Apple Launching New Final Cut Pro X Marketing Push to Win Back Professionals

[thermodynamic]

Be great if they started caring about pro's again. I love watching the old G5 launch videos with Jobs talking about powerful new Nvidia 6800 and the like

Be nice to see that kind of interest again.

Apple exists to serve itself, while making customers believe they are getting something of value. And Apple, many times, has put customers in the ditch (one of the more recent examples not being the migration to Intel but removing Rosetta in 2011, rendering 'universal' apps useless...)

The fact they ignore a serious target market should be revealing by now. Apple prefers iStuff. It's a shame, the Mac Pro tower literally beat the pants over its competition in terms of a quality build, and was a unit I would openly praise (and still do, but the hardware is sorely dated...)

 

[Colpeas]

Want to win back professionals? Then give the Mac Pro a decent update already! So overdue by now...

 

[DesterWallaboo]

Are there any professionals left still using macs? Too little, too late IMHO.

Yes.... yes we are.

 

[Hermodorus]

"Professional" sometimes means "Broadcast"

What's with the #trendyprog bashing of "professional" users here? Some of these memes (eg: that grumpy editors are being displaced by a new generation of self-taught FCP X users) are simply fallacious. I was personally intrigued after experimenting with FCP X recently (particularly how they reworked color correction); but at times it feels like a 64-bit Instagram for video.

At my facility in NYC, we have a storage network with GigE connectivity to each Mac Pro workstation (and a few iMac workstations as well) - all running FCP 7. We have certain policies and procedures in place that allow us to collaboratively work on projects, track assets, and layoff our content to SD and HD tape, as well as to LTO. Because we are both a broadcast facility and a university, we have unique needs: particularly in the realms of preservation & archives, as well as the routing, playout and delivery of our content/streams through RF and IP media networks.

We need ethernet ports, PCI slots (AJA's IOxt Thunderbolt to HD-SDI devices for our iMac workstations [lolz] aren't cheap), and DVD burners in our hardware. We need our software to play nice with networked storage. We need to monitor signals on "broadcast-quality" monitors (that's *ProTalk* for all you F4NB0IZ out there). FCPX simply does not meet these needs, and is an operational hindrance.

I'm hopeful that Apple will offer the tools our broadcast facility needs in the future. But we've essentially moved on to exploring Premiere, and recognize FCP7 will be phased out eventually. Everything dies.

 

[DesterWallaboo]

What's with the #trendyprog bashing of "professional" users here? Some of these memes (eg: that grumpy editors are being displaced by a new generation of self-taught FCP X users) are simply fallacious. I was personally intrigued after experimenting with FCP X recently (particularly how they reworked color correction); but at times it feels like a 64-bit Instagram for video.

At my facility in NYC, we have a storage network with GigE connectivity to each Mac Pro workstation (and a few iMac workstations as well) - all running FCP 7. We have certain policies and procedures in place that allow us to collaboratively work on projects, track assets, and layoff our content to SD and HD tape, as well as to LTO. Because we are both a broadcast facility and a university, we have unique needs: particularly in the realms of preservation & archives, as well as the routing, playout and delivery of our content/streams through RF and IP media networks.

We need ethernet ports, PCI slots (AJA's IOxt Thunderbolt to HD-SDI devices for our iMac workstations [lolz] aren't cheap), and DVD burners in our hardware. We need our software to play nice with networked storage. We need to monitor signals on "broadcast-quality" monitors (that's *ProTalk* for all you F4NB0IZ out there). FCPX simply does not meet these needs, and is an operational hindrance.

I'm hopeful that Apple will offer the tools our broadcast facility needs in the future. But we've essentially moved on to exploring Premiere, and recognize FCP7 will be phased out eventually. Everything dies.

You nailed it.

 

[tevion5]

Apple exists to serve itself, while making customers believe they are getting something of value. And Apple, many times, has put customers in the ditch (one of the more recent examples not being the migration to Intel but removing Rosetta in 2011, rendering 'universal' apps useless...)

The fact they ignore a serious target market should be revealing by now. Apple prefers iStuff. It's a shame, the Mac Pro tower literally beat the pants over its competition in terms of a quality build, and was a unit I would openly praise (and still do, but the hardware is sorely dated...)

The Rosetta stuff I can partly understand though as it forces devs to make their apps intel native which has clear performance benefits. But it is annoying not having some workaround for using old apps. I can haut power up my g5 if I have the need.

Yes, I'm sure the pro market could mean serious money that apple may still be interested in. I mean virtually every recording studio on the planet uses mac pros. That alone has to be something worth their time.

----------

Want to win back professionals? Then give the Mac Pro a decent update already! So overdue by now...

For once it actually is this simple. Ivy bridge i7 here, gtx 680 over there. Few more PC like upgrades and Ta da. It's not exactly coming up with the iPhone.

 

[toke lahti]

Final Cut Pro X really is one of the best home movie editors I've ever used.

Also maybe the most expensive home movie editor?
(Last real upgrade to iMovie was, w00t, in 2010?)

 

[deconstruct60]

We need our software to play nice with networked storage.

There is a specific methodology but it does work on some network storage set ups. To say it doesn't at all isn't particularly accurate. Certainly, there are some media catalog systems it doesn't work well with but zero doesn't really fly.

We need to monitor signals on "broadcast-quality" monitors (that's *ProTalk* for all you F4NB0IZ out there). FCPX simply does not meet these needs, and is an operational hindrance.

Creeping up on almost a year ago Matrox , Blackmagic, and Aja dropped drivers and tools to work with some of their connections to reference monitors:

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/new...l-update-their-broadcast-out-drivers-for-fcpx

Again rather curious stance given the incremental progress over 2012 that needs are not being met at all. Again there probably are legacy equipment that is part of some folks infrastructure that isn't covered.

I'm hopeful that Apple will offer the tools our broadcast facility needs in the future. But we've essentially moved on to exploring Premiere, and recognize FCP7 will be phased out eventually. Everything dies.

It really isn't solely up to Apple. One of the issues is that many of the integrations between 3rd party cards/equipment/filesytems/etc require contributions from both 3rd party vendors too. Some of the integration responsibility they are pushing off to the folks we sell those other components. Decoupling somewhat allows Apple to go at whatever pace they pick and the 3rd parties at their own pace (if at all).

Very similar to graphics drivers. There is a layer on top that Apple does but the low level stuff is all Nvidia's and AMD's responsibility.

There are organizations that like to look for "one stop shopping" ( or "one throat to choke"). Apple never was keen on filling that kind of role but played with it from time to time. Right now they have an awfully big throat, so nobody is going to choke them anyway. Selling product support services is not a targeted growth sector for them.

 

[deconstruct60]

And Apple, many times, has put customers in the ditch (one of the more recent examples not being the migration to Intel but removing Rosetta in 2011, rendering 'universal' apps useless...)

Nonsense. Universal apps work just fine, barring they are not using deprecated Carbon (or a much smaller set) of deprecated APIs, the Intel "half" of the application will just work.

Rosetta was only need for PPC only apps. Those apps were not Universal at all. In fact, they are apps (and drivers ) that ignored the Intel transition completely. Folks who were relying on those apps for the long term were burying their heads in the sand if they didn't think that represented a very significant problem for them to resolve. Rosetta was only a transition technology. Apple had previously cut off Classic (Mac OS 9) support and before that 68K support.

The fact they ignore a serious target market should be revealing by now. Apple prefers iStuff.

Apple prefers stuff that people actually buy. Folks buy or don't buy but they do something. A higher cost ( Mac Pro) doesn't necessary get a "get out jail free card". Apple makes money on everything. If they sell more of everything they'll make money and show growth. The combination of those two make the stockholders happy.

Markets were the number people in it is highly stagnant aren't very interesting to Apple. Markets with very high legacy sunk cost infrastructure, high barriers to entry , and semi-monopolistic control over delivery isn't particularly interesting. Those markets tend to be relatively stagnant over time in term of being a system supplier. Those kinds of users of equipment tend to buy and then squat for as long as market conditions permit.

 

[SomeDudeAsking]

This means a new Mac Pro is coming.

Wasn't that the same promise last year? And the year before that? And the year before that? The Mac Pro is becoming the Duke Nukem of computers.

 

[djdj]

What task can't your friends do if they used FCP X ?

The biggest issue is integration with third party high-end software tools. It just isn't there with X... not by a long shot.

 

[handsome pete]

Herewith asked.

Can't wait to see which it will be, but I sure can guess!

Well??

Please, stop pretending you have any clue as to the workflow or hardware requirements of everyone else out there. I've always been one to champion Apple's efforts with FCPX but have been honest about why it won't work for my company's workflow, networked storage, decks, etc. FCPX simply does not work with our setup, nor does it make sense with any workaround we'd have to deal with. Sorry if that offends you.

The idea that "professionals" abandoned Final Cut X is pretty silly and unsupported.

It's probably because they never adopted it in the first place. Most established users either transitioned to Avid or Adobe or are still sticking it out with FCP7. This isn't meant to bash FCPX at all. It's just hasn't gained significant marketshare in the professional community.


And a quick disclaimer here. The term "professional" these days is so blurred that it's pointless to use it anymore. Anyone who makes a living doing said work is a professional. That includes the large studio/broadcast collaborative teams along with the home office single users. At the end of the day the software is only a tool. The myth of the old, unwilling to try new things, curmudgeonly editor is just that. A myth. These are the same people who used to have to cut films by actually cutting and splicing film, or editing deck to deck, and so on. You really don't think they'd welcome a way to make it easier to do their craft? That's what they've been doing throughout the evolution of film/video production. The whole whine fest from both sides of this argument is tiresome. Just use whatever will get the job done. I've been an FCP editor a long time now and have used Premiere on projects when necessary. I'm moving to Avid solely because that's what my next job calls for. I welcome the future progress of all of these programs. The blind loyalty to one platform is just annoying and ruins any legitimate discussion on the topic.

 

[plysat]

Work in environment with six editing suites and still can't understand how FCPX can cater for multi-user environments at present - echoing the sentiments of an earlier poster about this.. We can't just work with attached storage.. Gigabit ethernet support is a must.

Personally I like FCPX, but we may be forced to Premiere come upgrade time unless they can address the management of the "fileless" structure Projects and Events.

X functions just fine using centrally served media over GB ethernet. The only thing local is render files, and if you set it up on a SAN, you can leave those on the server ask well. Lot's of misinformation flying around... Look, if you don't *like* it, or it doesn't meet a specific need you have... fine. But all this whining about how Apple has "abandoned" the poor pros is utter horseshi*t. There a plenty of NLE's and OS's to choose from. Just use another one. Get over it. But you're missing out on an awfully good one if you do.

 

[digitalgum]

Maybe we can get Samsung to release a new Mac Pro.

LoooooooL!!

Apple need that sort of competition....

would LOVE Samsung to make a very hackintosh friendly desktop PC with a chassis that looks like those concept mac pro's!

oh and obviously sell it for a third of the price that Apple sell Mac Pros for.. I'll buy 3!

 

[deconstruct60]

LoooooooL!!

Apple need that sort of competition....

They already have that sort of competition.

" ... Workstation market leaders have played quite consistent roles over the past two years: HP holds steady with its leading market share, Dell's share slides, Lenovo's share gains, and Fujitsu holds steady, in a distant minority position. That trend held in Q4'12, with two exceptions.

First, Lenovo broke a 7-quarter long streak of quarterly share gains, declining modestly to 12.9%. And second, climbing to 42.8%, HP resumed its market gains, gains that had stalled since the first quarter of 2011. ... "
http://jonpeddie.com/publications/workstation_report/

Apple is a distant "also ran" in the workstation market. They aren't a Tier 1 player. It is more so do they even want to compete or not. Not whether there is competitive to their products.

Competition isn't the primary issue. From same report:

"... All told, workstation vendors shipped about 934 thousand branded workstations, essentially flat from the third quarter's 932.3 thousand. And considering that Q4 is typically, cyclically stronger than Q3, flat isn't great. ... "

Lack of overall market growth is. It is whether is a growing pool of buyers that is an issue. Equally other Mac products volume numbers isn't the issue, but Mac Pro probably needs to contribute to growth ( or be axed for something that will ).

 

[Colpeas]

For once it actually is this simple. Ivy bridge i7 here, gtx 680 over there. Few more PC like upgrades and Ta da. It's not exactly coming up with the iPhone.

I prefer having a dual-CPU system, which is not achievable with i7. Xeons also seem to run cooler for some reason...

 

[alfistas]

Yes.... yes we are.

I was being sarcastic...

Obviously there are still A LOT of people using FC. The problem is that most people I know are seriously looking into alternatives since Apple discontinued the mac pro.

 

[hayesk]

All hope was lost when they first released it. I see no worth in trying to win back the 'professionals'. We have already moved on.

No, all hope wasn't lost when they released it. For every "sky is falling, Apple hates pros" post there was another rational post saying "keep using version 7 if it doesn't meet your needs yet, but watch FCPX - it will be updated."

----------

Apple exists to serve itself, while making customers believe they are getting something of value. And Apple, many times, has put customers in the ditch (one of the more recent examples not being the migration to Intel but removing Rosetta in 2011, rendering 'universal' apps useless...)

The fact they ignore a serious target market should be revealing by now. Apple prefers iStuff. It's a shame, the Mac Pro tower literally beat the pants over its competition in terms of a quality build, and was a unit I would openly praise (and still do, but the hardware is sorely dated...)

Wow, you are really trolling.
1. Rosetta is self-serving? You didn't want Apple to force developers to update their apps for Intel?
2. Universal apps run fine without PPC. Hence the name, universal.
3. You're complaining about the outdated Mac Pro in the same post as you are complaining that you demand to run old, slow PPC apps? What hypocrisy!

 

[nubero]

Every single time I've seen a "professional" complaining about it, it has turned out that they never used it, or are long time AE users, or are people who, frankly, don't even understand what video editing really is, let alone get paid to do it.

After Effects is for compositing, not editing.

 

[iRock1]

Since users here are complaining about pro software... Does anybody remember Aperture?

I don't think even Apple does.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[Beach40]

I'm squarely in the "what do I buy now?" boat.

Slick marketing campaigns don't translate into support for professional users with a business to run.

The sad thing is that Apple could easily have the consumer and professional markets well serviced, but the way they treat us as professional customers leaves a lot to be desired and certainly doesn't give me confidence to invest in their editing software as a platform for my business.

I was all set to go Avid, but now it looks like they are in big trouble.

Now I'm looking at Adobe, but its not clear what their intentions are.

 

[LorLorCore]

Don't be mad guys this is fantastic news. The fact that they want the pro's and "prosumor" back makes it more likely that they will in fact, release a new mac pro.

Or, it could just be a marketing scheme to keep face