Final Cut Pro Trademark Update Suggests Apple Eyeing Future Subscription Model

[Alan Wynn]

I’ve been putting off the switch to DaVinci Resolve for a while now. Here’s the nudge I needed.

Curious. You own Final Cut Pro. It currently meets your needs. Why would you switch to DaVinci Resolve? Blackmagic Design makes great stuff, but there is nothing to guarantee that they keep their software free forever. Their model is based on the idea that people will purchase their gear to use their software, but if Grant Petty does not feel he is getting a viable return, he will have to make a change.

I understand people choosing to start with Resolve, or switching from Premeire, but I am curious why people would switch that already only Final Cut Pro.

 

[citysnaps]

Just curious... were you a previous user of Photoshop and Lightroom? When you could buy perpetual copies?

Back then Photoshop cost $700 to buy and upgrades were $250 every couple years or so.

But you're now getting Photoshop and Lightroom for $10 a month. Nice!

You'd have to subscribe to Photoshop for almost 6 years before you spent the same amount of money as a person who bought a copy of Photoshop outright.

AND... you'd have gotten updates the entire time... while the other guy was still using the same version of Photoshop all those years. (unless they spent another couple hundred dollars for upgrades)

So yeah... I think it's fine to spend a small amount of money each month rather than spending huge amounts of money on major purchases and upgrades. It can be a lot more manageable. (I'm a full Creative Cloud subscriber, BTW)

I'm not saying all subscriptions are great... some are downright nasty (silly little apps for a couple dollars a month?)

But in your case... Photoshop and Lightroom is a great deal at $10 a month. Hopefully Apple will be similar to that.

Totally agree. I pretty much live in Lightroom and am very happy with the way it has evolved with updates. Excellent tools cost money to evolve and support. And Adobe's subscription price is reasonable.

If Apple should make FCP subscription-based, I'm sure the cost will be similarly reasonable and will include frequent updates and new features.

 

[CalMin]

I don’t mind subscriptions for stuff I use all the time (MS Office) but it’s really hard to swallow for stuff I only use from time to time (eg FCP).

I use it a few times a year - as a hobby. It’s not a business and I don’t make money off it, so the feeling of it draining my bank account when I don’t need it would just suck. And while it’s not hard to turn subs on and off, who needs that hassle?

 

[jgdeschamps]

It should be like you pay for 12 months and you own the current version forever.

If I understand correctly, what you want is called "credit."

 

[yurc]

Curious. You own Final Cut Pro. It currently meets your needs. Why would you switch to DaVinci Resolve? Blackmagic Design makes great stuff, but there is nothing to guarantee that they keep their software free forever.

They have paid option tho, so your opinion isn't valid. Resolve have free and Studio version, which is paid software.

They also sold video related hardware, so software isn't sole their business.

 

[cnharris]

You know they're going to start doing the same with hardware too. Done with Apple if I have to rent my next laptop.

 

[krakman]

I think for hobbyists a subscription is not very appealing, but for someone who makes money from FCP then why not.

I pay for adobe photoshop, 8.99 a month, that's equivalent to buying three pints of beer on a Friday night, yet the software has made me thousands of £s of profit which has bought me cars, houses and a holiday home by the sea.

 

[jgdeschamps]

my fear is this becomes a wider trend. What’s to say if the company makes macOS and iWork also subscription software too, requiring that you pay keep your Mac updated?

Exactly. And with the transition to M1 Macs, even more so. I love FCPX, but if Apple goes to a subscription-only model, I'll drop it. I wouldn't be surprised if MacOS eventually goes that route, so you'd pay a premium to buy a Mac and then be locked into a subscription to update the software. That would be enough to push me to Linux.

Apple used to charge between US$99 and US$129 for each MacOS X yearly upgrade, US$79 for iWork (Keynote, Numbers, Pages,) and iLife (iMovie, Garageband, iWeb, etc) for as much as US$79. Yes, people paid for those on a yearly subscription model delivered on DVD format. Try to run those on a new Mac.
My point is shared by previous posts, pay-once-use-for-life is not sustainable and was no one's original model, since it keeps you locked to the tech available at the time of release. Computer and SW tech definitely won't stay frozen in time.

 

[TonyTech]

If this provokes faster updates and more features then I'm all for it. I think a £300 value has been great for the last however many years.. but I am not bothered about paying for something that is a critical business tool that would give me more features/stability ultimately leading to more profitability.

That is what should happen in theory, but Adobe has demonstrated that it is not the case.

 

[mrapplecored]

Apple has amended its trademark for Final Cut Pro, its professional high-end video editing software, in a way that suggests it could be planning to turn the now one-time payment model for the software into a subscription.

As reported by Patently Apple, on Monday, Apple added a Nice Classification #42 listing to its Final Cut Pro trademark in Europe. The Class 42 identification is listed as including software as a service (SaaS), or a platform as a service (PaaS). For context, Microsoft Office 365, which is based on a monthly or yearly subscription, includes the same Class 42 listing for its suite of software.

Final Cut Pro is currently sold for $300 and is used widely by professional videographers, YouTubers, and content makers. Potentially changing the price and payment model into a monthly, or yearly subscription could entice even more customers to use the software. If Apple is planning the subscription route, it'll likely include more than simply the software itself.

With a subscription, Apple theoretically could offer subscribers access to original content, such as in-depth tutorials, walkthroughs, or exclusive videos/sessions with prominent video makers who use Final Cut Pro as part of their workflow.

Whether Apple takes the route is unknown, however, the pure nature of the updated trademark is rather telling. Apple over the years has launched a number of new services, the most recent being Apple Fitness+. The momentum is not slowing down, however. Apple is reportedly eyeing to launch a new podcast subscription service that would offer listeners exclusive and original content.

Article Link: Final Cut Pro Trademark Update Suggests Apple Eyeing Future Subscription Model

I have the latest FCP, but for home/family use and not for business/income. So Unless there are two versions, sorry it's not for me. I hate monthly payments as my use is sporadic at best, so I guess I'll have to go back to the watered down iMovie. Or look at Adobe.

 

[Boomish69]

I hate subscription software, sure it works for some things but overall it’s just a greedy money train developers are jumping on. I will change to another software rather than subscribe.

 

[4jasontv]

I have the latest FCP, but for home/family use and not for business/income. So Unless there are two versions, sorry it's not for me. I hate monthly payments as my use is sporadic at best, so I guess I'll have to go back to the watered down iMovie. Or look at Adobe.

Can you get Adobe products without cloud? I thought that option completely went away.

 

[TonyTech]

I prefer the old model of buying the stand-alone version once and then affordable upgrades when needed.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Apple's annual gross profit for 2020 was $104.956B, a 6.67% increase from 2019. We're talking about PROFITTING IN THE BILLONS ladies and gents. This means AAPL has plenty of money on hand to commit towards paying "prominent video makers" to create original content such as tutorials and walkthroughs ... 🥴 ... and updating FCP periodically as they have been doing for years without the need for a SaaS model. I fully expect Apple will attempt to present their greed as "adding value."

Why should iPhone users who cannot even run Final Cut Pro subsidize its development? That is what you are arguing. Apple makes money, they should spend it on something for me.

I bought Final Cut Pro for $300 when it became available on the App Store (more than 10 years ago). That is $30 a year for professional software used to make money. I do not like subscriptions (meaning if I stop paying the software stops working), I have no problems paying for new royalty free music and effects I can use, and periodic upgrades to the software.

 

[Alan Wynn]

I would be all for a monthly SaaS option that included cloud rendering, storage and collaboration tools as long as Apple maintains the current one-time paid version without stripping away any of the features that currently exist.

What about not providing free upgrades for every major version?

 

[Mr. Dee]

Apple used to charge between US$99 and US$129 for each MacOS X yearly upgrade, US$79 for iWork (Keynote, Numbers, Pages,) and iLife (iMovie, Garageband, iWeb, etc) for as much as US$79. Yes, people paid for those on a yearly subscriptions model delivered on DVD format. Try to run those on a new Mac.

I actually was gonna include that point, but you weren’t required to upgrade and your version of iWork didn’t suddenly stop working because a new version was out. The yearly upgrades was also a drive to make the OS more mature. The first 3 versions of OS X were rough around the edges. You could say it wasn’t until Tiger OS X became mainstream and it didn’t really become a household name until the Intel transition.

 

[mi7chy]

Great. Yet another subscription nagware in MacOS. Now it makes sense why the M1 devices exist.

 

[baryon]

That's gonna be a nope from me.

 

[Lestdog]

Go DaVinci Resolve. You also won’t be tied to one platform.

 

[Michael Scrip]

That is what should happen in theory, but Adobe has demonstrated that it is not the case.

What's not the case?

In the old days you spent a ton of money to buy Adobe software... and the only way to get new features was to pay a smaller, but still significant amount of money for an upgrade in a year or two.

But ever since they went to the Creative Cloud subscription... you pay a smaller manageable monthly fee and you get updates twice a year. And some features simply get added as soon as they are ready. They don't have to wait for a major release.

This is in contrast to the old way where a new feature might not be released until a year or more later (as a paid upgrade too!)

Look... I remember everyone's fears that once you started paying for your subscription... Adobe would get lazy because they're already getting your money every month.

But I've found the opposite to be true. Adobe is actually updating MORE OFTEN now.

Here are the most recent updates made to Premiere Pro:

2021 February
2021 January
2020 November
2020 October
2020 September
2020 June

Some are small updates and bug fixes... but some add fairly major features.

I remember one day I didn't have Content Aware Fill in Photoshop... and the next day I did! It just came as an update. Boom!

Oh I know some people simply can't stand the mere idea of subscriptions. But I can tell it has drastically changed the way software gets developed.

I'm a fan.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Even before reading this article, I’ve been plotting a switch to the fantastic Nuendo for years now.

Nuendo is $999. The upgrade from Nuendo 10 to Nuendo 11 is $200.

If they made Logic a subscription it would fast-track that switch for me.

At any price? What if logic was $60 a year? $75? $100? At $200 a year it would still take five years to pay off (not counting upgrades to Nuendo).

There is an ever so slight chance I’d stick with Logic ONLY if they put all that subscription money to pumping out worthy additions that made their software more up to speed with the industry. And I mean PUMPING out.

The advantage of subscription pricing to the developer is that it is easy to budget for new features and since there is an ongoing revenue stream, it is easy to know that it goes away without new features. In the current model, the Logic Pro product manager needs to compete with all of Pro Apps at a minimum (and at some level, with every other development team within Apple) for resources.

Again, I prefer a model that says I can continue using what I have forever on the hardware/OS version on which I bought it and only have to pay for upgrades, but I understand the benefits of the other model.

From what I’ve heard, I assume my experience with Logic is pretty analogous with Final Cut users. It’s fantastic software but come on Apple! Care about it a little more!

Final Cut Pro has had big jumps and small jumps. Its development has become somewhat more consistent over the last few years with twice annual upgrades, at least one of which is fairly substantial.

 

[Alan Wynn]

They have paid option tho, so your opinion isn't valid.

My question is “why someone would switch from software they own to something else?”. Not sure how having a paid version makes that invalid.

Resolve have free and Studio version, which is paid software.

Yup, and more of the features that used to be Studio only have migrated into the free version. However, as Grant Petty says in almost ever new hardware product release video, it is the hardware that pays for the software releases and if that stops working (people do not buy enough Resolve related hardware like their $1,000 editing keyboard), that model will have to change.

They also sold video related hardware, so software isn't sole their business.

Which I referenced in my original post. While DiVinci Resolve has made great strides, not all Blackmagic Design’s software has fared as well. Fusion is a great node-based compositor, but it has been falling further and further behind over the last few years.

 

[jgdeschamps]

I actually was gonna include that point, but you weren’t required to upgrade and your version of iWork didn’t suddenly stop working because a new version was out. The yearly upgrades was also a drive to make the OS more mature. The first 3 versions of OS X were rough around the edges. You could say it wasn’t until Tiger OS X became mainstream and it didn’t really become a household name until the Intel transition.

That's exactly what is ticking some people off... with a subscription model, you don't get to "choose" if you want to pay right now, or until a year and a half away. Though you do get easy payments/installments for full software versions plus some added content or features. So it's not really a greed issue. It's a marketing/management focus. And it's all derived from streaming services and people's reaction to them.
All businesses need to measure cash flow to predict how much money they'll get within an amount of time. If you can predict that, you can plan. If you can plan, you can deliver and thrive.
Most customers want the latest features and best service possible.
Marketing and/or management says "Hey, I have an idea to get a predictable income and deliver the goods..."
You fill in the blanks. Everybody wins if you happen to have a long lasting relationship with your software and hardware tools. At least in my opinion.

 

[Alan Wynn]

What's not the case?

I think he was saying they have not made the product more stable.

In the old days you spent a ton of money to buy Adobe software... and the only way to get new features was to pay a smaller, but still significant amount of money for an upgrade in a year or two.

From a professional standpoint the biggest problem I have with the Adobe software is the difficult of locking versions for the duration of a production. There is no way to install only bug fixes as was possible before under the fixed version approach. It makes using their software for feature film production more challenging.

Oh I know some people simply can't stand the mere idea of subscriptions. But I can tell it has drastically changed the way software gets developed.

It has pros and cons in the development process. It makes it somewhat easier to budget for infrastructure needed for longer term enhancements, but it also makes it harder to do them (as people want to see constant feature upgrades so they understand why they have to pay every month). As I said pros and cons.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Great. Yet another subscription nagware in MacOS. Now it makes sense why the M1 devices exist.

How does this change have anything to do with Apple Silicon, other than Apple Silicon makes Macintoshes much more compelling and software that takes advantage of the new features will be even more compelling?