jun 28, 2011, 10:25 PM
I'm sorry, I was under the impression the software was called Final Cut "Pro."

I'm on a 13" MacBook "Pro" that no professional in their right mind would be caught doing work on. Apple + Pro = not what you think.

SirHaakon
Jun 28, 2011, 10:25 PM
Go think different yourself....some of us have a living to earn and hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in our businesses.
If you have hundreds of thousands of dollars to invest in a business, it's pretty easy to not feel too badly for you.

ProVideo
Jun 28, 2011, 10:26 PM
I'm a long time reader of the site. I registered just to say I hope iDisk is either drunk, high, or has some sort of brain damage. Otherwise his ignorance of anything professional and complete lack of reading comprehension is truly an embarrassment and reflects poorly on all of humanity. :(

daylight28
Jun 28, 2011, 10:29 PM
So I checked out final Cut pro X, pretty cool, If I was a fresh young editor just out of school who had all the time in the world to learn how to use the thing.
You have more control with the older FINAL CUT 7, Tell you what, Add 64 bit to FCP 8 and fix the importing for the canon 60D SD CARDS and I will be happy. I like how it works. I worked with AVID it is ok. But I don't want to switch. Bring BAck FCS, Call FCPX "Next GEN" Editing for the next Generation and we will forget this ever happen.

Pentad
Jun 28, 2011, 10:31 PM
Former "Shake" guy.. who is probably bitter that Apple never made a viable replacement for that product when they axed it.... Apple isn't interested in the "pro" market but they're interested in developing more users of FCE and iMovie into pro's by introducing FCPX....

The "Pro" market complainers need to THINK DIFFERENT, not Apple, cause FCPX is different..


I'm tired of the 10% nascent market of "Pro" whiners.... Apple has people who use their products, that can create a great video with the tools they have.. thats called innovation and creativity.

The "Pro" market relies or (relied) on Apple, Apple doesn't rely on them... And if the complaining "Pros" will be patient then they're version of what they think FCPX should be, will return soon... but Apple nor Myself will wait for the "Pros" to give there said blessing on the product...

Quite complaining and just Innovate, remember the guy who edited entire Hollywood blockbuster film on something equivalent to iMovie (but was really final cut) thats called innovation people!!

There is so much wrong with this comment I'm not sure where to begin. Ah, lets start with your logic and this little gem:

"The "Pro" market complainers need to THINK DIFFERENT, not Apple, cause FCPX is different.."

Having read everything from the 'complainers', I believe they have a right to complain because FCPX isn't just 'different' it is missing core features they many of these professionals use in their jobs. I also believe that this is a key issues when we boil it all down. The product is missing features that many people used in their jobs. This is how they make money.

Instead of FCPX, what if Apple just stopped updating JAVA for OS X. We all know it's being deprecated and that Oracle is supposed to take over. However, let's pretend Apple just stops supporting the current version so while it works it's missing the latest security patches and updates.

Many people with Macs (and right here on MRs) depend on Java Programming in some form. I guarantee you people would howl because we make money on using a Mac and OS X as a tool to accomplish a goal for clients/businesses/employers/whatever.

I would probably sell my MBP and move to Windows. I would complain all the way, I would be twice as vocal as the FCPX folks, and I would sure tell Apple what a mistake they would be making.

I really do love my MBP as it's the best tool I've ever owned. That being said, I do enough development work in Java that I could not stay with Java programming if my tools does not support the features I need.

If you don't care about Java, what if Apple decided to dump Intel and move to A4 CPUs. This isn't such a far fetched idea. Apple would have vertical integration, they have other products on the A4 and it would give Apple better control and integration of applications.

However, it would kill off Intel compatibility and really hurt the VM market, for example. This would be another "See Ya, Apple' moment for me...

"but Apple nor Myself will wait for the "Pros" to give there said blessing on the product..."

I do agree that you can't let the market dictate features but ignoring your customers can be disastrous as well. New Coke, Apple Pippin, Apple Cube, are just a few examples where consulting your customers might have avoided problems.

"Quite complaining and just Innovate, remember the guy who edited entire Hollywood blockbuster film on something equivalent to iMovie (but was really final cut) thats called innovation people!!"

I'm not sure innovate is the issue here. If FCPX doesn't do something you need it to do, I'm not sure what innovation you can do with the product. For example, if Apple stopped updating their Java and a major security hole was discovered but not patched by Apple, what innovation do you suggestion?

I could try to patch it myself, enlist others, beg, but in the end my time is valuable and I'm just going to move to another platform that is updated.

In the end, I think Apple is focusing on the market that has made them rich. I mean, really, rich...not paying your taxes rich. Consumers love the brand and the products.

Pros are a niche group and how much money do they really spend anyway in the long run? I think you can see a pattern of Apple moving away from the Pro stature in many examples:

-The MBP line used to be very 'Pro' with some cutting edge features. How 'Pro' is it really? I mean, they sell a Pro based 17" Notebook for over $2k and it comes stock with a whopping 4 GB of memory! My cup runneth over!

-The XServer product line getting the axe is another example of a market Apple is dropping

-OS X Server -by way of XServe- is also becoming much less emphasized

-FCPX is just another example of more consumer based ideology

In the end, it's not a bad decision for Apple but those who used Apple products as professional tools might have to find a new tool maker.


Cheers!
-P

deconstruct60
Jun 28, 2011, 10:34 PM
What are you supposed to do if you have multiple clients? FCPX shows you every event from everything you've worked on. What if you have a client in a room? You don't want other people (especially competitors) looking at someone else's assets. Short of pulling a hard drive for every client, FCPX just isn't useable.


1. tag each client's footage with their id own unqiue ID and when client is in the room just show smart folder/collection with that search tag.
Likewise, if searching for clips with certain keywords just "and" with the client tag.

2. events can be nested into folders. Again the top level folders can be client ID numbers and/or codes.

Surely, you are not talking about letting the client "drive" the computer and look anywhere on the mounted drives they want to. If it is keeping a limited amount of information in the even "browse" window. a. it isn't that large. b. it is hierarchical so it just takes some organization. (http://help.apple.com/finalcutpro/mac/10.0/#ver26ccfda0 can't really see anything in the 2005 folder. Obviously, in this context you probably do not want to organize by date. )


3. but yeah another option it is to mount/unmout the clients stuff onto different external volumes. If it takes a password to mount the volume then you just might protect it even if you leave the mac unattended.




And not importing old projects? That was the nail in the coffin for a lot of people.

this is much more likely to get folks to look at the application for what it does do rather than trying to make it do exactly what it did before. There are aspects of file management which are now inside the app. I have seen several mistakes and folks shoot themselves in the foot by not approaching events/projects with a mental model aligned with what the app does as opposed to their preconceived notion and/or believing the default settings are the only way to do things.

iOS didn't have 3rd party apps or cut/paste for a couple of iterations. that didn't mean it wasn't useful. Nor did it mean it wasn't in the rollout plan. there are good reasons not to put it into the 1.0 release, but rather the 1.1 or 1.2 which shouldn't take all that long to show up.

grue
Jun 28, 2011, 10:34 PM
Well Nuke would would be just a souped up After Effects using the same logic. The complaints about FCPX mainly surround importing older projects from FCP7 and earlier, Multicam (which is coming) and being able to export OMF/AAF, XML and EDL for finishing.

Most Final Cut editors don't need all of these features. Steve was right...they're going to deliver features that most people need...not a small subset of Hollywood producers.

Wrooooooooong.

The complaints surround the stuff you mention, and having a source and record viewer, and having a non-terrible way to organize your media, along with being able to have a proper track-based interface such as we NEED, having timecode support, layered photoshop files, etc etc. It'd also be nice if they realized more than one person will work on a job, and it might be nice to store it on a SAN.

Apple didn't just screw the pooch, they knocked it out and raped it in the parking lot.

jdesign
Jun 28, 2011, 10:35 PM
So I checked out final Cut pro X, pretty cool, If I was a fresh young editor just out of school who had all the time in the world to learn how to use the thing.
You have more control with the older FINAL CUT 7, Tell you what, Add 64 bit to FCP 8 and fix the importing for the canon 60D SD CARDS and I will be happy. I like how it works. I worked with AVID it is ok. But I don't want to switch. Bring BAck FCS, Call FCPX "Next GEN" Editing for the next Generation and we will forget this ever happen.

Yay finally, someone who really understand!
Tried fcp x .. mmmmm more like imovie!

RebootD
Jun 28, 2011, 10:39 PM
There is so much wrong with this comment I'm not sure where to begin. Ah, lets start with your logic and this little gem:
Cheers!
-P

Wasting your time trust me. Just add to your ignore list like I did. I don't mind differences of opinion but a troll is a troll.

stevemiller
Jun 28, 2011, 10:39 PM
ideas should always be bigger then your tools... imagine if the person who invented the wheel gave up, because he didn't have the right "tool" or how about the first airplane with the wright brothers, ideas trump all that my friend......

you're totally right, ideas are bigger than tools, and as a result, people will use what works to make stuff happen. and thats exactly why people who have demands beyond the casual consumer are going to migrate away from fcp. other solutions have the tools and they work.

i know you like saying "think different" but honestly, that statement doesn't mean anything. i'd like to sell you a car without brakes. feel free to "think different" and try to figure out some other way to stop yourself. i hear brick walls are a pretty good stopgap solution.

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 10:40 PM
This guy saw the writing on the wall well over a year ago. Great blogpost and should be read by everyone who continues to believe Apple is somehow in love with the pro market.

Do you guys really understand computing. This blog was pedantic.

for instance

ake a look at the same lineup today. Apple dropped the replaceable battery, dropped the user-upgradeable hard drive, started charging for matte screens and replaced the immensely useful ExpressCard slot with a consumer-oriented SD card slot. Hell, the entry-level MacBook Pro dropped below $2,000 to make it appeal to consumers more.

http://www.apple.com/environment/

the built-in battery in our MacBook lineup is a perfect example. Other notebook batteries can be charged only 200 to 300 times. The MacBook Pro battery can be charged up to 1000 times.6 And because this battery lasts up to five years, MacBook Pro uses just one battery in about the same time a typical notebook uses three.

The reasoning for Apple is why put in upgradable battery when you've employed a new technology that triples battery life meaning people are far more likely to upgrade their Mac before their battery dies. Matte does not equal professional any more than glossy. A display hood can get rid of any lighting issues and Expresscard with Mac drivers were rare beyond the eSATA cards and audio stuff like UAudio and a small handful of others.

But look at what happened to QuickTime in the process. With a rewrite of the Mac OS as a whole, I expected Apple to clean up all the messes that QuickTime had been creating over the past seven versions. QuickTime is indispensable, yes, but it’s also been plagued with prevalent gamma issues and inconsistencies for years. Those in the professional video community have found workarounds, but it was only logical that Apple clean up this mess while they were cleaning up the rest of the OS.

LOL. That's like playing Jenga with code. If you go mucking around in the basement you're likely going to cause problems that lead to app instability. Quicktime was developed at a time where getting video at a quarter of Standard Def was a feat. There was no way to easily take Quicktime and make it 64-bit. A common fallacy made by people who don't quite understand how legacy API work at even a basic level.

In short, the system architecture of the Mac Pro just isn’t up to what true professional users need in 2010. It may have the bleeding-edge processors [introduced several months ago] but it lacks the back-end support to make it all useful. We’re still limited to 40 PCI lanes across 4 slots. There’s still no SAS backplane. There is still one FireWire bus. There is no USB 3.0. There is no BluRay. The machine will not fit in a rack mount.

Brook couldn't have known that Thunderbolt was coming but now it should be clear to him why there was no effort to add USB 3.0 or a faster FW. Thunderbolt obviates the need for most of those other connection technologies in speed and flexibility.

In short I disagree with the assertion.

Quicktime X is the front end to a new Audio/Video architecture that is light years beyond Quicktime 32-bit and while it's growing in features you can see the power in FCPX with Colorsync support throughout and the ability to do background rendering and more.

The modern day professional is changing..the days of 6 PCI slots have been gone a long time ago replaced by highly integrated motherboards.

Prepare to be brought into the future kicking and screaming by Apple....once again.

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 10:42 PM
you're totally right, ideas are bigger than tools, and as a result, people will use what works to make stuff happen. and thats exactly why people who have demands beyond the casual consumer are going to migrate away from fcp. other solutions have the tools and they work.

i know you like saying "think different" but honestly, that statement doesn't mean anything. i'd like to sell you a car without brakes. feel free to "think different" and try to figure out some other way to stop yourself. i hear brick walls are a pretty good stopgap solution.

Lol funny analogy on "Think Different"

grue
Jun 28, 2011, 10:42 PM
You have more control with the older FINAL CUT 7, Tell you what, Add 64 bit to FCP 8 and fix the importing for the canon 60D SD CARDS and I will be happy.

I'd list 64bit after multicore support and GPGPU, personally. Final Cut 7 is a thousand times more useful than FCX, but at least FCX will use more than 1/12th of my CPU power.

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 10:44 PM
Wrooooooooong.

The complaints surround the stuff you mention, and having a source and record viewer, and having a non-terrible way to organize your media, along with being able to have a proper track-based interface such as we NEED, having timecode support, layered photoshop files, etc etc. It'd also be nice if they realized more than one person will work on a job, and it might be nice to store it on a SAN.

Apple didn't just screw the pooch, they knocked it out and raped it in the parking lot.

I'm not buying the media management complaint. I don't think people are thinking through the new system for managing projects and events in FCPX so they're rejecting without "skating to the puck" and realizing that Apple has made it easier and cheaper to do a SAN based system in Lion. Anything that is a hold over from tape isn't going to get a lot of love in FCPX so the timecode and track based stuff is yesteryear. It's time to move on folks and learn some new techniques.

stevemiller
Jun 28, 2011, 10:45 PM
Lol funny analogy on "Think Different"

Thanks, at least we share a sense of humour :)

grue
Jun 28, 2011, 10:46 PM
If you have hundreds of thousands of dollars to invest in a business, it's pretty easy to not feel too badly for you.

Have you always been stupid, or is it a new adventure for you?

Just because someone has X amount invested in a business doesn't mean he had that in a bank account and is making that much every year. There are plenty of people who spend $50k to build an edit suite that might not fully pay for itself in a couple of years… and then it's time to upgrade a bunch of it.

grue
Jun 28, 2011, 10:48 PM
I'm not buying the media management complaint.

So you don't believe it MIGHT be difficult to deal with a situation where a house that does work for both, say, Arnie's Abortions and Pamela Pro-Life has to do all sorts of stupid workarounds to conceal projects if a client wants to come to a sessions? No post house is going to dedicate one disk array per clients.

iDisk
Jun 28, 2011, 10:51 PM
Thanks, at least we share a sense of humour :)

Hey, life's to short to waste on Apple, but it's fun debating and sharing opinions and facts with others on the forum.... If Apple would have marketed this product differently then the issue wouldn't be as big... They had alot of people believing that FCPX was strictly for "pros" at a affordable, magical, revolutionary price... when in reality it's geared at prosumers and pros

macsmurf
Jun 28, 2011, 10:52 PM
"if you're really a professional you shouldn't want to be reliant on software from a company like Apple." In the end, he says "your heart will be broken. Because they're not reliant on you."

:eek: If you use your heart instead of your head in business decisions then you're already in trouble. Apple doesn't, why should you?

Apple is a very flexible, secretive, and unpredictable company. The flip side of that coin is that you cannot trust them to behave a certain way on the long term.

Tomorrow Apple could cancel FCX, remove Java from the platform, cancel the Xserve (oh, wait. They already did that) and do a number of other things that might be detrimental to your business and they probably wouldn't even feel it on the bottom line.

I use OS X for work that I get paid for, but I can switch to Linux in a matter of hours. The only investment I've made was the price of the computer and I'm told it runs Linux just fine so I won't even have to use it as a paper weight in case Apple decides that the terminal really shouldn't be present on the platform or whatever.

If you need roadmaps and that sort of thing, go with companies that have a proven record of supporting businesses. Companies such as, dare I say, Microsoft.

Burger Thing
Jun 28, 2011, 10:58 PM
I think we are missing an important part of this FCP X debacle.

For what they do, Apple is a relatively small company. They have groups of programmers that finish one product then shift their focus onto another.

I don't think they have the resources (by choice?) to focus on a mature piece of software and make it better over time. Apple is consistently "re-inventing".

Think about their software. Very few applications are "mature."


Apple is making cash loads of money. One record braking Quarter after another. They DO have the financial resources to hire more programmers and restructure their software developing teams. It seems to me, that the recent software release were never free of accompanying rumble here in forums and elsewhere: Software buggy, incomplete, etc.

For a company, which is finically as successful as Apple, it is a worrying trend, if not a shame. Because if reputation has taken a hit and/or less and less professionals are using Apple, then the coolness factor will wear off and all of a sudden the iGadgets might not be so attractive anymore for a lot of people.

Steve is said to have an urge form perfection: form, shading of colors (see the white iPhone story). That makes the recent software releases really puzzling.

Having said that, I really hope they come around and implement the missing features in FCPX ASAP. But my fear is, the next months Apple's focus is directed again on the new iPhone and it's OS and various variations of the iPod.

daylight28
Jun 28, 2011, 11:06 PM
I'd list 64bit after multicore support and GPGPU, personally. Final Cut 7 is a thousand times more useful than FCX, but at least FCX will use more than 1/12th of my CPU power.

THAT too

gugy
Jun 28, 2011, 11:07 PM
Apple's fanboys need to chill.
I am a huge Apple fan, have been using their software/hardware for 20 + years. Survived the hard days of Gil Amelio's tenure and happily watched Steve bring Apple back from the brink of extinction.

Let's be honest, Apple while still support the professional creative community, they have been in the last 5+ years not taking to much attention to us. I make my living using Apple and I would hope they will not leave us behind to become a company solely focused on mainstream with iPads and iPhones.

Criticism is a good thing. I am glad to see the professional community up in arms against FCPX. While I don't mind a new revolutionary way to edit, they just did not bring so many essential things that made FCP such a powerful and desirable software. Let's hope all the noise will help make the next iteration of FCP a true professional software.

izcóatl
Jun 28, 2011, 11:08 PM
The "Pro" market complainers need to THINK DIFFERENT, not Apple, cause FCPX is different..


Yeah... think different, like the masses do...
I remember when owning a mac was a sort of making a statement. We supported this company in its darkest times. Nowadays, well, everybody has an iPod, an iPad, an iDon'tknowwhatdevice and they call themselves mac experts. Ok.

Oh, and get off my lawn!!

BugHunter
Jun 28, 2011, 11:09 PM
Seriously, out of all the opinions here, people calling Brinkman a whiner is really annoying me.
What part of his post is whining? He says that what Apple is doing makes sense for Apple, just they're not looking at the really top end Hollywood market. New features are decided by Apple's vision rather than influenced by customers and that the products are great value for money, but if you're a top end film studio, it might not be for you.
This is not whining, it's an educated opinion!

SteveW928
Jun 28, 2011, 11:10 PM
Is that often these high-end products drive the entire market segment. So, if the VFX folks walk away, the next tier, then the next tier, and eventually those amateur users all start seeing Apple as not being the solution for that kind of work. It might not even be true, but that will be the perception.

For example, I used to do a good amount of work in CAD and 3D modeling. There were actually some awesome products from low through the mid-high end range for the Mac. But, the general perception, because a few key high end products were absent from the platform, was that if you want to do CAD and 3D modeling, you get a PC.

In other words, because the high-end (what everyone pays attention to) was missing, the low-end assumed the platform didn't cut it, and went with the lower-end packages on the platform that had the high-end products.

While Apple is generally doing really well, I think this is short-sighted penny-pinching. They will likely do well even if the whole video-market bails, but they could do even better if they paid attention to it properly.

I'd note a similar blunder in the server market with cutting the xServe. It might not have been generating a lot of revenue, but that product was at least pertly responsible for Apple gaining some sliver of respectability in IT.

deconstruct60
Jun 28, 2011, 11:18 PM
You also have to keep in mind that those pro's, in no small part, were somewhat responsible for the resurgence of apple computers.

Self serving rubbish that gets continuously served up on these forums. "We saved Apple so they owe us" . The vast majority of macs have always been sold to people who are not in some high end graphics designer niche or some higher end, even smaller, video editing niche. Microsoft did far more by kicking in some cash (not merely buying product ) and keeping Office on the platform than any of these narrow niche products did.
If the only folks buying were these high end folks the application ecosystem would have dried up and withered away.

Each sale helped but not disproportionally once normalize to scale.

nuckinfutz
Jun 28, 2011, 11:21 PM
Is that often these high-end products drive the entire market segment. So, if the VFX folks walk away, the next tier, then the next tier, and eventually those amateur users all start seeing Apple as not being the solution for that kind of work. It might not even be true, but that will be the perception.

For example, I used to do a good amount of work in CAD and 3D modeling. There were actually some awesome products from low through the mid-high end range for the Mac. But, the general perception, because a few key high end products were absent from the platform, was that if you want to do CAD and 3D modeling, you get a PC.

In other words, because the high-end (what everyone pays attention to) was missing, the low-end assumed the platform didn't cut it, and went with the lower-end packages on the platform that had the high-end products.

While Apple is generally doing really well, I think this is short-sighted penny-pinching. They will likely do well even if the whole video-market bails, but they could do even better if they paid attention to it properly.

I'd note a similar blunder in the server market with cutting the xServe. It might not have been generating a lot of revenue, but that product was at least pertly responsible for Apple gaining some sliver of respectability in IT.

Steve

That's what made Final Cut Pro what it is today. It was the program for the rest of us who couldn't afford a megabuck Avid system. If the high end VFX guys called all the shots there'd be no Final Cut Pro.

In CAD is may be a bit different because you may need to deliver a final product in AutoCAD format or something else. In video the end result is either a tape or a digital file that has video properly cut, edited and synchronized to audio. What's causing the strife somewhat is a change in workflow because of the need to export to different apps to finish. I think this issue is more concerning to high end bays than say a videographer that would just rather keep the setup to say FCPX and Logic Studio for audio with a suite of plugins needed.

End the end FCPX will connect to other systems but that clearly wasn't ready yet for launch.

ma2ha3
Jun 28, 2011, 11:23 PM
apple was a small company in the past, they need pro support, but now they sell to mass users. i support apple move to home user.

Zab the Fab
Jun 28, 2011, 11:24 PM
Give the whining Adobe bots their day in the sun. What will be really fun is to come back here in 1 year when FCPX has been through the same cycle we all know so well. Initially the iPod, iPhone, iPad, iMovie (both versions) etc. etc. were all doomed by the hysterical nay sayers who resist all change.
Well, resistance is futile - you have been Apple-assimilated.

Now let's revisit this thread in 1 year when FCPX rules the industry, and in the mean time just let the whining bots have their day in the sun. It's a limited ride ahead for them. We'll remember their names for later ;)

Do I smell the flamethrowers charging ??? ;)

tdar
Jun 28, 2011, 11:38 PM
Wrooooooooong.


Apple didn't just screw the pooch, they knocked it out and raped it in the parking lot.

No, what they did was to reposition the product to a new and different vision that they feel will be much more successful for them. I have no doubt that it will. We all are sorry that people like you are being left behind in this transition. But Apple, like any company, does what they think is best for the company, not for each of it's users. This is just a fact. Apple of all of the major computer companies is the quickest to change direction and move in some other direction. That's what they have done here.

Why "pro's" thought that a $300 product, that was replacing a $1000 product, in a market that normally has costs in the tens of thousands of dollars was going to work out for you is just beyond me.

Apple has cut from the past and is now moving on to it's future. Now it's your turn. Sorry.

CmonSon
Jun 28, 2011, 11:43 PM
The way I see it, FCP 7 was like an old house. There were all sorts of ghetto remedies to get it to work the way it did, but ultimately the house was old and nothing could be done to upgrade it. So apple made a new house. They started fresh and created A more modern house (fcpx). Better wiring. Better plumbing, better framework.

Now i know The bathroom is in a different part of the house, and the kitchen looks different. But that's no reason not to move in. If theres no walk-in closet the master bedroom... And your old house had one... Then stay in your old house until a walk-in closet is built.

I know there are some features missing that a small (incredibly vocal) minority is in "desperate" need of... But to be honest FCPX is the future.Most of those little features will be added within the year.

Everyone cried about the iPad being a big iPod, and how it didn't have USB...look how many companies are mimicking the iPad now. Look how many ppl love the product. Half the ppl on this blog have never even tried to edit in fcpx... Stop throwing rocks at a house you've never even entered, just because some "pro" said it was bad.

kiljoy616
Jun 28, 2011, 11:45 PM
Considering the price drop this does seem to be more in line with been in the middle when it comes to the user level. Not exactly pro but not so amateur based that a majority of people can't get what they want out of it. I think Apple is in the right track if they want to reach 90% of the population that does not need or has alternative they can pick from.

deconstruct60
Jun 28, 2011, 11:45 PM
I'd note a similar blunder in the server market with cutting the xServe. It might not have been generating a lot of revenue, but that product was at least pertly responsible for Apple gaining some sliver of respectability in IT.

Blunder? by what metric. The number of Mac OS X Server sales are up since they transitioned away from XServe. They will be up further once it is just a 'add on' app to Lion.

A not so small minority of the folks complaining at the end was not so much about XServe ( "we didn't really like them anyway" ) it was that couldn't get the virtualiztaion clause on Mac OS X Server flipped over to the more clone oriented hardware they buying anyway.


Respect doesn't pay the bills. The "I have a list of 25 preconditions before I will consider your product" IT folks weren't buy them. Apple played the game of adding features that were "must haves" only for the list to get longer. It is a control freak game. As the article if you want to getting into a MMA control freak match with Steve Jobs ..... you are probably going to loose.

Some of those folks don't want the 'cost per seat' of the software to go down because that gives them more leverage over the software developer. The problem is that Apple isn't a "for hire" software contractor firm. They'll take feedback and adopt some insights. But they aren't going to be dictated to.

daylight28
Jun 28, 2011, 11:46 PM
If something is working why fix it APPLE.
Redesigned from the ground up! WHY It just needed a few upgrades.

I thought something was up when they laid off half there Final cut developers. Also, there was no real media event for FCPX, They had one when FCP 7 and Final Cut Server.
They killed FC SERVER too, wow that was dropped fast. I'm glad I am not a big post house.
This is the thing, I love Apple, but it hurts when they stick a knife in to you.

If your a Pro and has been using Final Cut since version 1 like me, Apple just took a big dump on you. All the time and investments we have made over the years just got put out with the trash.
If your a new editor and FCX looks like the future then learn Avid so when you get a job editing you know how to use it.

Has apple ever developed a pro app from the ground up?
I know that Apple bought FCP just like it did shake and color.
You cant call Motion a pro app and apple bought Logic which soundtracks came from.
:eek:
Logic is next.
:eek:

Sdashiki
Jun 28, 2011, 11:47 PM
Why "pro's" thought that a $300 product, that was replacing a $1000 product, in a market that normally has costs in the tens of thousands of dollars was going to work out for you is just beyond me.

Because, it did.

Do you really need to remember that?

rhuber
Jun 28, 2011, 11:48 PM
Self serving rubbish that gets continuously served up on these forums. "We saved Apple so they owe us" . The vast majority of macs have always been sold to people who are not in some high end graphics designer niche or some higher end, even smaller, video editing niche. Microsoft did far more by kicking in some cash (not merely buying product ) and keeping Office on the platform than any of these narrow niche products did.
If the only folks buying were these high end folks the application ecosystem would have dried up and withered away.

Each sale helped but not disproportionally once normalize to scale.

I don't think that, between the two of us, mine was the self serving rubbish-filled comment. I'm guessing you didn't actually read the post, because you completely missed the point that I was making. This has nothing to do with "us" or anyone owing anything to anybody. My comment was about the rebuilding of apple based on a specific approach... targeting schools and establishing their mac brand as powerful high-end solutions for those who create... and recently reversing that approach. Make of it what you will, but I really don't think it was that difficult a concept to follow.

bgtrack
Jun 28, 2011, 11:48 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/9A5248d Safari/6533.18.5)

The bottom line is this is a business. Apple makes billions each year. Why should they change their products to fit a slim number of people? Half the people on here that call themselves "pros" aren't even professionals.

jbyun04
Jun 28, 2011, 11:48 PM
The way I see it, FCP 7 was like an old house. There were all sorts of ghetto remedies to get it to work the way it did, but ultimately the house was old and nothing could be done to upgrade it. So apple made a new house. They started fresh and created A more modern house (fcpx). Better wiring. Better plumbing, better framework.

Now i know The bathroom is in a different part of the house, and the kitchen looks different. But that's no reason not to move in. If theres no walk-in closet the master bedroom... And your old house had one... Then stay in your old house until a walk-in closet is built.

I know there are some features missing that a small (incredibly vocal) minority is in "desperate" need of... But to be honest FCPX is the future.Most of those little features will be added within the year.

Everyone cried about the iPad being a big iPod, and how it didn't have USB...look how many companies are mimicking the iPad now. Look how many ppl love the product. Half the ppl on this blog have never even tried to edit in fcpx... Stop throwing rocks at a house you've never even entered, just because some "pro" said it was bad.

That may be, but to a prosumer who can't even import their FCS projects into FCPX, why even bother?

Someone who's already started a project has to start over again because Apple is "planning" to implement this feature within the year?

I'm pretty sure it's not SOME "pro", there's lots of pros out there that can't stand FCPX. Just look at the App Store.

kiljoy616
Jun 28, 2011, 11:48 PM
I really don't don't see why Apple screwed up so badly. They could have kept Final Cut Pro "Pro," and dumbed down Final Cut Express or maybe created a lite version of Final Cut Pro for the masses... This is a huge mistake.

How so, are they wrong. Why does Apple need to do any of the above. They have made a product that does plenty, even if its not up to par to the Pro's but then how many Pro's are out there that can't use something else. They are smart they are not trying to compete with the Pro developer but bringing something cheaper that still can be used by those not need ever last bit.

I am sure they will in time upgrade some things, but making things more accessible to many more people and keep the price down actually makes sense. Even if we don't see it yet.

deconstruct60
Jun 28, 2011, 11:55 PM
Why "pro's" thought that a $300 product, that was replacing a $1000 product, in a market that normally has costs in the tens of thousands of dollars was going to work out for you is just beyond me.


Alias Media Composer has "add-ons" that cost extra. Most likely FCPX will to. Eventually there could be add-ons that raise the price back up to the $1,000 level (or above since not amortizing these feature costs over the whole user base ) and they will only be leaving behind an even smaller percentage of the market. The in-app store functionality of the Mac App store are a natural next step for Apple to leverage. There is no pressing "need" to have a product with a different name to which to attach the "add ons". For example, for Lion "Mac OS Server" will just be an add-on. there will be no separate OS product SKU for Server anymore.


What is more important is to get the core out and brought to stability before adding the "add ons". Not the artifical segmentation between "Final Cut Express" and "Final Cut Pro". Some folks are too caught up in the superficial elements of product names and version numbers.

btbeme
Jun 28, 2011, 11:56 PM
Any of the "Pros" out there who rushed to disrupt their workflows with a brand-new application richly deserve what they received. Any true Pro - in any field - waits for the software or hardware to be proven before making the jump. The only "Pros" who are making loud whining sounds about their workflows being disrupted are not professionals at all.

As for the rest... anyone who feels that this is the final version of FCPX needs their head examined. As a large stockholder (over 8000 shares) I greatly appreciate Apple aiming for the larger market and not overdeveloping a niche application to sell at a loss simply so they can pacify a tiny market. Same reason Pages does not directly compete with Word, etc.

CmonSon
Jun 29, 2011, 12:00 AM
That may be, but to a prosumer who can't even import their FCS projects into FCPX, why even bother?

Someone who's already started a project has to start over again because Apple is "planning" to implement this feature within the year?

I'm pretty sure it's not SOME "pro", there's lots of pros out there that can't stand FCPX. Just look at the App Store.

Half the AppStore comments are complaints from ppl who resist change and have their noses up there asses... The other half are legitimate professionals that actually use the features that were left out.

I've actually worked on a fcp7 project in fcpx ... Simply export the fcp7 project as a video, then import it into fcpx and use the same footage to replace/add/edit. Either do that, or finish ur project in fcp7. No one is forcing anyone to use fcpx right away. The beauty of fcpx is that it doesnt overwrite or uninstall the older application.

Chwisch87
Jun 29, 2011, 12:01 AM
Apple pissed off 5,000 editors to make 5 million amateurs happy.

Sums up FCPx

zarusoba
Jun 29, 2011, 12:01 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

I wish Apple would buy Autodesk Maya, strip out half the guff, and turn it into something highly intuitive and usable.

chuck4d
Jun 29, 2011, 12:02 AM
You should review the MacProvideo tutorials by Michael Wohl before dismissing it totally. This product has a lot more power that meets the eye. If you spent a little time with this product. It will surprise you.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I found this article very interesting as I just now explored the new Final Cut. Decided against buying it because it seems like a souped up iMovie and not something that works well with other software for some intense editing.

Very interesting commentary by the man.

SirHaakon
Jun 29, 2011, 12:04 AM
Just because someone has X amount invested in a business doesn't mean he had that in a bank account and is making that much every year. There are plenty of people who spend $50k to build an edit suite that might not fully pay for itself in a couple of years… and then it's time to upgrade a bunch of it.
This is what I call bad business.

There are "plenty of people" (read: millions) who are completely sunk in credit card debt across this country as well because they just charge charge charge on their credit cards and for whatever reason (business, personal, stupidity, or otherwise) can just never pay it back.

Most people's attitude toward money in our society is completely out of whack, even if the intentions are good.

JDW
Jun 29, 2011, 12:06 AM
I know there are some features missing that a small (incredibly vocal) minority is in "desperate" need of...

CmonSon needs some CmonSens. And I say this not even being a so-called "Video Pro." Heck, I don't edit but home videos; but I don't use dumbed-down iMovie because it won't allow me to import files larger than 2GB. And even though FCPX may serve my needs (admission: I've not tried it yet), I am not so selfish to think that it should serve even a video pro in hollywood simply because some say "FCPX is the future." Although I've loved Apple since my first Mac 128k in 1984, I am not a blind follower of His-Steveness or his Chef, Tim Cook.

The fact is that Final Cut PRO was written for and has long catered to Pros. Therefore, concerning this particular piece of software, what Pros think matters most (which excludes most of us in this thread). But both Pros and non-Pros alike understand that had Apple positioned the codebase of what is now FCPX as "Final Cut Express," no one would be complaining and Apple could have rolled the new codebase into FC PRO at a later time when it was ready. The problem is that FCPX is half-baked in the eyes of the "pros" who have funded it faithfully these past 11 years and wish to fund it into the foreseeable future. "But Apple caters to the masses, not just 10,000 or so pros" you say? Poppycock! That's what iMovie is for.

So who is to blame on this botched FCPX debut? One cannot help but see the blame to fall squarely upon the shoulders of "the man who keeps the trains running on time," Tim Cook. (Since His-Steveness is on medical leave, we'll let him off the hook for now.) Mr. Cook a great corporate executive when it comes running a multi billion dollar business with over 70 billion in liquid assets, but he really only excels at one thing -- keeping those trains running on schedule. As such, Cook obviously told his engineers to kick out FCP "on time, no matter what." That's right, FCPX is half-baked because of Tim "Cook." Perhaps he should spend more time in the kitchen and make his name mean something.

Read this to get some real perspective on this FCPX update:

http://www.dvcreators.net/what-does-the-guy-who-led-the-original-final-cut-pro-revolution-think-of-the-final-cut-pro-x-release/

austinmcguire
Jun 29, 2011, 12:07 AM
Almost all of Apple's 1.0 releases (regardless of their marketing number) have had serious shortcomings. This includes Mac OS X, Quicktime X, and the iPhone :eek:. While Apple improves with each generation, their current "Damn the torpedoes" attitude has made this fact worst.

In the past, there was always an out if you needed what they were replacing. With Mac OS X, you could still boot into Classic, With Quicktime X, you could still use Quicktime 7, with dropping floppy disks, you could always go external USB Floppy. (I still use floppies for my job. I might only need them 3 times a year, but when I need them, nothing else works). This little detail is what Apple has seemed to miss recently. Dropping firewire from some Macbook pros a couple of years ago (They thankfully backed down and put it back in the following generation), the whole Matte/Glossy screen issue, removing Rosetta from Lion, and EOLing FCP7 before FCPX was up to speed.

This latest debacle could have been easily avoided with a simple spin. For example "Yes, FCP7 is EOL, however your FCPX license gives you downgrade rights. If for some reason you need to continue using the legacy FCP7 software, your purchase of a FCPX license will allow you to do so legally." This provides an out for the customer and costs Apple nothing (Kind of like what they did with the whole iMovie6 / iMovie08 outcry). The 10% who really nead a feature do not usually mind going through a few reasonable hoops.

I do not use FCP so this decision in itself does not affect me, however the general trend is alarming to me. Apple has had so many successful transitions in the last 10 years,they seem to have forgotten why they were successful and think they can move forward without any thoughts of "torpodoes". When you drop something, you should look at what will my customers that use this feature do when it is gone. While less then 10% might use a feature, sometimes that feature is the only way to get a job done. (See my floppy comment above as an extreme example of this).

bruinsrme
Jun 29, 2011, 12:07 AM
Any of the "Pros" out there who rushed to disrupt their workflows with a brand-new application richly deserve what they received. Any true Pro - in any field - waits for the software or hardware to be proven before making the jump. The only "Pros" who are making loud whining sounds about their workflows being disrupted are not professionals at all.

As for the rest... anyone who feels that this is the final version of FCPX needs their head examined. As a large stockholder (over 8000 shares) I greatly appreciate Apple aiming for the larger market and not overdeveloping a niche application to sell at a loss simply so they can pacify a tiny market. Same reason Pages does not directly compete with Word, etc.

I agree apple should continue peddling stripped down software for the masses.

If they want to do that at least provide the more thorough description of what the program is no longer capable of.
I am sure that small niche depends on the software and probably would be looking for an update to increase functionality and productivity.
Unless of course apple wants to drive away the "pro" customer

grue
Jun 29, 2011, 12:08 AM
Any of the "Pros" out there who rushed to disrupt their workflows with a brand-new application richly deserve what they received. Any true Pro - in any field - waits for the software or hardware to be proven before making the jump. The only "Pros" who are making loud whining sounds about their workflows being disrupted are not professionals at all.

As for the rest... anyone who feels that this is the final version of FCPX needs their head examined. As a large stockholder (over 8000 shares) I greatly appreciate Apple aiming for the larger market and not overdeveloping a niche application to sell at a loss simply so they can pacify a tiny market. Same reason Pages does not directly compete with Word, etc.

"Hay guise, I'm gonna like about having a couple million dollars in apple stock to try and get respect on an internet forum"

rhuber
Jun 29, 2011, 12:09 AM
This is what I call bad business.

There are "plenty of people" (read: millions) who are completely sunk in credit card debt across this country as well because they just charge charge charge on their credit cards and for whatever reason (business, personal, stupidity, or otherwise) can just never pay it back.

Most people's attitude toward money in our society is completely out of whack, even if the intentions are good.

How in the world did you take that person's comment and turn it into a response about bad business and stories of credit card debt? Try as I might... I can't find where you got that.

rhuber
Jun 29, 2011, 12:20 AM
I agree apple should continue peddling stripped down software for the masses.

If they want to do that at least provide the more thorough description of what the program is no longer capable of.
I am sure that small niche depends on the software and probably would be looking for an update to increase functionality and productivity.
Unless of course apple wants to drive away the "pro" customer

Unless you happen to buy a mac because it was a high-end product by company who prided itself and heavily marketed itself on NOT being a common product for the masses.

[ Sorry, I think I quoted the wrong post. Oops! ;) ]

thevofl
Jun 29, 2011, 12:22 AM
I am a Prosumer who still has FCP5. I don't make any bones about it. Just like I am a Prosumer photographer, and a Prosumer Designer. None of these things are my bread and butter.

Having said that, I trust the professionals in a trade. I hold them in high regard. Their opinion matters.

Apple touts the fact that Academy Award winning editors use their products. The professional editors will state clearly that they are using FCP7.

This carries a lot of weight with me. This is why pissing off 5,000 professional editors is not good. Apple's reputation and brand is being jeopardized. This isn't an iPhone 4 death grip where the relationship is between Apple and the consumer. This involves an industry. (And an industry who can throw together cleaver parody videos at the drop of a hat.)

This is a PR nightmare. It is not just FCP at stake here. This is really showing the flaws of the App Store. There are no trials; there are no refund policy for software; and the rating system really bites.

I'm sure FCPX is an excellent product, but ultimately this is a failed execution.

CmonSon
Jun 29, 2011, 12:22 AM
And I say this not even being a so-called "Video Pro." Heck, I don't edit but home videos; but I don't use dumbed-down iMovie because it won't allow me to import files larger than 2GB. And even though FCPX may serve my needs (admission: I've not tried it yet), I am not so selfish to think that it should serve even a video pro in hollywood simply because some say "FCPX is the future." ...
The fact is that Final Cut PRO was written for and has long catered to Pros. Therefore, concerning this particular piece of software, what Pros think matters most (which excludes most of us in this thread).

Who says what pros say matters most? Because they make money using the program, they get ultimate say in what it should look like and how it should perform? Season ticket holders don't decide who the team trades, and drafts. Sorry buddy.

And you of all ppl should understand the move towards a friendlier interface that can be used by above average videographers frustrated with the constraints of iMovie (look in the mirror) and professional movie makers. If anything, it would be selfish to think otherwise. To think that final cut only belongs to the elite, and all the rest of the millions of ppl who dont make a living off of it must be confined to the constraints of iMovie.
Gimme a break. I guess logic is only for professional musicians with record deals.

bruinsrme
Jun 29, 2011, 12:24 AM
Unless you happen to buy a mac because it was a high-end product by company who prided itself and heavily marketed itself on NOT being a common product for the masses.

I agree, my first post was sarcastic. If I was spending $299 I would expect a software package a little more advanced than something for the masses

rhuber
Jun 29, 2011, 12:25 AM
I agree, my first post was sarcastic. If I was spending $299 I would expect a software package a little more advanced than something for the masses

Sorry man... I just edited that I quoted the wrong post.

devilbond
Jun 29, 2011, 12:26 AM
PS - sign the petition.

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/finalcut/petition.html

BenRoethig
Jun 29, 2011, 12:27 AM
Been feeling that since they ditched matte screens in 2007. Lion just reiterates his point by making OSX more "consumery".

I can foresee many professional creatives migrating back to windows within the next year or two once it's painfully obvious (and somehow it isn't yet) that Apple has moved on quite some time ago.

Which would the completely opposite of the situation a decade ago where windows was for the mass consumer market and the Mac was for the demanding professional.

deconstruct60
Jun 29, 2011, 12:32 AM
I don't think that, between the two of us, mine was the self serving rubbish-filled comment. I'm guessing you didn't actually read the post, because you completely missed the point that I was making.


I did read the post and yes it is rubbish. That is not an accurate portrayal of Apple's recovery strategy nor the history of Mac usage.

Apple stopped the bleeding and shooting themselves in the foot. Killed the clones and Newton (which had its own clone offshoot spawning), simplified the product line up ( which already had elements targeted at the narrower markets you outlined from about '88 on. So it was hardly new), and got control of SNAFU'ed inventory. Additionally, the dumped/outsourced manufacturing. They also consumed an increasing share of the retail market for the product ( so nuked lots of "mac friendly" stores to absorb their revenue numbers). Finally they improved their financial image so were not on "death watch" every 6 months (i.e., fewer folks will buy computers from a company that is reported about to die). Additionally, they hit the iPod jackpot ( which was put on super growth by delivering the solution to PCs ; not Macs). [ While still at NeXT Steve Jobs said that if he returned to Apple he'd milk the Mac for what it was worth and move on the "next" thing. He did exactly that. Turned the Mac, not just the specific machines targeted to a narrow market... all of them, into a cash cow and leveraged into a new market. ]



Apple used to have over representation in the edu market from the Apple II days on through the 90's. That wasn't a lynch pin nor was it primarily driven by what higher end graphics designers were or were not doing.

Apple has always been about moving a volume of computers from the Apple I days. If not a top 5-7 computer maker they were screwing up. In the dark days folks like to create some mythos that Apple was about building custom stuff just for the niche "special people". Phfff. That's kool-aid drinking RDF talk.

Apple had a high presence on college campus because folks needed to write papers and use computers. They were easy to use and network. When Windows became more stable (easy to use) and easily networked (ethernet got cheap) then pushed out the Mac in many places because they were more cost effective. Not because colleges were closely watching designers for clues what to do.

daylight28
Jun 29, 2011, 12:35 AM
[QUOTE=btbeme;12847124 (over 8000 shares)[/QUOTE]
wow that is over 2 million dollars. Did you get it when it was at 11.00 a share when I did. I have no where near what you have but, that is great.


FCX looks like it will be great some day. But They should have rebranded it with a different name. Like I said before, "Gen X" Keep Final Cut Pro like it was and do some upgrades and not force there users to make a switch. I dont like change when it effect my work. I need to bring food home to feed my family I go paycheck to paycheck I need to work fast and get my work done. or I will need to sell my shares. I don't have time to learn a new system now. I will use FCS as long as I can but at some point I need to make a switch. I hope I can say FCPX blows FCS away but right now, I can not say that.
If apple had made word then trash word for pages people would be mad, but you know what, apple never made word they made apple works so pages looks great. Apple had shake and trashed it for motion, people got mad, I did, I use aftereffects now. Now steve is sick and maybe someone else is calling the shots for pro app i dont know.

2IS
Jun 29, 2011, 12:39 AM
Every thought that the reality is more likely that you're simply underpaid? This isn't a slam on you but millions of users per quarter don't seem to be going through the same issue. Value is all perception.

He didn't say "value" he said "spec-wise" and he's right. If you compare hardware specs, you typically pay more for less with Apple products. "Value" incorporates a whole lot more factors than merely hardware specs. Perhaps you should read more carefully next time.

satkin2
Jun 29, 2011, 12:53 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

It's not about caring,, it's about business. As a currently highly successful business I'm sure Apple are fully aware that the new FCP doesn't meet the requirements of the top end pros. However they have made the decision to go the route they've gone because they think that it is the best route to take for their business.

FCP isn't the only game in town and as disappointing as it may be to the pro users that it doesn't meet their requirements any more it isn't the be all and end all for them. If they had the previous version, this will still work, if they want to have new features they'll have to look at alternatives.

The use of emotive language such as 'don't care' really shouldn't come in to it. Its not about caring, its about business. Apple have made their decision and they will have good reason for it. The pros just have to make a decision now whether they are going to stick with Apple and their way of thinking or move to something that suits them better.

CodeBreaker
Jun 29, 2011, 12:53 AM
I have really started to hate Apple. They are doing just the wrong things since past two years. Firstly, they dropped firewire on my MacBook(pro). I played along. Then they crapped on iPhoto. Then, they ditched Xserve. OS X Lion Server is a joke. They destroyed MobileMe. And now this.

I'm not a video editor/pro, so this did not hit me. But it really seems that Apple has stopped caring for their old friends, who (still?) believe in them.

nuckinfutz
Jun 29, 2011, 12:54 AM
He didn't say "value" he said "spec-wise" and he's right. If you compare hardware specs, you typically pay more for less with Apple products. "Value" incorporates a whole lot more factors than merely hardware specs. Perhaps you should read more carefully next time.

It always becomes an Apples to Oranges comparison.

Laptop A has a slightly faster CPU or larger Hard Drive but Laptop B has an aluminum chassis or that new whizzbang port thingamabob.

Again ...almost 4 million Mac users per quarter have looked at the specs and saw value in Macs which means that specifications are subject to the taint of personal evaluation as well. Some specs mean more or less to some people.

Have a read carefully enough for you this time Mr. Semantics?

btbeme
Jun 29, 2011, 12:55 AM
"Hay guise, I'm gonna like about having a couple million dollars in apple stock to try and get respect on an internet forum"

I am guessing you meant "lie", not "like." Sorry to burst your zitty-faced bubble, but AAPL is about 20% of my portfolio. See, some people like to impale their pet companies for looking askance at their pet project, but in the real world, moving larger volumes of product to produce increasing amounts of capital is what makes the free market economy go 'round.

I am an investor first and an Apple user second. If Apple decided to produce an automobile next week, I'd be among the last to buy it but the first to suggest that others consider a purchase. See, thats the way that investors create wealth.

FCPX is such a minor revenue stream that it hardly registers on the quarterly reports. Folks whose businesses and livelihoods depend on software continuity should have been well aware of what they were risking if they went "all in" on FCPX. For an investor, it doesn't register a blip.

If you have the world's best answer for video editing software, I suggest you publish it and sell it for whatever price you feel it is worth. If I think you have a winner, you can count me in as having an interest in your IPO. In the meantime, if Apple feels it can make another billion over the next five years by producing FCPx, I am all for it. And, if 5000 "Pro" video editors take their $50 million elsewhere, so what... That seems like a great trade in a financial sense.

itsokay
Jun 29, 2011, 12:56 AM
what is the difference between a pro editor and one who shares ideas through montage?

enlighten me.

nuckinfutz
Jun 29, 2011, 12:57 AM
I have really started to hate Apple. They are doing just the wrong things since past two years. Firstly, they dropped firewire on my MacBook(pro). I played along. Then they crapped on iPhoto. Then, they ditched Xserve. OS X Lion Server is a joke. They destroyed MobileMe. And now this.

I'm not a video editor/pro, so this did not hit me. But it really seems that Apple has stopped caring for their old friends, who (still?) believe in them.

That's like saying "I believe in my hammer" A computer is a tool...nothing more nothing less. You're being highly emotional over an inanimate object which is a bit bizarre.

deconstruct60
Jun 29, 2011, 12:57 AM
This latest debacle could have been easily avoided with a simple spin. For example "Yes, FCP7 is EOL, however your FCPX license gives you downgrade rights. If for some reason you need to continue using the legacy FCP7 software, your purchase of a FCPX license will allow you to do so legally." This provides an out for the customer and costs Apple nothing (Kind of like what they did with the whole iMovie6 / iMovie08 outcry).

costs nothing? What "how to run a failed software company" book did you dig that one out of? All software has non zero support costs. Legacy software tends to run at an even higher rate per issue. Perhaps what you meant to say was that "Apple should eat the cost, they are rich anyway it won't hurt". Well one reason they are rich is because they don't eat other peoples costs. Even when they do ( occasional free Genius bar resolutions) they shave costs in other areas ( limited support lifetimes. )

Allowing a small limited number folks to use $999 software for $299 isn't a revenue building move either. They also radically changed the licensing terms too ( single employee can use on multiple macs assigned to them whereas the FCP 7 is much more limited).

Apple could allow volume seat holders to incrementally add to their coverage for a limited period of time through some not so public mechanism ( the way some folks can call up and get a Leopard copy if really need one. At least till Lion ships probably. )

One major problem with allowing FCP7 to live alongside FCPX is that it increases costs. You split your limited resources chasing two different code lines. Most of these shops screaming about legacy interfaces (EDLs ) are conservative shops anyway. Many of the were not going to adopt FCPX anyway if it wasn't radically new and a not so minor FCP 8-ish upgrade. The screaming is more about shuffling a longer period of time (since their product transitions are multiple years long anyway) on FCP 7 than anything about FCPX potential over the short term.

Second, it only serves to spawn a "keep the FCP 7 "code line movement. That train has already left the station so there is no reason to spend much time on that.

slrandall
Jun 29, 2011, 01:00 AM
I have really started to hate Apple. They are doing just the wrong things since past two years. Firstly, they dropped firewire on my MacBook(pro). I played along. Then they crapped on iPhoto. Then, they ditched Xserve. OS X Lion Server is a joke. They destroyed MobileMe. And now this.

I'm not a video editor/pro, so this did not hit me. But it really seems that Apple has stopped caring for their old friends, who (still?) believe in them.

If you hate Apple, then don't use their products. However ...

Which Macbook Pro? I have a 2011 model, and its FW port is in use as we speak.
If you don't like iPhoto, try Aperture. If you don't like that, then once again: don't use their products. No one is forcing you.
What's wrong with OS X Lion Server? Have you even used it? I have a friend who's an IT guy/hobbyist developer who absolutely loves it.
And yes, they got rid of MobileMe, but: http://www.apple.com/icloud/
Almost everyone [myself included] who has used iCloud thinks its wonderful.

If you don't like Apple, then don't buy/use their stuff.

telecomm
Jun 29, 2011, 01:03 AM
I trust the professionals in a trade. I hold them in high regard. Their opinion matters.

Apple touts the fact that Academy Award winning editors use their products. The professional editors will state clearly that they are using FCP7.

This carries a lot of weight with me. This is why pissing off 5,000 professional editors is not good. Apple's reputation and brand is being jeopardized.

I think this hits the nail on the head. There was a time when it was important to brand the Mac platform as capable of serious computing, to establish that it's not just a toy.

The sense that there's a "upper limit" to what is capable on the platform (i.e., serious people on the cutting edge of a sexy industry don't use Macs) is really bad PR, and would probably drive away a number of average consumers. After all, look at all the coverage this topic is getting, and the discussion it's generating among people who probably won't even buy the product, let alone use it to its potential!

btbeme
Jun 29, 2011, 01:05 AM
wow that is over 2 million dollars. Did you get it when it was at 11.00 a share when I did. I have no where near what you have but, that is great.

Slightly more than half were purchased at a pre-split price of $18, so they have a cost of around $9 each. The rest have been purchased over the last several years and have a dollar-cost average around $60 a share. I continue to make steady (but smaller) purchases as tie goes by, as I feel AAPL is worth around $550 a share with its current product lineup. I think App Store fees and the explosive tablet growth are severely underestimated.

Anecdote - a friend of mine wanted to "buy an iMac, but Dell didn't have them for sale online." Ironic how Macs were considered to be PCs, but now the masses know they want an iMac or a MacBook or an iPhone - and the PC salespeople have to tell them how "Mac-like" their Windows or Android product is.

Stridder44
Jun 29, 2011, 01:08 AM
It's simple and the writing is on the wall for the old stuck in the ways pro's... NOt even Larry Jordan complains or is whining this much (if at all)... Just move on then, or think different my friend :apple: ;)

*shakes head* Keep drinking that kool-aid.

jimmc
Jun 29, 2011, 01:11 AM
I still don't understand all the uproar. The fact that the product is new means that there will be a lot of missing features initially. Its like when the iPhone was first released. It lacked a huge number features that people wanted or needed, but the potential was there.

Why can't people keep using the old version until the new one is more mature?

That in fact is exactly what the "real pros" are doing. No professional film editor would even conceive of disrupting his current workflow with a brand new piece of software. It will be evaluated at our shop by perhaps one junior editor on a completed project, with a report made to management about its capabilities.

And only if we see any cost/benefit increase will we adopt it, and commit to sending staff to learn the new software.

The reason these groups are filled with "naysayers" is because the real pros are too busy to worry about it. . . .

Signed,
Management at a "real pro" editing house

Jerome Morrow
Jun 29, 2011, 01:12 AM
Wow … this penis measurement fest is heating up :D In times like this you can see the real people faces and i must say for some of you here i had more respect two weeks ago than now.

captain kaos
Jun 29, 2011, 01:17 AM
Well there you go!

Apple says we are not answerable to anyone and does not care for pro apps, (but like to charge pro app rates) and would like to concentrate on itoys. We may as well cut our next films in imovie for iphone.

thedarkhorse
Jun 29, 2011, 01:29 AM
I still don't understand all the uproar. The fact that the product is new means that there will be a lot of missing features initially. Its like when the iPhone was first released. It lacked a huge number features that people wanted or needed, but the potential was there.


Except the iphone was a new product, this is the 8th iteration of Final cut pro.

It would be more akin to apple releasing the iphone 5 without sms because it has iMessage, no support for non @mac.com email accounts because they rethought email protocols, a touchscreen rotary dialer with no option to go back to the standard dialing number pad, and on top of that no apps work on it until they are rewritten for iphone 5.
But it's faster

Axelcary
Jun 29, 2011, 01:32 AM
Yea, I'm sure they won't make millions from this product. :rolleyes:

Apple has good name and fame for its products in the market. i am sure they will make it if they don't bother about the professional market even

bonehead
Jun 29, 2011, 01:33 AM
Alias Media Composer has "add-ons" that cost extra. Most likely FCPX will to. Eventually there could be add-ons that raise the price back up to the $1,000 level (or above since not amortizing these feature costs over the whole user base ) and they will only be leaving behind an even smaller percentage of the market. The in-app store functionality of the Mac App store are a natural next step for Apple to leverage. There is no pressing "need" to have a product with a different name to which to attach the "add ons". For example, for Lion "Mac OS Server" will just be an add-on. there will be no separate OS product SKU for Server anymore.


What is more important is to get the core out and brought to stability before adding the "add ons". Not the artifical segmentation between "Final Cut Express" and "Final Cut Pro". Some folks are too caught up in the superficial elements of product names and version numbers.

I think you are correct in your assessment (although it is Avid not Alias). Too bad Apple didn't tell everyone at their event at NAB that v1.0 would be missing a few key features.

iFrankie
Jun 29, 2011, 01:43 AM
Any large customer that has worked with Apple will agree with what Ron Brinkmann has said.

Customers don't have a relationship with Apple. Customers don't drive product features. It's not Apple's style. It never has been and probably never will. Steve Jobs' comments to the Hollywood VFX pros sounds exactly like Steve Jobs and this philosophy trickles down to the rest of Apple. Hands become tied in every department even when they know certain things should be done on behalf of the customer.

It's hard for the common Apple user to understand this unless you have worked with Apple on a larger scale.

the8thark
Jun 29, 2011, 01:51 AM
I love reading the nostalgic responses here.

Final Cut Pro 7 and earlier. The interface was old and tired. You could learn what you needed to know but it just felt like stuff bolted on that sorta worked.

Now if I had built up braintrust in this app I too would be stressing FCPX. Any counselor will tell you that change causes stress in humans.

The trick is to realize this and continue to move forward. There's a recommendation that some people make to others "try taking a different route to work tomorrow, on that you've never taken before"

There's something exhilarating about changing one's path even if there's trepidation at first.

At this point FCPX isn't ready but it will be ready and the question that editors need to ask themselves is

"Will I be able to switch to Avid or Premiere and beat the young kid that stuck with FCPX and mastered it?"

Your competition isn't going to be afraid to learn and adapt and that could make you a dinosaur.
Brilliant post. And I agree 100%. People are treating FCPX like it's a 10.0 and not a 1.0 release. Apple did the best they could under the circumstances and with a little feedback they can make it even better. People just expect FCPX to be perfect right off the bat. That's just dumb. No one will use a 1.0 version of anything for mission critical projects.

So many people are just QQing about FCPX cause they want perfection and don't get it. But that's Apple reputation. If MS released something half as good as FCPX everyone would praise it.

Apps from Apple are either godly perfect or they are sh¡t. And anything in between is just the same as sh¡t to them. Apple made a pretty good app that will get better in time. But cause people over-react Apple cop flack for something that is actually pretty good.

mac9000
Jun 29, 2011, 01:52 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I found this article very interesting as I just now explored the new Final Cut. Decided against buying it because it seems like a souped up iMovie and not something that works well with other software for some intense editing.

Very interesting commentary by the man.

The iMovie of today is a very thinned out version of iMovie HD 2006, which I still use. The same seems to have happened with Final Cut Pro. The weird thing is, the new iMovie seemed harder to use because it lacked a timeline :mad:

Why didn't Apple just leave the pro features in FCP and put in the easy ones as well? I don't want it to end up with Windows-based pro video editors on top, that would be a nightmare! :eek:
Hopefully, if Apple drops FCP, nobody will make pro video editors except for Linux programmers, then I won't have to deal with (as) glitchy software.

KingCrimson
Jun 29, 2011, 01:52 AM
It's very simple, now that Apple has $60 billion cash horde, they don't need those high-end professional anymore. You've been thrown overboard like so much flotsam and jetsam for the siren call of the consumerist masses.

bonehead
Jun 29, 2011, 01:54 AM
Most of these shops screaming about legacy interfaces (EDLs ) are conservative shops anyway.

Care to share your data on this? If you have ever worked in feature film or broadcast TV post-production you would be aware that EDLs are ubiquitous.

mac9000
Jun 29, 2011, 01:55 AM
Brilliant post. And I agree 100%. People are treating FCPX like it's a 10.0 and not a 1.0 release. Apple did the best they could under the circumstances and with a little feedback they can make it even better. People just expect FCPX to be perfect right off the bat. That's just dumb. No one will use a 1.0 version of anything for mission critical projects.

So many people are just QQing about FCPX cause they want perfection and don't get it. But that's Apple reputation. If MS released something half as good as FCPX everyone would praise it.

Apps from Apple are either godly perfect or they are sh¡t. And anything in between is just the same as sh¡t to them. Apple made a pretty good app that will get better in time. But cause people over-react Apple cop flack for something that is actually pretty good.

Yeah, Final Cut Pro X is just bad relative to the older versions. I'd take it over anything Windows-based. It seems like a bias, but I have never seen a good, well programmed commercial Windows program before, or any Microsoft product for that matter. My XBOX 360 is a broken one we got that requires a paperclip to open the DVD drive and 20 tries to turn on.

Also, Apple just uses "X" because it looks cool. Quicktime X is not QT 10, it's v8. FCP X is not the 10th version. Mac OS X should really be a higher number than "10" by now, considering the beta was first released in 2000.

Rodimus Prime
Jun 29, 2011, 02:02 AM
Brilliant post. And I agree 100%. People are treating FCPX like it's a 10.0 and not a 1.0 release. Apple did the best they could under the circumstances and with a little feedback they can make it even better. People just expect FCPX to be perfect right off the bat. That's just dumb. No one will use a 1.0 version of anything for mission critical projects.

So many people are just QQing about FCPX cause they want perfection and don't get it. But that's Apple reputation. If MS released something half as good as FCPX everyone would praise it.

Apps from Apple are either godly perfect or they are sh¡t. And anything in between is just the same as sh¡t to them. Apple made a pretty good app that will get better in time. But cause people over-react Apple cop flack for something that is actually pretty good.

If you want to call it a 1.0 release then CHANGE THE NAME. Do not call it a massive upgrade to FCP 7.

It kept the name to the consumers of this product it means it is an upgrade. Using your argument is the standard Apple appoligist argument.

Simple truth to the matter is Apple is done with the pro market. This is just another nail in the coffin that already has a ton of nails in it.
Lets see the list so far to back Apple is leaving the pro market.

1. Killing Xserver with nothing to replace it.
2. Logic has lagged behind.
3. FCP 7 was lagging behind the rest of the industry
4. Dropping Fireware.
5. Mac Pro not being updated and the updates they do get are pretty weak at best.
6. FCPX lacking key pro features.
7. This guy releasing what he saw going on.

Come on that was added to already a pretty long and growing list and I know I missed some items. Apple is done with the pro market. Apple has burned those bridges of the people that kept the company alive during the lean times.

AppleScruff1
Jun 29, 2011, 02:04 AM
I really don't don't see why Apple screwed up so badly. They could have kept Final Cut Pro "Pro," and dumbed down Final Cut Express or maybe created a lite version of Final Cut Pro for the masses... This is a huge mistake.

Apple makes mistakes? :eek:

Apple doesn't care about pro users, yet their computers (and every other product) is overpriced....At least spec-wise

But at least they make record profits quarter after quarter and that is what is truly important to most users here. :D

CIA
Jun 29, 2011, 02:08 AM
Brilliant post. And I agree 100%. People are treating FCPX like it's a 10.0 and not a 1.0 release. Apple did the best they could under the circumstances and with a little feedback they can make it even better. People just expect FCPX to be perfect right off the bat. That's just dumb. No one will use a 1.0 version of anything for mission critical projects.


It's funny you say that, because when I fire up the app it doesn't say 1.0, it says Final Cut Pro X Version 10.0.

http://i.imgur.com/kFjsl.png

LethalWolfe
Jun 29, 2011, 02:08 AM
Brilliant post. And I agree 100%. People are treating FCPX like it's a 10.0 and not a 1.0 release. Apple did the best they could under the circumstances and with a little feedback they can make it even better. People just expect FCPX to be perfect right off the bat. That's just dumb. No one will use a 1.0 version of anything for mission critical projects.
Apple is calling it a 10.0 release so why are you surprised when people are critical of it for missing rudimentary features?

Is FCP X a v1.0 app that Apple slapped the FCP name on to in order to cash in on a decade of brand building or is FCP X the next iteration of a very successful and very well round (though far from perfect) professional NLE and should be evaluated as such?

It can't be both.


Lethal

grs
Jun 29, 2011, 02:09 AM
It seems that the FCPX defenders have divided into two groups--one that tells pros they must come to grips with the paradigm shift imposed by Apple, recognize that the lost features represent the old, outmoded way of doing things, and either change with the times or go the way of the dinosaur, and another that reassures the pros there are no lost features after all, only features that haven't made their way into this initial release. Wait 'til next year and everything will be roses and sunshine again.

Of course, these are contradictory positions, and I suspect they are both based entirely on guesswork. My own uninformed opinion is that many if not all missing features will be restored, but not because that was the original plan. I think Apple misjudged the reaction of professional FCP users and will be forced to fix what has turned out to be a botched release. Just a guess.

MattInOz
Jun 29, 2011, 02:18 AM
So you don't believe it MIGHT be difficult to deal with a situation where a house that does work for both, say, Arnie's Abortions and Pamela Pro-Life has to do all sorts of stupid workarounds to conceal projects if a client wants to come to a sessions? No post house is going to dedicate one disk array per clients.

Why would need a dedicated disk Array?
Just different access point and control for each client/project.
I Mean if it's "that" important surely they should have created an Access Control system before this.

bmk
Jun 29, 2011, 02:18 AM
Brinkmann NOT a Billionaire. Nuff said.

Publicly traded companies need more than "hey this is cool" to appease
shareholders that expect a return on their investment. Projects that don't
bring in the revenue/profits don't get the most attention.


You are not a billionaire either. So by your very own logic what you say isn't worth listening to (which it's not).

MacFly123
Jun 29, 2011, 02:21 AM
Ever thought that the reality is more likely that you're simply underpaid? This isn't a slam on you but millions of users per quarter don't seem to be going through the same issue. Value is all perception.

Haha, LOVED ur comment :) Think Different! :cool:

People need to calm down! I am a video producer by profession and guess what? Apple didn't spend over a year and millions of dollars with teams of people and development to COMPLETELY rewrite FCP with a BEAST of an engine under the hood so they can just dumb it down into iMovie!!! :rolleyes:

They will be adding the pro features back ASAP! Especially with all this backlash! They are probably going ape @%$# and developing as fast as they can to get all the missing features back. And not only back, but better and more powerful and with a more beautiful UI & UX than before!!! They have set the foundation for the next decade, and I'll bet you anything we will see some new features updated when Lion releases like project versions, XML and APIs etc., and then in about 6 months see another update with multi-cam and everything else people are whining about! In one year people will be saying FCP 7 what???

CHILL PEOPLE!!!

rikscha
Jun 29, 2011, 02:25 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

A couple of years ago macs were used only by pros and ethusiats. Now Apple doesn't care anymore? Delivering the software that people make their Hollywood movies with , is certainly not bad marketing for Apple.

SkyStudios
Jun 29, 2011, 02:26 AM
Well Nuke would would be just a souped up After Effects using the same logic. The complaints about FCPX mainly surround importing older projects from FCP7 and earlier, Multicam (which is coming) and being able to export OMF/AAF, XML and EDL for finishing.

Most Final Cut editors don't need all of these features. Steve was right...they're going to deliver features that most people need...not a small subset of Hollywood producers.



Every thought that the reality is more likely that you're simply underpaid? This isn't a slam on you but millions of users per quarter don't seem to be going through the same issue. Value is all perception.

its iMovie not FCP, thats the problem, and the hype that surrounded it only made it worse, it was like inviting trouble as a publicity stunt, the new FCPx is useless, iMovie now has more promising features, if you need iMovie use iMovie not this new fcpx aka imovie v8.2, whats hilarious is the adverts here about FCPX training, haha, like iMovie training

slrandall
Jun 29, 2011, 02:28 AM
If you want to call it a 1.0 release then CHANGE THE NAME. Do not call it a massive upgrade to FCP 7.

It kept the name to the consumers of this product it means it is an upgrade. Using your argument is the standard Apple appoligist argument.

Simple truth to the matter is Apple is done with the pro market. This is just another nail in the coffin that already has a ton of nails in it.
Lets see the list so far to back Apple is leaving the pro market.

1. Killing Xserver with nothing to replace it.
2. Logic has lagged behind.
3. FCP 7 was lagging behind the rest of the industry
4. Dropping Fireware.
5. Mac Pro not being updated and the updates they do get are pretty weak at best.
6. FCPX lacking key pro features.
7. This guy releasing what he saw going on.

Come on that was added to already a pretty long and growing list and I know I missed some items. Apple is done with the pro market. Apple has burned those bridges of the people that kept the company alive during the lean times.

Really? Apple has absolutely no server option now? Hmm ... And FireWire is not gone!! Goodness, do you people even have Macs? And 7. isn't really a reason ...

For goodness' sake, one incident [and apparently a ton of other contrived examples] does not mean anything! Can we please stop saying that Apple no longer cares about high-end professionals? It's simply not true.

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 02:30 AM
I always thought that a Pro was someone that got paid for what they do. I've made my living and supported my family editing video since 1999. I've never used XML, multicam, and realize I can finish my edits in FCP 7 and start new ones in FCPX.

Are there "pros" that are more capable than me. I'm sure there are. Do people need what FCPX doesn't offer. I'm sure there are - but I'm not one of them. Here's to the future of FCPX and to all the money I'm going to make with it.

This is the truth, and my situation exactly (apart from print/web being a bigger part of my work than editing - still worked with and enjoyed FCP for over 10 years.).

SkyStudios
Jun 29, 2011, 02:33 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

A couple of years ago macs were used only by pros and ethusiats. Now Apple doesn't care anymore? Delivering the software that people make their Hollywood movies with , is certainly not bad marketing for Apple.

you can say that again brotha, apple is not a computer company any more remember, they switched to the communications devices (ipads, iphones) while still providing computers, this means they dont plan on investing in computers and pro users, its very clear that they have been and will be focused on a world wide global market

logic pro has been updated maybe 2 times in the last ten years, from v6, to 7 and 8.

LethalWolfe
Jun 29, 2011, 02:37 AM
For goodness' sake, one incident [and apparently a ton of other contrived examples] does not mean anything! Can we please stop saying that Apple no longer cares about high-end professionals? It's simply not true.
I prefer the term "not high on the priority list" to "no longer cares." DVD SP, Sound Track Pro, Color, Final Cut Server and Cinema Tools all got axed in the past few days and no, Apple does not offer any server grade hardware anymore (adding the name "server" to existing towers and mac mini's does not count).


Lethal

wulf
Jun 29, 2011, 02:41 AM
- the pro's are right, Apple doesn't care about them. Not because of the missing pro essentials in X, but because they pulled FCP 7 (studio).

- Apple is right, the pro market is not an interesting market anymore. Apple, as a company, is not a niche player. They're working on a corporate signature that prevents future disappoint of their main target group. They choose their products very carefully.

- The pro's are right, because at some point Apple did care about pro's and they didn't provide any clue to their current path. Let's pretend "Pro" means a user who invested a sum of money in a platform and decides he and his customers rely on it's features to make a living. This platform is not available anymore. Apple does however pretend it is and should / could have known this would lead to bad reviews. Their marketing is badly managed in this case.

- Apple is right, this software has features which are great. Users will make money by using X. Actually the pro's should worry for a different reason. FCP 7 was developed as a tool to produce content for TV (film) with small user base in mind. X provides a tool to develop for the web, for a new generation of pro editors. I think, if you redefine your thoughts about "pro", and basically agree on the fact that a pro makes money using the tool, than you must agree X will provide us with a new breed of pro editors. There will be millions of pro editors, instead of 10.000. It's just a matter of definition. Eventually there will be a small base of high skilled editors, they will have other tools available.

So the real question for the pro is, am I skilled enough? Or should I focus on the new direction Apple just pointed? Apple has a good record of pointing the right way. They did this before, look at music, which now seems obvious. However, when Apple introduced Ipod, there was a lot of controversy. They tricked the music business into their game. The difference is, this happened in a time nobody really cared about Apple. Now, the opposite is true. Everybody cares about everything Apple does. There is a big spotlight on Apple and they're trying to hide in their own shadow. This is probably their biggest marketing fail. The product is good for what it is. Their vision probably also, but we can only speculate, because Apple doesn't share their vision.

G4DP
Jun 29, 2011, 02:45 AM
Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on....

Wouldn't you agree that the "Pros" should just innovate with the tools they have? meaning just give FCPX a shoot, starting from scratch... I think the pro market needs to THINK DIFFERENT this time around, Not Apple.

It was those same "Pro's", whether it be film, graphic design etc, that helped to keep this company going when it was about to go down the sewer. If it hadn't been for them Apple would not exist.

They have a right to complain, they have been shafted because Steve Job's ego gets in the way. When it goes wrong next time they won't be there to keep the money going into the Apple coffers. The millions of fad followers certainly wont be spending $10,000s of dollars on Apple machine will they.

chaosbunny
Jun 29, 2011, 02:46 AM
Now where's my retina display iPad? Get on it, Apple!

Nowhere. Because the majority of users doesn't care. They are perfectly happy with the iPad as it is. That's also why it is selling so good and is the beginning of the post-pc-era you know. Why should Apple cater to your own special needs? Since they don't have to, they don't care about you. :rolleyes:

Fukui
Jun 29, 2011, 02:51 AM
Brinkmann NOT a Billionaire. Nuff said.

Publicly traded companies need more than "hey this is cool" to appease
shareholders that expect a return on their investment. Projects that don't
bring in the revenue/profits don't get the most attention.

Sometimes the most important projects are those that don't make that much money. First rule of business after finding your customer: takecare of your customer.

Lumeswell
Jun 29, 2011, 02:54 AM
The "Pro" market relies or (relied) on Apple, Apple doesn't rely on them... And if the complaining "Pros" will be patient then they're version of what they think FCPX should be, will return soon... but Apple nor Myself will wait for the "Pros" to give there said blessing on the product...

I was trying to avoid getting drawn in to this side of the debate, but this post put me over the edge.

Apple are totally relying on the Pro market to sell this, thats why they put Pro in the title, so every wannabe Joe can say they are using Pro software to cut their home movies. 'iMovie 11' or 'iMove Pro' just doesn't have the same ring to it does it.

I don't care if Apple wants to concentrate on the consumer market, but don't pretend its pro software.

I will take this all back if Pixar and Disney start to exclusively cut all their next film releases in FCPX, and finally drop that bag of hurt in physical DVD and Bluray distribution and stop selling their movies that way.

nuckinfutz
Jun 29, 2011, 02:58 AM
You are not a billionaire either. So by your very own logic what you say isn't worth listening to (which it's not).

I'm not sure you grasped what I was intending to say. Brinkmann is a guy that loves compositing...it's his canvas. His intention isn't to appeal to the greatest swath of people. Jobs has always wanted to change the world or at the least make an impact that is large and thus his reach is more ambitious than Brinkmann. I certainly didn't mean to state that Brinkmann's opinion wasn't valid but rather one man's passion fuels great software albeit at a niche level and anothers fuels great software at a voluminous level which makes for billions.

cheers

Lumeswell
Jun 29, 2011, 02:58 AM
Apple has a good record of pointing the right way. They did this before, look at music, which now seems obvious.

I'm sorry, did I miss something - when did Apple change the way music was *produced*?

nuckinfutz
Jun 29, 2011, 03:02 AM
Final Cut Pro FAQ

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/

BAM looks like XML support will be here soon with OMF/AAF and more.

Haha, LOVED ur comment :) Think Different! :cool:

People need to calm down! I am a video producer by profession and guess what? Apple didn't spend over a year and millions of dollars with teams of people and development to COMPLETELY rewrite FCP with a BEAST of an engine under the hood so they can just dumb it down into iMovie!!! :rolleyes:
!

+1

I've been waiting for a more modern take on FCP and it's here. Sure it's going to take some major revisions to polish it out and get it settled but i'm looking to start using a DSLR for video and FCPX is poised to handle the modern video recording DSLR very well. The other stuff will come as witness by the FAQ just recently posted.

Now I await the next Logic Studio update.

baryon
Jun 29, 2011, 03:12 AM
Final Cut Pro 7 was bad anyway. Adobe Premiere CS5 is much better in every way I can think of: It's faster, much more up to date, less buggy, less laggy, and has a much more modern interface, too. It also does everything that FCP 7 did, if not more, especially in terms of file formats.

Here's the way I think Apple thinks:

"Is Final Cut Pro the best video editor out there?" - no, it's as good as the others, at best.

"What can we do to make it the best video editor?" - not much, there isn't much innovation we can think of in the video editing world.

"So then let's do something completely different to make our product stand out and be unique, and reach new kinds of people"

FCP 7 was great but it wasn't the best thing in the world. It was basically identical to all the other editors. What's the point of having yet another identical video editor? Nothing! So then it made complete sense for them to do something different: those who want the classic video editor can use Premiere. The rest can use FCP X, and that's a huge new market!

This is NOT a consumer product. It's not priced as a consumer product and it has features no consumer would want. But it is less professional. However, the professional world is becoming less professional too: camera men are increasingly using Canon 5Ds to record, and edits are no longer done in giant studios but rather on a MacBook Pro right there and then. It requires less people, less time, less effort and less money. FCP X will be perfect for the increasingly simplified workflows of what we used to call professionals.

Real professionals - the guys who make feature films, for example - didn't use Final Cut Pro 7 in the first place. They have specialized equipment for everything and aren't dependent on a single company like Apple.

The problem is that some people are in between, and they don't want to merge with the less pro group or the more pro group. But they will have to eventually anyway.

jntdigital
Jun 29, 2011, 03:12 AM
OK, im gonna go on record to say that I actually like FCPX, but im not a pro editor by any means so thats just IMHO.

Wasnt there an macrumors article earlier with a guy who had seen it basically saying that FCPX will NOT be ready for professional use, and that Apple has a bad track record for these types of releases? He later backtracked on it under some pressure but this has played out just as he had warned.

rmwebs
Jun 29, 2011, 03:13 AM
As much as I hate to say this, Apple hasnt given a damn about their pro customers since the first iPhone was released. They saw the kind of cash they could make by focusing on consumer electronics, and hey presto - no more pro niche.

You'd be delusional to think they still give a damn about Final Cut, the Mac Pro, Xcode, Mac OS X Server, etc.

res1233
Jun 29, 2011, 03:16 AM
I always thought that a Pro was someone that got paid for what they do. I've made my living and supported my family editing video since 1999. I've never used XML, multicam, and realize I can finish my edits in FCP 7 and start new ones in FCPX.

Are there "pros" that are more capable than me. I'm sure there are. Do people need what FCPX doesn't offer. I'm sure there are - but I'm not one of them. Here's to the future of FCPX and to all the money I'm going to make with it.

Question marks are good for you…

ronbrinkmann
Jun 29, 2011, 03:18 AM
I find it ironic that the guy who whines about Shake makes such broad strokes about professional software when dozens of Apple Engineers spent considerable lengths of time over at PIXAR developing nothing but world class professional software for PIXAR's needs.


Got a lot of friends at Pixar. Don't ever recall them talking about the dozens of Apple Engineers showing up over there...

Pixar's very capable of making their own software, methinks.

Nostromo
Jun 29, 2011, 03:19 AM
This man thinks his child has been killed by Apple.

Special effects people will know better if Shake was really killed.

Or if it was becoming outdated, and Apple had pulled the plug with reason.

That a new framework had to be written to carry the next generation of special effects software.

One thing he said was interesting: that Apple has the ability to produce great software that focuses on the essential features easier to use (and gives more space to creativity).

Where I don't follow him is that Final Cut Pro X is a good bye to professional users. It's too soon to say that.

jeremy h
Jun 29, 2011, 03:24 AM
It was those same "Pro's", whether it be film, graphic design etc, that helped to keep this company going when it was about to go down the sewer. If it hadn't been for them Apple would not exist.


This whole mess doesn't surprise me - I've been using Macs professionally since 1989 and I can remember at the height of the problems in the early 90's being invited to some sort of Apple PR meeting (as the company I worked for was a big Apple professional user) - where they were going to sort out the many issues we, as customers were having at the time.

There were quite a lot of us there and we were all really fed up with the way we were being treated and were quite vocal about it. We all felt that we were supporting them in quite difficult times and they should at least listen to us and respond.

The response was quite a shock - the Apple guy was inflexible, aggressive and confrontational - the seminar type meeting broke up with his parting shot that if we're that unhappy we should all switch to the PC. (I think Quark 4(?) for the PC was just about then.)

I personally don't think Apple have ever seen themselves as a pro market company ... "The Computer for the rest of us". The fact they were was more to do with serendipity, fonts, postscript and the laserwriter II.

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 03:34 AM
I personally don't think Apple have ever seen themselves as a pro market company ... "The Computer for the rest of us". The fact they were was more to do with serendipity, fonts, postscript and the laserwriter II.

Maybe they haven't seen themselves as a pro company.

They have however always see themselves as a company for creative people, which means most/many creative pros love their stuff. I think they are still aiming at the creative crowd, and FCP X is pretty good for us. It's just not as good (yet) for the more technical crowd. (Yes, I know it's possible to be technical and creative, but my point remains, the niche technical stuff was never Apples primary interest I think.)

MacFly123
Jun 29, 2011, 03:41 AM
Final Cut Pro FAQ

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/

BAM looks like XML support will be here soon with OMF/AAF and more.



+1

I've been waiting for a more modern take on FCP and it's here. Sure it's going to take some major revisions to polish it out and get it settled but i'm looking to start using a DSLR for video and FCPX is poised to handle the modern video recording DSLR very well. The other stuff will come as witness by the FAQ just recently posted.

Now I await the next Logic Studio update.

Haha, I just saw the FAQ post and I was professing my post here as prophecy instantly fulfilled haha :D

jeremy h
Jun 29, 2011, 03:51 AM
Maybe they haven't seen themselves as a pro company.

They have however always see themselves as a company for creative people

I actually agree with you.

Prior to the iPod and iPhone most people saw Apple as a specialist graphics computer company for specialists but I don't think they ever saw themselves as that - even when the only people buying their stuff were specialists!

shompa
Jun 29, 2011, 03:56 AM
Final cut pro was the software that got me to switch from PC to mac 2002.

Apple has destroyed this great program and I am starting to doubt Apples whole computer strategy.

Apple only cares about mainstream, iphone and Ipad.
To bad. I loved Apple COMPUTER inc.

CJM
Jun 29, 2011, 04:02 AM
Well.. I could downvote iDisk all day. I'd think he was trolling if it wasn't so consistent.

It is a bit depressing that Apple would move away from it's professionally-oriented roots just to make their bottom line look even larger. I hope Apple pulls out the stops and updates the app with the missing features.

zephonic
Jun 29, 2011, 04:29 AM
Not sure what the beef is?

I worked in post for a long time and rarely saw FCP in that field. All the pros used Avid or Media 100 and dismissed FCP as "good only for wedding vids".

I have been out of it for 3 years, but did FCP really gain enough momentum and critical mass to become the new industry-standard?

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 04:35 AM
Except that a good majority of the complaints about missing features are features that actually exist, but in a different way. So yes you have to think differently because the software deals with edits/video/audio differently.

Really, where is the multicam support, the external tv monitoring, XML/ODF export, tape import and export, etc?

OllyW
Jun 29, 2011, 04:36 AM
Not sure what the beef is?

I worked in post for a long time and rarely saw FCP in that field. All the pros used Avid or Media 100 and dismissed FCP as "good only for wedding vids".

I have been out of it for 3 years, but did FCP really gain enough momentum and critical mass to become the new industry-standard?

I don't know about Industry Standard but it's been used for more than just wedding videos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Cut_Pro#Major_films_edited_with_Final_Cut_Pro).

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 04:37 AM
Really? Apple has absolutely no server option now?

Can you show which is the XServer substitute?

linuxcooldude
Jun 29, 2011, 04:48 AM
Really, where is the multicam support, the external tv monitoring, XML/ODF export, tape import and export, etc?

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 04:51 AM
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/

Ys, I have read it, but I can't find any alternative to what I have listed. Can you show where those alternatives are?

Winni
Jun 29, 2011, 04:59 AM
Arn lol I didn't read the article, to be honest, I just saw another FCX headline, and just ranted on....

Wouldn't you agree that the "Pros" should just innovate with the tools they have? meaning just give FCPX a shoot, starting from scratch... I think the pro market needs to THINK DIFFERENT this time around, Not Apple.

I think you just don't understand the implications that dropping all those features from FCPX had for high-end users. There's nothing to think differentLY for them - they simply cannot do their work with FCPX because it does NOT have the features that they REQUIRE. The old versions of Final Cut Pro HAD these features, so FCPX simply is an inferior product that carries the "Pro" tag without any justification.

FCPX should have been named Final Cut Express or iMovie Pro and everybody would have been happy with it. But in it's current incarnation, it's just not a worthy successor to the old Final Cut Pro.

Just because it MIGHT be easier to edit with it does NOT excuse for the lack of required features that its predecessor had.

Or to put it that way: If Apple keeps on selling products that carry the letters "PRO" in its name, Apple would be well advised to actually TALK to its PRO customers and LISTEN to them. Everybody else in the industry does it, and there are reasons why the competition is so successful - and why Apple now receives a deserved beating.

AAPLaday
Jun 29, 2011, 05:04 AM
Good job mac users have Bootcamp. Seems like if they want to use pro as opposed to prosumer software this is the way to go. I bet it is a good product though. If it was the express version.

linuxcooldude
Jun 29, 2011, 05:11 AM
Ys, I have read it, but I can't find any alternative to what I have listed. Can you show where those alternatives are?

companies like AJA and Blackmagic offer free deck control software that allows you to capture from tape and output to tape.

It was located in the link that I provided

Lumeswell
Jun 29, 2011, 05:53 AM
You guys deal in a cliquish industry where it matters what application environment is used regardless if whether that translates into a superior product in the end or not.
Cheers

So the solution is to trap the user in a half baked environment and not play with others at all? That's going to result in superior quality I'm sure.

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 05:54 AM
It was located in the link that I provided

Thanks for proving my point, FCP X doesn't have tape import or export as I have said

linuxcooldude
Jun 29, 2011, 06:05 AM
Thanks for proving my point, FCP X doesn't have tape import or export as I have said

No, you said:

Can you show where those alternatives are?

Looks like an alternative to me.

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 06:08 AM
No, you said:



Looks like an alternative to me.



Except that a good majority of the complaints about missing features are features that actually exist, but in a different way.

So no, there is no alternative on FCPX for those things. Can you show me where on FCPX can I import from tape?

throttlemeister
Jun 29, 2011, 06:09 AM
God, this thread is hilarious. Hollywood doesn't have different requirements than a MR geek with a video camera? You guys kill me.

toxotis70
Jun 29, 2011, 06:18 AM
Thanks for proving my point, FCP X doesn't have tape import or export as I have said

Who wants tapes any more ?
Dinosaurs maybe !!!

Its the tapeless era ... get over with it .

We dont care if Holywood PRO (so called) want tapes, EDL etc.

Third party companies like AJA - Black Magic are responsible for their hardware not Apple !
And they said that they will support soon with drivers (AJA has Beta drivers already)... so where is the problem?

Keep using FCP 7 , until FCPX is ready for YOU.

For me is already there :D

Les Kern
Jun 29, 2011, 06:24 AM
10,000 users at 299.00 is about $3 million. Subtract the dev costs and support costs after purchase they actually might be losing money on it. Who wants that. Apple isn't in the business to do the right thing, they are in it to make money. PERIOD. They are not in it to make us happy either, no matter what the commercials say. If you remember that simple fact you will always understand where Apple's true love lies and what motivates them.
Hey, if they loved us, they'd build a ********* manufacturing plant in the US, or if they loved the US they'd bring back their billions in overseas banks.
No my friends, Apple is Microsoft is BP is Goldman Sachs.

SBlue1
Jun 29, 2011, 06:27 AM
remember my words, in two or three years there will be no mac pro anymore... :(

TechKnow
Jun 29, 2011, 06:31 AM
what is the difference between a pro editor and one who shares ideas through montage?

enlighten me.

A lot of pro editors work in a team environment where others finish the product so there is a need to share assets across multiples systems. Ie audio finishing, color correction, titles, special effects, adding foley sounds.

linuxcooldude
Jun 29, 2011, 06:32 AM
So no, there is no alternative on FCPX for those things. Can you show me where on FCPX can I import from tape?

You didn't ask me for FCPX tape export, you asked me for alternatives.

Please ask your questions more accurately.

Who wants tapes any more ?
Dinosaurs maybe !!!

Its the tapeless era ... get over with it .

We dont care if Holywood PRO (so called) want tapes, EDL etc.

Third party companies like AJA - Black Magic are responsible for their hardware not Apple !
And they said that they will support soon with drivers (AJA has Beta drivers already)... so where is the problem?

Keep using FCP 7 , until FCPX is ready for YOU.

For me is already there

Last time I upgraded, I went tapeless. I know tapes are on their way out.

Enzobot24
Jun 29, 2011, 06:41 AM
Who wants tapes any more ?
Dinosaurs maybe !!!

Its the tapeless era ... get over with it .

We dont care if Holywood PRO (so called) want tapes, EDL etc.

Wow, you aren't very learned in video formats and workflows.

Tron: Legacy and Avatar (like many Sony F23 and F35 productions) were shot at 880Mbit/s on HDCAM SR tape. At a (virtually) uncompressed 4:4:4 chroma-subsampling.

That's right.... on tape. A tape that holds hundreds of gigabytes and provides production houses with an archivable, digital negative.

Yup... sounds really dinosauric.

SiPat
Jun 29, 2011, 06:45 AM
If you go back to the days when the two Steves worked from the Jobs' garage, you'll see one thing: make computing easy and available to the masses. The fact that it took a laser printer and DTP software to take Apple to the pro level of the design/publishing industry was fortuitous.

Check out old SJ interviews and Apple has stuck to its raison d'être throughout its existence. FCPX will come good, even though it won't let me import video that iMovie does without blinking.

toxotis70
Jun 29, 2011, 06:48 AM
Wow, you aren't very learned in video formats and workflows.

Tron: Legacy and Avatar (like many Sony F23 and F35 productions) were shot at 880Mbit/s on HDCAM SR tape. At a (virtually) uncompressed 4:4:4 chroma-subsampling.

That's right.... on tape. A tape that holds hundreds of gigabytes and provides production houses with an archivable, digital negative.

Yup... sounds really dinosauric.

There will be options to do that... why do i have to pay more for something i dont want ?
Now, i can do more for only 300$.

If i want tapes or anything else , i can with third party support... where is the problem ?

steadysignal
Jun 29, 2011, 06:50 AM
If I didn't know any better, I'd think at least 1,000 of those 10,000 had nothing better to do than post on these forums ... Perhaps people are misusing the "pro" qualification.

... as confirmed by a -14 rating and post #158.

If I didn't know any better, I'd think at least 1 of those 10^X complainers who complain about complainers had nothing better to do than post on these forums ...

danimal99
Jun 29, 2011, 06:57 AM
You have no idea what you're talking about obviously. Pro studios can no longer add seats if they don't have extra licenses around for the older Final Cut Pro/Studio because Apple, foolishly, EOL'd it when they released iMovie Pro. If you have 15-20 editors all working on projects together, that cannot be imported into iMovie Pro, then they are screwed.

This whole "adding seats" thing is such a baloney argument. Do you ever stop to think Apple knows exactly how many "seats" are getting added on a monthly basis? I'm sure it's not many. They know the numbers, they've run the numbers and they decided they could take the risk of upsetting those tens of added seats (if that many) every month by rewriting the software from scratch to build a significantly improved base that will benefit everyone.

And yes I've worked on TV, live TV, behind the camera, in front of the camera, producing, directing, editing, you name it. I bought my own copies of Final Cut Pro then upgraded to Studio 3 to edit on my own time. I don't feel abandoned at all, and am excited about FCPX and the possibilities it brings. Sucks that I feel like I have to include that, with all the elitist "pros" running around telling people they're noobs who don't know what they're talking about.

janstett
Jun 29, 2011, 07:05 AM
The "Pro" market complainers need to THINK DIFFERENT, not Apple, cause FCPX is different..

Case in point that "different" does not mean "better".

Sustaining oneself off toenail clippings and boogers is different.

Drinking soup through your nostrils is different.

z3r0
Jun 29, 2011, 07:11 AM
That or sell them to TheFoundry or Side Effects Software. Though I can see these two merging in the future. Nuke + Houdini

Ron, can do a better job then Randy.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Apple really should spin off their pro division. Let then maintain a close working relationship with Apple, Inc., but they can design their own software, Mac Pros, Xserves, etc. Clearly Apple Consumer Electronics are no longer interested in the Pro market. Which is fine, they should just acknowledge reality and allow pros to get the tools they need elsewhere.

gorgeousninja
Jun 29, 2011, 07:15 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

In the end, he says "your heart will be broken. Because they're not reliant on you."

That's all that needs to be said.

Been feeling that since they ditched matte screens in 2007. Lion just reiterates his point by making OSX more "consumery".

I can foresee many professional creatives migrating back to windows within the next year or two once it's painfully obvious (and somehow it isn't yet) that Apple has moved on quite some time ago.

Don't really see a link between creative profesionals and windows... never has been.

z3r0
Jun 29, 2011, 07:17 AM
I would go with one of these (http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/x86/sun-fire-x4170-m2-server-077278.html) with FreeBSD

Can you show which is the XServer substitute?

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 07:30 AM
You didn't ask me for FCPX tape export, you asked me for alternatives.

Please ask your questions more accurately.

Please, read the conversation before saying nothing

KnightWRX
Jun 29, 2011, 07:33 AM
I would go with one of these (http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/x86/sun-fire-x4170-m2-server-077278.html) with FreeBSD

How does that provide a proper server to run OS X server on though ? Your suggestion is basically : "forgoe Apple and switch vendors", something enterprise IT learned a long time ago (and any hold outs found out back in November last year) and something that video editors are learning now.

And if you're buying Oracle hardware, might as well run Solaris, much better than FreeBSD and at least supported by a vendor when something goes south. ;)

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 07:36 AM
[SIZE=1]Don't really see a link between creative profesionals and windows... never has been.

I suppose that those things only are to beginning a flame war, that they aren't believed.

zephonic
Jun 29, 2011, 07:37 AM
Not sure what the beef is?

I worked in post for a long time and rarely saw FCP in that field. All the pros used Avid or Media 100 and dismissed FCP as "good only for wedding vids".

I have been out of it for 3 years, but did FCP really gain enough momentum and critical mass to become the new industry-standard?

I don't know about Industry Standard but it's been used for more than just wedding videos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Cut_Pro#Major_films_edited_with_Final_Cut_Pro).

Fair enough, but if that is a list of all the movies edited with FCP then it's just a drop in the bucket. Hollywood does about 600 movies per year AFAIK.

Not to discredit FCP, but I hardly ever saw it being used by top-tier post facilities. That could easily be attributed to inertia, but if Apple failed to really penetrate that market over the last decade I can understand why they wouldn't bother with FCPX.

deconstruct60
Jun 29, 2011, 07:43 AM
Lion adds Launchpad, but it doesn't take away other methods of launching apps. The Mac App Store is a great idea, but they don't prohibit you from installing apps through other means. Same for everything in Lion - there are new ways to do things, but it is 99% optional or IN ADDITION to pre-existing features.


Lion is also not a complete rewrite or Mac OS X either. A slightly better analogy would be between Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X 10.0 (or perhaps better still the public beta but that isn't quite fair.). Probably a better one would be between Newton OS and iOS .

There are three basic ways Apple could do a rewrite transition.

1. Long break. Stop FCP 7 and then do nothing until completed all of the features of FCP 7 plus all the new ones before releases. [ Anyone who has "pro" experience in software development knows these sorts of projects have higher than average failure rates and/or the gaps is very long (like Newton -> iOS ). ]

2. Indecision. Keep FCP 7 code line alive while try to duplicate it. Again leads to longer development and also competing resources. Often the legacy product kills off the newborn before it has a chance. Other times customers get confused as to which one really betting and just go to someone else with more singular focus. This also tends to indicate willing to entertain a debate with the customers as to which codeline is the future.


3. "All in " option. You bet the farm on the newer version while also being realistic as to how quickly can grow out the feature set. If don't grow it out fast enough will loose the mid-range adopters as they make their scheduled upgrade projects. Same issue as the late adopters make their transitions. However, in the initial phases as long as the early adopters are happy that is primary key indicator of success. This approach tends to work better when the target model is changing anyway (e.g., most production shifting to fragments of already digitized, random access, shorter segments rather than sequential access longer segments. )


Apple has lots of cash in reserve so they have chosen option 3. It is higher risk but also higher reward if pull it off correctly. Some of folks are moaning because they wanted to follow the minimal risk strategy. It isn't their call... they don't own the software.

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 07:50 AM
Fair enough, but if that is a list of all the movies edited with FCP then it's just a drop in the bucket. Hollywood does about 600 movies per year AFAIK.

Not to discredit FCP, but I hardly ever saw it being used by top-tier post facilities. That could easily be attributed to inertia, but if Apple failed to really penetrate that market over the last decade I can understand why they wouldn't bother with FCPX.

Good point! A lot of Apple/FCP-fans are probably under the impression that FCP is used far more than it really is at the very high end of the feature-industry.

mBox
Jun 29, 2011, 07:51 AM
Uh...Steve says the same thing every keynote: We want to enable the masses to create their own content.

Are the declarations of a focus on the average joe not clear enough?I dont know how you got a negative on this statement. If the company doesn't want to focus on the professional side, should they be chastised? I mean I work in this field and Im just happy that they made a computer that can handle the other "pro" apps e.g Avid MC, AdobeCS, Autodesk Maya/Smoke/AutoCAD, etc...
When Apple decides to move right out of the pro side such as kill off Mac Pro, then so be it. Its just business folks. Its not personal.
Im glad I spent my 300 bucks on a piece of software that might have some use in my studio. Ive seen worse purchases at the five digit range that collect dust after a year here :P

jeab
Jun 29, 2011, 07:56 AM
I'm not a pro. I'm a jolly amateur, a prosumer, or whatever. And yes, I cut my own wedding video, and I make videos from my holidays. I used iMovie for some years, but for my wedding I used FCE, and I have kept using FCE since. Please don't laugh at me. :)

FCPX has a magnetic timeline and no tracks, I've been told. There is no way that I could have cut my wedding video with FCPX. I needed V1 for camera 1, V2 for camera 2, V3 for camera 3, V4 for camera 4 and V5 for titles. Anything else would just have been messy in my case.

I also needed V6, V7, V8 and V9 to make some amateur tricks to compensate for problems in the source footage from camera 4. I needed A9/A10 for external sound source #1 and A11/A12 for external sound source #2. And all the waveforms were next to eachother, how convenient.

No, I didn't have to export separate (video or audio) tracks to send them downstream in some sort of collective workflow, I just needed those tracks to get my own amateur job done without losing track of all the details.

Oh, and bins. Not tags, bins. I always knew what had been sorted and what had not been sorted. And sequences. And nested sequences.

I just edited a video from a dinner where the light conditions were difficult. I'm not a professional colour corrector person, but hey, does Apple really want me to slice my cuts and make transitions between the colour corrected slices when even FCE can keyframe just about everything?

Persistent in and out points. Need I say more.

Even I, a FCE amateur with a single license and no huge investments, see FCPX as a downgrade. I can only guess (and read) how the pros feel.

Sorry I used so many words. Now you may laugh.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 08:00 AM
If Apple didn't want Pro's to weigh in/comment/complain/write about FCPX - then they shouldn't have released it as is.

Since Apple is selling the software to the public - anyone/everyone is entitled to comment on it.

So complain about the complainers or whitewash the release all you want.

mBox
Jun 29, 2011, 08:04 AM
FCPX has a magnetic timeline and no tracks, I've been told. There is no way that I could have cut my wedding video with FCPX. I needed V1 for camera 1, V2 for camera 2, V3 for camera 3, V4 for camera 4 and V5 for titles. Anything else would just have been messy in my case....Brother you would have learned FCPX faster and been more productive if you cut that much footage in it :) Trust me, Im working with FCPX now. You could easily do all that. Give it a try.

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 08:05 AM
I'm not a pro. I'm a jolly amateur, a prosumer, or whatever. And yes, I cut my own wedding video, and I make videos from my holidays. I used iMovie for some years, but for my wedding I used FCE, and I have kept using FCE since. Please don't laugh at me. :)

FCPX has a magnetic timeline and no tracks, I've been told. There is no way that I could have cut my wedding video with FCPX. I needed V1 for camera 1, V2 for camera 2, V3 for camera 3, V4 for camera 4 and V5 for titles. Anything else would just have been messy in my case.

I also needed V6, V7, V8 and V9 to make some amateur tricks to compensate for problems in the source footage from camera 4. I needed A9/A10 for external sound source #1 and A11/A12 for external sound source #2. And all the waveforms were next to eachother, how convenient.

No, I didn't have to export separate (video or audio) tracks to send them downstream in some sort of collective workflow, I just needed those tracks to get my own amateur job done without losing track of all the details.

Oh, and bins. Not tags, bins. I always knew what had been sorted and what had not been sorted. And sequences. And nested sequences.

I just edited a video from a dinner where the light conditions were difficult. I'm not a professional colour corrector person, but hey, does Apple really want me to slice my cuts and make transitions between the colour corrected slices when even FCE can keyframe just about everything?

Persistent in and out points. Need I say more.

Even I, a FCE amateur with a single license and no huge investments, see FCPX as a downgrade. I can only guess (and read) how the pros feel.

Sorry I used so many words. Now you may laugh.

This to me smells a lot like someone going into FCP X with the mindset that he already knows FCP and will go straight to work.

Have you watched any of the training videos etc., or really tried to study how this application works, instead of cursing when it doesn't work like the old one?

Not trying to be rude, that's just what it sounds like to me. And I recognize it from me first opening FCP X. Seeing that it all felt a little confusing, I've decided to actually try to learn how to use it properly. Many of the people that have gone about it this way claim it's actually pretty nice, so I think it's worth a shot.

jonnysods
Jun 29, 2011, 08:05 AM
They are not reliant on you. This speaks of doom for the Mac Pro to me.

That's sad. I was drawn to Apple because of their high end software. Still love them, but I'm scared that I'm going to end up with a 27" iPad on my desk one day.

milo
Jun 29, 2011, 08:07 AM
Sadly, he's probably right.

I just hope they don't do an "upgrade" like this for Logic. It's still a decent app, but a change like this would push many users to move to alternatives (and as he said, apple probably wouldn't care).

Along the same lines, it calls their commitment to the mac pro into question as well.

mdriftmeyer
Jun 29, 2011, 08:22 AM
Wow, you aren't very learned in video formats and workflows.

Tron: Legacy and Avatar (like many Sony F23 and F35 productions) were shot at 880Mbit/s on HDCAM SR tape. At a (virtually) uncompressed 4:4:4 chroma-subsampling.

That's right.... on tape. A tape that holds hundreds of gigabytes and provides production houses with an archivable, digital negative.

Yup... sounds really dinosauric.

Neither Movie utilized FCP 7 during the making of these films.

dazzer21
Jun 29, 2011, 08:25 AM
Well - I guess that's why there have been no real movements in the Mac Pro upgrades, and why their top-of-the-range 'prosumer' iMac is the fastest thing they make... top-end doesn't matter any more. Which is a shame. It was good to look upon Macs as being true 'cutting edge' kit. Oh well - I suppose that bragging rights no longer apply.

hayesk
Jun 29, 2011, 08:26 AM
This guy is right, but he forgets one thing:

These pros have egos as big, if not bigger, than Steve Jobs. And they don't want to change their old ways because someone else suggested that a new way might be better.

That's why hearts will be broken - Apple won't bend to the pros and any more. To that I say, boo hoo! Real pros will evaluate the product properly based on what it can do now, and its potential, not how well their ego gets stroked.

Look what happened when they reduced the price of WebObjects. No code was changed, but overnight, Enterprise all of a sudden determined it wasn't a pro tool because it no longer cost $50,000 per seat, and interest plummeted. I saw similar complaints when Apple reduced the price of Shake. Ego got in the way of common sense. I can't blame Apple for not wanting to serve these people. I wouldn't want to have to deal with these customers either.

When people say Apple doesn't want to serve the pro market anymore, they're only partially right. Apple doesn't want to serve those with old-fashioned and out-dated ways that refuse to change. Apple wants to the freedom to innovate - and that often requires dumping the old way of doing things to make the new way successful.

toxotis70
Jun 29, 2011, 08:29 AM
I'm not a pro. I'm a jolly amateur, a prosumer, or whatever. And yes, I cut my own wedding video, and I make videos from my holidays. I used iMovie for some years, but for my wedding I used FCE, and I have kept using FCE since. Please don't laugh at me. :)

FCPX has a magnetic timeline and no tracks, I've been told. There is no way that I could have cut my wedding video with FCPX. I needed V1 for camera 1, V2 for camera 2, V3 for camera 3, V4 for camera 4 and V5 for titles. Anything else would just have been messy in my case.

I also needed V6, V7, V8 and V9 to make some amateur tricks to compensate for problems in the source footage from camera 4. I needed A9/A10 for external sound source #1 and A11/A12 for external sound source #2. And all the waveforms were next to eachother, how convenient.

No, I didn't have to export separate (video or audio) tracks to send them downstream in some sort of collective workflow, I just needed those tracks to get my own amateur job done without losing track of all the details.

Oh, and bins. Not tags, bins. I always knew what had been sorted and what had not been sorted. And sequences. And nested sequences.

I just edited a video from a dinner where the light conditions were difficult. I'm not a professional colour corrector person, but hey, does Apple really want me to slice my cuts and make transitions between the colour corrected slices when even FCE can keyframe just about everything?

Persistent in and out points. Need I say more.

Even I, a FCE amateur with a single license and no huge investments, see FCPX as a downgrade. I can only guess (and read) how the pros feel.

Sorry I used so many words. Now you may laugh.


If you want to edit like before, then FCPX is not for you... thats not a bad thing.
But for all of us , Pros or not , who want something different, easier, faster, cheaper etc... FCPX is an opportunity !

For example, you can have Persistent in and out points , indeed you have more in-outs points available... just press F and have it as Favorite.

You can have as many Favorites (in-out) as you want.

You can see them marked with color , in upper part of your video clip, or select any of them by click on the keyword ...
There are many workarounds for other things too... but you have to be open mind and think different (if you like).

scoobydoo99
Jun 29, 2011, 08:36 AM
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but one possible drawback to ignoring the pro video editing market (i.e. Hollywood) is a reduction in the industry's affinity for Apple hardware. Apple has consistently been over-represented in movies and TV shows, relative to market share. With roughly 10% market share, Apple has enjoyed a roughly 50% visibility in movies and TV, due partly to the fact that nearly everyone in Hollywood uses Apples professionally (and often personally). Heck, it was even a PowerBook that uploaded the virus to the alien ship and saved the world in Independence Day!) Of course, Apple often pays for product placement, but this is usually not in cash, but in "free" hardware given to studios. Other times, producers use Apple products (without compensation) in the background in various scenes because they look modern and attractive or because they convey a "hipness" to a show.

SO, if Hollywood begins to migrate away from Apple products professionally (due to FCP X), will they be less likely to promote Apple's image in film and television entertainment?

MorphingDragon
Jun 29, 2011, 08:40 AM
I would go with one of these (http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/x86/sun-fire-x4170-m2-server-077278.html) with FreeBSD

Why oracle equipment? If youŕe going to buy overpriced equipment, why not go all the way and get IBM? (Big fan of their blades though)


And if you're buying Oracle hardware, might as well run Solaris, much better than FreeBSD and at least supported by a vendor when something goes south. ;)

Completely avoiding Solaris vs BSD Unix arguments.

Though why would you need tech support? I thought enterprise grade OSes were perfect, never failed and ran on pixie dust. Well... at least according to Microsoft Server advertising. ;)

mdriftmeyer
Jun 29, 2011, 08:41 AM
It was those same "Pro's", whether it be film, graphic design etc, that helped to keep this company going when it was about to go down the sewer. If it hadn't been for them Apple would not exist.

They have a right to complain, they have been shafted because Steve Job's ego gets in the way. When it goes wrong next time they won't be there to keep the money going into the Apple coffers. The millions of fad followers certainly wont be spending $10,000s of dollars on Apple machine will they.

No the Pros weren't keeping Apple afloat. Those Pros were part of the massively differentiated product chart that Steve consolidated into 4 major products back in 1998 and subsequent introduction of the iMac.

Just call me one of those Evil NeXT employees who came with Steve and flushed all the cruft down the drain. Steve focused on the Consumer, not the Prosumer and has done so for 13 straight years quite successfully.

The Pro market accounts for < 3% of Apple's bottom line, if that. Apple was drowning when Steve was put in charge and Amelio was running the ship. No amount of Professional group would ever save Apple. The volume had to come from the consumer markets and that's the reason Steve abandoned several ideas [one of those ideas was to sell systems of world class UNIX Hardware that competed against SUN Servers, HP and IBM housing 30+ CPUs in big iron--internal discussion reference].

The fact that Apple has taken over 2 new markets and continues to expand their leadership roles in them will only bode well for the Professional markets.

Perhaps it's just me but I don't seem to see a lot of chit chat about OS X Lion and how it's going to make your life far easier and 3rd party developers making those necessary plugins a huge sigh of relief with how many advances will be ready for 10.7.

This new Code base takes full advantage of what is in 10.7. Enjoy it and you will be stunned on how both 10.7 and iOS 5 have dramatically improved over 10.6 and iOS 4.

The legacy of GCC for Developers is done with the emergence of 10.7 and iOS 5. What's old is new again with Services, system-wide and the emergence of LLVM across the board with all those new APIs, ARC and MC-JIT will suddenly see your system get far greater mileage out of it than when it was using 10.6.x.

But, far be it for me to stop everyone stomping their feet loudly and speaking as if Apple betrayed them.

i.mac
Jun 29, 2011, 08:48 AM
Apple doesn't care about pro users, yet their computers (and every other product) is overpriced....At least spec-wise

Easy solution? Vote with your walet and Don't buy every other apple product...

njloof
Jun 29, 2011, 08:51 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

I wish Apple would buy Autodesk Maya, strip out half the guff, and turn it into something highly intuitive and usable.

Yeah, ha ha, funny you should mention Maya. We had pretty much the same conversation a decade ago with A|W about how Maya was not going to focus their feature development on "pro" users anymore. They've done a great job of ignoring that market over the past decade, while using the imagery produced by the "pros" to continue to market their tools.

i.mac
Jun 29, 2011, 08:55 AM
Brother you would have learned FCPX faster and been more productive if you cut that much footage in it :) Trust me, Im working with FCPX now. You could easily do all that. Give it a try.

Why give it a try? That means work and adapt... It is much easier to complain...