Which 64 bit platform? A few years ago no NLE ran 64 bit on Mac. Premiere switched last year, Avid still didn't. And neither of them are more modern. They just have features, but in terms of being modern, they are as antiquated as FCP 7 was.
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.
Early Final Cut Pro X Response Mixed, Updates Coming
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Which 64 bit platform? A few years ago no NLE ran 64 bit on Mac. Premiere switched last year, Avid still didn't. And neither of them are more modern. They just have features, but in terms of being modern, they are as antiquated as FCP 7 was.
Absolutely agree. There is a market for an "iMovie Pro" level of product, and this will meet that need very nicely. It's a shame that they've gutted final cut pro to make room for this pretender.
I'm sure too. I make a lot of the recommendation about what direction our "technology platform" (sorry, horrible phrase but it fits) should be heading in at work, that's a major part of my job in fact, and a while ago I got the feeling that Apple were not really interested in higher end business/pro markets any more, and I suggested we start looking for alternatives. FCPX has vindicated me somewhat. It would have been quite nice to have been wrong.
On a personal level I love their products as a consumer. I just can't suggest with a straight face that anyone who needs to make a living from their computer can trust Apple.
Why not? A one person shop who doesn't use extra hardware and extra editors can make a living out of FCP X quite well.
i don't understand this not catering business. i feel like that is what apple has been doing all this time. apple had 3 NLE's at one point (imovie, FCE, FCP). if that is not catering, i don't know what is.
i belong in the FCE crowd so going to FCP X will be a no-brainer for me. i have to admit that i am a bit disappointed that there is no edl export b/c that has been a long NLE staple for the film crowd. of course, nobody finishes in film these days, so, i guess apple is neglecting that crowd. as for the other missing features--there is probably an easy workaround for them. i guess no multicam support is also a deal breaker for some. but, apple promises to add many of the missing features and you have to take their word for it. why? b/c they didn't have to make FCP X. they skipped FCP 8 & 9 and went straight to 10. so, you have to believe that they have something up their sleeve for this new Final Cut Pro(gram).
the professionals who work in the broadcast industry knows that their industry doesn't even move that quickly. most are using avid from the early 2000. yet, they whine that apple is missing "pro" features. please.
Nah that's not correct. They do use up to date software, and they do invest on hardware, plugins, which can be FCP specific. And now suddenly their plugins and extra hardware don't work with this version, granted they still have their FCP 7 installs and some will keep working on it but more importantly, Apple is silent about whether or not it'll ever work. So I can easily understand their frustration.
The problem is not that. Sure they can keep using FCP 7, but for how long? FCP 7 is a competitive product right now, industry standard even, but if Apple is not going to add some of the crucial features to FCP X in the long term, FCP 7 won't cut it in several years when the competition has taken off.
So some of these people need to know, today, that whether Apple has really abandoned them, or if Apple plans to add all the missing stuff in time.
Last edited:
Please excuse me - I got confused with multiple tabs opened, and made a reply that didn't make sense.
Last edited:
How dare you make a post to try to bring a tangent back to the main topic?
My apologies.
What is the main topic btw?
i see their concerns. like they reported, apple will probably add stuff to FCP X. if you look around, nobody is doing what apple is doing and the missing features are missing b/c they are probably trying to figure out how to improve and best implement them. i haven't used FCP X yet, but, the missing features seems to be a consequence of a completely revamped system. in the meantime, FCE users will probably grabbed tFCP X since it is a no-brainer upgrade, like for myself.
i hope they add them. and not just add them. but improve upon them somehow. for instance, easier to read EDL's that are meta-data capable and searchable... somehow.
the multicam thing can be thunderbolt enable...
external monitor thru thunderbolt... or even hdmi...
but, i like where apple is heading w/ FCP X b/c of it's completely modern and if they add that database stuff to it... then it would be truly awesome.
I believe they will add them as well, but I don't make a living out of this. So on my part it's just wishful thinking combined with a sense of rationality. After all, what are they going to do other than adding features.
But for people who depend on them, an official word must be out. So far everything came in form of rumor. While they may all be true, they are not official and people need to hear something official to make their longterm decisions.
That's the thing. This app would indeed be the absolute pinnacle of NLE if it didn't lack so many important features. What it does, it does quite well. Some of the stuff in this app are said to be amazing, by the same people who downplayed the app due to the stuff missing. So when Apple gets it right, it'll be great. So let's hope that they get it right sooner than later.
It's not about me, oh verbose one. It's about Apple. It's about them claiming one thing, and us discovering it's really another. Basically, in front of the world, they have demonstrated they have/had no clue what is needed in a production environment.
It's as if they came out, with drool hanging from their mouths, and said, "Trust us, we can make it better."
And we're sitting on our hands, dumbfounded and fidgeting, wondering how quickly we can move to a system whose programmers won't embarrass us. It's really that bad. This has to be the single biggest screw-up of a release by any tech company - ever! And I'm not the only one saying it.
When Brinkman expressed frustration - by leaving and joining up with the Foundry - it was possible to interpret that Apple's implied commitment to high-end applications (soft and hardware) was never really there. But there was always hope that it was an anomaly, not a trend.
With this whiz bang edit program, that's as useless as is on a boar, the trend seems to be continuing.
How does it effect me? Are you serious? Do you even have a job? Maybe not with all the posting you're doing here today. Unless you're an Apple plant.
(1) Maybe you're a child. In which case, I apologize for being so hard on you.
Hey. We waited and waited for Apple to finally catch up. It's not about the boy in the basement looking for an easier way to color correct his sleep-over so he can post it on YouTube, OK? It's about Apple saying, "We know Pro" and then us finding out that "Pro" means "prolapsed" not "professional."
Anyone making money on FCP X is so far behind the curve, they might as well hang it up now. The rest of the industry continues to climb like a rocket - achieving things that used to be impossible. This is only possible through the ability to SHARE data. With FCP X, NONE of this is possible. None.
If you're making money with FCP X, you're counting your audience on 1 hand, and flipping burgers with the other. It offers nothing special, and forbids you to improve your footage with external means.
And you think Apple should be happy with this release so someone sitting all alone in their basement can FINALLY make a short movie to put on Vimeo? Seriously? Back to point (1).
Why do you care who I'm "angry" at? You don't even understand why FCP X is such a joke?
Ugghh! Point (1). Seriously? Seriously? Who are you?!
Do you think FCP would have become anything if it wasn't for 3rd party support (hardware, especially)? Do you think FCP would have grown at all, if it couldn't interact with other applications? Do you think it's sluggish growth wouldn't have caused an early collapse if it didn't have so many loyal users who trusted Apple's statements about making it better?
That trust is gone, bubba. Vanished. Whoosh.
So here's a little puzzle for you. Who's going to risk developing hardware and software for this little mutation? Who? Everyone is leaving! What's going to bring them back? I can migrate all my hardware over to Avid! For almost nothing. But now I'm wondering if we should stick with Logic for our audio work. Is that going to be destroyed - I mean "improved" soon too? Hmm. Maybe it's time to switch to PC - Win 7 is stable, and I'll even have more options. It's still the better platform for 3D and compositing.
Oh Apple. You are so stupid. Mind-numbingly stupid.
1 year from now Apple will announce that FCP X is now just as functional was FCP 7 was, but with magnetic timelines and background rendering, and the line of people clamoring to buy it will be filled with the 8th-grade lunch line from Cupertino's public schools. Because, for Apple, editing is a solo enterprise best done in your basement.
You see, iBug, no-one migrates away from a product, and suddenly comes back. It's exhausting. It's inefficient. It requires building a new production pipeline, and a belief that 2 years from now, it'll still be worth it. Well, that's the problem. It requires trust. Trust that is gone.
Their competition can make software that runs better on Apple hardware than Apple can. Right now. AND, their competition actually understands how to make that software incredibly useful. Right now.
Apple just unzipped their fly, and a puff of smoke came out. And you're on this forum pounding some drum saying it doesn't really mean anything. There's a little boy somewhere who doesn't have the skill set of an 8 year old who can finally tell a story thanks to FCP X.
Well, that's wonderful.
In a couple of days, none of us will be talking about it, other than to laugh. But right now it's like tsunami hit, and Apple doesn't even know it.
It's almost as if you're understanding of this issue is entirely superficial! From reading your comments, it's hard to believe you even know what the purpose of a broadcast monitor is. See point (1).
Agreed, well partially. They demonstrated that they don't care / or they don't know what's needed in some of the production environments.
Disagreed. Maybe in NLE. For me it was when Adobe bought Macromedia and immediately discontinued Freehand, forcing every single Freehand operator to jump ship to Illustrator, just because they could. It was disgusting.
My question was "how does it effect you that Apple releases this today instead of a year later with more features?"
You haven't answered this.
But I'll answer your question. I don't work for Apple.
I'm 29 years old, and no, you haven't really been hard on me. But if you think you are being hard on me and somehow enjoying it, you may as well continue to think you are.
That boy is not gonna pay 400$ for that. He gets iMovie for free which is perfectly fine to do that job.
Ah so, it is indeed about you. You do not speak for all the professionals out there. You don't even know what percentage of FCP 7 users will be able to keep doing their work using FCP X. You just know you won't be able to. Pro does not equal you and you alone. Pro means people who make a living out of this. Period.
Apple as any other software company will be happy with a release if it sells and makes them money.
And again, that boy could make that movie for free with iMovie, so Apple never needed to put out this app for that boy.
I do understand. I have listened and read about all the frustrations of industry professionals, more than you did most probably. My understanding of why people are angry doesn't really contradict anything I wrote on this thread.
For you yes. Whether that trust has gone for everyone, only time will tell. Neither you nor me, nor anybody has authority to make that kind of judgement today.
Everyone is leaving? Really? You knocked down 1.9 million doors and asked everyone? Screenshot or never happened!
Sorry couldn't help it.You are more optimistic than I am. I don't think Apple will get all the missing features ready in a year.
For some, yes. But for many people who work in big post houses, they already own all the NLE software to begin with. Whether or not they use FCP 7 today, they know how to use Avid or Premiere too, because for some of their projects they switch to them. For them, migrating is extremely easy because it only means launching a different app when you come work in the morning.
None of the other NLE on Mac hardware runs better than FCP X does. But I agree with the second part.
Screenshot or never happened!. Seriously, quote me where I say "it doesn't mean anything".
Why only little boys? Girls don't make movies?
I think Apple knows it quite well from all the reviews out. But I think I'll still be talking about it in couple of days and I'm already laughing about it.
To be honest, you can claim that my understanding of this issue is entirely superficial and that wouldn't be so far off the mark. I don't use NLE's for a living. Yet I use other software for it, and I've seen my fair share of discontinued software creating headaches, and weird but, not from Apple. So I can understand what people must be feeling right now. Although Apple didn't discontinue FCP. They rebooted it, in a sense. Whether or not they will iterate on it to suit your needs (I mean yours personally) is information they must provide.
Last edited:
That's only an option if you already own enough FCP 7 licences, or can find enough to meet your needs.
Sure, if you already have enough FCP 7 licences for your needs you can keep on using it if FCP X doesn't meet your requirements.
What do you do if you are building a new facility today? What do you do if you are migrating from other systems to FCP and are part way through?
What do you do if FCP X isn't an option for your workflow, but FCP 7 is no longer for sale.
THAT'S the issue at the moment.
Last week Apple sold a product that broadcasters and post-production companies were standardising around, and building entire facilities based around (and planning to in the future).
Next week, Apple will no longer sell this product, and don't have a suitable "works today" replacement for it...
What are broadcasters/post-production customers who have made a commitment to FCP supposed to do?
They can't "use FCP 7 then" - Apple won't sell it to you to use...
Precisely. This seems to be one of the biggest issues. I've heard that Apple might be even clearing out inventory around so people can't buy it off the shelves as well. That's way below the waist.
Yep - I'm sure it will. I'm sure it will also gain a whole lot of people who just like creating their own content for pleasure. For small-scale production, and for single-editor set-ups with simple self-contained workflows, I'm sure it will work, quickly and generate perfectly acceptable results.
If you're creating content for the web, and operate with a single person controlling the content from start to finish, I'm sure it will be great for you.
Shoot your stuff on DSLR, edit it in FCP X, upload it to Vimeo, and have lots of people tell you how great your stuff is. It'll be great for that.
Cutting a multi-episode TV show, where you have to off-line, on-line, sound mix, colour correct, composite VFX shots, deliver multiple versions with multi-track masters for overseas sales, have multiple people working across multiple episodes logging, viewing, and editing the same centrally stored media? Hmm - FCP 7 does this now. People are using it for this now, and their livelihoods are based around it.
They aren't going to be doing this in FCP X next week. And they aren't going to be able to buy FCP 7 to do it either.
It strikes me as if FCP X is closer to "Prosumer" than FCP was before. It really is FCP E X at the moment.
Yep - it's moving the "specialised" stuff it learned from the broadcast and high-end market place and leveraging it down to a lower level, at a price point that allows new users to jump on-board.
But losing broadcasters, post-production houses and serious editors who are at the top of their craft is a major loss of credibility.
I don't think this will matter to Apple - I'm sure they've calculated that they can do without the broadcast market entirely. Because at the moment they've abandoned them with a product that doesn't work, and aren't selling one that does.
If you're a new purchaser the price point is attractive. If you're a broadcaster/post-production house I suspect the difference in cost, whilst nice, is a small percentage of the outlay you will be spending on hardware, routing gear, monitoring, installation, ergonomic furniture etc.
The question is whether Apple really have a roadmap now.
As high-end users do more and more digging into FCP X - more and more fundamental issues seem to be being raised. Particularly in collaborative working, media sharing, distributed editing etc. terms.
And not being able to monitor what you're doing in the HD-SDI domain (either on a decent broadcast monitor - or a scope - or even to route around a facility) - I seriously thought early reviewers were mistaken. No editing platform aiming to be used by a broadcaster or post-production house for online, final master creation, can omit this. I still can't believe Apple can have dropped the ball so badly in this regard.
Last edited:
Well, only if they lose them all. Apple needs to move quickly for damage control, if they intend to not lose those markets entirely, and I think if they don't want to, they still have a shot at it. Couple years isn't such a long time.
It certainly won't matter for them. In the grand scheme of things, it would be like a speeding ticket for Apple even if they lost the entire FCP userbase overnight. That kind of freedom has advantages and disadvantages. The advantage is, they can say "what the hell, I'm doing a rewrite from scratch and dumping the old thing", which can in the long term become quite profitable. The disadvantage is, people know that Apple doesn't need them to be happy. But that has been like that for a long time now.
The problem is this. We all know Apple has loads of cash, so we all think like, since they have all this cash why can't they deliver this and that? Which is reasonable. Why can't Apple write a better NLE than Avid does, they have much more cash than Avid. Why can't Apple write the best DAW out there, they have more cash than, well, Avid+Steinberg. Etc. But the problem is, Apple was in the midst of bankruptcy and they did get out of it not through professional software but through consumer products. iPod, iTunes music store, and partially iMac saved Apple's ass. So all that money came from consumers, not from pro markets. That being said, it probably wouldn't kill them to hire 20 more NLE developers to maintain FCP 7 for couple more years.
My feeling is that, and that's just my feeling, Apple did have a roadmap to do this rewrite and actually make it attractive for everyone at the same time. And they failed on it because it turned out to be a much bigger work than they assumed. So they'll have to pick up the pieces one by one.
To be honest, I've listened to all those issues from several sources. And while some of them seem to be harder to implement (unless some work is already done) while others would be quite easy, if Apple wanted to implement them and can be done in a matter of weeks, but again, only if Apple wants to implement them.
Last edited:
Indeed
Couldn't agree more with you. What I don't get is why Apple decided to go forward with that SuperMeet BS last April. Why? Why treat like dumbs a crowd of pro editors and industry people? What was really "jaw dropping" about all that? Btw, why was the crowd applauding when they announced the price dropping? I don't know you but if I'm a pro biker in the Tour de France I want to ride the most expensive and top of the line bike I can afford. I wouldn't ride in one on sale at Walmart...
Couldn't agree more with you. What I don't get is why Apple decided to go forward with that SuperMeet BS last April. Why? Why treat like dumbs a crowd of pro editors and industry people? What was really "jaw dropping" about all that? Btw, why was the crowd applauding when they announced the price dropping? I don't know you but if I'm a pro biker in the Tour de France I want to ride the most expensive and top of the line bike I can afford. I wouldn't ride in one on sale at Walmart...
If everyone thought like you did, FCP wouldn't exist at all. FCP when it was first released was worse than AVID but much more affordable, and that's why people started using it. They knew it was the inferior product, but it was cheap.
What was jaw dropping were probably the things FCP X could do, because Apple didn't mention the things it couldn't do.
Last edited by a moderator:
well, don't forget that when final cut pro 1.0 came out that apple was riding on the firewire standard that made it a breeze to capture video w/ a single wire and a mac. the firewire standard and dv format. fastforward to 2011 and we have thunderbolt, icloud... os x lion and other emerging tech that apple could leverage to make another revolution in the industry. and by revolution, i mean, just make it work like FCP did back in the day.
this is probably why they wanted to skip to FCP 10 b/c they have a vision for it, which right now is not complete....
Well they certainly can do it, if they have their heart set on it, but we'll have to wait and see. So far all the rumors said that Apple wants this thing to be successful and they are looking for feedback. Let's hope the feedback they are looking for aren't only from one man shops.
You know what I just hope for
I just hope Apple hurries up and updates back in the missing features :-}
I just hope Apple hurries up and updates back in the missing features :-}
Beta Testers
so I know we are now on page 26 of this discussion. However, I have one big question and I apologize in advance for cursing.... but.... WHO THE **** WERE THE PEOPLE WHO DID THE BETA TESTING??? They could not have been real editors. Someone please speak up if you were really testing this software pre release. I want to have a conversion with you.
Conversely, did Apple just piss on all your requests?
In this economy, I hate for anyone to lose their job, however, the lead of the team at Apple who said this is ready for public use. Should lose his job. I dont care about future updates, you really failed here... Just goes to show you, you can show the masses a work in progress. It will kill your image.
so I know we are now on page 26 of this discussion. However, I have one big question and I apologize in advance for cursing.... but.... WHO THE **** WERE THE PEOPLE WHO DID THE BETA TESTING??? They could not have been real editors. Someone please speak up if you were really testing this software pre release. I want to have a conversion with you.
Conversely, did Apple just piss on all your requests?
In this economy, I hate for anyone to lose their job, however, the lead of the team at Apple who said this is ready for public use. Should lose his job. I dont care about future updates, you really failed here... Just goes to show you, you can show the masses a work in progress. It will kill your image.
Request for refund
I was pouring through the apple discussion forums and found this request for refund from Apple for their FCPx purchase:
I have no question about the functions of Final Cut Pro v10.0, nor do I have any interest in paying for technical support. I purchased this app with the understanding that it was a new, functional version of Final Cut Pro (as indicated by the version number: 10.0, not 1.0). After familiarizing myself with the software and conferring with many other experienced Final Cut Pro users, it has become clear that Final Cut Pro v10.0 is not a functional replacement for Final Cut Pro v7.0.2, nor is it suitable for video production in a professional environment, as the App Store description and other Apple marketing materials implied.
The App Store description and associated marketing materials make no mention, for instance, of Final Cut Pro v10.0's inability to open project files from earlier versions of Final Cut Pro, the lack of XML and OMF support, and the lack of broadcast-quality monitoring. Apple's failure to disclose these limitations was deceptive, and falls under the state of California's definition of false advertising under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act: "Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any … false or misleading representation of fact, which … in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is likely to be damaged by such act."
Please refund to me the full purchase price of this application.
I was pouring through the apple discussion forums and found this request for refund from Apple for their FCPx purchase:
I have no question about the functions of Final Cut Pro v10.0, nor do I have any interest in paying for technical support. I purchased this app with the understanding that it was a new, functional version of Final Cut Pro (as indicated by the version number: 10.0, not 1.0). After familiarizing myself with the software and conferring with many other experienced Final Cut Pro users, it has become clear that Final Cut Pro v10.0 is not a functional replacement for Final Cut Pro v7.0.2, nor is it suitable for video production in a professional environment, as the App Store description and other Apple marketing materials implied.
The App Store description and associated marketing materials make no mention, for instance, of Final Cut Pro v10.0's inability to open project files from earlier versions of Final Cut Pro, the lack of XML and OMF support, and the lack of broadcast-quality monitoring. Apple's failure to disclose these limitations was deceptive, and falls under the state of California's definition of false advertising under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act: "Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any … false or misleading representation of fact, which … in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is likely to be damaged by such act."
Please refund to me the full purchase price of this application.