Former Shake Product Designer: Apple Doesn't Care About Pro Market

[deconstruct60]

Really, where is the multicam support, the external tv monitoring, XML/ODF export, tape import and export, etc?

Many "reviews" seem to indicate that some folks were spending more time looking for stuff that was missing than actually trying to learn and use the product. That is not the behavior of a real pro, IMHO. All of these "reviews" that popped up in less than 6-7 hours were amateur. Many of those folks were searching for a conclusion they had already conceived. Trotting out the list of features not implemented yet is only scaffolding to support what they wanted to find. If it wasn't these listed elements it would be something else.


http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/professional-video-editors-weigh-in-on-final-cut-pro-x/


Yes, the mutlicam interface could be (and reportedly will be ) improved but fundamentally it is set of related clips and organized that way. What is missing the automagic organization and custom tool for switching between feeds. The core foundation is there. The "I can't " is really "It is harder to do" though for several folks.


External TV monitoring is 3rd party software issue. Sure Apple could have worked with the hardware folks in secret but the essential "who" in charge of delivering the software is not Apple. Ditto with the high end tape drives input/output. Several cameras with tape are on the list. Anyone deeply committed to tape is not an early adopter. They were deeply unlikely to move on this specific version anyway. Using tape doesn't make you a "pro". It only means you have deep sunk costs in equipment expenditure. There are lots of folks who are not using tape and turning out high quality, high end product.

The XML import/export is a miss; for now. Part of the issue though is that they are been a chorus of "See no movement on FCP so it it is dead" from folks. If Apple sat on the product for 5-6 months to do the XML import/export it will still resulting in complaining. It is also likely that if delivered 5-6 months from now FCPX would be Lion only ( again likely wailing about how some legacy hardware peripheral doesn't have drivers for Lion and it is a non starter . )

If the changes Apple made to the process between import and export are not significant the two end points don't really matter much. Seems like pros should be trying to answer the question of "which process flow would I want to put this into" first before moving onto "how do I put it into the process flow". The first question will actually take a couple of months to figure out ( have to learn the tool to make the evaluation). The second question is a 20 mins or less exercise.

FCPX is missing stuff and not fully functional. However, "can't be used by pros" is a gross overgeneralization.

Apple's screw up is more not composing the list of missing stuff themselves and having it available before product shipped. They didn't have to get into when the features would roll out but should have know someone folks are obsessed with checklists and could quickly decide to wait till later to evaluate.

 

[Dranix]

How about those of us who are already pros?
This IS about pros....and they are running up against massive limitations on this lame lite version.
Admit it (if you can) Apple has dumped on any pros out there whether in video or other spheres.
Now see how far they take this in the new post PC era.
To hear how they bought Shake only to bury it makes my blood boil.

Sorry to be frank - But are you all so stupid that you think broadcast/Hollywood is all there is to the pro area in video editing? They are not - not by far.

 

[wulf]

I'm sorry, did I miss something - when did Apple change the way music was *produced*?

Depends on your definition of "Produced". However that was not my point. I meant music as a business. They definitely changed "who" produced the music as a pro and redefined "pro". agree?

 

[budgynana]

Well.. I could downvote iDisk all day. I'd think he was trolling if it wasn't so consistent.

I was going to do the same thing! lol

Fact of the matter is, in terms of Apple's solution to a "professional" editing application, Final Cut Pro 7 already covered pretty much everything "pros" need all in 1 package (xml's, multicam editing, omf and aaf support, etc). When FCPX was released, missing lots of features that have been discussed ad nauseam, all older versions, and the support for them, was immediately discontinued. What this means is that Apple are effectively saying to all old, and to a lesser extent new, FCP users that may or may need or may or may not have used or relied on them, that they have to abandon these features until such time that they or 3rd parties build support for them.

Whilst you can technically have your own crossover period by having both on the same system, if you bother to look, Apple themselves have a kb article (cba to find the link but will if challenged) where they strongly recommend that you do not have both on the same system. They clearly state that you should run them on seperate startup volumes.

Some people need these missing features, some don't. Some are "professionals", some aren't. Doesn't matter. That aside, and to summise what I said earlier, Apple eol'd a fairly competent suite of apps without releasing a suitably "sufficient" replacement. This is a full commercial release that is designed and placed to replace.

Those are the fundamental facts and I hope everyone on both sides of the fence can agree on those.

Now for personal opinion.

I agree that upgrading mid project, without testing, etc, is stupid and admittedly nobody is forcing you to switch. But the facts are undeniable and there was never a cross over period for people to adjust. And so they are forcing people to come down on one side or the other.

Almost every update of anything does add or remove features but not in the way Apple have done so with this release. This should not have been a 1.0 release. If you release software to replace something that you are going to immediately discontinue you better be damn sure that it is ready. To say that these features are coming, is of high priority or however they state it, is unacceptable. If they had continued Final Cut Pro 7 this wouldn't be anywhere near such a big deal, but they didn't so it is a huge deal! If they didn't name it Final Cut "Pro" X it wouldn't be such a big deal either.

To put this into perspective, I never use the animation facilities within Photoshop and personally I couldn't really care if they got rid of them in a future release because, and this is critical, they have other applications that can plug the gap - fyi I do all my Adobe based animation within After Effects. But for Photoshop dependent users this would be outrageous and I would fully agree. I certainly wouldn't argue against them, but I would "advise" that there is another Adobe application for that task. Where Apple has gone wrong is that they've made no provisions or attempts to fill the gap they have left. Coming soon is not an acceptable response. It's either there or it isn't.

I work in media education and it is an obligation that we prepare our 150+ graduates a year as best as possible for the working world. We cover all disciplines and professional collaboration is an absolute must. For example, our editors must be able to work collaboratively with musicians and sound designers/editors and if their tool of choice is Pro Tools then there must be a way to let them to do so - e.g. aaf. If we were to encapsulate them to something that is as restrictive as FCPX then we are doing a huge disservice (and no we can't buy the Automatic Duck plugin just for this task). It would be morally wrong of us to give them such a specialised set of skills that they would only be able to seek employment using FCPX and not work with anything or anybody else. And then we have to bear in mind that Apple can suddenly change their mind and change the rules of the game!

We were once a strongly Avid orientated institution and we were about to actually officially add Final Cut Pro to our curriculum for editing specialists but we are now having to think again very strongly if this is such a wise move - we have been using it for years but not in an officially taught or supported capacity. As it stands, we have Final Cut Pro 6 so we "could" add it to our teachings but when the time comes for forced upgrades, for those of you that work in large institutions will know that some upgrades are mandatory, Final Cut Pro X absolutely does not meet our needs so we may have to abandon it for pedagogical reasons. FYI, our institution has approx. 100 Final Cut Pro seats, not all used by editing specialists admittedly.

Not really that relevant but remember how Apple tried to remove right mouse clicks?

 

[Oletros]

http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/professional-video-editors-weigh-in-on-final-cut-pro-x/

Apart that the same Apple says that multicam doesn't exists on FCPX by now I don't blame Apple nor 3rd party. I was only responding to someone that said that all those features existed, nothing more.

 

[Rocketman]

All you really need is a bloatware version which includes "advanced mode" which at minimum captures already deployed code so users who need it have access to it.

I understand Apple's fixation on high volume markets and appreciate they bring some advanced features to low end users to the extent they can be simplified.

I simply object to critical pro capabilities being better yesterday than today. Apple could easily just make all the complex stuff available on a "server or pro version" of the app.

People were paying $20k per copy of software to obtain some features. Apple bought it and killed it presumably because they wanted to own key features for consumer product plans.

Apple could easily have a skunkworks division that serves smaller markets with codebases they own.

Rocketman

 

[RebootD]

So Apple has personally contacted every single studio, from start-ups to Hollywood, and personally checked to see if they all have enough copies to keep going until they update FCPX? Got it that makes total sense.

This whole "adding seats" thing is such a baloney argument. Do you ever stop to think Apple knows exactly how many "seats" are getting added on a monthly basis? I'm sure it's not many. They know the numbers, they've run the numbers and they decided they could take the risk of upsetting those tens of added seats (if that many) every month by rewriting the software from scratch to build a significantly improved base that will benefit everyone.

And yes I've worked on TV, live TV, behind the camera, in front of the camera, producing, directing, editing, you name it. I bought my own copies of Final Cut Pro then upgraded to Studio 3 to edit on my own time. I don't feel abandoned at all, and am excited about FCPX and the possibilities it brings. Sucks that I feel like I have to include that, with all the elitist "pros" running around telling people they're noobs who don't know what they're talking about.

 

[smali]

If I didn't know any better, I'd think at least 1,000 of those 10,000 had nothing better to do than post on these forums ... Perhaps people are misusing the "pro" qualification.

... as confirmed by a -14 rating and post #158.

I pointed this out in another thread.

Its hilarious, these "pros" are like on some kind of Jihad against Apple. Its so bad on some sites they are splitting the FCPX forums into "Useful Info" and "pros bitch about FCPX here".

 

[deconstruct60]

I don't know if it's been mentioned, but one possible drawback to ignoring the pro video editing market (i.e. Hollywood) is a reduction in the industry's affinity for Apple hardware.

FCPX is targeted to "Hollywood". It is not targeted to some parts, but there are elements (like audition ) that probably will get used on projects that are end-to-end digital recording and don't outsource to editing chop shops for the editing process. Similarly, for quick editing in the field to see if takes fit together at all or not. So not necessarily literally the "final cut" but some cut.

It is the folks closer to the set that may drop in a Mac because they use it much more than the folks in the back office/trailer/offsite that are doing the final cuts and polish to the video. You don't see folks watching movies/video on tape in shows do you? The "pros" are using tape; according to some.




There is some very high end digital camera support missing, but that can be added over time. Apple isn't necessarily going to write all of that integration software either. It is also easier to do now that the product is official (less onerous NDAs to sign ).

 

[2IS]

It always becomes an Apples to Oranges comparison.

Laptop A has a slightly faster CPU or larger Hard Drive but Laptop B has an aluminum chassis or that new whizzbang port thingamabob.

Again ...almost 4 million Mac users per quarter have looked at the specs and saw value in Macs which means that specifications are subject to the taint of personal evaluation as well. Some specs mean more or less to some people.

Have a read carefully enough for you this time Mr. Semantics?

No you haven't becuase you're still arguing value meaning you're still arguing with yourself. I've never heard anyone refer to "specs" on a PC to anything other than hardware and perhaps screen size and I doubt you have either. So yeah, before making baseless insults on someones pay grade, try to at least be talking about the same thing.

 

[deconstruct60]

Apart that the same Apple says that multicam doesn't exists on FCPX by now I don't blame Apple nor 3rd party. I was only responding to someone that said that all those features existed, nothing more.

That person said that many of the complaints were for stuff that was in the product just done differently. There wasn't a specific list.

 

[Rustus Maximus]

I pointed this out in another thread.

Its hilarious, these "pros" are like on some kind of Jihad against Apple. Its so bad on some sites they are splitting the FCPX forums into "Useful Info" and "pros bitch about FCPX here".

Annnnnd Godwin's Law proves true again. Only instead of Nazis it's now more chic to use Terrorists. The "pros" (in quotes again for extra insult) are no more eeeevilllll for being angry about the present form of Final Cut Pro X (version 1.0 or 10.0 whichever) than those who like FCP X as it stands right now. As I have stated before, it's a tool. Tools change, talent doesn't. Become a good storyteller, which is what an editor is frankly, the means of getting there are many, some easier, some harder.

 

[Oletros]

That person said that many of the complaints were for stuff that was in the product just done differently. There wasn't a specific list.

Yap, he said "a good majority" and I asked for some of the most important

 

[2jaded2care]

I think this release answers the question of whether the 40 people who were laid off earlier from the FCP team were really developers or just unnecessary baggage.

In case anyone hadn't noticed, Apple is in full damage control over this. It is the best early Christmas present (and object lesson) that Apple could have given to Avid and Adobe.

 

[smali]

Annnnnd Godwin's Law proves true again. Only instead of Nazis it's now more chic to use Terrorists.

Actually I'm from an Islamic family and learned about Jihad many years before you even heard of the word that became popularised in national media. Sorry you don't seem so clever now

 

[CameramanDK]

1 more thing all you pro-FCP X guys forget

You seem to forget, ignore or maybe never thought about: The software license for FC Studio is only a small percentage of the investment in an edit suite. Hardware, storage, backup, network etc. is where the dollars are spent in 10.000s - even 100.000s.

With no support for FCS you have to rethink and soon rebuild your infrastructure and workflow. To me its a waste of time and money, only good thing is that a white MacBook or an iPad/iPhone is all Ill ever buy from Apple again. And I was close to getting a new Mac Pro + 30" screen - no reason to do ever. So Apple could have sold me not only the cheap app but also + $10.000 new hardware if.... but they missed the chance.

I would never use Apples 30" to view and check color, focus etc., but from now I cant use any proper monitor. Cant show my clients (who pays my bills) a decent picture...??? As a cameraman this is a dealbraker and theres no workaround.

Was also investing in hardware to record video on hard drives in ProRes 422. Now Im looking for other options because it wont be cut on Final Cut!

Bye bye Apple

 

[chagryph]

Former "Shake" guy.. who is probably bitter that Apple never made a viable replacement for that product when they axed it.... Apple isn't interested in the "pro" market but they're interested in developing more users of FCE and iMovie into pro's by introducing FCPX....

The "Pro" market complainers need to THINK DIFFERENT, not Apple, cause FCPX is different..


I'm tired of the 10% nascent market of "Pro" whiners.... Apple has people who use their products, that can create a great video with the tools they have.. thats called innovation and creativity.

The "Pro" market relies or (relied) on Apple, Apple doesn't rely on them... And if the complaining "Pros" will be patient then they're version of what they think FCPX should be, will return soon... but Apple nor Myself will wait for the "Pros" to give there said blessing on the product...

Quite complaining and just Innovate, remember the guy who edited entire Hollywood blockbuster film on something equivalent to iMovie (but was really final cut) thats called innovation people!!

If Apple didn't want to do anything with the Pro market then they shouldn't have bought Shake, Logic, FCP and shouldn't have created servers and MacPros and other Pro software and hardware. If you are not interested in something then why even start? Oh, wait... it makes perfect sense. They bought all those companies or products so they can kill them and have less competition to deal with.

Now it makes perfect sense.

 

[danimal99]

So Apple has personally contacted every single studio, from start-ups to Hollywood, and personally checked to see if they all have enough copies to keep going until they update FCPX? Got it that makes total sense.

Nope, but it's just simple math. They know exactly how many copies are being registered, so whatever that number is, it's low enough to them that they felt the time was right to make significant changes. The hardware demands an entirely new codebase. The users demand more efficient use of that hardware. The old codebase was no longer sufficient.

It's ridiculous that so many knuckleheads are taking this so personally. It's painfully obvious that "pros" feel threatened by the tools becoming easier to use. Evolve your own skills, or get out of the way of progress.

 

[Rustus Maximus]

Actually I'm from an Islamic family and learned about Jihad many years before you even heard of the word that became popularised in national media. Sorry you don't seem so clever now

None of that changes your roundabout attempt to paint "pros" as crazy militants, which is insulting both to them and any attempt at mature discussion of the concerns surrounding this software release from Apple. Disagree with them if you want, but that doesn't make them insane.

Now if they start going around blowing up Apple stores and kidnapping Apple employees and fans then I think jihad would apply, but as you said, you are already very familiar with what it means.

 

[deconstruct60]

Yap, he said "a good majority" and I asked for some of the most important

The fact is there are a ton of "reviews" out there that all have at least one error in them because the reviewers didn't read the manuals, do tutorials , and/or learn the product. In one of the more negative reviews :

"So far the only people I've seen with positive reviews of the application are those who were in the beta test program, application developers or those who do not make a living as a video editor."
http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/final-cut-pro-x-whats-missing-for-some-pros

Putting aside the last two examples, is it really a surprise that the folks who have actually spent the time and commitment to actually learn and use the product have higher positive outlook as to the usefulness/value of the program? Contrast that with all of the "well I spent all of less than 4 hours trying to use it and I can't figure it out and it doesn't do exactly what I want " reviews. In the 6-9 month future, I have a good feeling about which set of reviews are going to be more accurate if look back to evaluate them.



"Most important" is a relative valuation. For a shop that doesn't have to integrate with some legacy hardware (tape) or have inflexible/external/etc workflow ( export edit metadata ) then several of these aren't as important. Neither one of those have to do with actually doing the edits but can be part of the process.


The software development reality is that sometimes they have to take 100's of different, and often conflicting, "most valuable" rankings on features and come up with a consolidated ordering that will not satisfy everyone. The one that matters is the overall aggregate ordering, not some selected subset of population. Individuals or small groups arguing over what is "most important" is not likely going to be productive since they don't have to be the same between subgroups.

 

[marshzd]

Most Final Cut editors don't need all of these features. Steve was right...they're going to deliver features that most people need...not a small subset of Hollywood producers.

No offense, but this demonstrates how little you know about the industry. As for most "films" and "short films" from "Hollywood", many of them don't need these features. George Lucas' editor doesn't need the features.

Who really needs the features? Television stations across the entire United States. When you are a Post Production house for a TV series you have to be able to deliver in their format the way they want it. When you're doing it for multiple TV shows, you have to be flexible.

This isn't a small subset, this is the entire TV industry that uses Final Cut Pro (the 3 main local news stations here use FCP, and every single Post House that delivers to them uses FCP). None of them (including the company I work for) can use FCPX as it provides none of the options we need. One of the BIGGEST reasons for this are no audio tracks.

It was simple: The first 2 tracks, stereo sound. Second 2 tracks, Spanish translation. Third 2 tracks, Portuguese. On and on including surround sound options and what not so when the file is distributed for broadcast or DVD they have it all there and ready.

Good look doing that with a system that works right now with FCPX (it's coming, but we can't do it now).

So you're right, this doesn't have a lot to do with "Hollywood", but it has a huge amount to do with television. And very little to do with "producers" at all, since it's the Post Supervisors who are going to be making the decisions at the end of the day.

 

[Bubba Satori]

The modern day professional is changing..the days of 6 PCI slots have been gone a long time ago replaced by highly integrated motherboards.

Prepare to be brought into the future kicking and screaming by Apple....once again.

That should be nominated for a Nobel Prize for arrogance and delusional thinking.

How insufferably pompous.

No, rational adult customers will not be "brought into the future kicking and screaming by Apple."

They will go where they are not treated like brain dead iDrones.

 

[subsonix]

Been feeling that since they ditched matte screens in 2007. Lion just reiterates his point by making OSX more "consumery".

Nonsense, tell me what features in the operating system that "professionals" rely on that has been removed? They have added Xsan to Lion, they also introduced Thunderbolt to their computers. They could easily gone with a slower, cheaper, more consumer oriented standard.

I can foresee many professional creatives migrating back to windows within the next year or two once it's painfully obvious (and somehow it isn't yet) that Apple has moved on quite some time ago.

Yeah, because Windows 8 looks so much more "pro".

 

[RebootD]

I think we need to call a doctor because several posters here have a "Selective Reading Comprehension Disorder".

Again, like so many others, you have no idea what you are talking about. Also as I've said before reading + comprehension = your friends.

For the millionth time many have ZERO ISSUE with them starting over with new code but EOL'ing a suite that is still going to be used for some time to come was a stupid and arrogant misstep. Hell I LIKE the new interface and welcome 64bit architecture but they admit, fully, that the replacement is not ready for professional use.

Nope, but it's just simple math. They know exactly how many copies are being registered, so whatever that number is, it's low enough to them that they felt the time was right to make significant changes. The hardware demands an entirely new codebase. The users demand more efficient use of that hardware. The old codebase was no longer sufficient.

It's ridiculous that so many knuckleheads are taking this so personally. It's painfully obvious that "pros" feel threatened by the tools becoming easier to use. Evolve your own skills, or get out of the way of progress.

 

[RebootD]

Adding a bunch of iOS fluff is my justification for calling it 'more consumery'. We already have Expose, Spaces and a wonderful dock, launchpad and all that is just more gimmicky fluff to get the kids to say "WOW!".

And the Windows quote can be replaced with "X" that provides more affordable solutions (or a quad tower that doesn't start at $1k over retail of other machines) and no a glossy iMac is not an option.

Nonsense, tell me what features in the operating system that "professionals" rely on that has been removed? They have added Xsan to Lion, they also introduced Thunderbolt to their computers. They could easily gone with a slower, cheaper, more consumer oriented standard.



Yeah, because Windows 8 looks so much more "pro".