Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Posts Final Cut Pro X FAQ, Promises Updates
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited by a moderator:
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?
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited:
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.
"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!
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!
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.
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.
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.
Last edited:
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.
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.
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, 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.
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.
A bunch of babies cry in Hollywood and people capitulate? Jeez, when has that ever happened 
I know they're not all there, but the rest are just riding their coat tails.
I know they're not all there, but the rest are just riding their coat tails.
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.
The real issues
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!!!
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!!!
No, they're not. Most of them simply cannot use it for their work at this stage of its life.
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.
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.
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.