Early Final Cut Pro X Response Mixed, Updates Coming

[Splutterbug]

I work in TV, I'm not an editor I'm a producer and the majority of my day is spent in an Avid suite doing rough cuts. Why Avid? well that has always been the professional standard and I've been pushing like crazy to upgrade to FCP next time as I find FCP much more user friendly and equally as powerful. I'm just going to have to stop pushing till I see some updates though. No legacy compatibility is terrible, it's not simply a case of finishing a project and then deleting it, pro editors keep backups for a long time for re-versions and the inevitable long long client and legal approval process.

I'm disappointed but from a personal perspective a little relieved as I don't have to replace my own laptop which I don't think is powerful enough to run it, (C2D form 2007 don't think the graphics card is up to the specs).

I think this is a case of over marketing and under delivering we were promised a shiny new dawn in post production, we got (from what I hear) a fancy Final Cut express

 

[Ol'MacUser]

Their old product alienated just the editors that didn't like the UI and the assists that could wrap their heads around OS controlled media. This new product seems to alienate everyone in the entire workflow.

Agreed. Wish I could give you 10 thumbs up.
What's happened here is that many FCP users have been patiently watching competitors make improvements while FCP gets colored markers and promises that a big upgrade is coming. We have held off moving back to Avid, or taking another look at Smoke, because someone told us that the next upgrade would be fantastic, revolutionary, worth the wait . . . etc.

Well, once we got to see it, the disappointment isn't just in the product, but also in the company that was stupid enough to think this was a satisfactory release.

Apple had the discipline to hold off releasing a white iPhone until it was perfect, but FCP X is released and they're clueless how useless it is. Amazing.

So anything they say now is laughable. Some of us haven't forgotten what they did to Shake, either. Too focused on professional users, no money in it, let it die.

I think we can all agree that Final Cut Pro ended at version 7.

Will X become pro? Hard to tell. But if Avid stays focused on doing things right, FCP X could become a competitor again, but who's going to switch back? We'll just wait for the next Avid upgrade. Life's too short to base a business on software developers that put your livelihood on a lower priority than building slick little cell phones.

 

[wonderspark]

I've always wanted to start using FCP, but was holding off until they got 64-bit going. Well, I bought X along with the new Motion and Compressor, just to play with until I get it figured out. Maybe it will turn into something good, or at least help me keep as diverse as I can be, even though it's been a while since I used AVID. It's certainly different, and taking a while to get used to. I don't think it's very intuitive, like Apple says it is. Maybe I'm insane.

 

[JabbaII]

Looks like Adobe is smelling blood:

Released last week:
Adobe's Vision for Professional Video
http://tv.adobe.com/watch/industry-trends/adobes-vision-for-professional-video/

Watch 2:24 --> "how do you like them apples"

 

[slackpacker]

I say it's about time to get rid of that piece of trash called Final Cut Pro Studio 3.

Apple needed to clean house accept it and plan. Right now and for the next few years I see no reason why users can't still keep using FC Studio as it is now. There are other options that currently are more mature than FCPX like Adobe Premiere or you can do what I did a long time ago ... Install Edius 6 on Bootcamp.

 

[iBug2]

- First, Apple is not discontinuing FCP (at least not in name.) So the simple notion that FCPX can import iMovie projects and won't import FCP7's is really troublesome for whoever have invested money in the former Final Cut Studio suite. What happened to all the "professional standard" claims of before?

- Second, third parties shouldn't be thrown into the equation. Apple should be held accountable. They were the ones offering that "professional standard" BS. Their claim now is "everything just changed in post". You bet, painfully to Avid and Premiere.

- Third, if you read me well, I never wrote STEVE and FCPX in the same sentence. I wrote STEVE and FCP. And yes, STEVE claimed in every keynote about FCP being the "professional standard" in post-production, blah, blah, blah....

- At this moment there are 612 ratings for FCPX from many not so happy App Store customers....

Everything you say is true, and they all mean that Apple should be held accountable for mismarketing the new FCP X. That's all.

 

[iBug2]

That was not the point I was trying to make. What was the "rush" to get it out even before the recommended 10.6.8 is available?

At any rate it is out and with a lot of negative controversy.

So we all move on.

10.6.8 is not required, it's recommended. Probably Lion will be recommended as well. There's no need to wait as long as the software runs perfectly fine on 10.6.7.

 

[iBug2]

Agreed. Wish I could give you 10 thumbs up.
What's happened here is that many FCP users have been patiently watching competitors make improvements while FCP gets colored markers and promises that a big upgrade is coming. We have held off moving back to Avid, or taking another look at Smoke, because someone told us that the next upgrade would be fantastic, revolutionary, worth the wait . . . etc.

Well, once we got to see it, the disappointment isn't just in the product, but also in the company that was stupid enough to think this was a satisfactory release.

So you are saying that Apple should have waited another year to work more on this product instead of releasing the half baked version 2 days ago. Would that be more suitable? What difference does that make for you?

I think that's even worse because you wait another year without knowing where Apple is going with the app. At least this way you know what the app will look like in a year and you can start deciding beforehand whether you like this and might want to work with it in a year or not, and switch now. Not to mention the users who can actually start using FCP X as it stands today don't have to wait another year for it.

Are you angry that they couldn't add more features to this app during this time (which is blaming Apple for not hiring more developers for their video tools development team) or are you angry that Apple released it as it is now, but didn't say what was exactly missing and didn't give the roadmap for when the missing features would be added (which is blaming Apple marketing and sales), which are two different things?

Apple had the discipline to hold off releasing a white iPhone until it was perfect, but FCP X is released and they're clueless how useless it is. Amazing.

Yeah because if you sell people an iPhone which leaks sunlight through the cover you can't really fix it later on. But software can be updated.

Not to mention Apple's dot zero hardware releases don't have such a great track record as their dot zero softwares. How fast do people forget about antennagate, flickering issues with iMacs and macbooks etc. I never buy Apple hardware without waiting for a few weeks after they release it.

 

[iBug2]

I think Gruber explains the issue best:

On The Talk Show earlier today, Dan Benjamin and I made the analogy to the first release of Mac OS X — a true ground-up rewrite with the intention of laying a solid foundation for the long-term future, but, in the short term, lots of missing features and frustrating changes compared to what current users were accustomed to. The difference is that with the transition from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X, Apple kept Mac OS 9 around for years, both as a boot-the-machine OS and in the form of the Classic emulation layer. There was a years-long transition. Whereas the previous — dare I say classic? — versions of Apple’s professional video software were discontinued upon yesterday’s release of the new versions.

This ground-up rewrite may well have been the right thing to do. Apple seems convinced that this is a better fundamental concept for video editing — and, really, storytelling in general. But it may prove risky not to offer a transition period. Hell, even with iMovie, when they made the switch from old-style editing to the new one (and lost a bunch of features in the initial release of the new iMovie), Apple kept iMovie HD 6 available as a free download for two years. If iMovie users were worth appeasing with a transition period, surely professional Final Cut Pro users are too. If Final Cut Pro X can’t even open Final Cut Pro 7 projects, how quickly can editors be expected to switch?

• Apple should have not discontinued the previous suite. That doesn't make much sense. They should have kept offering it at a discounted price during the transition.

• Apple should have been more forthcoming about this release and instead of trying to hide the missing features, they should have indicated them in their press release and webpage.

• Apple should really break their silence this time and actually offer a roadmap on the product and say what feature might be coming and what feature will never come, at least directly from them, so people who definitely need those features can make up their mind accordingly.

 

[D4F]

What a bunch of cry-babies some of those reviewers are.

NO professional software is ready for professional use on day one. Anyone who thought that is either not a pro or maybe just incredibly inexperienced.

I'm really happy that I can have Final Cut today so that I can start learning it. Once it gains more features in a few months I'll know what I'm doing and will be ready to go. The complainers will, I guess, just ignore Final Cut until then and THEN they'll start learning it.

Oh well, some of us will be six months ahead of you. Too bad for you.

In those six months others using different software will release products you will be able to only dream about OR it will take you several times longer to make them look similar.. By the time you will be ready to compete you will have to breakthrough to the market others already took over.
You really don't get how important are certain features don't ou?

 

[iBug2]

In those six months others using different software will release products you will be able to only dream about OR it will take you several times longer to make them look similar.. By the time you will be ready to compete you will have to breakthrough to the market others already took over.
You really don't get how important are certain features don't ou?

Actually the others will be using the same software as they do today during those months. No new Premiere version is coming in 6 months, although Avid promised for an update before 2012.

So I don't see how anything will change in the upcoming 6 months, since FCP 7 is still installed in everyones hard drive.

 

[iBug2]

Some of us haven't forgotten what they did to Shake, either. Too focused on professional users, no money in it, let it die.

Sorry but, before Apple acquired Nothing Real, there wasn't a mac version of Shake to begin with nor was it planned.

So if Apple never bought off Shake, there probably never would be a mac port. And I don't believe that you are honestly worried about PC Shake users that because Apple bought it and ended it, they lost their apps.

They kept licensing the source code after they discontinued the app as well.

Shake was Brinkmann's app, and when he left Apple to join The Foundry to work on Nuke, it was the right thing to do to discontinue Shake. Nuke was already gaining traction and it was next big thing and Shake wouldn't be able to compete with it without Brinkmann. The only thing Shake had going for it was the price, compared to Nuke. But for that niche market who used Shake, price probably wasn't much of an issue.

 

[JabbaII]

Actually the others will be using the same software as they do today during those months. No new Premiere version is coming in 6 months, although Avid promised for an update before 2012.

So I don't see how anything will change in the upcoming 6 months, since FCP 7 is still installed in everyones hard drive.

CS5.5 came out in May.

 

[SiPat]

I see FCP X as a direct but more costly replacement for the Express version.

Pro users will continue to use the last FCP Studio version or migrate to Adobe Premiere.

I will continue using iMovie HD ver 6.0.4

 

[iBug2]

CS5.5 came out in May.

Which brings MPE support for more Nvidia cards (mainly Quadro line) and Audition integration.

The first part doesn't concern mac users because none of the added hardware can be installed on a Mac. So yes, for Adobe Audition users it's a small upgrade. But I don't think anyone who didn't switch at CS 5 would switch at CS 5.5, assuming the switchers would keep their Macs. If they'd switch to PC, then yes 5.5 has some advantages compared to 5 due to supporting more hardware.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Here's my question for you, out of curiosity. Is iMovie 2011 up to the same feature level as iMovie HD yet? Has it surpassed it?

 

[iBug2]

Here's my question for you, out of curiosity. Is iMovie 2011 up to the same feature level as iMovie HD yet? Has it surpassed it?

No clue, never used either of them.

 

[Reach]

No clue, never used either of them.

I know you're eager, and you've probably written about half the posts in this thread, but I do believe that question was for the gentleman (or woman) just before you, that said he/she was using iMovie HD.

 

[iBug2]

I know you're eager, and you've probably written about half the posts in this thread, but I do believe that question was for the gentleman (or woman) just before you, that said he/she was using iMovie HD.

Possible. Since it didn't include a quote and since I was the last poster, I assumed it was directed at me. I also posted a quote from John Gruber which involved the iMovie transition so it could be about that I thought.

 

[reel2reel]

Well, the kids seem to like it!

Of course, it's easy to like something when you don't have the first clue about what you're missing (and NO I'm not talking about multicam, I'm so sick of hearing about multicam, jeez)

 

[noggin2000]

Interesting times we live in.

Appple has pushed hard for FCP/FCS to make major inroads into the mainstream broadcast and post production industry. I'm sure broadcasters and post-houses aren't the majority of FCP customers by any means, but they do provide leverage and confirm that the product is "professional" by using it.

FCP 6 and 7 have made massive inroads and displaced Avid in many areas, particularly those transitioning from SD and entirely standalone/tape-based workflows to HD and more hybrid networked/tape+tape less workflows. It has offered great solutions, allowing innovative new workflows to be introduced, but also fitting in with legacy and more traditional workflows. (Traditional workflows may not make sense to small, self-contained operation, but they are vital for large productions operating across multiple platforms)

FCPX appears to be version 1 of a new editing app. Massively more powerful internally, with lots of stuff that was all-too-obviously missing from FCP 7 (and FCS). Stuff like 64 bit processor support, background rendering etc. It's at a great price point, and as a domestic consumer it looks great as an HD-friendly replacement for FCE (and massively better than iMovie)

HOWEVER - FCP X is not currently anywhere near a full replacement for FCP 7 installations as used in many broadcast areas. The limitations on core workflow support mean you just can't consider using it - and most broadcasters wouldn't want to use such a new product today anyway in a mission critical environment.

If you are a broadcaster building a new operation - what do you do? If you are an existing post house wanting to expand with extra FCP / FCS suites - what do you do?

You can't buy FCP 7 / FCS any more. Apple won't sell it to you.

You can't use FCP X - because it has zilch support for workflows that you can't work without.

The criticism of FCP X has got a bit harsh and heated - it's a version 1 product. I can cut it some slack. (Though there are some jaw dropping omissions in the current version - I can see how Apple can see that a large proportion of FCP users - mainly self-contained, small scale producers and those making movies for fun or for education will be fine with FCPX and saw the logic in releasing it with a reduced featureset compared to FCP 7 / FCS) It's a new product built from the ground up, just like Mac OS X was a new OS built from the ground up. It's going to take time to mature. Fine. Get that totally.

What I can't understand is how Apple think they can pull the plug on the previous version, when the new version has so much functionality missing that is vital to a proportion of users (who may be a minority, but they are influential, add credibility AND use FCP to generate revenue - and buzz about the product) Can you imagine if MS had pulled XP on the day they launched Vista - it feels as if Apple have done that...

Many of the supporters of FCP X have posted that people should stop whining : "They can carry on using FCP 7".

Sure you can - but only if you have it already...

What do you do, today, if you need to put 50 FCP seats in a new broadcast centre?

What do you do today, if you want to put in more edit suites into your facility?

You can't use FCP X - it won't work in many broadcast and post-situations that FCP 7/FCS is fine in. You can't buy new versions of FCP 7 / FCS (unless you can find them on a shelf somewhere) because Apple won't sell it to you.

The fully functional, popular, cost-effective solution you could buy last week, is now gone. You don't have an Apple option anymore. This is crazy.

Effectively the broadcast and post-production house FCP market has been thrown into limbo.

Seriously - what do Apple think people are going to do in the next 6-12 months minimum it will take for FCP X to gain the internal and 3rd-party functionality needed to replicate current FCP 7 workflow?

Avid, Adobe and even GVG, Sony and Quantel must think Christmas has come 6 months early. (And I can see some people looking at Lightworks anew as well)

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Apple released a "We've listened to our customers, and have decided to allow FCP 7 / FCS to be purchased for an interim period" If not this could be MobileMe v2.

Not a great time to be an Apple rep to broadcasters...

 

[iBug2]

Interesting times we live in.

FCP/FCS has pushed hard to make major inroads into the mainstream broadcast industry. I'm sure broadcasters aren't the majority of FCP customers, but they do provide leverage and confirm that the product is "professional" by using it.

FCP 6 and 7 have made massive inroads and displaced Avid in many areas, particularly those transitioning from SD and entirely standalone/tape-based workflows to HD and more hybrid networked/tape+tape less workflows.

FCPX appears to be version 1 of a new editing app. Massively more powerful internally, with lots of stuff that was all-too-obviously missing from FCP 7 (and FCS). Stuff like 64 bit processor support, background rendering etc. It's at a great price point, and as a domestic consumer it looks great as an HD-friendly replacement for FCE (and massively better than iMovie)

HOWEVER - FCP X is not currently a full replacement for FCP 7 installations as used in many broadcast areas. The limitations on core workflow support mean you just can't consider using it - and most broadcasters wouldn't want to use such a new product today.

If you are a broadcaster building a new operation - what do you do? If you are an existing post house wanting to expand with extra FCP / FCS suites - what do you do?

You can't buy FCP 7 / FCS any more. Apple won't sell it to you.

You can't use FCP X - because it has zilch support for workflows that you can't work without.

The criticism of FCP X has got a bit harsh and heated - it's a version 1 product. I can cut it some slack. (Though there are some jaw dropping omissions - I can see how Apple can see that a large proportion of FCP users - mainly self-contained, small scale producers and those making movies for fun or for education.) It's a new product built from the ground up, just like Mac OS X was a new OS built from the ground up.

What I can't understand is how Apple think they can pull the plug on the previous version, when the new version has so much functionality that is vital to a proportion of users (who may be a minority, but they are influential, add credibility AND use FCP to generate revenue - and buzz about the product)

Many of the supporters of FCP X have posted that people should stop whining : "They can carry on using FCP 7".

Sure you can - but only if you have it already...

What do you do, today, if you need to put 50 FCP seats in a new broadcast centre?

What do you do today, if you want to put in more edit suites into your facility?

You can't use FCP X - it won't work in many broadcast and post-situations that FCP 7/FCS is fine in. You can't buy new versions of FCP 7 / FCS (unless you can find them on a shelf somewhere)

Effectively the FCP market has been thrown into limbo.

Seriously - what do Apple think people are going to do in the next 6-12 months minimum it will take for FCP X to gain the internal and 3rd-party functionality needed to replicate current FCP 7 workflow?

Avid, Adobe and even GVG, Sony and Quantel must think Christmas has come 6 months early. (And I can see some people looking at Lightworks anew as well)

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Apple released a "We've listened to our customers, and have decided to allow FCP 7 / FCS to be purchased for an interim period" If not this could be MobileMe v2.

Couldn't have said better.

I think Apple should keep offering FCP 7 during this transition and at a considerably discounted price even.

Also some official roadmap info should be out sooner than later.

 

[bartzilla]

The criticism of FCP X has got a bit harsh and heated - it's a version 1 product. I can cut it some slack. (Though there are some jaw dropping omissions - I can see how Apple can see that a large proportion of FCP users - mainly self-contained, small scale producers and those making movies for fun or for education.) It's a new product built from the ground up, just like Mac OS X was a new OS built from the ground up.

John Gruber talks about how its wrong of people to grade competitors to Apple "on a curve" here. Gruber was talking about the tablet market space specifically, but I feel strongly that if its a good enough standard to review one market space then its a good enough excuse to judge others.

So saying "It's version one of a new product" is no excuse. If FCPX was marketed as a new product named "iMovie Pro" then it would be about the right level and would probably get good reviews in that context.

But it isn't marketed as "iMovie Pro" (even though that's clearly what it is), it's marketed as Final Cut Pro, and in that context, in the context that Apple have chosen to position it, its a retrograde step from the previous version. It doesn't deserve any slack, and neither do Apple.

 

[iBug2]

So saying "It's version one of a new product" is no excuse. If FCPX was marketed as the new product "iMovie Pro" then it would be about the right level and would probably get good reviews in that context.

No it wouldn't. If two days ago Apple announced that they are discontinuing Final Cut Pro and releasing a new app called iMovie Pro, the anger and hatred you see on these boards would be ten times worse.

But it isn't marketed as "iMovie Pro" (even though that's clearly what it is), it's marketed as Final Cut Pro, and in that context, in the context that Apple have chosen to position it, its a retrograde step from the previous version. It doesn't deserve any slack.

What does it matter if this is iMovie Pro? If Apple actually released an amazing FCP X which was far more better than FCP 7 in every context, and named it iMovie Pro, do you think if anyone would care about the name?

The application does deserve some slack, because it's quite a time and money investment to do this kind of rewrite. What doesn't deserve a slack is Apple's marketing and sales for not informing people what exactly this new product is before starting selling it.

 

[Tales]

Couldn't have said better.

I think Apple should keep offering FCP 7 during this transition and at a considerably discounted price even.

Also some official roadmap info should be out sooner than later.

Me couldn't agree more with the post you quoted. However I wonder what would happen if you call Apple support as a business and wanted to buy a copy of Final Cut Studio.

I know for a fact that even though Tiger and Leopard are discontinued products, if you call apple support they will sell you a copy. It would be interesting to know if that is also the case for FCStudio/server etc.

Apple really needs to launch a support doc or at least some other sort of communication. Because it's highly disturbing to hear features are 'coming soon' from other power users and not from Apple itself.

On the other hand it seems that third party plugins are still possible, seeing as AJA has released beta drivers and some other companies have too.

I believe it is a good step in the long run. But a transition phase would be nice. Give buyers of FCPx access to FCP7 like iMovie 8 did with iMovie 6.