PDA

View Full Version : Apple Posts Final Cut Pro X FAQ, Promises Updates




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jun 29, 2011, 02:59 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/29/apple-posts-final-cut-pro-x-faq-promises-updates/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/answers-500x121.jpg

(http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/answers.jpg)
Apple has quietly posted (http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/) a FAQ for Final Cut Pro X in response to the many questions and criticisms. (via 9to5Mac (http://9to5mac.com/2011/06/29/apple-officially-responds-to-final-cut-pro-x-complaints-with-new-faq-website/)). The FAQ appears not to be linked from Apple's main site, and has not yet been publicized.Final Cut Pro X is a breakthrough in nonlinear video editing. The application has impressed many pro editors, and it has also generated a lot of discussion in the pro video community. We know people have questions about the new features in Final Cut Pro X and how it compares with previous versions of Final Cut Pro. Here are the answers to the most common questions we've heard.The FAQ mirrors some of the same issues addressed in David Pogue's article (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/24/apple-says-multicam-support-is-top-priority-in-fcp-x-and-more/) with responses from Apple product managers, but also gives a few more specifics.

Regarding importing from Final Cut Pro 7, Apple says that due to the many changes there was no way to "translate" old projects without losing or changing data. So, Apple suggests that users continue to use Final Cut Pro 7 for existing projects.

As for Multicam editing, Apple again promises that "it will" support it. The "next major release" will provide "great multicam support".

Another feature they promise will be coming is export of XML. They say they "know how important XML export" is to their users and expect to add it to Final Cut Pro X. A set of APIs will be released in the next few weeks so that 3rd party developers can access the "next-generation XML in Final Cut Pro X". Similiarly, OMF, AAF and EDL support should become available through 3rd parties once the API is available. One third party solution (http://automaticduck.com/products/pefcp/) is already available for OMF and AMF export.

Finally, assigning audio tracks for export is promised for a "summer" update which will "allow you to use metadata tags to categorize your audio clips by type and export them directly from Final Cut Pro X."

Final Cut Pro X was released just last week, but was met with significant complaints due to missing features. The rest of the FAQ (http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/) provides some more details that may be of interest to professional video editors.

Article Link: Apple Posts Final Cut Pro X FAQ, Promises Updates (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/29/apple-posts-final-cut-pro-x-faq-promises-updates/)



CallistoJag
Jun 29, 2011, 03:06 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)

apple haters grinning everywhere :(

MetalMoon
Jun 29, 2011, 03:06 AM
They should have just waited till these features where ready and release Final Cut Pro X then, why they wanted to get it out before Lion, who knows?

dethmaShine
Jun 29, 2011, 03:06 AM
After all, what more do you want?

It's an absolute rewrite in the form of v1.0. There's ought to be things missing and Apple now promises to patch them up.
On another note, there will hardly be a professional using FCP X straight off for his/her final projects.

The only thing I'm doubtful is the Multi-cam support which might still not be added to FCP X as the FAQs state.

arn
Jun 29, 2011, 03:08 AM
my reading of the FAQ is minor update this summer (audio), major (multicam) update later.

arn

johneaston
Jun 29, 2011, 03:08 AM
The "next major release" will provide "great multicam support".


But, because of the way Apple chooses to conduct its business, the next major release could be six months or six years away. Not very comforting.

For me, this FAQ just appears to admit that FCPX wasn't really ready for mainstream release (and really shouldn't have been given the 'Pro' moniker).

vjl323
Jun 29, 2011, 03:08 AM
If I'm reading the FAQ correctly, multicam support won't be something that a free update will provide, but rather a major release? Does that mean another year+ away?

While I actually do like FCPX, some of the lack of features really to cause a problem for me, and multi-cam is one of the big ones. I guess one has to wait a while to get that? Or am I reading that wrong?

dethmaShine
Jun 29, 2011, 03:10 AM
my reading of the FAQ is minor update this summer (audio), major (multicam) update later.

arn

Exactly. That could be bad. I don't know what Apple means by High Priority. :confused:

nine
Jun 29, 2011, 03:10 AM
Maybe they'll make a "Sorry Video" like the Southpark one
rDqatJPvOfk

nubero
Jun 29, 2011, 03:11 AM
This FAQ is an insult

arn
Jun 29, 2011, 03:12 AM
If I'm reading the FAQ correctly, multicam support won't be something that a free update will provide, but rather a major release? Does that mean another year+ away?

It's not entirely clear. You can't charge for updates on the App Store. So Apple would have to put out an entirely new FCP app in the app store to charge people. Apple hasn't run into this yet. I'd guess that the next major FCP update will be free, and given the wording of the FAQ, I'd say that's pretty likely.

arn

Truffy
Jun 29, 2011, 03:17 AM
Exactly. That could be bad. I don't know what Apple means by High Priority. :confused:
Exactly. What would really help would be a roadmap for these updates. And reserving multicam support, which was enjoyed in FCP7, for the next major release is just insulting.

grue
Jun 29, 2011, 03:19 AM
After all, what more do you want?

It's an absolute rewrite in the form of v1.0. There's ought to be things missing and Apple now promises to patch them up.
On another note, there will hardly be a professional using FCP X straight off for his/her final projects.

The only thing I'm doubtful is the Multi-cam support which might still not be added to FCP X as the FAQs state.

If you're going to do something, do it right. Don't go halfassed and say "We'll fix it later"

iLilana
Jun 29, 2011, 03:19 AM
I just hope us Logic Pro producer/editor/engineers don't get as f'ed over as you FCP people did. Why did they release this as commercial when its CLEARLY a beta quality program? missing features, workflow compatibility, hardware compatibility. Is this whole debacle sounds like it may end up in class action lawsuit land.

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 03:23 AM
Nice to see them releasing some official information. Doesn't help much right away, but they are at least promising multicam, audio-updates, XML-export (which means OMF/AAF/EDL will be available from third parties).

BillyBobBongo
Jun 29, 2011, 03:26 AM
What strikes me as odd is how many times in that FAQ they say that they understand how important a certain feature is to users. If they undertand that, then why didn't they put it in in the first place? :confused:

t0mat0
Jun 29, 2011, 03:28 AM
Nice slap of a wakeup call to the non digital tape using workflow industries:

"Can I edit my tape-based workflow with Final Cut Pro X?
Yes, in a limited manner. Final Cut Pro X is designed for modern file-based workflows..."

So the harder more technical to (re)implement features take longer, and they've got a product out they can iron bugs out of in the meantime.

Are the pros that agile they could, would or should jump onto a new version of FCP for their main work? Seems the main issue is impatience on getting their features so they can use it!

Loki!
Jun 29, 2011, 03:34 AM
This FAQ is an insult

I absolutely agree...

MacFly123
Jun 29, 2011, 03:36 AM
It's not entirely clear. You can't charge for updates on the App Store. So Apple would have to put out an entirely new FCP app in the app store to charge people. Apple hasn't run into this yet. I'd guess that the next major FCP update will be free, and given the wording of the FAQ, I'd say that's pretty likely.

arn

WOW, it is like my comment in the last post from the Shake guy was prophecy!

Like I said people, CALM DOWN! Update coming with Lion along with XML & APIs, and another update with multi-cam + more in 6 months. Mark my words!

Lone Deranger
Jun 29, 2011, 03:41 AM
They should have just waited till these features where ready and release Final Cut Pro X then, why they wanted to get it out before Lion, who knows?

Wouldn't have mattered. People would've found something else to complain about.

mdriftmeyer
Jun 29, 2011, 03:42 AM
What strikes me as odd is how many times in that FAQ they say that they understand how important a certain feature is to users. If they undertand that, then why didn't they put it in in the first place? :confused:

Developer Cycles and Product releases for features don't always coincide.

It's a clear indication that they had a choice: Release in June or extend several Betas to key developers for the next 2 quarters and then release it, and still receive complaints for change.

They chose to release the new architecture and in a few weeks will come the Developer APIs to extend support so by the end of this quarter and entering the next quarter both 3rd parties and Apple will release plugins and major updates to this new flag ship editing software.

This ends the several years complaint that FCP is dead,etc., and opens a new can of worms on it not being feature perfect.

Guess what? List the number of major areas Apple is simultaneously competing on and then compare what Apple was doing back in 1998. Night and Day.

Apple is spewing out store after store, market after market for major target markets at a rate never seen in this corporation but it's never fast enough for some very vocal customers.

In 1998 Apple [as a former employee so I know wherefore I speak] had 3 months of capital to keep the doors open and now they have $70 Billion in the bank and have leap frog'd Microsoft in valuation. And all during one of the worst global recessions since The Great Depression.

Take a long pause and think about exactly what Apple has accomplished, all during Steve fighting for his own life.

Yet people continue to whine that this 1.0 product isn't the greatest solution for present and future approaches to NLE.

And all for $299. Truly pathetic.

I paid $299 in 1996 for Openstep User/Developer as a student before working at NeXT Inc.

Seriously, get some perspective folks.

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 03:42 AM
A case of major good news in this FAQ is that they are promising that FCP7 will work with Lion!

arn
Jun 29, 2011, 03:46 AM
It's a clear indication that they had a choice: Release in June or extend several Betas to key developers for the next 2 quarters and then release it, and still receive complaints for change.

Again, I know this has been debated back and forth. I'm not a video editor, but I've followed the release closely.

The release lacked features that people didn't even fathom weren't going to be included. It's a different level of justified complaining.

The best equivalent is that when Lion is released, it turns out it doesn't work with current Mac formatted hard drives. You have to reformat everything in a new format. It's just so absurd, it wouldn't have occurred to people to ask Apple specifically if Mac formatted hard drives were supported in Lion. (just a hypothetical example).

If people were just complaining that the interface was different, I'd probably fall on your side and tell people to suck it up and try it. But that's not what people are complaining about.

arn

macsmurf
Jun 29, 2011, 03:46 AM
Let's say that a year from now, FCPX has become a comparatively huge success with consumers interested in movie editing. Given the price and the features that is probably not too much of a stretch.

Shouldn't Apple then spend the most time supporting these users instead of the pros? Seems like the smart thing to do.

bmk
Jun 29, 2011, 03:55 AM
Wouldn't have mattered. People would've found something else to complain about.

That's probably true, but a lot of people have a lot of legitimate concerns about FCP X.

Does anyone know of ANY update to a piece of software that broke the ability to import files from the immediately preceding version of that software? This seems to me to be unique - and an incredibly bad precedent.

cracker9
Jun 29, 2011, 03:57 AM
I currently do a project about once a month not a big pro or anything, and have been using final cut pro for years. So what i'll finish my current project in FCP 7 then switch to X? big deal. just glad it's out love what im seeing in the work flow organization of this new editing power house. trust me guys it will all work out in the end.

kissmo
Jun 29, 2011, 03:58 AM
Too much noise on this release.
Too much stress, too much anger.

I am not a pro using Final Cut Studio.
People are way over stressed about this launch.

While I agree with the PROs that there are too many missing features to a veteran app like final cut pro I think there is way too much noise about this release.

People screaming on forums that they will leave final cut for other platforms are just vocal.
Wouldn't it be easier to keep using the same old FCS 3 suite and wait for a while until they release updates?
Then, if nothing good comes out, move to another platform.

I am sure their talent can be put to work quite fast on AVID or on Premiere!
I do understand it is hard to be parted from a piece of software with which you had "a symbiotic relationship". But screaming will not do too much.
For sure Apple will not change everything back.

Just WAIT! Have patience. I know there are money involved in this.

But think this way: waiting a little for the fog to clear out, check how updates on FCS will work out and then make a decision to stay or move to other options.

Is it that hard people????

dethmaShine
Jun 29, 2011, 04:00 AM
If you're going to do something, do it right. Don't go halfassed and say "We'll fix it later"

Fix?

Do you realize what it takes to re-write that kind of a professional app? I'm no way saying that Apple doesn't deserve the backlash, but think about it in another way. A complete re-write of a professional app:

1. Takes a lot of time and resources.

2. It's not that Apple is not giving refunds or portraying that they are not going to add the features.

3. FCP X represents the future of VideoEditing from the point of view of Apple. They have shipped this product so that the pros can test it and see whats there's in it for them. No professional is going to start using it as the main app for their workflow. I cannot believe it and I won't. I'm still not using Xcode 4 for my stuff cause it really does suck. I'll wait for it to become worthwhile and start using it then. This app represents a learning curve for these video experts who will spend their time and resources to learn the future of VideoEditing as conceived by Apple. If they cannot, they move on; but I'm pretty sure 95% of them will stick with Apple. It's not like FCP7 just got deleted from their computers.

Lets see where this goes.

hob
Jun 29, 2011, 04:04 AM
"not yet" means they shouldn't have pulled FCS3. That was the worst part about this whole thing.

jmpnop
Jun 29, 2011, 04:04 AM
Let's say that a year from now, FCPX has become a comparatively huge success with consumers interested in movie editing. Given the price and the features that is probably not too much of a stretch.

Shouldn't Apple then spend the most time supporting these users instead of the pros? Seems like the smart thing to do.

Your idea is great, market a consumer application as Pro application. A pro application is for professionals, not consumers. If they wanted to make a consumer version, they've should've called it iMovie Pro or something...

JesterJJZ
Jun 29, 2011, 04:06 AM
Can I...?
Not Yet...

Can I...?
Not Yet...

Can I...?
Not Yet...

Can I...?
Not Yet...

Can I...?
Not Yet...

Can I...?
Not Yet...

Can I...?
Not Yet...


Wow...

FCPX = Fail

vjl323
Jun 29, 2011, 04:10 AM
It's not entirely clear. You can't charge for updates on the App Store. So Apple would have to put out an entirely new FCP app in the app store to charge people. Apple hasn't run into this yet. I'd guess that the next major FCP update will be free, and given the wording of the FAQ, I'd say that's pretty likely.

arn

I've been wondering if/when Apple would deal with upgrades via any of the app stores - purchased upgrades I mean. I've seen some weird wording [and taken screenshots] when I've gifted an app to someone but attempting to purchase it for myself, after an update's been released - the wording on the error suggests they may have the ability to charge for updates. Or rather, upgrades.

It would be nice to know if multicam would be a free update or require a paid upgrade [through a new upgrade feature of the app store or an entirely new version ala iWork/iLife]. The wording, "major release" makes it sound like it will be a long wait for multicam support. At the very least, the summer update doesn't look like it will include multicam support. That's a bit of a bummer for me, personally.

/vjl/

macsmurf
Jun 29, 2011, 04:11 AM
Your idea is great, market a consumer application as Pro application. A pro application is for professionals, not consumers. If they wanted to make a consumer version, they've should've called it iMovie Pro or something...

So you're saying that Apple shouldn't cater to the bulk of their FCP X users because of the name?

I'm not saying that Apple is not in the wrong here. I'm calling BS. I don't believe that Apple will take professionals very seriously even though they say they will.

JesterJJZ
Jun 29, 2011, 04:11 AM
A case of major good news in this FAQ is that they are promising that FCP7 will work with Lion!

That's the only good news we've had in a while.

writingdevil
Jun 29, 2011, 04:12 AM
[QUOTE=arn;12847713]... I'm not a video editor, but I've followed the release closely...."

this is the problem with some sites, that everybody and their aunt has an opinion, even if they have ZERO real knowledge of what is going on. i guess it's a way for people to feel like they are contributing, but honestly, reading reviews, other peoples comments, and then trying to pass some judgement on a product out of their league, just takes up space, doesn't contribute to any technical context, and seems like a school research paper.

"The best equivalent is that when Lion is released, it turns out it doesn't work with current Mac formatted hard drives. You have to reformat everything in a new format."

this is not even a reasonable equivalent. lion is a system that most people, not all, but most, will upgrade to rather quickly, though some will wait for inevitable bugs to be worked out. fcp is a very specialized product, a small percent compared to lion users. and fcp 7 is usable, will be usable, and doesn't require reformatting to be used in lion.

vjl323
Jun 29, 2011, 04:13 AM
"not yet" means they shouldn't have pulled FCS3. That was the worst part about this whole thing.

That's the big issue I have. I actually *like* FCPX, for the features it does have and the pure speed it performs with. But the lack of many options that FCP7 folks are used to, make me a bit nervous. I can see pro editors [and even semi-pros] wanting to still be able to use and purchase FCP7 for new machines. If you run a company that is growing and need to buy more FCP7 seats, how can you? Perhaps FCP7 is EOL because it won't run under Lion?

If I were Apple, I would have named this Final Cut Express X. It *does* have some awesome features, but they haven't caught up to what they currently...err..used to offer in FCP7. Keep FCP7 around; lets the Pros play with FCEX knowing that in another year FCEX will become FCPX and be feature complete.

/vjl/

Parystec
Jun 29, 2011, 04:16 AM
Hey I was looking forward to the upgrade now it looks like a downgrade. Maybe this is a new direction for apple ? They have done everything else :D:apple:

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 04:16 AM
They should have just waited till these features where ready and release Final Cut Pro X then, why they wanted to get it out before Lion, who knows?
No, you have to release at some point to get feedback and get third-party support going (releasing plugins for beta software is just not working, developers don't like to create plugins for a software that has no fixed APIs yet and one they cannot make money with yet).
And FCP X is clearly finished enough that a lot of people say they really like using it, just that it has a significant number of missing features still. But these are features that affect some people, by far not all people. Better to get those people who don't need the missing features going.

You see if Apple had done nothing else but declared that FCP 7 will still be available until FCP X reaches a set of defined feature parity (and released this FAQ and this assurance that FCP 7 will work under Lion, ie, likely for about two years on new machines and a current OS), a lot of the comments like 'Apple is cutting us off at the knee' would have been baseless.

Matt T
Jun 29, 2011, 04:18 AM
I don't really understand the backlash with FCPX. Wasn't it a fairly well known fact this release would be a major change? If it doesn't have the features you need to make the switch, then don't switch - simple.

A friend of mine is comparing it to the OS 9 > OS X transition, which I think is a fairly good analogy. OS 9 was stable and well established; OS X, being a complete rebuild, was a big change and a little rough around the edges. I think Apple chose to release FCPX now to help make the transition as smooth as possible in the long run - for people who need FCP7, it still works well and will be supported by Apple; for those who would like to play around with a new version, we have FCPX, which will be updated as time goes by and eventually be ready for the majority of the userbase to switch over to.

writingdevil
Jun 29, 2011, 04:23 AM
..... Is this whole debacle sounds like it may end up in class action lawsuit land.

huh? class action lawsuit over what? if you don't want it, don't buy it. if you bought it, get a refund if it isn't what you want.

understandably some editors expected everything to be in place when it was released. they were not. apple is laying out what the plans are, including general time lines. there is no need for a specific timeline as at this point they may not know how long it will take to do the work.

some of the post houses i work with are buying it and getting started on it (with editors who are interested and pick up new tech approaches pretty quickly) and will certainly not switch for some time, as it is a new way of thinking editorially.

some other houses are not buying it and will continue with fcp 7 on lion, and see how things play out down the road. they have said they know they are sacrificing getting up to speed on it but that is their approach.

arn
Jun 29, 2011, 04:25 AM
need FCP7, it still works well and will be supported by Apple

I don't believe that's true. At least, you can't buy it anymore. So your business can't hire another FCP 7 editor without trying to find a copy on ebay or pirating it.

arn

yayitsezekiel
Jun 29, 2011, 04:28 AM
well FCP 7 works great for me...I guess I'll be sticking with that for now :)

Shame Apple couldn't have thought this through :rolleyes:

jmpnop
Jun 29, 2011, 04:29 AM
So you're saying that Apple shouldn't cater to the bulk of their FCP X users because of the name?

I'm not saying that Apple is not in the wrong here. I'm calling BS. I don't believe that Apple will take professionals very seriously even though they say they will.

FCPX is downgrade from FCP7. I don't really see the point of calling it Final Cut Pro since it no long caters the pro market which previous versions did.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 04:29 AM
Exactly. What would really help would be a roadmap for these updates. And reserving multicam support, which was enjoyed in FCP7, for the next major release is just insulting.

Why? What is point of knowing when multicam support comes? Whether it is in three, six, or nine months? If you need it, just ignore FCP X until the feature arrives, and with ignoring I mean, don't try to shoehorn your multicam projects into FCP X unless you feel that the advantages of FCP X warrant a workaround for your multicam work.

Six months or a year ago, nobody clamoured to have a roadmap as to when exactly FCP X would be released. You know why people want a roadmap? Two reasons:
1) They want to know whether something comes in the foreseeable future (ie, within a year), or much further out (since much further out usually means no firm promise that X comes exactly as promised but rather a vague guide at what is likely to appear).
2) They want to use the new stuff and cannot wait to switch, and like anybody who eagerly awaits something cannot get enough details about the when (that is why we like rumours) and want to plan to be able to switch the moment things are available.

dethmaShine
Jun 29, 2011, 04:34 AM
I don't believe that's true. At least, you can't buy it anymore. So your business can't hire another FCP 7 editor without trying to find a copy on ebay or pirating it.

arn

There's no question that Apple should put FCP7 for sale in their Online Store. It's a big mistake and the customers may suffer.

odedia
Jun 29, 2011, 04:35 AM
After all, what more do you want?

The only thing I'm doubtful is the Multi-cam support which might still not be added to FCP X as the FAQs state.

What? the FAQ clearly states that it will be added and is a top priority.

"Does Final Cut Pro X support multicam editing?
Not yet, but it will. Multicam editing is an important and popular feature, and we will provide great multicam support in the next major release."

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 04:37 AM
What strikes me as odd is how many times in that FAQ they say that they understand how important a certain feature is to users. If they undertand that, then why didn't they put it in in the first place? :confused:
For crying out loud, anything that works reasonably well (no big bugs) and is feature-complete for a certain subset of your customers is well worth the release for exactly these customers.

Heck, nobody complained that Apple released Keynote before it had 'completed' its office suite. Of course people could not switch from MS Office (read FCP 7) to iWorks (read FCP X) the day Keynote was released because they still needed Excel and Word. Keynote was perfectly usable the day it was released, years before Pages and Numbers.

Yes, Apple needs to make sure that those needing FCP 7 because they are expanding (ie, needing new or additional licences) for stuff FCP X cannot yet do, have a possibility to get those licenses. But that is about the only substantive change Apple has to do. The rest is communication.

GoodWatch
Jun 29, 2011, 04:37 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)

apple haters grinning everywhere :(

That's what we need, comments like this to keep the myth alive..... If you dare to complain on an Apple product you are a 'hater'. That was 1993 man, now is 2011.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 04:47 AM
That's probably true, but a lot of people have a lot of legitimate concerns about FCP X.

Does anyone know of ANY update to a piece of software that broke the ability to import files from the immediately preceding version of that software? This seems to me to be unique - and an incredibly bad precedent.
Microsoft Word? Powerpoint? Heck, I can even open the same Word document on two different computers with the same version of Windows and Office and they look different.
Ok, I am half joking but I think you get my point and it is absolutely true that complex documents have a significant risk of not transferring without needing manual repairs from an older version of Word or Powerpoint to a newer one.

But it is absolutely true that there needs to be a solution, even if some of settings get backed in during the conversion. Anybody who wants to re-edit a movie cut in FCP 7 today in say eight years from now, should not have to rely on the hope that his Mac Pro bought six years earlier (the last one to run Lion and thus FCP 7) does not crap out on him.
Of course, keeping FCP 7 running on computers past Lion would solve part of that.

champ01
Jun 29, 2011, 04:48 AM
"Multicam editing is an important and popular feature, and we will provide great multicam support in the next major release"

Multicam support available in..... 2013???

JasperJanssen
Jun 29, 2011, 04:48 AM
I don't believe that's true. At least, you can't buy it anymore. So your business can't hire another FCP 7 editor without trying to find a copy on ebay or pirating it.


You can still buy support, just not the application itself, direct from apple. There are as yet options to get NOS of FCS3 licenses, and I suspect if the situation actually gets to the point where people are being forced to pirate it, Apple will reopen phone sales.

http://www.videoguys.com/Item/Apple+Final+Cut+Studio+3+including+Final+Cut+Pro+7/14F2A523436324D4.aspx

http://cgi.ebay.com/Apple-Final-Cut-Studio-3-HD-MB647Z-A-/130539414094?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1e64c1624e#ht_798wt_1020

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 04:52 AM
Perhaps FCP7 is EOL because it won't run under Lion?

Have you actually read the FAQ? Apple clearly says that FCP 7 will work fine under Lion.

Biolizard
Jun 29, 2011, 04:53 AM
Apple does not sell it, but authorized distributors and resellers are still selling and I suppose they are making a fortune from all FCP X bad publicity :D

Will resellers be able to restock, though? If not, then it's not something to be relied upon. The supply of FCP 7 licences could run dry anytime.

I think Apple were right to release FCP X. Clearly software of this complexity needs to be used and have feedback and evolve over time, but the mistake was removing FCP 7 from normal distribution.
They should've said "Here's FCP X, it has about 75% of what FCP 7 does but it does it more efficiently, we're going to be building on this platform for years so start testing with it. We'll begin a transition now and in 12 months time you won't be able to buy FCP 7 anymore as we expect FCP X to be at feature parity by then, so get learning."

Given Apple is normally the master of transitions (OS 9 -> OS X, PPC -> Intel) I'm not sure how they've managed to screw this one up.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 04:56 AM
I don't believe that's true. At least, you can't buy it anymore. So your business can't hire another FCP 7 editor without trying to find a copy on ebay or pirating it.

And that will change, I am so certain about that I don't think it is even worth getting worked up about. Apple cannot and will not say: 'If you need multicam support now on additional machines, go screw yourself you won't get it from us for the next six to twelve months."
There's no question that Apple should put FCP7 for sale in their Online Store. It's a big mistake and the customers may suffer.
As I said this almost goes without saying.

H. Flower
Jun 29, 2011, 05:08 AM
Can I hide Events that I am not working on?

Yes. You can hide Events in Final Cut Pro X by moving them out of the Final Cut Events folder. In the Finder, navigate to the /Users/username/Movies folder and create a new folder. Then move the Events you are not using out of the Final Cut Events folder and into your new folder. The moved Events will no longer appear in Final Cut Pro X. If your Events are located on an external drive, you can move the Events to a new folder on that drive, or you can simply unmount the drive.

Why not allow us to choose what we want open, rather than have the program itself dictate it, forcing us to use "workarounds" ?

Like much of this program, it seems so convoluted......

Mrbill317
Jun 29, 2011, 05:11 AM
I am currently running both versions. I installed FCP7 on the 4th developer release of Lion for work without a problem. I also have FCPX working as well (Motion 5 too).
All seem to be fine.


That's the big issue I have. I actually *like* FCPX, for the features it does have and the pure speed it performs with. But the lack of many options that FCP7 folks are used to, make me a bit nervous. I can see pro editors [and even semi-pros] wanting to still be able to use and purchase FCP7 for new machines. If you run a company that is growing and need to buy more FCP7 seats, how can you? Perhaps FCP7 is EOL because it won't run under Lion?

If I were Apple, I would have named this Final Cut Express X. It *does* have some awesome features, but they haven't caught up to what they currently...err..used to offer in FCP7. Keep FCP7 around; lets the Pros play with FCEX knowing that in another year FCEX will become FCPX and be feature complete.

/vjl/

spooky2k
Jun 29, 2011, 05:15 AM
Your idea is great, market a consumer application as Pro application. A pro application is for professionals, not consumers. If they wanted to make a consumer version, they've should've called it iMovie Pro or something...

If an application can be used by people to edit, it doesn't matter if it's 'pro' or 'consumer'. A great piece of software empowers the user. It doesn't matter whether they're 'pro' or 'consumer'. Sure, there are some features that a pro would need and a consumer wouldn't, but that's all to do with personal workflow. That differs from person to person.

Apple are right to provide basics and let third parties handle specialised, niche features and provide support for their own hardware. They haven't dropped the ball here. They've simply released a solid editing app that many people, for some bizarre reason, thought they could switch to right away.

H. Flower
Jun 29, 2011, 05:21 AM
If an application can be used by people to edit, it doesn't matter if it's 'pro' or 'consumer'. A great piece of software empowers the user. It doesn't matter whether they're 'pro' or 'consumer'. Sure, there are some features that a pro would need and a consumer wouldn't, but that's all to do with personal workflow. That differs from person to person.

Apple are right to provide basics and let third parties handle specialised, niche features and provide support for their own hardware. They haven't dropped the ball here. They've simply released a solid editing app that many people, for some bizarre reason, thought they could switch to right away.

Why is the timeline closed architecture, though?

Do you remember that's what drove people away from AVID to the old Final Cut?

pubwvj
Jun 29, 2011, 05:32 AM
"Regarding importing from Final Cut Pro 7, Apple says that due to the many changes there was no way to "translate" old projects without losing or changing data. So, Apple suggests that users continue to use Final Cut Pro 7 for existing projects."

That is really BAD because the next thing is Apple will of course stop supporting FCP7 and then when they upgrade their hardware you won't be able to run FCP7 on the new machines and your projects become so much trash.

Apple should be maintaining compatibility for all applications all the way back. The computers, even an iPodTouch, have the computing power necessary to emulate all the previous machines. There is a tremendous amount of software that was never upgraded to PowerPC and then to Intel. Developers went out of business. But many users, especially in small businesses and education, still use that software. This is a great resource. It is a shame for Apple to abandon it. If they're doing this for Quicken they should do it for all applications.

Some people say upgrade to alternative software but are no alternative titles for a lot of the software. Apple should not be abandoning Rosetta and they should not have abandoned Classic. They are an enormous company with tremendous resources. They could easily keep emulation for these older systems going.

It is irresponsible of Apple to create obsolescence of hardware by discontinuing operating system and technical support for older systems. This policy of Apple's creates more trash filling the landfills and is a waste of resources.

The solution is for Apple to make new software intelligently scaleable such that it recognizes the hardware it is being installed on and adjusts to fit within the memory footprint and hardware's capabilities. Yes, certain new features like transparent window shadows will not be available but there are many improvements which can be continued to offer for older hardware such as the folders in the new iOS which do not need any advanced hardware capability.

The benefit to Apple is they can continue getting sales of operating systems each year as they offer new versions of the OS with new features. Additionally Apple will gain more market penetration as the old hardware is kept active and passed down in families resulting in a larger user installed base. Charge for the technical support - obviously. Just keep offering AppleCare.

Apple should also encourage developers to support the furthest back operating systems and hardware possible.

tatonka
Jun 29, 2011, 05:34 AM
Are people really still amazed that Apple doesn't give two ribs about the pro market? Some people must be in deep denial to still not see that.
Apple wants to cater the ambitous amateures .. there just is not enough money in the pro market alone.

I love my MBP, but I wouldn't trust Apple with my business, as in base a coporate decision on an Apple product much less one that could eventually, maybe, potentially be released. I am fine with buying it for private purposes.

T.

dethmaShine
Jun 29, 2011, 05:38 AM
Will resellers be able to restock, though? If not, then it's not something to be relied upon. The supply of FCP 7 licences could run dry anytime.

I think Apple were right to release FCP X. Clearly software of this complexity needs to be used and have feedback and evolve over time, but the mistake was removing FCP 7 from normal distribution.
They should've said "Here's FCP X, it has about 75% of what FCP 7 does but it does it more efficiently, we're going to be building on this platform for years so start testing with it. We'll begin a transition now and in 12 months time you won't be able to buy FCP 7 anymore as we expect FCP X to be at feature parity by then, so get learning."

Given Apple is normally the master of transitions (OS 9 -> OS X, PPC -> Intel) I'm not sure how they've managed to screw this one up.

Wonderfully said. Probably the best post overall in this final cut pro tragedy.

Truly, Apple has been a master of a number of transitions but this was way too rude and rough. Unfortunately, this involved thousands of professionals who have invested hundreds of thousands or maybe millions of $s in their business which is more or less FCP dependant.

Not good Apple. You have learnt so much over the years, but still? FCP7 needs to come back.

Popeye206
Jun 29, 2011, 05:41 AM
Developer Cycles and Product releases for features don't always coincide.

It's a clear indication that they had a choice: Release in June or extend several Betas to key developers for the next 2 quarters and then release it, and still receive complaints for change.

They chose to release the new architecture and in a few weeks will come the Developer APIs to extend support so by the end of this quarter and entering the next quarter both 3rd parties and Apple will release plugins and major updates to this new flag ship editing software.

This ends the several years complaint that FCP is dead,etc., and opens a new can of worms on it not being feature perfect.

Guess what? List the number of major areas Apple is simultaneously competing on and then compare what Apple was doing back in 1998. Night and Day.

Apple is spewing out store after store, market after market for major target markets at a rate never seen in this corporation but it's never fast enough for some very vocal customers.

In 1998 Apple [as a former employee so I know wherefore I speak] had 3 months of capital to keep the doors open and now they have $70 Billion in the bank and have leap frog'd Microsoft in valuation. And all during one of the worst global recessions since The Great Depression.

Take a long pause and think about exactly what Apple has accomplished, all during Steve fighting for his own life.

Yet people continue to whine that this 1.0 product isn't the greatest solution for present and future approaches to NLE.

And all for $299. Truly pathetic.

I paid $299 in 1996 for Openstep User/Developer as a student before working at NeXT Inc.

Seriously, get some perspective folks.

Wow... do you have to be so realistic and level thinking? :p

I think you're dead on with this comment. I'm sure the tradeoff was wait forever to bring it all, or release what was ready, get feedback and continue adding the features.

Plus, since the Lean development process is a big deal now, they could be using that development methodology and it makes it easy to make these sort of decisions in order to hit deadlines.

It does suck they could not get it all in, but with all these changes, I'm sure in the long run it will work out and given the feedback, I'm sure they're in overdrive.

tatonka
Jun 29, 2011, 05:42 AM
Your idea is great, market a consumer application as Pro application. A pro application is for professionals, not consumers. If they wanted to make a consumer version, they've should've called it iMovie Pro or something...

Actually it is an ingenious marketing scheme to charge more. iMovie is what 19.99$ on the app store? iMovie Pro would go for maybe 99$. But an ambitous amateuer that wants to play with the big boys tools (and there is ton of those, amateuer, not tools) would find a way to justify 299$ as well.
In order to get those guys though, you need to create a pro image around the software (whether it acutally is pro level or not).

T.

macsmurf
Jun 29, 2011, 05:43 AM
Are people really still amazed that Apple doesn't give two ribs about the pro market? Some people must be in deep denial to still not see that.
Apple wants to cater the ambitous amateures .. there just is not enough money in the pro market alone.

I love my MBP, but I wouldn't trust Apple with my business, as in base a coporate decision on an Apple product much less one that could eventually, maybe, potentially be released. I am fine with buying it for private purposes.

T.

The funny thing is that when Apple make a statement, such as this FAQ, people will readily believe that this time they really mean it :)

It's all about risk vs. benefit. There seem to be a great deal of risk involved in taking Apple's public statements at face value.

jmpnop
Jun 29, 2011, 05:43 AM
If an application can be used by people to edit, it doesn't matter if it's 'pro' or 'consumer'. A great piece of software empowers the user. It doesn't matter whether they're 'pro' or 'consumer'. Sure, there are some features that a pro would need and a consumer wouldn't, but that's all to do with personal workflow. That differs from person to person.

Apple are right to provide basics and let third parties handle specialised, niche features and provide support for their own hardware. They haven't dropped the ball here. They've simply released a solid editing app that many people, for some bizarre reason, thought they could switch to right away.

It may be good for you but for 'pros' it isn't sufficient. Calling consumer application 'professional application' is just ridiculous. Remember 'pro' isn't a term added to make a name sound cooler like Apple's prefix 'i'.

xStep
Jun 29, 2011, 05:46 AM
FCPX is downgrade from FCP7. I don't really see the point of calling it Final Cut Pro since it no long caters the pro market which previous versions did.

What I got out the FAQ is that it will cater to the pro market, in the future, and for the added price of third party software. ;) I wonder what it will cost to bring this 'Pro' software up to pro usability.


Does Final Cut Pro X support OMF, AAF, and EDLs?
Not yet. When the APIs for XML export are available, third-party developers will be able to create tools to support OMF, AAF, EDL, and other exchange formats. We have already worked with Automatic Duck to allow you to export OMF and AAF from Final Cut Pro X using Automatic Duck Pro Export FCP 5.0.

linuxcooldude
Jun 29, 2011, 05:55 AM
It may be good for you but for 'pros' it isn't sufficient. Calling consumer application 'professional application' is just ridiculous. Remember 'pro' isn't a term added to make a name sound cooler like Apple's prefix 'i'.

I'm sure changing the name will make all the difference in the world.

iBug2
Jun 29, 2011, 05:55 AM
Why is the timeline closed architecture, though?

Do you remember that's what drove people away from AVID to the old Final Cut?

What drove people away from AVID to the old Final Cut was the price.

"Regarding importing from Final Cut Pro 7, Apple says that due to the many changes there was no way to "translate" old projects without losing or changing data. So, Apple suggests that users continue to use Final Cut Pro 7 for existing projects."

That is really BAD because the next thing is Apple will of course stop supporting FCP7 and then when they upgrade their hardware you won't be able to run FCP7 on the new machines and your projects become so much trash.



That's what happens when an app is discontinued. But there are some ways to keep the old projects alive. FCP 7 works with Lion, so that means it'll work for 2 more years at least. If After Lion Apple switches to 64bit only mode, then it'll keep working on Lion and any hardware Lion supports, that means any hardware released in the next 2 years. That hardware will be able to work for at least 4-5 years without issues. So FCP 7 will be used in the next 6 years.

After that, one would need to run Lion on new hardware through virtual machines etc, to keep FCP 7 running.

Skika
Jun 29, 2011, 05:59 AM
FAQ summary:

Q: Does it have X/ Can i do X?

A:Not yet.

JesterJJZ
Jun 29, 2011, 06:03 AM
huh? class action lawsuit over what?

False marketing, advertisement? Something to that end. This product is not Final Cut Pro and they are selling it under that brand.

Gareth-H
Jun 29, 2011, 06:09 AM
Any thoughts on whether FCP6 is likely to be stuck with using Snow Leopard? We hadn't upgraded earlier (since it pretty much does everything we need it to) but since FCP X is a no-go due to missing features, I'm concerned that there's no way we can keep the OS up-to-date now we can't upgrade to FCP7.

gkpm
Jun 29, 2011, 06:09 AM
So the whole world knows FCP X doesn't yet have all the advanced pro features of previous versions.
Apple refunded those who complained.
There is now a FAQ saying what people should expect next.

But now the complaints are all about the name? Because they call it Pro?

Next people will be complaining that the MacBook Pro doesn't come with Fibre Channel interfaces or 10GbE...

SirHaakon
Jun 29, 2011, 06:09 AM
This product is not Final Cut Pro and they are selling it under that brand.
Lol. This product IS Final Cut Pro, because they own the name and can slap it on whatever they want. Just because you don't like the direction the software is going doesn't mean you can sue over it.

toxotis70
Jun 29, 2011, 06:13 AM
I am a PRO user and i prefer FCPX philosophy , speed and easy of use !

For my main job i wiil continue to work with old one, for a short period, but then i will go for the newer .

It is extremely fast, versatile and easy to use.

In a while, we will have support for extra hardware (video cards - external monitor) from AJa and other companies , there is already plugin for importing-exporting FCP 7 projetcs from automatic duck.

More plugins are near, at no cost (if you upgrade) ...

No one forced you to buy the new one...

MrNomNoms
Jun 29, 2011, 06:14 AM
And funny enough this whole fiasco could have been avoided had they provided the FAQ at the time the product was put on the AppStore so that customers knew what they were getting - a product that was very much work in progress.

Lumeswell
Jun 29, 2011, 06:18 AM
there is already plugin for importing-exporting FCP 7 projetcs from automatic duck.



So a third party developer could do what apple said they couldn't do because they would lose data?

Burger Thing
Jun 29, 2011, 06:19 AM
Can I hide Events that I am not working on?

Yes. You can hide Events in Final Cut Pro X by moving them out of the Final Cut Events folder. In the Finder, navigate to the /Users/username/Movies folder and create a new folder. Then move the Events you are not using out of the Final Cut Events folder and into your new folder. The moved Events will no longer appear in Final Cut Pro X. If your Events are located on an external drive, you can move the Events to a new folder on that drive, or you can simply unmount the drive.

Why not allow us to choose what we want open, rather than have the program itself dictate it, forcing us to use "workarounds" ?

Like much of this program, it seems so convoluted......

I totally agree. I almost start to develop breathing difficulties because so many things can't be done or require a stupid workaround. I salute to make attempts for a user friendlier software but if at the same token the whole thing becomes so restrictive that you need to look at a FAQ or Helppage to get the simplest things done, it gets a bit tiring. Probably the silliest example is the lacking save/save as feature. :rolleyes:

And I can send clips directly to YouTube but I can't send clips from the Storyline to Motion. Ha Ha Ha.

smali
Jun 29, 2011, 06:23 AM
I like how even slight positive comments get rated down...

Seriously these "pros" need to act a bit more professional. Just trying to learn about the new app on various forums and all are just full of these self-entitled brats.

A lot of them forget if it wasn't for Apple and the original FCP they wouldn't be editing anyways unless they sold off their homes to pay for Avid.

Seriously stop crying, forget being professional for a second...maybe just act like adults for a change rather than 5 year olds! If you can't do that, make your own editing app.

Let the down-rating commence!

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 06:25 AM
So a third party developer could do what apple said they couldn't do because they would lose data?

Everyone knows it's possible to have some halfassed import of old projects. I'm sure Apple is holding out on that because so far they have not been able to do it in a satisfactory way.

toxotis70
Jun 29, 2011, 06:26 AM
So a third party developer could do what apple said they couldn't do because they would lose data?


Apple chooses not to do that for 2 reasons ...

First , they cant do 100% (neither Automatick duck can) .
Its a totally different approach .
So, if they did that , they maybe had more problems from ungry users....

Second , they prefer (like they did 10 years ago with FCP 1) to be more Democratic... more cheap products for everyone, and let third developers to make the extra options for those PRO users.
If you are a PRO , you can buy the extra options and built a system to your likes.

The only thing Apple did wrong, was the lack of detailed info about those specs in the very first day(but thats why they refund all people that doesnt like it ).

Mighuel
Jun 29, 2011, 06:32 AM
Any thoughts on whether FCP6 is likely to be stuck with using Snow Leopard? We hadn't upgraded earlier (since it pretty much does everything we need it to) but since FCP X is a no-go due to missing features, I'm concerned that there's no way we can keep the OS up-to-date now we can't upgrade to FCP7.

I remember someone saying that FCP6 will continue to work on Lion but you can't install it due FCP6 having PowerPC based installer. Lion doesn't support Rosetta.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 06:38 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)

there is already plugin for importing-exporting FCP 7 projetcs from automatic duck.



So a third party developer could do what apple said they couldn't do because they would lose data?

If a thirdparty plugin is not perfect, nobody blames Apple, if Apple is not perfect it gets blamed.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 06:41 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)

Can I hide Events that I am not working on?

Yes. You can hide Events in Final Cut Pro X by moving them out of the Final Cut Events folder. In the Finder, navigate to the /Users/username/Movies folder and create a new folder. Then move the Events you are not using out of the Final Cut Events folder and into your new folder. The moved Events will no longer appear in Final Cut Pro X. If your Events are located on an external drive, you can move the Events to a new folder on that drive, or you can simply unmount the drive.

Why not allow us to choose what we want open, rather than have the program itself dictate it, forcing us to use "workarounds" ?

Like much of this program, it seems so convoluted......

I totally agree. I almost start to develop breathing difficulties because so many things can't be done or require a stupid workaround. I salute to make attempts for a user friendlier software but if at the same token the whole thing becomes so restrictive that you need to look at a FAQ or Helppage to get the simplest things done, it gets a bit tiring. Probably the silliest example is the lacking save/save as feature. :rolleyes:

And I can send clips directly to YouTube but I can't send clips from the Storyline to Motion. Ha Ha Ha.

As if FCP 7 would be any easier and could be used without any manual.

jhende7
Jun 29, 2011, 06:41 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)

Among many of the qualities of a "Pro" or "Professional"- A high standard of professional ethics, behavior and work activities while carrying out one's profession (as an employee, self-employed person, career, enterprise, business, company, or partnership/associate/colleague, etc.)

Seems many people on this forum are self declaring themselves "Pros" without possessing one of the key qualities.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 06:48 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)

And funny enough this whole fiasco could have been avoided had they provided the FAQ at the time the product was put on the AppStore so that customers knew what they were getting - a product that was very much work in progress.

If people base their fundamental criticism on a lack of knowledge, we know how serious we have to take them.

Burger Thing
Jun 29, 2011, 06:54 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)



As if FCP 7 would be any easier and could be used without any manual.

I am sorry, but if Apple feels the need to publish a workaround on their FAQ page on how to save several instances of your project to get something simple and fundamental as "save as" done then something went seriously wrong in the user-friendliness department of the software, don't you think?

toxotis70
Jun 29, 2011, 06:58 AM
I am sorry, but if Apple feels the need to publish a workaround on their FAQ page on how to save several instances of your project to get something simple and fundamental as "save as" done then something went seriously wrong in the user-friendliness department of the software, don't you think?

Apple says , that you have to think differnet... if you want.

If you dont, stay with the old version or choose another platform... simple.

No one forces you what to do .

I didnt had to search more than a couple days to find everything i want, but i read manuals, and saw some tutorials before i start to shout, maybe you have to do the same, you may even like it more !!!

cgbier
Jun 29, 2011, 07:20 AM
Any thoughts on whether FCP6 is likely to be stuck with using Snow Leopard? We hadn't upgraded earlier (since it pretty much does everything we need it to) but since FCP X is a no-go due to missing features, I'm concerned that there's no way we can keep the OS up-to-date now we can't upgrade to FCP7.
I'm in the same situation. Staying with FCP6 and waiting for FCP8.

The FCS2 installer needs Rosetta. The software itself is universal, so there's no chance to install it on a wiped disk. I don't know if you will be able to pull it out from your TimeMachine though without the need of running the installer.

tatonka
Jun 29, 2011, 07:23 AM
If people base their fundamental criticism on a lack of knowledge, we know how serious we have to take them.

And how serious is that?

T.

HORTENSE
Jun 29, 2011, 07:28 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) Mobile/8J2)

Apple makes great products, but it's hard to digest how something like this product release can get by big shots in the company in charge of this. Marketing 101, protect the integrity of your brand.

BryanBensing
Jun 29, 2011, 07:32 AM
"They say they "know how important XML export" is to their users"...

Then why didn't they added in the first release? :rolleyes:

thatisme
Jun 29, 2011, 07:34 AM
I see it as a good sign that Apple is at least acknowledging FCPX's shortcomings (omissions) and providing a level of optimism that in a period of time the software should address a lot of the concerns that are currently floating about.

I guess what I don't understand is how, if you are a "professional" and need multicam and the other omissions, how you could even attempt to migrate to a new, untested, un-fleshed out version of ANY software? If your software is mission critical, I wouldn't expect anyone to jump to the new version on day one. Every new piece of software needs to be thoroughly tested before implementation to ensure it meets your needs.

There is a reason many corporations are still using Win XP instead of Vista / 7. Hell, we are still using Office 2003 due to file compatibility issues with newer versions....

I do understand the need to download FCPX for evaluation and for training, but to expect to be able to use it as a replacement for FCPS on day one is a bit too optimistic in my eyes.

Apple should not have EOL'd FCPS so quickly, but I doubt that they will not still provide new licenses for production houses that rely on that software. Also, the rate of new licenses being needed probably isn't too high at this point, but it is still existent.

johnnymg
Jun 29, 2011, 07:34 AM
I'm in the same situation. Staying with FCP6 and waiting for FCP8.

snip....................

You will be waiting forever! :p

cheers
JohnG

macsmurf
Jun 29, 2011, 07:37 AM
No one forces you what to do

When a company stops selling the product they're pretty much forcing you to either upgrade or look elsewhere. Not today but down the line.

In other words you're wrong.

There is a reason many corporations are still using Win XP instead of Vista / 7. Hell, we are still using Office 2003 due to file compatibility issues with newer versions....


....and yet Microsoft extended the support of XP a number of times. They kept updating the system long after Vista came out and they made sure that their customers were informed more than a year in advance. I believe they currently say that XP support (patches/updates/etc) will be discontinued in 2014.

See the difference?

econgeek
Jun 29, 2011, 07:41 AM
FCP X already supports multicam-- it just does it differently than the previous version. It automatically syncs audio as well, which has never been done before.

Seems that there is a contingent of AVID so called "professionals" who ADOBE shouting down anyone who tries to talk about how much, as a professional, they find FCP X to be a delight to work with.

That they are so AVID tells you that ADOBE is scared.

Cry babies gonna cry, while the rest of us are editing faster than ever.

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 07:44 AM
FCP X already supports multicam-- it just does it differently than the previous version. It automatically syncs audio as well, which has never been done before.


It doesn't support multicam

econgeek
Jun 29, 2011, 07:44 AM
"They say they "know how important XML export" is to their users"...

Then why didn't they added in the first release? :rolleyes:

Because apple doesn't let crybabies dictate their release schedule...otherwise they'd never ship because the AVID crybabies ADOBE coming up with things to insist must be in there to be "professional".

Its really a shame that all of you who aren't editors but are general apple haters, are amplifying the whining, and I'm tired of so-called "news" outlets reporting that "professionals" are unhappy with FCP X.

That's called spin.

Real, genuine professionals are quite happy with it.

kbmb
Jun 29, 2011, 07:44 AM
1) Posting this FAQ AT launch!

2) Explaining to some industry big-wigs about the changes.

3) Make a transition plan, much like the MobileMe to iCloud plan. Keep selling FCP7 for a period of a year and then EOL it.

However, you, I and the wall all know this is Apple.....they aren't so good at communicating with customers.....pro or not :p

-Kevin

econgeek
Jun 29, 2011, 07:45 AM
It doesn't support multicam

I've been doing multicam with it all morning.

I guess you guys think if you repeat these dishonest claims loud enough people will believe you.

unfortunately, it seems you're right, but only because there's a built in group of apple haters who are happy to ramp up any supposed vulnerability to the moon.

Remember antanna gate? This is just another one of those fabricated "failures".

Lumeswell
Jun 29, 2011, 07:46 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)



If a thirdparty plugin is not perfect, nobody blames Apple, if Apple is not perfect it gets blamed.

Bet they are glad they managed to avoid that ....

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 07:47 AM
It's not like FCP7 just got deleted from their computers.



No.. but support has. And without the ability to import older projects - editors now have to use two different programs (one for new projects and one to edit/revise older ones)

The fact is - for many professional editors - FCPX isn't usable as released. And those editors are completely justified in voicing their complaints. Why? Because Apple released the software and is selling it. That entitles anyone (professional or not) to evaluate it and voice their issues/compliments.

The logic of "just don't upgrade" is a bit faulty. The point isn't if/when it will be viable to upgrade. The issue TODAY is that it's not usable and that's what some people are commenting on.

Arn's comment a few pages back is very eloquent and accurate.

I also can't think of any new software version that wasn't able to import an older version. I *think* I understand why it wasn't/isn't possible with FCPX - but I also think something could have been done - even with user prompting - to facilitate an import of some sort.

And for the person who joked/mocked/whatever about MS Office having issues importing older files - I have to laugh because I've been using MS Office since the first version - and except on a very few occasions - I've never NOT been able to import an older file into the new version. Does it need some tweaking - sometimes. But it still imports.

econgeek
Jun 29, 2011, 07:47 AM
1) Posting this FAQ AT launch!

2) Explaining to some industry big-wigs about the changes.

3) Make a transition plan, much like the MobileMe to iCloud plan. Keep selling FCP7 for a period of a year and then EOL it.

However, you, I and the wall all know this is Apple.....they aren't so good at communicating with customers.....pro or not :p

-Kevin

1) They did post a FAQ at launch. (The product has been out only a few days.)
2) They did get big wigs on board with the changes. The big wigs love it. What you're hearing from are AVID so-called "professionals" who are NOT editors, but just ADOBE bashing Apple.
3) FCP 7 is still for sale. The whole claim that it has been EOLed is bogus.

Apple is great at communicating.... they just can't always overcome the shouting of the liars.

cgbier
Jun 29, 2011, 07:47 AM
You will be waiting forever! :p

Yeah, figured that meanwhile... :D

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 07:48 AM
And how serious is that?

T.

As honest but subjective and emotional reactions and likely much less important than what they seem to be.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 07:49 AM
Remember antanna gate? This is just another one of those fabricated "failures".

Apple held a press conference. They admitted their was a "flaw" in the antenna. They also pointed that all phones have a similar issue. That last point can be debated.

Point is - that just because all phones have a similar issue doesn't mean the iPhone doesn't. And that means that it wasn't a fabricated failure.

But keep on trying to equate anyone with something to say that doesn't praise Apple as a hater. I'm sure that works out well for you.

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 07:50 AM
i've been doing multicam with it all morning.


Hilarious

econgeek
Jun 29, 2011, 07:52 AM
No.. but support has.

This is false, and if you work in the industry you would know it. Nowhere has Apple said they are going to stop supporting it. None of the companies (most support is provided by third parties) have thrown up their hands and invalidated their support contracts, or stopped selling support services.

The fact is - for many professional editors - FCPX isn't usable as released.

That is an opinion. Unless you're now saying it crashes on launch for everybody and can prove it. So, when you say "the fact is" what you tell me is that you're not a professional editor and you're just jumping on the apple bashing bandwagon.

That entitles anyone (professional or not) to evaluate it and voice their issues/compliments.

And we're perfectly right to point out that these "complaints" are mostly falsehoods, or based on dishonesty, or misrepresentation of the situation... such as your lie about support above, or your claim that the product doesn't work at all, which you called "A fact".

Hilarious

Sigh, I can't say I'm surprised that the bashers are completely ignorant of the facts... I guess the facts don't matter, right? Apple is evil, and it doesn't matter what the truth is, so long as you can convince some gullible person not to use an apple product, right?

Nevermind making an argument, or responding to arguments. That's not worth your time, is it?

Which, of course, just proves my point.

Apple held a press conference. They admitted their was a "flaw" in the antenna. They also pointed that all phones have a similar issue. That last point can be debated.

Once again, people who never took college physics think that their opinions are facts, and you can't debate them.... they cannot even construct a counter argument.... as you have failed to do so here.

Point is - that just because all phones have a similar issue doesn't mean the iPhone doesn't. And that means that it wasn't a fabricated failure.

Actually it does. All phones work this way. Its physics. The people going after the iPhone for this were acting like there was a defect in the iphone, rather than a consequence of the laws of physics. It is a perfect example of people who are ignorant of technology attacking Apple based on their ignorance.

Here people claim that the app doesn't support multicam-- when in reality, it supports it better, for the way I shoot, than the previous version! BTW ,that claim was disproven last week by Pogue, but still they keep repeating it.

But keep on trying to equate anyone with something to say that doesn't praise Apple as a hater. I'm sure that works out well for you.

I'm equating people who lie about apple to try and make them look bad as "haters". By attacking me in this way you confirm my accusation-- after all, if you had an argument to the point, you wouldn't need ot make an argument to the person.

The Phazer
Jun 29, 2011, 07:55 AM
3) FCP 7 is still for sale. The whole claim that it has been EOLed is bogus.

No it isn't.

Phazer

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 07:57 AM
This is false, and if you work in the industry you would know it. Nowhere has Apple said they are going to stop supporting it. None of the companies (most support is provided by third parties) have thrown up their hands and invalidated their support contracts, or stopped selling support services.



That is an opinion. Unless you're now saying it crashes on launch for everybody and can prove it. So, when you say "the fact is" what you tell me is that you're not a professional editor and you're just jumping on the apple bashing bandwagon.



And we're perfectly right to point out that these "complaints" are mostly falsehoods, or based on dishonesty, or misrepresentation of the situation... such as your lie about support above, or your claim that the product doesn't work at all, which you called "A fact".



Sigh, I can't say I'm surprised that the bashers are completely ignorant of the facts... I guess the facts don't matter, right? Apple is evil, and it doesn't matter what the truth is, so long as you can convince some gullible person not to use an apple product, right?

Nevermind making an argument, or responding to arguments. That's not worth your time, is it?

Which, of course, just proves my point.

I really hope that this is a role, not reality.

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 07:57 AM
I've been doing multicam with it all morning.

With the work-around Pogue wrote about (which is not in any stretch of the imagination a replacement), or do you mean you have edited something using clips from multiple cameras? I kid you not, some people think multicam means just that..

mBox
Jun 29, 2011, 07:58 AM
Nice slap of a wakeup call to the non digital tape using workflow industries:

"Can I edit my tape-based workflow with Final Cut Pro X?
Yes, in a limited manner. Final Cut Pro X is designed for modern file-based workflows..."

So the harder more technical to (re)implement features take longer, and they've got a product out they can iron bugs out of in the meantime.

Are the pros that agile they could, would or should jump onto a new version of FCP for their main work? Seems the main issue is impatience on getting their features so they can use it!To be honest most real pro houses digitize their material to digital format not using FCP or NLE software. Back when we were mostly DVCAM, we would dump all our VHS and even BetaSP to DVCAM first so that we at least have a digital tape version. But back then it was mostly BetaSP to Avid Media Composer (to keep quality higher) and that wasnt always a fun ride :P

goodcow
Jun 29, 2011, 08:02 AM
Too much noise on this release.
Too much stress, too much anger.

I am not a pro using Final Cut Studio.
People are way over stressed about this launch.

While I agree with the PROs that there are too many missing features to a veteran app like final cut pro I think there is way too much noise about this release.

People screaming on forums that they will leave final cut for other platforms are just vocal.
Wouldn't it be easier to keep using the same old FCS 3 suite and wait for a while until they release updates?
Then, if nothing good comes out, move to another platform.

I am sure their talent can be put to work quite fast on AVID or on Premiere!
I do understand it is hard to be parted from a piece of software with which you had "a symbiotic relationship". But screaming will not do too much.
For sure Apple will not change everything back.

Just WAIT! Have patience. I know there are money involved in this.

But think this way: waiting a little for the fog to clear out, check how updates on FCS will work out and then make a decision to stay or move to other options.

Is it that hard people????

There are lots of businesses that are built around the entire Final Cut Studio workflow. FCPX clearly, at the moment at least, won't cut it. The reason people are freaking out is not only because FCPX doesn't meet their needs, but Apple has needlessly EOLed Final Cut Studio. There's no legal way to purchase more seats of the old software for your business.

So now they either have to wait and hope that FCPX improves, or dump a ton of money into a platform switch.

I just don't understand why Apple would EOL Final Cut Studio.

cgbier
Jun 29, 2011, 08:02 AM
I've been doing multicam with it all morning.

Enlighten us backward ones: How do you do that?

mBox
Jun 29, 2011, 08:02 AM
Apple held a press conference. They admitted their was a "flaw" in the antenna. They also pointed that all phones have a similar issue. That last point can be debated.

Point is - that just because all phones have a similar issue doesn't mean the iPhone doesn't. And that means that it wasn't a fabricated failure.

But keep on trying to equate anyone with something to say that doesn't praise Apple as a hater. I'm sure that works out well for you.Hmm as a pro video guy I'm flattered that most are placing this debacle in the same level as the antennae problem. But really? Its a phone that hits the masses 100x than FCPX. Its their bread and butter so yes I guess it was right for Steve to make a press conference. Video editors...sadly we dont get that love :)

thatisme
Jun 29, 2011, 08:08 AM
When a company stops selling the product they're pretty much forcing you to either upgrade or look elsewhere. Not today but down the line.

....and yet Microsoft extended the support of XP a number of times. They kept updating the system long after Vista came out and they made sure that their customers were informed more than a year in advance. I believe they currently say that XP support (patches/updates/etc) will be discontinued in 2014.

See the difference?

But what you forget is that MS did the same thing Apple did. They EOL'd their product. THEN, companies complained about the new software loud enough that MS then reversed course and continued to support and update the software. Yes, there is a timetable out there for the eventual EOL of the program, but if MS had it's way, it would have been a clean break to Vista, and you know how that story would have panned out. Now, we have 7, from what I hear, is better than Vista.

Take this and now apply this to FCPX. People bitch about missing features (justifiably), and Apple now has a rough roadmap on their software, promising feature sets to be added. When has Apple done this in the past? Usually, they are more secretive than the CIA about product roadmaps.

They also began providing refunds for purchases of FCPX. Unheard of from Apple.

I would be willing to bet that FCPS licenses will be made available again for a period of time, until which FCPX becomes feature complete.... Only time will tell

mBox
Jun 29, 2011, 08:09 AM
Enlighten us backward ones: How do you do that?There is a method released where you use the audio to sync all your clips and then apply it in Audition. I dont have any frickin multi cam material here cuase we only shoot with one camera. Its a RED MX and they aint cheap :P

econgeek
Jun 29, 2011, 08:10 AM
With the work-around Pogue wrote about (which is not in any stretch of the imagination a replacement), or do you mean you have edited something using clips from multiple cameras? I kid you not, some people think multicam means just that..

Enlighten us backward ones: How do you do that?

It isn't a "workaround" it is just a different way of doing it. And it works better than the previous way. In fact, it is fairly easy to cut between the cameras, and the app automatically lines them up for you to boot.

The idea that you can't do this is so absurd that it shows just how dishonest this whole thing is. What do people think-- when you buy a new camera you have to buy a new version of FCP? Or that you can only use footage from one camera in a given project? How would FCP even detect that you were using footage from two different cameras? Can it tell cameras of the same model apart, or does it only work for cameras from different manufacturers? We know it can't be different resolutions because Apple has made it very public that you can mix footage of different formats.

Apple would have to go thru a lot of work to *Prevent* people from using multiple cameras, when you think about it!

Every video about FCP shows stacking footage from multiple shoots and cutting between them. It doesn't matter if those shots came from the same camera at different points of time, or different cameras at the same point in time.

IF you have multiple cameras running at the same time it automatically syncs them, so, its actually easier than other editing programs for this type of editing.

I'm sure Apple can extend the feature, and that is what they are promising to do.

But the claim that you can't do it now is a bald faced lie.

And that this claim has been repeated often and to the point where cgbier is so certain of it that he can smugly demand I prove it to him--- shows this is all about bashing Apple and that most of the people doing it don't know the first thing about editing, or Final Cut Pro X.

Hell, just watching the videos on the Apple website and you can see intercutting between shots from different cameras!

All the rest of the bitching is on the same level.... disingenuous at best, but mostly dishonest.

Ok, I'm done here. It isn't worth my time to argue video editing with people who aren't even familiar with the basic concepts.

I can't believe you guys spend your time online running around bashing Apple. What pathetic lives you must have.

Back to editing for me.

kbmb
Jun 29, 2011, 08:11 AM
1) They did post a FAQ at launch. (The product has been out only a few days.)

Ummm...not quite. This FAQ should have been there on the App Store page so people would know BEFORE buying it.

2) They did get big wigs on board with the changes. The big wigs love it. What you're hearing from are AVID so-called "professionals" who are NOT editors, but just ADOBE bashing Apple.


No doubt they talked to lots of people....and overall FCPX looks fantastic. However, all the "pro" complaints and valid. They removed key features and functionality from FCPX. This isn't about "change". No crap people are going to have to "change" in order to learn/use FCPX.....but there is no learning when you can't do certain aspects.

3) FCP 7 is still for sale. The whole claim that it has been EOLed is bogus.

FCP7 is not for sale from Apple....which means that technically support isn't available either unless you have the pro support contract. Of course with boxed software, you'll always be able to get it from 3rd party resellers for months. That's not the point. I can get iLife '08 from Amazon today:
http://www.amazon.com/Apple-iLife-08-OLD-VERSION/dp/B000BX5JQG

Doesn't mean Apple is gonna support it.

Apple is great at communicating.... they just can't always overcome the shouting of the liars.

Apple needs to "Speed up" the communication. Too many days between it's release (6/21) and the FAQ (6/28). Sorry...but even 7 days is too long.

-Kevin

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 08:12 AM
This is false, and if you work in the industry you would know it. Nowhere has Apple said they are going to stop supporting it. None of the companies (most support is provided by third parties) have thrown up their hands and invalidated their support contracts, or stopped selling support services....

That is an opinion. Unless you're now saying it crashes on launch for everybody and can prove it. So, when you say "the fact is" what you tell me is that you're not a professional editor and you're just jumping on the apple bashing bandwagon.

And we're perfectly right to point out that these "complaints" are mostly falsehoods, or based on dishonesty, or misrepresentation of the situation... such as your lie about support above, or your claim that the product doesn't work at all, which you called "A fact".

Sigh, I can't say I'm surprised that the bashers are completely ignorant of the facts... I guess the facts don't matter, right? Apple is evil, and it doesn't matter what the truth is, so long as you can convince some gullible person not to use an apple product, right?

I'm equating people who lie about apple to try and make them look bad as "haters". By attacking me in this way you confirm my accusation-- after all, if you had an argument to the point, you wouldn't need ot make an argument to the person.

Well I guess you "lose" since I do work in the industry. Apple didn't say they were going to support it. Yet if more people in my office need FCP 7 - tell me - how do we purchase licenses for it from Apple.

I'm not jumping on any bandwagon. If 5, 10, 50, 75 whatever percent of my business revolves around taking years of legacy edits and updated them - I can't do that in FCPX. And that makes FCPX unusable. You seem so caught up in trying to discredit my post that you neglected to understand the semantics of my post. I didn't say the software was unusable by all professionals. Nor did I say the software itself was unusable. What I said was "for many professional editors - FCPX isn't usable as released. " Re-read that statement a few times until you understand it. Thanks.

And sure - you're entitled to your opinion. But maybe you should try looking at the situation from a less egocentric/applecentric point of view. Then you'll understand the complaints and why you might not have the issue - you'll come to see that not everyone thinks/has the same workflow as you.

I never said Apple was evil. I said that for some professionals - FCPX isn't usable AS RELEASED. That's a fact. There's nothing to debate there.

milo
Jun 29, 2011, 08:12 AM
It's good that they did this and was incredibly dumb that they didn't release this info BEFORE putting the software on sale. But those on the high end aren't going to be that happy with all the answers. Too many basically say you'll have to buy expensive third party apps to get functionality back that was in 7 (oops, so much for the price drop) or boil down to "you're holding it wrong". This document is a step in the right direction but they botch it by throwing in digs about the way most broadcast/film work is not the "modern" workflow they're interested in supporting.

I guess we'll see where the software is in six or 12 (or more) months. If one of the alternatives wants to step up their game, now's definitely the time to steal back the high end of the market.

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 08:16 AM
It isn't a "workaround" it is just a different way of doing it. And it works better than the previous way. In fact, it is fairly easy to cut between the cameras, and the app automatically lines them up for you to boot.

Hell, just watching the videos on the Apple website and you can see intercutting between shots from different cameras!
...
All the rest of the bitching is on the same level.... disingenuous at best, but mostly dishonest.

It's definitive, you're only a little troll, you can't be real, it woudl be so ridiculous someone like you.

From Apple FAQ:

Does Final Cut Pro X support multicam editing?
Not yet, but it will. Multicam editing is an important and popular feature, and we will provide great multicam support in the next major release.

hayesk
Jun 29, 2011, 08:17 AM
So a third party developer could do what apple said they couldn't do because they would lose data?

If there's a plugin, then what the heck are people complaining about then? Oooh, you have to buy a third party product. Boo freakin' hoo!

This and the support being added back in, says to me the real whiners are not because Apple isn't supporting you is that Apple is making you learn something new. Cry me a freakin' river.

When Adobe switched from Pagemaker to Indesign, people didn't bitch like children all over the Mac news sites. They continued to use PageMaker and upgraded when InDesign met their needs.

When Apple released XCode 4, people didn't jump to XCode 4 right away, and many still haven't. They're waiting until it serves their needs and they're not whining like children about it.

milo
Jun 29, 2011, 08:17 AM
1)Apple is great at communicating....

Wow, one of the most laughable comments I've seen on this board in a long time. Communication is arguably Apple's weakest trait.

mdriftmeyer
Jun 29, 2011, 08:18 AM
There are lots of businesses that are built around the entire Final Cut Studio workflow. FCPX clearly, at the moment at least, won't cut it. The reason people are freaking out is not only because FCPX doesn't meet their needs, but Apple has needlessly EOLed Final Cut Studio. There's no legal way to purchase more seats of the old software for your business.

So now they either have to wait and hope that FCPX improves, or dump a ton of money into a platform switch.

I just don't understand why Apple would EOL Final Cut Studio.

It's a 12 year old code base. Most version of Operating Systems don't have nearly as long of a life cycle. Windows XP is the lone exception.

Final Cut Pro 7 may have been released in 2009 but it's code base goes back to 1999 for Apple, never mind Macromedia.

Keep using it for your needs today. If you find investing $299 for FCPX in your workflow, today, is a burden I somehow think people miss the boat on software transitions.

These frustrations remind me of the old Mac OS stalwarts when OS X was released.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 08:18 AM
It isn't a "workaround" it is just a different way of doing it.

By your own definition - it's a work around.

(pssssst. Apple themselves, on their website FAQ stated that Multicam editing wasn't supported yet... so any workflow you have IS a work around.)

Thanks for playing...

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 08:20 AM
If you find investing $299 for FCPX in your workflow, today, is a burden I somehow think people miss the boat on software transitions.

Where does he said anything like that?

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 08:23 AM
If there's a plugin, then what the heck are people complaining about then? Oooh, you have to buy a third party product. Boo freakin' hoo!

This and the support being added back in, says to me the real whiners are not because Apple isn't supporting you is that Apple is making you learn something new. Cry me a freakin' river.

When Adobe switched from Pagemaker to Indesign, people didn't bitch like children all over the Mac news sites. They continued to use PageMaker and upgraded when InDesign met their needs.

When Apple released XCode 4, people didn't jump to XCode 4 right away, and many still haven't. They're waiting until it serves their needs and they're not whining like children about it.

InDesign imported PageMaker files.

Vegasman
Jun 29, 2011, 08:26 AM
Let's say that a year from now, FCPX has become a comparatively huge success with consumers interested in movie editing. Given the price and the features that is probably not too much of a stretch.

Shouldn't Apple then spend the most time supporting these users instead of the pros? Seems like the smart thing to do.

Who do you think puts all the Macs and iStuff on TV Shows and movies? It's these guys and their circle of friends. Don't be surprised if the free Apple publicity you see in these types of media starts going down.

Blipp
Jun 29, 2011, 08:31 AM
this is the problem with some sites, that everybody and their aunt has an opinion, even if they have ZERO real knowledge of what is going on. i guess it's a way for people to feel like they are contributing, but honestly, reading reviews, other peoples comments, and then trying to pass some judgement on a product out of their league, just takes up space, doesn't contribute to any technical context, and seems like a school research paper.


Probably the truest statement in this whole debate. Apple has screwed the launch of FCPX dramatically and will have to fight to win back disenchanted pros. But that fight is for the pros, if you're an amateur interested in making your own high end movies for festivals and whatnot FCPX will still be an extremely capable and value rich platform for you to work on. Don't let yourself get so caught up in what FCPX is lacking for the pro market and assume it's a failure on all fronts because of it.

Keebler
Jun 29, 2011, 08:35 AM
I personally believe the pro editors out there should be concerned about the missing features. I'm glad Apple put out this FAQ although I don't know if they've successfully answered all the questions.

The only thing I am surprised about is how fast some of the pros are threatening to move to another NLE so quickly. But then again, I'm just a single user so I don't understand all the intricacies involved at their level.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 08:37 AM
FCP7 is not for sale from Apple....which means that technically support isn't available either unless you have the pro support contract. Of course with boxed software, you'll always be able to get it from 3rd party resellers for months. That's not the point. I can get iLife '08 from Amazon today:
http://www.amazon.com/Apple-iLife-08-OLD-VERSION/dp/B000BX5JQG

Doesn't mean Apple is gonna support it.

How do you define support? You can support software without selling it. If Apple has stated that FCP 7 will run fine on Lion, isn't that them saying they 'support' it on Lion?

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 08:39 AM
If Apple has stated that FCP 7 will run fine on Lion, isn't that them saying they 'support' it on Lion?

No, it only says that it runs on Lion, nothing more

BeyondtheTech
Jun 29, 2011, 08:41 AM
This FAQ is an insult

I agree, it's pretty FAQ'ed up.

Sirmausalot
Jun 29, 2011, 08:44 AM
If there's a plugin, then what the heck are people complaining about then? Oooh, you have to buy a third party product. Boo freakin' hoo!

The plug in I need is called Automatic Duck and it costs $500. So I am crying, or would be if I couldn't switch to Adobe which includes OMF export.

What the total cost of plug ins Apple should have included with Final Cut X (and did include with Final Cut Studio) is unknown, but certainly many times the price of the program itself. $299 is the teaser rate. To get it to work, you have to spend many times more than that. Worthless trash.

myca
Jun 29, 2011, 08:45 AM
At least they've come out with a statement, but this release has been such a mess.

I'm hoping that the next Logic Pro release doesn't go along the same route, I can almost see them only allowing monitoring through a macs built in audio output (after down-converting to aac), and only being able to record with the built in mic.

And whilst they're at it why not remove ReWire support, surround sound and Mackie control support, after all not all users need these. Heck if they open up some APIs third parties can give us these features back at a silly price.

The above may be an extreme example, but that is what they've done with some features on this release.

min_t
Jun 29, 2011, 08:49 AM
Let's say that a year from now, FCPX has become a comparatively huge success with consumers interested in movie editing. Given the price and the features that is probably not too much of a stretch.

Shouldn't Apple then spend the most time supporting these users instead of the pros? Seems like the smart thing to do.


I hope it does happen just to spite these short-sighted whineys. I'm hoping they go the way of the carbon apps and are left behind. We need fresh young users with the vision to see possibilities, not looking back at the good ol days.

sined13
Jun 29, 2011, 08:50 AM
"The application has impressed many pro editors..."

Name one.

"The "next major release" will provide "great multicam support"..."

Ok, so one of the missing features that pros complain about the most will only be available in the next major release (i.e. not in an upcoming update). This means people will have to pay to get a feature that should have been there from day one.

Bravo Apple!

cgbier
Jun 29, 2011, 08:52 AM
I don't know if they've successfully answered all the questions.

In my case not nearly. It is still too muddy, and why should I buy (expensive) plugins that were built into the "old" version?

We are on the verge to replace 5 (out 7) editing bays (those G5 get a bit long in the tooth), so, of course, we would like to know WHEN FCX will have the full feature set we were used to, and how it will work with networking. That thing with duplicating and copying projects is not very convenient to us.
We are right now strategizing: Cross our fingers that we still will be able to get FCP7 or take advantage of Avid's switch offer. As it stands now, FCX is rather dead for us.

Tales
Jun 29, 2011, 08:54 AM
The plug in I need is called Automatic Duck and it costs $500. So I am crying, or would be if I couldn't switch to Adobe which includes OMF export.

What the total cost of plug ins Apple should have included with Final Cut X (and did include with Final Cut Studio) is unknown, but certainly many times the price of the program itself. $299 is the teaser rate. To get it to work, you have to spend many times more than that. Worthless trash.

I think you are missing something. $299 isn't a teaser rate, it's a price for a full functioning piece of software that works out fine for most people. However some professionals (In my case Pros earn money with their work) MIGHT need some extra functions, Automatic Duck has a plugin out which those Professionals can buy. And an investment of 500$ for something you use to make money is peanuts. Lets face it the total price is still sub 999$.

And I'm imagining when Apple releases the SDK in a couple of weeks theres nothing stopping you or other users to create a free or cheaper version.

Just because you need the Screwdriver and the Hammer doesn't make the screwdriver a bait which no one could use.

Just to recap, I'm not saying Apple did right by leaving some of those functions out. But saying that it's a piece of crap is just, well.. crap.



"The application has impressed many pro editors..."

Name one.

"The "next major release" will provide "great multicam support"..."

Ok, so one of the missing features that pros complain about the most will only be available in the next major release (i.e. not in an upcoming update). This means people will have to pay to get a feature that should have been there from day one.

Bravo Apple!

Major update doesn't equal paying for an update. Major update could just mean 'The next update that contains new features' whereas a minor update would just contain bugfixes.

Vegasman
Jun 29, 2011, 08:59 AM
The only thing I am surprised about is how fast some of the pros are threatening to move to another NLE so quickly. But then again, I'm just a single user so I don't understand all the intricacies involved at their level.

I think it is because they were already considering jumping ship due to FCP falling behind to competitors... but the promise of the next shinny new release kept them from doing so. But now, the decision process has become a lot clearer.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 09:01 AM
No, it only says that it runs on Lion, nothing more
And what is 'supporting'? Is there any statement from Apple that they support Aperture 3 for example? No, we just conclude from the fact that they are selling (and advertising it) that it is 'supported'.

What supported means is that new OS releases are tested against an application and steps are undertaken to ensure compatibility (be it inside the OS or the application).

Another meaning of the word 'supporting' can be that the company offers service contracts for an application.

It is still too muddy, and why should I buy (expensive) plugins that were built into the "old" version?
Because you cannot wait for Apple to add some of those features back to FCP X since FCP X is otherwise so great that you want to start using it as soon as possible.

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 09:01 AM
Major update doesn't equal paying for an update. Major update could just mean 'The next update that contains new features' whereas a minor update would just contain bugfixes.

FAQ says major release, not update.

Look, one:

Does Final Cut Pro X allow you to assign audio tracks for export?
Not yet. An update this summer will allow you to use metadata tags to categorize your audio clips by type and export them directly from Final Cut Pro X.

Two:

Does Final Cut Pro X support multicam editing?
Not yet, but it will. Multicam editing is an important and popular feature, and we will provide great multicam support in the next major release. Until then, Final Cut Pro X offers some basic support with automatic clip synchronization, which allows you to sync multiple video and audio clips using audio waveforms, creating a Compound Clip that can be used for simple multicam workflows.

See the difference?

Oletros
Jun 29, 2011, 09:05 AM
And what is 'supporting'? Is there any statement from Apple that they support Aperture 3 for example? No, we just conclude from the fact that they are selling (and advertising it) that it is 'supported'.

What supported means is that new OS releases are tested against an application and steps are undertaken to ensure compatibility (be it inside the OS or the application).

Another meaning of the word 'supporting' can be that the company offers service contracts for an application.

No, support for a software package means that it will have bugfixes, it will have updates for new hardware to run it, they will have technical support, etc.

Saying that they won't sell it more, removing download pages from your site, etc is not supporting it.

cgbier
Jun 29, 2011, 09:08 AM
Because you cannot wait for Apple to add some of those features back to FCP X since FCP X is otherwise so great that you want to start using it as soon as possible.
No, because we work for the government and have to spend that money for the new Macs by September, otherwise it's gone. When you buy new hardware, you'd like to have functioning software (to your needs with it). Vaporware won't help us.

skinned66
Jun 29, 2011, 09:14 AM
A bunch of babies cry in Hollywood and people capitulate? Jeez, when has that ever happened :rolleyes:

I know they're not all there, but the rest are just riding their coat tails.

scottishwildcat
Jun 29, 2011, 09:19 AM
They should have just waited till these features where ready and release Final Cut Pro X then, why they wanted to get it out before Lion, who knows?
I do feel a *little* bit sorry for Apple here. When you work on complex bits of consumer software (as I do too), there's always a trade-off between putting out a major new version that's missing a few features, and delaying its release until it's "finished".

Because software is never finished. If Apple had waited to finish those features, it could have been another year before we saw FCPX, and in the meantime, some other new features would probably have snuck in that needed finishing too. And before you know it, people would have been complaining that there hadn't been a new release of FCP for 4 or 5 years, and switched to Premiere or whatever anyway.

Releasing early can be a great way (in engineering terms, but not necessarily PR terms) to quickly prioritize what needs fixing in the first point release, and incentivize the team to make those fixes -- nothing gets problems fixed quickly like bad publicity. Been there, done that. The key thing from Apple's point of view is to make sure they really do fix the biggest problems, fix them well, and fix them relatively quickly.

dhrlove
Jun 29, 2011, 09:22 AM
FCPX is great if you are a ONE MAN SHOW for production.
Unless you want:
1. Multi cam
2. To work with photoshop layers.
3. To use your old and GREAT tools like Color or Soundtrack Pro.

Though, most work environments that produce media that YOU enjoy are produced by TEAMS of people. FCPX does not accommodate that.

They should call it Final Cut SOLO. Lets be real, was R&B better when there were bands or was it better when the drum machine was created and 1 dude could create an album?

ALSO, as a solo act, I was more empowered by the tools that came with FCS3 than I am with the FCPX tools.

FINALLY, nobodies complaining about the paradigm shift in the UI or the FUTURE of tapeless workflow. WE ALL WANT THAT!!!

handsome pete
Jun 29, 2011, 09:23 AM
Real, genuine professionals are quite happy with it.

No, they're not. Most of them simply cannot use it for their work at this stage of its life.

I've been doing multicam with it all morning.


You don't understand what multicam is.




I'll repeat what I've said before about this whole thing. Most of those who don't understand all of the backlash or just say "keep using FCP7 for now" are not seeing the bigger picture. No competent professional user out there was ever planning on using FCPX from the start. That would be stupid. But this release paints a picture of Apple veering away from the professional user. So when these professionals are eventually ready for the transition from an outdated FCP7, the fear is that FCPX will not be a suitable replacement. this current release certainly isn't. They will then be forced to change platforms and that can be a costly maneuver. We just had to add 2 FCP7 seats to our company this week. So what happens when we have to add 2 or 3 more in 6 months? We've already established that FCP7 is bit outdated already. If FCPX can't fit into our workflow at that point, then we'll have no choice but to go in a different direction. Luckily we have Production Premium on all of our machines.

Apple has done come really cool things with FCPX. They're right in that tape based workflows are not the future. The problem is that for many of us, that's not a choice. We have to support tape. Tape is dying, but it is an incredibly slow death. It will still be around for quite some time. Simply cutting FCP users from that doesn't work. The absence of other key features is inexcusable too (being version 1.0 is not a valid reason either).

They may be able to change the way we look at editing, but that can't happen overnight and can't be forced. It's an evolution. Simply put, what the release of FCPX says most is that Apple doesn't care about its professional userbase anymore. That's fine and has even been assumed as much over the recent years. This is where most of the negativity from the "pros" is coming from. And this FAQ doesn't do much to quell those assumptions.

cgbier
Jun 29, 2011, 09:25 AM
I do feel a *little* bit sorry for Apple here. When you work on complex bits of consumer software (as I do too), there's always a trade-off between putting out a major new version that's missing a few features, and delaying its release until it's "finished".

Because software is never finished. If Apple had waited to finish those features, it could have been another year before we saw FCPX, and in the meantime, some other new features would probably have snuck in that needed finishing too. And before you know it, people would have been complaining that there hadn't been a new release of FCP for 4 or 5 years, and switched to Premiere or whatever anyway.

Releasing early can be a great way (in engineering terms, but not necessarily PR terms) to quickly prioritize what needs fixing in the first point release, and incentivize the team to make those fixes -- nothing gets problems fixed quickly like bad publicity. Been there, done that. The key thing from Apple's point of view is to make sure they really do fix the biggest problems, fix them well, and fix them relatively quickly.
They could have saved themselves a lot of trouble by just keeping FCP7 alive. We had bought an FCP X copy or two for playing around while the real work was done with the old app.

MSlaw
Jun 29, 2011, 09:28 AM
Your idea is great, market a consumer application as Pro application. A pro application is for professionals, not consumers. If they wanted to make a consumer version, they've should've called it iMovie Pro or something...

Go look on any app store and look at how many apps have pro in them. Then go back and re-read what you just said.

smali
Jun 29, 2011, 09:30 AM
Can all you bitchy "pros" just piss off and make something decent for once? Just the same old crap on TV and recycled rubbish in the movies theaters.

youtube/vimeo is far more entertaining these days I have to say.

WestonHarvey1
Jun 29, 2011, 09:31 AM
[QUOTE=arn;12847713]... I'm not a video editor, but I've followed the release closely...."

this is the problem with some sites, that everybody and their aunt has an opinion, even if they have ZERO real knowledge of what is going on. i guess it's a way for people to feel like they are contributing, but honestly, reading reviews, other peoples comments, and then trying to pass some judgement on a product out of their league, just takes up space, doesn't contribute to any technical context, and seems like a school research paper.

"The best equivalent is that when Lion is released, it turns out it doesn't work with current Mac formatted hard drives. You have to reformat everything in a new format."

this is not even a reasonable equivalent. lion is a system that most people, not all, but most, will upgrade to rather quickly, though some will wait for inevitable bugs to be worked out. fcp is a very specialized product, a small percent compared to lion users. and fcp 7 is usable, will be usable, and doesn't require reformatting to be used in lion.

There are non-editors who are otherwise professionals and understand software and can understand this situation in the abstract, and are thus perfectly capable of contributing to this discussion.

MisterK
Jun 29, 2011, 09:32 AM
I really feel for the high end video professionals who wanted to like FCPX. Apple's my favourite company and I actually WANT to use everything they make. So when an application like Motion doesn't take care of my needs and I have to go to After Effects, I actually feel like I'm corrupting my Mac experience somehow... despite how much I actually love Adobe's products. I'm sure FCPX users feel the same way.

As a person who works in marketing, I understand why Apple is making their decisions. They probably have a white board somewhere in Cupertino that lists their strengths as a company: Industrial design, marketing, customer support, retail, owning the entire experience, media distribution. Each of Apple's products and services should play to as many of these strengths as possible in order to be given the greatest chances of success.

Aside from the executive's Macbook Air, business and professional environments are not where Apple wants to be playing. The calculation for a business is quite simple: performance to price. Industrial design and marketing don't matter when the decisions are based off balance sheets. Customer support, virus protection, and retail don't matter as much when there is an IT department already in existence. Apple's strengths are great, but they don't make price as large of an incentive.

Apple's (very large) playground is beginner to prosumer. I think the only companies legitimizing Macs at a higher professional level are Adobe and Microsoft. I will fight tooth and nail to keep using Apple's products, but if Adobe were to ever leave the Mac, I'd have no excuses left.

This is sad in the same way that the demise of the XServe is sad, but very few people cared how beautiful the rack in your server room was. Apple wants users with expertise falling in between iMovie and Final Cut Express to be producing stuff that falls between Final Cut Express and Final Cut Pro.

I will actually buy FCPX because it looks easier to use. I'm part of the reason Apple is doing this.

macintoshia
Jun 29, 2011, 09:34 AM
You'd think a company as savvy as Apple would take this as a PR disaster ... and therefore, mobilize an all out effort to really discuss these issues with a variety of stakeholders for the sake of the long-term business.

Of course as stated in several places, it could be an effort to consolidate the product AND just say that "we think editing video is now a commodity thing" and our software effort here is saying that ... we've figured out that what helps Apple is to now help consumers do video versus the market share of pro's." They could be right.

But why not be smart enough to tackle the issue head on and create a day where you make that market-driven case and show the software for what it is and isn't in advance.

That would have be sensitive, smart and best of all, kind.

It's really hard to not say ... Apple, you acted dumb.

tripjammer
Jun 29, 2011, 09:35 AM
After all, what more do you want?

It's an absolute rewrite in the form of v1.0. There's ought to be things missing and Apple now promises to patch them up.
On another note, there will hardly be a professional using FCP X straight off for his/her final projects.

The only thing I'm doubtful is the Multi-cam support which might still not be added to FCP X as the FAQs state.


Plus it is 64bit! People are just whiney because they are...This software will get better with time. What else is there to use? Use that if it is better.

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 09:36 AM
What strikes me as odd is how many times in that FAQ they say that they understand how important a certain feature is to users. If they undertand that, then why didn't they put it in in the first place? :confused:

I dont understand why people can't be patient or look at the positive side of things. No one is forcing you to use Final Cut Pro X. Heck! If you download it, you don't even have to use it! You can still use 7 until you are happy with X!

There are so many great features that will make my editing life SO MUCH BETTER. Remember the "UNRENDERED" screen in Final Cut Pro 7? Well its gone in Final Cut Pro X. I can no edit without ever having to wait. The color correction tools are much better and I can organize my clips a lot easier too. These are just a few of the features I've ran into and loved!

I videotape concerts and performances and use MultiCam for them, but I think I will manage with editing without it for now. I have done it before, its not that bad.

TechKnow
Jun 29, 2011, 09:38 AM
A bunch of babies cry in Hollywood and people capitulate? Jeez, when has that ever happened :rolleyes:

I know they're not all there, but the rest are just riding their coat tails.

This is bigger than Hollywood. I have a friend here in town that runs a small shop of less than 10 employees. They do a lot of local work and they have several national clients (Hoarders tv show). They just switched to an all FCP Studio setup after years of being an Avid shop. Apple actively sought out these types of shops and marketed the benefits of FCP over Avid and Adobe. The investment was over several years and at great expense. They are now trying to decide what their options are going forward.

FCPX is not an option because of the clientele they have. They are filming part of the project and other production houses are working on graphics and audio so there is a need, not a desire, to output EDL, OMF and share media and project files.

This is not just a inconvenience for them, this is a wake up call moment. All the equipement they have now still works. That is not the problem. The problem is waiting to see if Apple will continue to support this style of workflow in their future releases, or have they abandoned this market for the consumer / prosumer market.

If Apple has made that decision, it would be nice if they would announce it and allow business owners to decide what direction the businesses 5 year plan is headed in.

dhrlove
Jun 29, 2011, 09:41 AM
Can all you bitchy "pros" just piss off and make something decent for once? Just the same old crap on TV and recycled rubbish in the movies theaters.

youtube/vimeo is far more entertaining these days I have to say.



All those movies your stealing at piratebay aint produced by twits with a camera phone and imovie.

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 09:41 AM
You'd think a company as savvy as Apple would take this as a PR disaster ... and therefore, mobilize an all out effort to really discuss these issues with a variety of stakeholders for the sake of the long-term business.

Of course as stated in several places, it could be an effort to consolidate the product AND just say that "we think editing video is now a commodity thing" and our software effort here is saying that ... we've figured out that what helps Apple is to now help consumers do video versus the market share of pro's." They could be right.

But why not be smart enough to tackle the issue head on and create a day where you make that market-driven case and show the software for what it is and isn't in advance.

That would have be sensitive, smart and best of all, kind.

It's really hard to not say ... Apple, you acted dumb.

Harvey
http://macintoshia.com
the land of mac learning

This is such an overreaction to what has actually happened. People are mad that at most 3 features are missing. THREE FEATURES! HELLO..... How many features does this application have? This is not a PR disaster. Just a bump in the road. We always get over these bumps and forget about them. (iPhone 4 Anttenagate)

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 09:45 AM
I dont understand why people can't be patient or look at the positive side of things. No one is forcing you to use Final Cut Pro X. Heck! If you download it, you don't even have to use it! You can still use 7 until you are happy with X!



You're not a professional - so you simply don't get it. That's ok. But since Apple released (and sold) the software and touts it as "pro" - professionals have every right to voice their concerns or complaints. They also have the right to question Apple on their timeline and future plans regarding both FCP7 and FCPX.

From what I can tell - there is much to love about FCPX. But that doesn't make it ready for primetime for some professionals.

This is such an overreaction to what has actually happened. People are mad that at most 3 features are missing. THREE FEATURES! HELLO..... How many features does this application have? This is not a PR disaster. Just a bump in the road. We always get over these bumps and forget about them. (iPhone 4 Anttenagate)

It's not an overreaction. There are more than three features missing. Speak for yourself - not everyone.

PS - People didn't forget about the iPhone 4 issue. They either got a case, returned the phone or learned to live with it. That's not the same as forgetting.

But again - it's clear you aren't a professional and are simply not getting what the professionals are saying.

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 09:48 AM
You're not a professional - so you simply don't get it. That's ok. But since Apple released (and sold) the software and touts it as "pro" - professionals have every right to voice their concerns or complaints. They also have the right to question Apple on their timeline and future plans regarding both FCP7 and FCPX.

From what I can tell - there is much to love about FCPX. But that doesn't make it ready for primetime for some professionals.

I agree completely. My point was that this is not as big of a deal as people are making it out to be.

Who are you to tell me that I am not a professional? Have we met?

Check out my website: http://jacklinkproductions.com

handsome pete
Jun 29, 2011, 09:51 AM
This is such an overreaction to what has actually happened. People are mad that at most 3 features are missing. THREE FEATURES! HELLO..... How many features does this application have? This is not a PR disaster. Just a bump in the road. We always get over these bumps and forget about them. (iPhone 4 Anttenagate)

First off, it's not just 3 features. Stop pulling numbers out of your ass.

Secondly, the features are absolutely essential for a professional editing application.

If it wasn't a PR disaster it wouldn't have gotten the attention it has, especially from such a niche market.

KnUx
Jun 29, 2011, 09:51 AM
Let's say that a year from now, FCPX has become a comparatively huge success with consumers interested in movie editing. Given the price and the features that is probably not too much of a stretch.

Shouldn't Apple then spend the most time supporting these users instead of the pros? Seems like the smart thing to do.
Yes, lets make all the consumers think that having a pro app makes them a pro editor. We all know Apple did this for the money so that consumers can get something that the "pros" use. Fact is, after looking at Final C-, iMovie Pro, People will be switching to other video editing programs for more control over what they want to edit. When the Hollywood Movies and TV-Shows look like crap in the future, that's when you'll realize that Apple messed up if something isn't done about this.

sined13
Jun 29, 2011, 09:56 AM
Major update doesn't equal paying for an update. Major update could just mean 'The next update that contains new features' whereas a minor update would just contain bugfixes.

That is incorrect.

The original statement from Apple is:

"The "next major release" will provide "great multicam support"..."

In the software world, a major release always means the same thing: the next major version of a software. In this case, that would be FCPX 2.0.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 09:56 AM
I agree completely. My point was that this is not as big of a deal as people are making it out to be.

Who are you to tell me that I am not a professional? Have we met?

Check out my website: http://jacklinkproductions.com

I find it amusing that posters, like yourself, can conclude that some people are making it out to be a bigger deal than it is.

People have different work flows and requirements. If a program lacks the ability to maintain that workflow or offer a viable solution - then it's a BIG problem for that individual.

It's also very telling as to who Apple is more interested in. If you want to claim that 90 percent of the population doesn't care or need these features - I won't argue. At all. But 10 percent of the population does and were told by the CEO that big things were coming. You can't or shouldn't be surprised when Apple is called out for not delivering (to date) on what was promised.

I'm not complaining really. I am simply voting with my wallet until there's a resolution that's satisfactory for my workflow. That means I'll stay in FCP 7 until "whenever."

Shookster
Jun 29, 2011, 09:59 AM
There's a much more detailed unofficial FAQ here:
http://www.digitalrebellion.com/blog/posts/final_cut_pro_x_frequently_asked_questions.html

macsmurf
Jun 29, 2011, 09:59 AM
Who do you think puts all the Macs and iStuff on TV Shows and movies? It's these guys and their circle of friends. Don't be surprised if the free Apple publicity you see in these types of media starts going down.

Really? The editors decide which consumer products to use in the movie?

BenRoethig
Jun 29, 2011, 10:01 AM
Your idea is great, market a consumer application as Pro application. A pro application is for professionals, not consumers. If they wanted to make a consumer version, they've should've called it iMovie Pro or something...

Its a pro application. Its just not in any way shape or form complete.

"not yet" means they shouldn't have pulled FCS3. That was the worst part about this whole thing.

Yep. Problem isn't the direct, problem is that they botched the launch in every way shape and form imaginable.

jianadmu
Jun 29, 2011, 10:03 AM
I think it has potential. Once all updates are given to us, I'll give it a chance. That could be a long time from now. So....I go back to using Premiere Pro, FCP7 and Avid:)

If it's still a disappointment after the updates. At least I have fall backs. No harm done.:)

SiskoKid
Jun 29, 2011, 10:04 AM
People seriously have to chill the eff out. The features are coming. Yes, at some point Apple has to release the software into the wild so they can make the product better. All 1.0 software is beta software. All 1.0 hardware is beta hardware. If you're a person who is an early adopter, then you should KNOW THIS ALREADY!!! Holy balls.

Also, if there are features missing, the best thing to do is learn the software while still using Final Cut Pro 7. Your software didn't deactivate once FCP X came out, so seriously, grow up.

FCP X will get feature parity or close to FCP 7 very soon. I've been using FCP X casually beside FCP 7, and I gotta say the software is absolutely mind blowing. I'm very impressed, and it's blazingly fast. Once those features come in, and they will come, then you guys can wipe the tears from your face and start learning it. But apparently paying the $300 now to learn it is different than paying the $300 in 4-6 months to learn it because it added a handful of features.

Just pull the heads from your asses and seriously stop bitching. Apple is getting the features in there, and it'll be fairly soon. In the meantime, use FCP 7 for your professional life and learn FCP X on the side so once it has all the features you need, you can make the switch. Otherwise, you're not really a professional if you expected to switch your whole professional life around FCP X on the first day if it did have feature parity. Or, if you are a professional who does that, you're not very bright.

initialsBB
Jun 29, 2011, 10:04 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: 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)

They should have just waited till these features where ready and release Final Cut Pro X then, why they wanted to get it out before Lion, who knows?

Because "Real artists ship".

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 10:05 AM
I find it amusing that posters, like yourself, can conclude that some people are making it out to be a bigger deal than it is.

People have different work flows and requirements. If a program lacks the ability to maintain that workflow or offer a viable solution - then it's a BIG problem for that individual.

It's also very telling as to who Apple is more interested in. If you want to claim that 90 percent of the population doesn't care or need these features - I won't argue. At all. But 10 percent of the population does and were told by the CEO that big things were coming. You can't or shouldn't be surprised when Apple is called out for not delivering (to date) on what was promised.

I'm not complaining really. I am simply voting with my wallet until there's a resolution that's satisfactory for my workflow. That means I'll stay in FCP 7 until "whenever."

Im not saying that no one needs these features! Did I say that?

I am saying that It is not that big of a deal, because MOST of these features will come someday and you can use Final Cut 7 until then!

The thing is that no one WANTS to use Final Cut Pro 7 anymore. Which I understand... We are ready for an update. This update isn't ready for everyone yet. I understand. But as I have said before, No one is forcing you to use it.

I do understand all of the concerns that professionals have posted and I agree with most of them. Posting your concerns is a good thing. I just dislike how people love to turn everything into a PR disaster just because they dont get instant-gratification.

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 10:07 AM
I think it has potential. Once all updates are given to us, I'll give it a chance. That could be a long time from now. So....I go back to using Premiere Pro, FCP7 and Avid:)

If it's still a disappointment after the updates. At least I have fall backs. No harm done.:)

This is what I have been trying to tell people! Everyone acts like Apple is stuffing Final Cut X down their throats and forcing them to use it.

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 10:10 AM
Once those features come in, and they will come, then you guys can wipe the tears from your face and start learning it.

In the meantime, use FCP 7 for your professional life and learn FCP X on the side so once it has all the features you need, you can make the switch. Otherwise, you're not really a professional if you expected to switch your whole professional life around FCP X on the first day if it did have feature parity. Or, if you are a professional who does that, you're not very bright.

Amen.

pgwalsh
Jun 29, 2011, 10:11 AM
What strikes me as odd is how many times in that FAQ they say that they understand how important a certain feature is to users. If they undertand that, then why didn't they put it in in the first place? :confused:


If I were Apple, I would have named this Final Cut Express X


^^ ^These two post say it all IMO.

This is a prosumer app at a prosumer price. Pro coming in next release, hopefully.

jacobo007
Jun 29, 2011, 10:17 AM
This is a clear example that you just canīt make everybody happy...

Either they release it now with the idea of adding features in the upcoming updates (kind of like in iOS where there was no copy/paste, multitasking, etc.) and people say Apple doesn't care about the PRO market because of all the missing features,

OR

They release it one year or two later and the same people say, WTF Apple hasn't updated FCP in years!! they just donīt care about the PRO market anymore.

So they decided to release it now and work on it.

the vj
Jun 29, 2011, 10:22 AM
This FAQ is an insult

To say the least. I completly lost trust in Apple. I mean, they can come up with what ever they want without telling you in advance.

Who says FCP 7 will run under the Tiger? What am I going to do with all my projects? I work at a TV station and we have to go and check files made 3 years ago.

As we speak, one of the TV channels I mange just changed their logo, So I spent 4 month going back to every single promo to replace the logo as well the voice over, for that I need to open the original FCP document where the music, voice over and effects are in different tracks.

If I had FCP X I would have to import the final promo and RE CREATE the entire soundtrack. Having the original FCP file take me an hour to do so, replacing in FCP X can take days, imagine... I would have to find the original tapes.

And that is just one silly scenario.

But is Apple arrogance the actual problem. They got FCP to capture a market, then they stopped the development because "it was too buggy".

Now they want to re invent the wheel with FCP X, what they want is to sell the "modules", literally wash their hands of the development, they want to offer the core.

But the big issue is... we are falling into a marketing experiment! EXPERIEMENT that, as you can see, started with the wrong foot already.

Apple will have to start negotiations and licenses, that may take ages or many no even happen for most of the developers. Probably FCP X will die or people will end up asking for features that where present in FCP 7 that no other developers are willing to create for a low margin.

I mean... you want to do "business" with someone who is not reliable who already framed you and has a reputation of being arrogant and "emotional epileptic" (they can come up with any idea at any time without consulting you).

Would you hired that person even is a great graphic designer? Or would you go for someone more dedicated, focused, reliable that can do the job just fine?

I am going for Adobe Premiere or Avid by the end of the year. If Final Cut X works I may get it BY THE END OF 2012.

I will get a copy for me LATER ON, probably early 2012, but I will never change all the post production suites I have, not for crazy unreliable developers.

As an editor we are more humble than people believe, we just wanted FCP 7 to use all cores and communicate with Compressor just fine because when Compressor uses QMaster FCP 7 can not communicate. We just wanted those twicks, better audio tools (NO HAVING A PINK HANDLE OVER A GRAY WAVEFORM, IS A NIGHTMARE TO READ IT). And probably real tome communication with Soundtrack or at least incorporate Soundtrack tools into FCP 7.

That is it, we never asked for "electromagnetic timelines" for "interstellar productions".

Sorry Apple, no excuses, you are an ground up with resources and you just showed a bad legitimated face. Is like dating a pretty girl who is just that A PRETTY GIRL to show of, but not for marriage, she is lazy and still bad in bed.

There are issues of form and bottom , Apple can argue the form, but the bottom line is clear: you are risking your assets into an unreliable video post production software developer.

Today is us, in 3 to 5 years will be the kids who are entering into video post production today. I have been in this media for 22 years now, since the Video Toaster and Atari ST. I have seen systems rise and fell and here I see that pattern. When Apple realized how complex the EXPERIMENT is, they will drop it and start something new with "quantum mechanical timelines".

That is all I have to say.

Stella
Jun 29, 2011, 10:23 AM
This is a clear example that you just canīt make everybody happy...

Either they release it now with the idea of adding features in the upcoming updates (kind of like in iOS where there was no copy/paste, multitasking, etc.) and people say Apple doesn't care about the PRO market because of all the missing features,

OR

They release it one year or two later and the same people say, WTF Apple hasn't updated FCP in years!! they just donīt care about the PRO market anymore.

So they decided to release it now and work on it.

OR

Apple could have managed the release a little better. Apple gave the impression it was ready for "Pro" use. Apple didn't reveal what features were missing and the fact you couldn't import FCP7 projects into FCPX ; this was only found out upon FCPX release.

Had Apple been more upfront with the feature set, all this uproar would probably not have occured.

Apple should take a lesson in Communications. Apple may make great products, most of the time, but its communications always falls way short.

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 10:23 AM
This is a clear example that you just canīt make everybody happy...

Either they release it now with the idea of adding features in the upcoming updates (kind of like in iOS where there was no copy/paste, multitasking, etc.) and people say Apple doesn't care about the PRO market because of all the missing features,

OR

They release it one year or two later and the same people say, WTF Apple hasn't updated FCP in years!! they just donīt care about the PRO market anymore.

So they decided to release it now and work on it.

omg best comment ever.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 10:23 AM
People seriously have to chill the eff out. The features are coming. Yes, at some point Apple has to release the software into the wild so they can make the product better. All 1.0 software is beta software. All 1.0 hardware is beta hardware. If you're a person who is an early adopter, then you should KNOW THIS ALREADY!!! Holy balls.

Also, if there are features missing, the best thing to do is learn the software while still using Final Cut Pro 7. Your software didn't deactivate once FCP X came out, so seriously, grow up.

FCP X will get feature parity or close to FCP 7 very soon. I've been using FCP X casually beside FCP 7, and I gotta say the software is absolutely mind blowing. I'm very impressed, and it's blazingly fast. Once those features come in, and they will come, then you guys can wipe the tears from your face and start learning it. But apparently paying the $300 now to learn it is different than paying the $300 in 4-6 months to learn it because it added a handful of features.

Just pull the heads from your asses and seriously stop bitching. Apple is getting the features in there, and it'll be fairly soon. In the meantime, use FCP 7 for your professional life and learn FCP X on the side so once it has all the features you need, you can make the switch. Otherwise, you're not really a professional if you expected to switch your whole professional life around FCP X on the first day if it did have feature parity. Or, if you are a professional who does that, you're not very bright.

There is so much wrong about your post it's not worthy of a lengthy post pointing them all out. Why don't you "chill out."

"Fairly Soon?" Please define that for us. When is soon? Do you have access to Apple's timeline?

And again - I'll reiterate - no professional would make the switch mid project or just switch on day one. If that's your argument against why people are complaining - find a different one. Because that's not the argument at all.

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 10:24 AM
OR

Apple could have managed the release a little better. Apple gave the impression it was ready for "Pro" use. Apple didn't reveal what features were missing and the fact you couldn't import FCP7 projects into FCPX ; this was only found out upon FCPX release.

Had Apple been more upfront with the feature set, all this uproar would probably not have occured.

Apples Front Page:

The all new Final Cut Pro X! Click here to see what features are missing!

.......

hayesk
Jun 29, 2011, 10:27 AM
^^ ^These two post say it all IMO.

This is a prosumer app at a prosumer price. Pro coming in next release, hopefully.

While it's missing features, it's still a pro app. It's just not for all pros. Price is irrelevant. Anyone using the price to criticize the software (not necessarily you, but anyone) or labelling it as "iMovie Pro, not for real pros" just tells us that they are just a snobby elitist who feels threatened that more people can access pro-level tools.

The term "pro" is a funny one too. Anyone who uses the tool to make a living is a pro. Some seem to think that pro is only those who make TV commercials, shows, or feature movies.

This happened with GarageBand, PageMaker, digital SLR cameras, and even the GUI over a command line. A handful of pros criticized the bejeezus out of the tools saying they can't match whatever workflow they've been using for decades, and tried to say anyone using the new thing surely isn't a real "pro."

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 10:27 AM
If there is any doubt to whom Apple is most excited about marketing the software to - you need only go past the splash screen on the program where it asks if you want to import your iMovies.

Nuff said.

blackpond
Jun 29, 2011, 10:35 AM
This new Final Cut is Apple's "Vista." Of course it will be updated with the next version. But until then, Avid and Adobe will benefit greatly.

Apple should sell off the pro app division. It would do better in the hands of a group of developers who have something to gain from it.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 10:37 AM
To say the least. I completly lost trust in Apple. I mean, they can come up with what ever they want without telling you in advance.

Who says FCP 7 will run under the Tiger?

I presume you meant Lion. And if you had swallowed your pride and had actually read the FAQ instead of just being sulky, you could have read in it that FCP 7 does run under Lion.

ny3ranger
Jun 29, 2011, 10:39 AM
Sucks that apple did that. But why would you buy a product without knowing what features were in it or a review of it. Seems like a 2 way failure to me. Its sucks that apple change the product so much but you should read the features before you buy something and not make assumptions. Apple giving refunds so thats good for people that purchased without knowing the changes.

Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/29/apple-posts-final-cut-pro-x-faq-promises-updates/)


Image (http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/answers.jpg)


Apple has quietly posted (http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/) a FAQ for Final Cut Pro X in response to the many questions and criticisms. (via 9to5Mac (http://9to5mac.com/2011/06/29/apple-officially-responds-to-final-cut-pro-x-complaints-with-new-faq-website/)). The FAQ appears not to be linked from Apple's main site, and has not yet been publicized.The FAQ mirrors some of the same issues addressed in David Pogue's article (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/24/apple-says-multicam-support-is-top-priority-in-fcp-x-and-more/) with responses from Apple product managers, but also gives a few more specifics.

Regarding importing from Final Cut Pro 7, Apple says that due to the many changes there was no way to "translate" old projects without losing or changing data. So, Apple suggests that users continue to use Final Cut Pro 7 for existing projects.

As for Multicam editing, Apple again promises that "it will" support it. The "next major release" will provide "great multicam support".

Another feature they promise will be coming is export of XML. They say they "know how important XML export" is to their users and expect to add it to Final Cut Pro X. A set of APIs will be released in the next few weeks so that 3rd party developers can access the "next-generation XML in Final Cut Pro X". Similiarly, OMF, AAF and EDL support should become available through 3rd parties once the API is available. One third party solution (http://automaticduck.com/products/pefcp/) is already available for OMF and AMF export.

Finally, assigning audio tracks for export is promised for a "summer" update which will "allow you to use metadata tags to categorize your audio clips by type and export them directly from Final Cut Pro X."

Final Cut Pro X was released just last week, but was met with significant complaints due to missing features. The rest of the FAQ (http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/) provides some more details that may be of interest to professional video editors.

Article Link: Apple Posts Final Cut Pro X FAQ, Promises Updates (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/29/apple-posts-final-cut-pro-x-faq-promises-updates/)

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 10:42 AM
Apple gave the impression it was ready for "Pro" use.
And just because it is not ready for all pros yet, does not mean it is not ready any pros at all. Or are you not a real pro if you don't need any of the missing features?

pgwalsh
Jun 29, 2011, 10:47 AM
While it's missing features, it's still a pro app. It's just not for all pros. Price is irrelevant. Anyone using the price to criticize the software (not necessarily you, but anyone) or labelling it as "iMovie Pro, not for real pros" just tells us that they are just a snobby elitist who feels threatened that more people can access pro-level tools.

The term "pro" is a funny one too. Anyone who uses the tool to make a living is a pro. Some seem to think that pro is only those who make TV commercials, shows, or feature movies.

This happened with GarageBand, PageMaker, digital SLR cameras, and even the GUI over a command line. A handful of pros criticized the bejeezus out of the tools saying they can't match whatever workflow they've been using for decades, and tried to say anyone using the new thing surely isn't a real "pro."
You actually made my point in your post. It clearly misses the mark for Professionals in high end video editing.

Thanks! :D

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 10:48 AM
And just because it is not ready for all pros yet, does not mean it is not ready any pros at all. Or are you not a real pro if you don't need any of the missing features?

And just because it's ready for some pros does not mean that those pros who have concerns aren't entitled to voice them.

It seems like 1/2 (or maybe more) of the posts on these threads are people complaining about people complaining. And it's hypocritical (not directed to you) to suggest those Pros "get over it" - since the people posting can't get over people wanting to voice their concerns.

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 10:49 AM
There is so much wrong about your post it's not worthy of a lengthy post pointing them all out. Why don't you "chill out."

"Fairly Soon?" Please define that for us. When is soon? Do you have access to Apple's timeline?

And again - I'll reiterate - no professional would make the switch mid project or just switch on day one. If that's your argument against why people are complaining - find a different one. Because that's not the argument at all.

It is the argument. You just dont want it to be

milo
Jun 29, 2011, 10:50 AM
Great article about the situation.

http://www.onerivermedia.com/blog/?p=322

Basically it boils down to if Apple kills Shake, Color, DVD studio pro etc, and does this to FCP does it really make sense for any professional who depends on software to go the apple route and trust that the app they invest time and money in will even exist in the future, much less get updated as opposed to losing functionality?

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 10:51 AM
And just because it's ready for some pros does not mean that those pros who have concerns aren't entitled to voice them.

It seems like 1/2 (or maybe more) of the posts on these threads are people complaining about people complaining. And it's hypocritical (not directed to you) to suggest those Pros "get over it" - since the people posting can't get over people wanting to voice their concerns.

Are you complaining about people complaining about complaining? Seems we could go on forever......

jmpnop
Jun 29, 2011, 10:52 AM
Go look on any app store and look at how many apps have pro in them. Then go back and re-read what you just said.

Go use FCP7 and see how much better it is than FCPX.

kunia
Jun 29, 2011, 10:53 AM
Next pro app due for an update is Logic.
We'll call it GarageBand Pro...err...Logic Pro X
We'll "borrow" the UI simplicity from GarageBand and implement that into logic.
We'll dump the environment (it's just too complicated for average user), bus routing (but this will come in the next major patch) and multiple midi controller support (but that will come in the next major release).
We'll introduce brand new AU-X plug-ins (sadly all your AU plugins will not work with this new complete re-write of the program), implement new magnetic midi note snapping with auto midi note fill so that the user can write music with just a tap, and simplify flex time tool to just two buttons (it will do 90% of what previous logic release could do - Logic Pro X is so advanced that it will figure out what you want to do with your flex audio and apply the processing in the background without user intervention).
Oh, and the new mixer...wait till you see it...it will be amazing!

Note: since Logic Pro X is a complete rewrite, you will not be able to open any previous Logic projects.

Pros rejoice - Everything just changed in studio. Only $199 on Mac app store.

In other news we've decided to end Mac Pro line of computers. We found that user upgradable/exchangeable times such as Hard Disks and Video Cards and too many I/O ports confuse the average customer. Also, the ability to use non-apple matte monitors puts current mac pro users at a disadvantage - OS X Lion was intended to be displayed on a glossy Apple displays. We also found that Mac pro weight is an issue to an average user - you just can't take it anywhere you want.

Future looks promising:)
adrian

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 10:54 AM
Are you complaining about people complaining about complaining? Seems we could go on forever......

I don't think I've posted once complaining about people voicing their joy over FCPX. I think you'll see a difference :)

milo
Jun 29, 2011, 10:56 AM
In case it hasn't been posted already in one of these threads. Hits the nail on the head.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXepNCs_iZo

jacklink01
Jun 29, 2011, 10:57 AM
If there is any doubt to whom Apple is most excited about marketing the software to - you need only go past the splash screen on the program where it asks if you want to import your iMovies.

Nuff said.

..this is such a dumb argument. seriously. I understand almost every argument except this one. I think it is nice that they give that option for consumers. Ill never use it, but hey.. who cares if they add a feature like that.. it was probably easy to add so they threw it in. Multicam on the other had, will take time to develop.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 11:04 AM
..this is such a dumb argument. seriously. I understand almost every argument except this one. I think it is nice that they give that option for consumers. Ill never use it, but hey.. who cares if they add a feature like that.. it was probably easy to add so they threw it in. Multicam on the other had, will take time to develop.

Perhaps you aren't as well versed as I am in marketing and product development (I have over 20 years of experience). I'm not saying the option isn't good to have. I'm saying the "in your face" prompting right after the splash screen is very telling. It wasn't just a menu option under "file" or what have you.

Again - very telling as to who the (at least initial) marketplace for FCPX was geared towards.

By the way - up until the FAQ was posted (which - by the way - still isn't "advertised" on their site) - can you show me anywhere where it says that FCP 7 documents won't import? Right. I thought not. Yet they make a "splash" offering iMovie imports.

Do the math.

pgwalsh
Jun 29, 2011, 11:06 AM
Great article about the situation.

http://www.onerivermedia.com/blog/?p=322

Basically it boils down to if Apple kills Shake, Color, DVD studio pro etc, and does this to FCP does it really make sense for any professional who depends on software to go the apple route and trust that the app they invest time and money in will even exist in the future, much less get updated as opposed to losing functionality?

Wow.. informative and it gives a very good insight from a professional.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 11:08 AM
It clearly misses the mark for Professionals in high end video editing.

For 100% of all professionals? Or for 90%? Or for 50%?

budgynana
Jun 29, 2011, 11:10 AM
Snip

By the way - up until the FAQ was posted (which - by the way - still isn't "advertised" on their site) - can you show me anywhere where it says that FCP 7 documents won't import? Right. I thought not. Yet they make a "splash" offering iMovie imports.

iMovie compatibility is/was clearly a priority for them above all other options. The fact that FCP7, and older, doesn't even get a mention surely demonstrates to people who they are targeting?

tobyx
Jun 29, 2011, 11:12 AM
Apple are right to provide basics and let third parties handle specialised, niche features and provide support for their own hardware. They haven't dropped the ball here. They've simply released a solid editing app that many people, for some bizarre reason, thought they could switch to right away.

This is just simply wrong. I don't think you understand what the removal of "a few niche features" means. Those "niche features" are used by professional editors on a day-to-day basis. Those "niche features" allow a professional editor to hand his work over to a colorist or to online. Leaving those "niche features" out is like Photoshop being unable to save a layered PSD file. It was so completely unthinkable to the whole professional community that those things would be left out so the outcry is huge now.

Final Cut Pro X is perfectly fine for someone sitting at home and creating a movie from start to finish—another reason why iMovie Pro would be such a suitable name.

These features are used by professionals not once a week or once a month, they are used many times a day, just like the ability to create a professional PDF in InDesign, a layered file in Photoshop, an EDL/XML/AAF of an edit in FCP7/Avid MC/Premiere or an OMF to be mixed in ProTools.

There is no workaround for this! You can edit and publish to YouTube but you can't hand your work to a team for finishing.

No motion picture, no commercial CAN BE EDITED in FCPX due to this. It is completely undoable, unless you want a mindless monkey recreating the work from the ground up later in Media Composer or Premiere or dataconform or Smoke or Flame or whatever.

(The only workaround for now is buying a 3rd party application for around $500 to export to ProTools. Something Final Cut Pro 7 did just fine without it.)

The cool new editing workflow in Final Cut Pro X is completely overshadowed by the fact that in the end, even a perfectly told story cannot be handed over to the next steps in the production pipeline. Editors shouldn't color correct or do effects or sound design or mix on projects because it is not their job or profession and they are simple not able to. Just like a colorist can't edit and a visual effects artist can't mix.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 11:13 AM
And just because it's ready for some pros does not mean that those pros who have concerns aren't entitled to voice them.

The problem I have that there is a difference between voicing concerns and concluding that FCP X is no good for any pro and that Apple clearly does not care about pros at all despite implementing features (or promising to implement) that are clearly only of value to pros.

tobyx
Jun 29, 2011, 11:13 AM
for 100% of all professionals? Or for 90%? Or for 50%?

100%.

budgynana
Jun 29, 2011, 11:14 AM
For 100% of all professionals? Or for 90%? Or for 50%?

We don't use Red here, or anything really really high end for that matter, but the fact remains that this is Apple's top of the line editing application and whereas the old version of supported it this replacement now doesn't. I wouldn't dare state a percentage but fact of the matter is they removed stuff they previously supported in their "pro" app so there will be lots of "professionals" affected.

tobyx
Jun 29, 2011, 11:17 AM
That is all I have to say.

And you, sir, are completely right.

deconstruct60
Jun 29, 2011, 11:17 AM
I also can't think of any new software version that wasn't able to import an older version. I *think* I understand why it wasn't/isn't possible with FCPX - but I also think something could have been done - even with user prompting - to facilitate an import of some sort.


It is extremely doubtful that would work. Unless the user understands well how FCPX projects/events/etc are stored , organized, etc this would only be a process of the blind leading the blind. It is not until the users know to do it the new right way that this kind of process will work well. Otherwise, the prompts will be to questions they don't know the answer to. Users who have zero experience using the product will most likely fail often at doing this too. The result very likely be a zero reduction in the wailing and the users would still have no experience constructing projects.

There will likely be an import process of same sort that was done between different editing products before ( e.g., between FCP7 and Avid). An export to XML that covers a subset, but the gist of the project. That followed by an import of XML. As some point there will be something similar between FCP 7 and FCPX.

WestonHarvey1
Jun 29, 2011, 11:18 AM
Snip



iMovie compatibility is/was clearly a priority for them above all other options. The fact that FCP7, and older, doesn't even get a mention surely demonstrates to people who they are targeting?

No, it wasn't a "priority", it's just a reality. They have the same underlying architecture. They'd have had to go out of their way to make it NOT able to import iMovie projects.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 11:21 AM
100%.
And those professionals who have blogged about FCP X, saying it fulfils their needs and they like it aren't real professionals then?

tobyx
Jun 29, 2011, 11:23 AM
And those professionals who have blogged about FCP X, saying it fulfils their needs and they like it aren't real professionals then?

A professional who cannot or does not care about being able to professionally hand over their work to other professionals is not a professional.

He might not *have to* in every case. There are people working solo and doing it fine and professionally. But he has to be *able* to.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 11:24 AM
A professional who cannot or does not care about being able to professionally hand over their work to other professionals is not a professional.

So, anybody selling directly to consumers (and being self-employed) is not a professional?

tobyx
Jun 29, 2011, 11:26 AM
So, anybody selling directly to consumers (and being self-employed) is not a professional?

Not saying that. Excuse my edit above. What if your client asks you "Hm, we really need to work on the color in these shots, I'm sorry."

Are they going to say "Sorry, can't do that, I worked in a software that doesn't allow me to hand this over to something more sophisticated. I'm kind of locked in... Hm..." ?

(Don't get me started on exporting image sequences of raw footage and reconforming them by eye-matching later.)

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 11:26 AM
No, it wasn't a "priority", it's just a reality. They have the same underlying architecture. They'd have had to go out of their way to make it NOT able to import iMovie projects.

There's a difference between having the ability and making it a pop up screen as soon as the program runs. I don't think anyone is arguing against the ability to import projects - in fact, the more formats that can be imported the better. If you don't see the distinction...

darbus69
Jun 29, 2011, 11:28 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)

What strikes me as odd is how many times in that FAQ they say that they understand how important a certain feature is to users. If they undertand that, then why didn't they put it in in the first place? :confused:

Developer Cycles and Product releases for features don't always coincide.

It's a clear indication that they had a choice: Release in June or extend several Betas to key developers for the next 2 quarters and then release it, and still receive complaints for change.

They chose to release the new architecture and in a few weeks will come the Developer APIs to extend support so by the end of this quarter and entering the next quarter both 3rd parties and Apple will release plugins and major updates to this new flag ship editing software.

This ends the several years complaint that FCP is dead,etc., and opens a new can of worms on it not being feature perfect.

Guess what? List the number of major areas Apple is simultaneously competing on and then compare what Apple was doing back in 1998. Night and Day.

Apple is spewing out store after store, market after market for major target markets at a rate never seen in this corporation but it's never fast enough for some very vocal customers.

In 1998 Apple [as a former employee so I know wherefore I speak] had 3 months of capital to keep the doors open and now they have $70 Billion in the bank and have leap frog'd Microsoft in valuation. And all during one of the worst global recessions since The Great Depression.

Take a long pause and think about exactly what Apple has accomplished, all during Steve fighting for his own life.

Yet people continue to whine that this 1.0 product isn't the greatest solution for present and future approaches to NLE.

And all for $299. Truly pathetic.

I paid $299 in 1996 for Openstep User/Developer as a student before working at NeXT Inc.

Seriously, get some perspective folks.

+1
as an amateur who use Educational version of FCP for years I was worried that I could no longer afford to continue, but at 299 and a little patience I can continue on as a "prosumer" and do the occasional paying jobs-I for one am thankful.

Keebler
Jun 29, 2011, 11:30 AM
I think it is because they were already considering jumping ship due to FCP falling behind to competitors... but the promise of the next shinny new release kept them from doing so. But now, the decision process has become a lot clearer.

good point. i guess they were waiting to hear about the new release.

tobyx
Jun 29, 2011, 11:32 AM
good point. i guess they were waiting to hear about the new release.

People will calm down and just start clicking the Pr (Premiere) icon that has been sitting in their dock for years. I had a license for a very very long time, just never clicked it.

My work only edits on Avid Media Composer anyway so we could care less.

deconstruct60
Jun 29, 2011, 11:32 AM
(The only workaround for now is buying a 3rd party application for around $500 to export to ProTools. Something Final Cut Pro 7 did just fine without it.)


$299 + $500 < $999

The horror, a solution that is $200 more affordable.

cfurlin
Jun 29, 2011, 11:36 AM
Is this whole debacle sounds like it may end up in class action lawsuit land.

I know. And while we are at it, let's make sure we sue Apple for square corners on the MacBooks. I have life-threatening bruises from those corners! :rolleyes:

WestonHarvey1
Jun 29, 2011, 11:37 AM
There's a difference between having the ability and making it a pop up screen as soon as the program runs. I don't think anyone is arguing against the ability to import projects - in fact, the more formats that can be imported the better. If you don't see the distinction...

I don't think it means anything other than being a good introduction to an alien environment. It's better than a sample project, since it would be your own familiar work, if you happen to have an iMovie project laying around. Since you can't import FCP7, this is a good way to start the learning process.

handsome pete
Jun 29, 2011, 11:47 AM
$299 + $500 < $999

The horror, a solution that is $200 more affordable.

That $500 only covers one of the problems with the current release. If third party solutions end up being the only solution, then who's to say it won't cost $2000 to get a fully functional FCP?

You're also leaving out Compressor, Motion, DVDStudio, Soundtrack that was included in the original suite.

jwdsail
Jun 29, 2011, 11:51 AM
Wow..

Considering major releases are usually spaced a year apart, this is disappointing. I was one of the people saying that some of these missing features were related to changes in QuickTime/Lion and an 1.1 update would drop w/ Lion to resolve many of these issues...

Ouch.

I have to say, that if Apple isn't going to fix the glaring issues w/ FCX by the Lion release, they should offer FCS3 for sale to those willing to pay for it, until FCX is fully cooked.. At least the option to buy additional seats / license codes using existing on-site media at locations w/ existing installs... Even better would be to allow a free download of FCS3 when you buy FCX... (receipt code)

It would have been better to let FCS3 remain the video editing suite for sale for another year while they *finished* FCX..

I'm still in wait-and-see mode, looking for info on using Conduit and DV Matte Blast with FCX, and waiting for Lion before making any serious decisions... My FCS2 still works fine. Wish I'd picked up a copy of FCS3 now tho...

deconstruct60
Jun 29, 2011, 11:52 AM
iMovie compatibility is/was clearly a priority for them above all other options. The fact that FCP7, and older, doesn't even get a mention surely demonstrates to people who they are targeting?

No. it demonstrates that iMovie is already aligned with the core changes incorporated into FCPX. Perhaps you missed the story a couple days ago???

Back when iMovie was called "First Cut" .....
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1177184


Does it offer to open iMovie version 2 files ?

FCP7 files are not. Folks may wish they were but there are not. Import doesn't work yet for those so it is not offered. It is really that simple.

Stella
Jun 29, 2011, 11:57 AM
delete.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 12:04 PM
I don't think it means anything other than being a good introduction to an alien environment. It's better than a sample project, since it would be your own familiar work, if you happen to have an iMovie project laying around. Since you can't import FCP7, this is a good way to start the learning process.

You don't think it means anything? Ok. You are entitled to think whatever you want. Now tell me what professional video editor has projects in iMovie. Now tell me again that it isn't telling that the first screen after the splash is a pop up asking you to import iMovie projects and say with a straight face that you don't see the point.

deconstruct60
Jun 29, 2011, 12:04 PM
That $500 only covers one of the problems with the current release. If third party solutions end up being the only solution, then who's to say it won't cost $2000 to get a fully functional FCP?

Oh the horror , FCPX + add ons cost $400-500 less the Avid Media Composer. Additionally, there is a large gap between Avid (and many other high end "pro" apps) pricing and FCP 7 pricing. That gap is something Apple has always leveraged. Not so much with Premiere though (which is why the core system price dropped to $299 ).

The costs for these more narrow niche markets probably will go up since Apple won't be able to amortize the feature costs over every user. When features are bundled for everyone then everyone pays. If split out into "add ons" the folks that need them pay for them. The folks who needs lots of "add ons" will pay more.

I would not be surprised if some folks end up paying $1,200-1,400 (i.e., more that the old $999 price) to flush out the suite if they actually use all the pieces on a day to day basis. However, the overall cost for average individual seats could still drop a couple hundred bucks if not several hundred (e.g., the licensing changes "per employee" as opposed to "per seat").

deconstruct60
Jun 29, 2011, 12:07 PM
Now tell me again that it isn't telling that the first screen after the splash is a pop up asking you to import iMovie projects and say with a straight face that you don't see the point.

The first time you start the program or every time? In the former case ... no I don't see the point. In normal usage after first time, the users never sees this. So it has no point.

In the latter case, seems like a preference you'd want to turn off... so it is a bug. This is a "do once" thing. After than the normal process is to create events. Again you have no point.

teloche
Jun 29, 2011, 12:09 PM
The first time you start the program or every time? In the former case ... no I don't see the point. In normal usage after first time, the users never sees this. So it has no point.

im so glad i did not buy fcpx, i have been using friends computer to try it and its absolutely backwards, this is for the ipad, should be a fcp ipad and a fcp pro, this is not pro at all

Ted13
Jun 29, 2011, 12:11 PM
I'm very glad to hear that FCP7 will work under Lion. What Apple doesn't tell us though, is where one can get new copies of FCP7/FCS3. They need to do that.

WestonHarvey1
Jun 29, 2011, 12:30 PM
You don't think it means anything? Ok. You are entitled to think whatever you want. Now tell me what professional video editor has projects in iMovie. Now tell me again that it isn't telling that the first screen after the splash is a pop up asking you to import iMovie projects and say with a straight face that you don't see the point.

My hypothesis works better than yours. For yours to work, there would have to be actual evidence that Apple intends for FCPX to be a consumer level product. It's not priced like one, it's not designed like one, it's not featured like one and all the missing features either have or will have workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations.

It's just the most obvious thing it can import right now, so they put the import in a prominent place *in case* you have something already to experiment with.

jaduffy108
Jun 29, 2011, 12:40 PM
So, anybody selling directly to consumers (and being self-employed) is not a professional?

Manu...deconstruct60....you guys just dont "get it" because you clearly have never worked in broadcast TV / film post production.

You may be a great, artistic editor..as good as any "pro" on the planet. That has nothing to do with this debacle. I happen to think, as many of my colleagues in TV post...that FCP X is awesome in many ways. The bummer is...we can't interface with ANYONE! As someone correctly pointed out in the comments section of David Pogue's (NY Times) blog.. "Apple blew up the bridge to the post production workflow." So it doesn't matter how awesome FCP X is. I can't get my job done using it. "Cutting the story" is a small part of what we need in an editing app.

I don't have the time to list and explain why FCP X is a 100% non-starter for pro editors working in TV broadcast / film workflows that involve audio houses, color correction, etc, etc, etc. The list is simply too long! Go read David Pogue's blog at the NY Times, especially the 15(!!) pages of comments.

Apple, by leaving out these "features" has made their position abundantly clear. They aren't stupid. Apple doesn't care about being part of the tv broadcast / film world anymore. They're targeting editors that want to create content for the iPad, vimeo and youtube. That's a much larger market, so I can't blame them. I just don't think they realize the extent of the backlash this is going to create....not just from pro editors and post houses that have invested massive amounts of $$, but from educational centers that teach FCP (Video Symphony, J&R, etc)...film schools like USC / UCLA. They can't teach an EOL'd product like FCP7 and you can't cut a film on FCPX nor use FCP X in a TV post workflow. They will drop FCP like a hot potato. That will kill FCP demand.

Apple may fix some of the issues, but their FAQ is only going to add fuel to the fire. It was insulting actually. We need 3rd party plugins (bandaids) that make our jobs more complicated in order to use FCP X?? Gee thanks for thinking of us Apple. :rolleyes:

A LOT of trust has been lost and honestly...I think most in the tv broadcast / film worlds feel pretty screwed over. While I could use FCP X at home and enjoy it thoroughly....I, for one, will now purchase AVID media composer for home use because I feel FCP jobs will be in very short supply in the coming years. I need to refresh my Avid skills and be prepared. This is my livelihood. Believe me, I'm not alone.

AVID and Adobe are throwing a big party this weekend.

manu chao
Jun 29, 2011, 12:42 PM
Not saying that. Excuse my edit above. What if your client asks you "Hm, we really need to work on the color in these shots, I'm sorry."

Are they going to say "Sorry, can't do that, I worked in a software that doesn't allow me to hand this over to something more sophisticated. I'm kind of locked in... Hm..." ?

What you describe could be the difference between a good professional and a not-so-good professional. I am simply saying that even the not-so-good professionals can make a living and are thus by definition professionals. And therefore FCP X can be used successfully by professionals, just not the sort of professionals you have in mind.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 12:44 PM
My hypothesis works better than yours. For yours to work, there would have to be actual evidence that Apple intends for FCPX to be a consumer level product. It's not priced like one, it's not designed like one, it's not featured like one and all the missing features either have or will have workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations.

It's just the most obvious thing it can import right now, so they put the import in a prominent place *in case* you have something already to experiment with.

Apple intends FCPX to be a prosumer app which they are hoping (at this point) professionals can use too or in the near future based on their updates. So your hypothesis (and that's all it is) is based on an incorrect assumption that I (or anyone) stated that FCPX was for consumers. I know I didn't say that.

P.S. It is designed like one. And while not an entry level price - it's priced smartly so that any Prosumer (or Consumer for that matter) can justify the additional expense for more powerful tools that iMovie allows. Especially if they were holding out because FCP was too expensive at $999

Again - do the math.

handsome pete
Jun 29, 2011, 12:49 PM
My hypothesis works better than yours. For yours to work, there would have to be actual evidence that Apple intends for FCPX to be a consumer level product. It's not priced like one, it's not designed like one, it's not featured like one and all the missing features either have or will have workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations.


The evidence is in this release. FCP in the past has been geared to broadcast professionals. FCPX as it stands now isn't. They tried to marry their consumer product with their pro product, but somehow lost a ton of the pro features along the way.

Your mention of workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations are all speculative at this point.

As for pricing (which I don't think is a real argument anyway), how is $300 not more in the consumer price range?

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 12:50 PM
Apple may fix some of the issues, but their FAQ is only going add fuel to the fire. It was insulting actually. We need 3rd party plugins (bandaids) that make our jobs more complicated in order to use FCP X?? Gee thanks for thinking of us Apple. :rolleyes:



So wait. What you are saying is that this doesn't "just work" ? ;) ;) ;)

Cydonia
Jun 29, 2011, 01:01 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)

If I'm reading the FAQ correctly, multicam support won't be something that a free update will provide, but rather a major release? Does that mean another year+ away?

It's not entirely clear. You can't charge for updates on the App Store. So Apple would have to put out an entirely new FCP app in the app store to charge people. Apple hasn't run into this yet. I'd guess that the next major FCP update will be free, and given the wording of the FAQ, I'd say that's pretty likely.

arn

In app purchase for extra bolt-ons?

jaduffy108
Jun 29, 2011, 01:02 PM
What you describe could be the difference between a good professional and a not-so-good professional. I am simply saying that even the not-so-good professionals can make a living and are thus by definition professionals. And therefore FCP X can be used successfully by professionals, just not the sort of professionals you have in mind.

oh Manu...

Cutting a student film?...FCP X=great.
Cutting a wedding video?...FCP X = awesome.
Cutting a low budget doc?...FCP X = fantastic.
Are you being paid for your editing skills? Yes...congrats, you're a professional editor.

You are exactly the "pro" Apple is targeting with FCP X. Enjoy it. FCP X is a well designed, thought out application for **you**...the "one-man-show" editor.

I love student films and low budget docs. Really.

I think we need to distinguish between "pro editor" and "pro workflow". It's the later that is a disaster.
And a LOT of people have invested blood, sweat and tears(!)...plus post houses, schools, etc have invested 100's of thousands of $$ into FCP because we/they were told it was a long term solution, that it would be supported, etc. Apple just f'd us.

WestonHarvey1
Jun 29, 2011, 01:16 PM
The evidence is in this release. FCP in the past has been geared to broadcast professionals. FCPX as it stands now isn't. They tried to marry their consumer product with their pro product, but somehow lost a ton of the pro features along the way.

Your mention of workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations are all speculative at this point.

As for pricing (which I don't think is a real argument anyway), how is $300 not more in the consumer price range?

They didn't try to marry the products. iMovie was R&D for FCPX. A proof of concept. The goal was always a paradigm shift in pro editing.

I'm not speculating. Apple said so, see the topic of this thread.

$300 didn't used to be a lot of money for consumer software, but it is a lot now. Larger user bases in general and mobile software pricing has created large downward price pressure. Look at OS X upgrades - they're probably $29 forever from now on. $300 is an astronomical price today.

tobyx
Jun 29, 2011, 01:21 PM
$299 + $500 < $999

The horror, a solution that is $200 more affordable.

And about as elegant as making a screenshot off of something in Photoshop you need to send to a client.

And still only fixes sound mixing and editing after. You still can't do scrap with the picture.

franbelda
Jun 29, 2011, 01:28 PM
New FCPX Workflow!

To do the basic stuff other NLE (including FCP 7) do you need 4 different softwares: FCPX, Compressor, Automatic Duck, Media Express (or its AJA counterpart).

Digitize your material from tape using Media Express, switch over to FCPX, edit, render out your movie, import it in media express, edit to tape, switch to FCPX export audio tracks using Automatic Duck. Revision time: recut your edit in your (single and one-per-project) timeline, render out again, go back to media express, try to do an insert and cross your fingers.

Clunky, imprecise, prone to a myriad of errors, unacceptable in a collaborative, pressure-filled, creative business like TV or film. It is not professional. You know what would be a dreamy? Having a super-software where you could do all of these every day, run of the mill, bread-and-butter chores. Oh wait, there are many super-softwares that do this! Oh joy there's Avid, Premiere Pro, Sony Vegas, Lightworks, FCP7 (now defunct). FCPX? Not even close.

Oh and we don't care if you consider yourself a professional because your auntie Bessie paid you 200 (or 2000) dollars to cut all her old videos together. I also play guitar and sing horribly every other weekend at a friend's bar for tips, that does not make me a professional musician. It makes me an enthusiast. FCPX is a great software for enthusiasts, an apalling one for Pros.

tobyx
Jun 29, 2011, 01:39 PM
Oh and we don't care if you consider yourself a professional because your auntie Bessie paid you 200 (or 2000) dollars to cut all her old videos together. I also play guitar and sing horribly every other weekend at a friend's bar for tips, that does not make me a professional musician. It makes me an enthusiast. FCPX is a great software for enthusiasts, an apalling one for Pros.

Yes. What he said.

NickFalk
Jun 29, 2011, 01:40 PM
Cutting a wedding video?...FCP X = awesome.


Actually wedding videos without the multicam function will be the exact opposite of awesome...

ChrisA
Jun 29, 2011, 01:42 PM
Why did Apple not call this "feature incomplete Alpha" release?

People now are saying "I can't use this." And they will need to switch to some other product. Had they simply done nothing else but change the title to include the world "Alpha" then people rather than saying "I can't use this" might say "This might be really good".

It seems Apple is looking for short term profit, selling a few copies now and loosing the long term as people walk away from Apple's Mac platform

gstrocco
Jun 29, 2011, 01:46 PM
APPLE FAQ:
Can I hide Events that I am not working on?
Yes. You can hide Events in Final Cut Pro X by moving them out of the Final Cut Events folder. In the Finder, navigate to the /Users/username/Movies folder and create a new folder. Then move the Events you are not using out of the Final Cut Events folder and into your new folder. The moved Events will no longer appear in Final Cut Pro X. If your Events are located on an external drive, you can move the Events to a new folder on that drive, or you can simply unmount the drive.


Seriously? How retarded is that?
They couldn't think of a better way to hide events that you're not working on than having to leave the application and start re-arranging your working folders in Finder?

jaduffy108
Jun 29, 2011, 01:57 PM
Actually wedding videos without the multicam function will be the exact opposite of awesome...


Oh well...i was trying to say something nice about FCP X ;)

Thanks for correcting me...

Reach
Jun 29, 2011, 02:00 PM
Lots of pro features guys!
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/pro-features/

And most of the hyperbole claiming FCP X has no pro features is clearly insane anyway. FCP X has more great features than it misses. But I do understand that the missing ones tend to stick out. :p

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 02:12 PM
APPLE FAQ:
Can I hide Events that I am not working on?
Yes. You can hide Events in Final Cut Pro X by moving them out of the Final Cut Events folder. In the Finder, navigate to the /Users/username/Movies folder and create a new folder. Then move the Events you are not using out of the Final Cut Events folder and into your new folder. The moved Events will no longer appear in Final Cut Pro X. If your Events are located on an external drive, you can move the Events to a new folder on that drive, or you can simply unmount the drive.


Seriously? How retarded is that?
They couldn't think of a better way to hide events that you're not working on than having to leave the application and start re-arranging your working folders in Finder?

All of this jury-rigging to get FCPX to work (for now) and perhaps in the future is pretty anti-Apple's philosophy of making things easier/more intuitive/etc. Even the most rabid Apple fan has to concede that.

Lots of pro features guys!
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/pro-features/

And most of the hyperbole claiming FCP X has no pro features is clearly insane anyway. FCP X has more great features than it misses. But I do understand that the missing ones tend to stick out. :p

That page is great marketing. It's also a bit misleading as are the other pages which don't point on features currently not available. The page was created specifically to speak to all the negativity that has been written/posted thus far. Much like a defense or prosecuting attorney sends over boxes of discovery when the other is really only looking for a single piece of information. I

Information/feature overload will definitely convince those not taking a hard look at the software to conclude that it's a perfect app and can do anything.

The Captain
Jun 29, 2011, 02:30 PM
A lot of this debate over the missing functionality for me is just splitting hairs, the real problem is the way Apple feels the need to dictate a workflow for the user. Apple does not lead me anywhere, my clients do! It's my clients demands that drive my creativity, not Steve Jobs whims, and what FCPX gives me is not what my clients are asking for, and takes away things they are. What apple makes is just a tool to help me make give my clients the best possible product, and the new FC limits my options to do that. Not just with the missing features, which are fundament for my clients (regardless of what Apple thinks tapes support will be needed far into the future), but with the workflow options within the program. It's just too limiting.

Ever since FCS 2 came out a group of us that go to lunch regularly have been thinking on what Apple could do with a future program, and what we all came up with was something more like a baby Avid DS. And editing software that would have the compositor and color corrector fully integrated within the editing interface but each with it's own separate functions. Kinda like how Color had rooms for each workflow, but within FC. Sure there is a CC in FCPX, but it's a simpletons CC compared to the tools Color gave us. I even thought that working node tree as an option in FC like shake had, would be great.

But Apple didn't got that route. They tried to make the options more "simple". Well as someone pointed out on another thread, complexity is freedom. Apple has taken away a lot of freedom for the editor within the program, freedom to customize the interface for specific task for instance (big problem), and freedom to change up workflows to complete a task within the timeline itself as an example.

Creativity is not a top down affair. Artist need more tools, not simpler ones, to expand on their ideas. Sure a good editor could cut a movie in imovie, but if he used that program for his whole career, all his movies would end up looking kinda the same. It just doesn't give you many creative options, and neither does FCPX.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 02:49 PM
By the way - for those insisting that it's not a big deal to keep both FCP 7 and also have FCPX on your system and just switch between based on the project you're doing should read this...

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4722

Quite simply put - the programs aren't playing nicely together people are finding out and now Apple recommends partitioning your hard drive with fresh OSX installs on both.

Oh yeah - and reboot every time you want to switch which app you're going to use....

Simple! ;)

champ01
Jun 29, 2011, 03:03 PM
I really feel for the high end video professionals who wanted to like FCPX. Apple's my favourite company and I actually WANT to use everything they make. So when an application like Motion doesn't take care of my needs and I have to go to After Effects, I actually feel like I'm corrupting my Mac experience somehow... despite how much I actually love Adobe's products. I'm sure FCPX users feel the same way.

This I think is one of the mayor reasons why long time users are so pissed.

We backed Apple every time when others "outsiders" were bashing Apple for no other reason then bashing.

I also think that the respect for Apple did not only came from the massive success they made with the iPod, iPhone and iPad etc.... their was love before that and that love came from their loyal user base (and lots of professionals are in that category)

FCPX was release to early and the loyal user base were expecting something truly magical but which turned out to be a downer after those long years waiting.
Its not that FCPX is a joke or that FCP7 was nice to work with its about something much closer to our hearts and its called respect.

I'm not gonna say anymore that Apple should do this or should do that because Apple really can handle itself but personally I wouldn't mind if they attract more beta users and listen to what they have to say and don't kill a previous "pro" application that fast when the new one is only part usable.

samcraig
Jun 29, 2011, 03:04 PM
You have to watch this video from Conan's editors about FCPX

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxKYuF9pENQ

Hysterical.