iMovie '08 Was Originally Called 'First Cut', Ubillos on Final Cut Pro X

[jjhny]

The real questions are:

1/ Who branded these "Pros", "Pros"? Their Mums? Putting a video on YT and getting 100,000 hits doesn't automagically entitle you to use "Pro" status, it just means you have the skills it takes to make content.

The definition is that if you get paid for your work or make your living from it you are a "Pro" - if you don't make any money or your living you are an "amateur."

A professional golfer gets paid to golf, an amateur golfer does not. It is fairly straightforward.

2/ How can there be THIS many real professional video editors out there? I can call myself a "Pro" out of the blue - doesn't make me one.

You are right, calling yourself a pro doesn't make you one - and by that logic, Final Cut Pro X isn't a professional app just because it has the word "pro" in it's name. Pro would mean it is for people who get paid using the software, so by definition it is not for the casual or amateur user. That is one issue why people are angry they co-opted the name pro. 'Final Cut Home X' might have worked as a name, 'Final Cut Single User X,' or 'iMovie Pro X' - any of these names and there would be no controversy!

Finally the argument is that it is ALL new - well, ok, so use a new name for it then!

 

[sclawis300]

How has this not been mentioned?????

On a lighter note, has anyone seen Team Coco's response to this?

http://teamcoco.com/video/conan-editors-love-final-cut

 

[Oletros]

Ah, lots of prima donna wannabe "Pros" (A "Pro" what, exactly?), shouting one another down, with their tired, pointless & recycled opinons:

"No, *I'm* the one with the RIGHT opinion - listen to ME, because MY opinion is RIGHT. PERIOD. Apple have just..." zzzz ZZZZZZZ

And you're doing exactly the same.


And insulting everyone which doesn't have your opinion

 

[ctakim]

Think of FCP X as a disruptive innovation.

Simple truth is Apple is done with the pro market. FCPX was just the latest in the long list of middle fingers Apple has given the people who supported them threw the tough times.
[snip]

Actually, I disagree. I don't think Apple has made a conscious decision to abandon the professional market, but they are taking a big gamble about the next step forward. So as to not cross post, I'll reference my own perspective on this here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1177352/

I think they are gambling on how to leapfrog to the next generation of core software technology for video editing. They've made a conscious effort to make an abrupt transition, which may backfire. But it is in Apple's DNA to push the envelope in this way. However, I do feel for those professionals who have pushed for the use of FCP, yet now feel abandoned. It must be quite gut wrenching.

 

[LoganT]

The most likely reason that Apple doesn't sell Final Cut Studio anymore is probably because most people already own it. It's not worth it to stock FCS on shelves, when most people who needed it, have already bought it. Plus, Apple might just assume that if you really need it, you could just pirate it. Or, install from someone else's copy.

 

[econgeek]

This thread is just like attempting to discuss video camera capabilities with people. You find a whole bunch of canon fans claiming that canon cameras are "pro" and that everything else sucks because it isn't "pro".

They don't understand the technology. They can't make a specific argument. They can't defend when the canon implementation is demonstrably poorer for video than a competitors. They don't even listen to that.

They just keep insisting that because they are a "pro" anything they like is also "professional quality" and anything they don't is amateur.

I doubt most of them have ever gotten a paid gig.

And, for what its worth, even though it's irrelevant-- I've been getting paid to cut going back to the days when cuts were made with special razorblades.

 

[Oletros]

This thread is just like attempting to discuss video camera capabilities with people. You find a whole bunch of canon fans claiming that canon cameras are "pro" and that everything else sucks because it isn't "pro".

They don't understand the technology. They can't make a specific argument. They can't defend when the canon implementation is demonstrably poorer for video than a competitors. They don't even listen to that.

They just keep insisting that because they are a "pro" anything they like is also "professional quality" and anything they don't is amateur.

I doubt most of them have ever gotten a paid gig.

And, for what its worth, even though it's irrelevant-- I've been getting paid to cut going back to the days when cuts were made with special razorblades.

If you're saying that those "pro's" aren't doing specific arguments the ones which are not listening or reading are not those "pro's"

 

[illbeback]

Maybe good later on, but right now it sucks.

Tell me any 1st version of software that "has it all"?
Listen, there's FCP 7 so use that and get used to FCP X in the background till the feature set gets there.
At least it'll be 64 bit.
Hey, I know... why don't YOU architect the next NLE!

 

[arn]

On a lighter note, has anyone seen Team Coco's response to this?

http://teamcoco.com/video/conan-editors-love-final-cut

check out our sub-blogs on the sidebar

 

[jjhny]

Run everything through a KiPro - that solves your tape problem.

That is nice! And, yes, going forward, sure - look likes a good solution. AJA is a great company - I own a KONA board.

But it doesn't handle the racks and racks of digibeta, betasp, etc, etc. at the existing facilities.

Tape input is a module in a program, it is not rocket science how it operates - it doesn't have to be 64 bit. What we are all arguing about here is an arrogant streak from Randy U. He went on vacation and decided none of us have tape libraries anymore because he doesn't. Or that we don't need older projects, because once his vacation tape is done, who cares about the old project. Or Randy doesn't need to send his vacation videos to a sound post-house - a few fixes and tweaks in FCPX and the family will love it!

That's the lunacy. He chose not to understand the complicated part of the biz. Literally ignored it - and he decided for us. He didn't attempt to fully understand it. That's the definition of narcissism, not having empathy for those you deal with.

The fight here isn't about new features and 64 bit - I am the biggest booster of the new engine and certain other aspects like compositing groups of clips. It is what Randy left out (that he didn't have to). That is the crux of the problem. It's the narcissism of one guy. At least Steve Jobs is generally right, more times than wrong!

 

[manu chao]

The other option is to just switch to Adobe and get CS 5.5 Master Collection or Avid MC, which a lot of people are planning for unless Apple makes some kind of extreme public announcement on a major path change SOON. At this point it's in the same category as iPhone antenna issue

So, what impact did 'Antennagate' had on iPhone 4 sales? If the backlash against FCP X has the same consequences, I don't think Apple needs to be worried. In particular since Apple did not actually had to do anything besides public handholding to 'solve' the antenna issue.

 

[TMay]

Actually, I disagree. I don't think Apple has made a conscious decision to abandon the professional market, but they are taking a big gamble about the next step forward. So as to not cross post, I'll reference my own perspective on this here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1177352/

I think they are gambling on how to leapfrog to the next generation of core software technology for video editing. They've made a conscious effort to make an abrupt transition, which may backfire. But it is in Apple's DNA to push the envelope in this way. However, I do feel for those professionals who have pushed for the use of FCP, yet now feel abandoned. It must be quite gut wrenching.

(more paragraphs please!)

I have to concur, and frankly, I can't see that Apple had a choice. Look how long it took to wean even themselves of carbon for cocoa technology.

FCP 7 is deprecated. There isn't any other way to look at it. For those that need support of what is rapidly becoming legacy technology (film, et al), now would be a good time to abandon Apple and look elsewhere.

On the other hand, FCPX will be attract tens of thousands of dslr wielding amateurs on the way to becoming the next RED wielding Ridley Scott or Quentin Tarentino.

Either way, Apple has demonstrated time and again that they will put a bullet in old technology, and that is what has happened.

Let Avid and Adobe absorb that legacy market, if that is to be, but I suspect that the future will not be kind to them for that.

 

[charlituna]

At this point we'd need someone like Donald Trump sitting at a table and saying: "you're fired!". Who do we fire for such an epic disaster? I wouldn't exclude having to fire Steve Jobs again. After all he pushed for Imovie 08 which nobody wants.

In order to call this an 'epic disaster' we would need to know the number of actual sales, how many folks were unhappy versus happy or satisfied enough with the point zero release to wait and see what happens.

We would also need to know how many folks are actually impacted by the lack of any given missing feature etc. Rather than just mad that something really cool that they never used and don't really need but liked having around for the cool points.

Point of fact, us truly pro editors know now to expect much when a software is completely revamped. We know that the first couple of months will be learning the new system while the bugs are fixed and features come back on line. We keep our old software going in the meantime so we can keep meeting deadlines and making money. We also rarely trash the disks etc for our old software in case we revisit former projects. I myself can restore back to my Final Cut Pro 3 set up.

We aren't really impacted by any of this because we are pretty much all in the midst of projects and only a total moron switches something mid project. So we will be on our FCP7, Avid etc for a while longer. Possibly as much as a year from now by which time FCPX will likely be in a much better place

I remember all the "oohs and aahs" at the Final Cut Supermeet in April when Apple first unveiled FCPX. I watched that entire video. There were so many new time-saving features. And the people in the audience were going crazy.

I would be curious to see the comments from those that were all over the blogosphere praising the preview now that they have the product in their hands.

 

[morningsong]

One of the things people bashing the pros miss is that most are also HUGE apple fans. Many of us in the industry have spent the past however many years, fighting engineering and IT departments just trying to get mac products INTO the workplace. Last year, my facility did a $500,000 upgrade for post. Getting FC rooms up and going was a battle...but something me and a few of my editors felt was the right path.

One of my editors bought FCPX on release day and has deemed none of our workflow will be supported out of the gate. That is more than disappointing.

Again, I'm platform independent at my facility, so it doesn't matter much (we have 4 online rooms, 4 avid bays and 2 final cut rooms)...but as an apple fan, it sucks that after years of arguing the positive side of OSX, the engineers get the last laugh.

Those throwing stones at people venting should give a little slack here, someday you might be the one getting the shaft.

 

[butterfly0fdoom]

Could you imagine if they hadn't have redone iMovie when they did, what it would be like now? disastrous. We'd all have core i5 macs, DSLR HD footage and a clunky piece of bloatware that was written 10 years ago that still cant place a line of text over a video and play it back in real time. THIS would be a big problem. It'd still be 32 bit and wouldn't use all of our ram. It wouldn't use openCL or GCD or any of the modern technologies, what... so people could still be content using something they were familiar with 3 years ago?

iMovie isn't 64-bit and doesn't use GCD.

 

[Jerome Morrow]

One of my editors bought FCPX on release day and has deemed none of our workflow will be supported out of the gate. That is more than disappointing.

Was he expecting to use the next day or week or even month? I'd like to think NO, but if he did than ...

 

[charlituna]

Digital downloads are a step forward, yes.
Discontinuing DVD sales today is not.

See the point?

Thing is, the only way to really get folks to change is to force it. So long as DVDs are still around, folks will demand them. What 'you' want won't matter. But if you take the DVDs out of the game then folks will have to change or live without

 

[mdriftmeyer]

At this point we'd need someone like Donald Trump sitting at a table and saying: "you're fired!". Who do we fire for such an epic disaster? I wouldn't exclude having to fire Steve Jobs again. After all he pushed for Imovie 08 which nobody wants.

How about you fire yourself. When the next point update arrives with an extensive array of additions and improved missing features will you continue to whine about this product? I'm better you will.

 

[iBug2]

You are right, calling yourself a pro doesn't make you one - and by that logic, Final Cut Pro X isn't a professional app just because it has the word "pro" in it's name. Pro would mean it is for people who get paid using the software, so by definition it is not for the casual or amateur user. That is one issue why people are angry they co-opted the name pro. 'Final Cut Home X' might have worked as a name, 'Final Cut Single User X,' or 'iMovie Pro X' - any of these names and there would be no controversy!

Actually there would be. FCP X can be used by a lot of people who make money out of editing. This has been pointed out even by the most violent criticizers of this app. It just isn't ready for all of them. So by your definition, this is a pro app.

Or if your definition requires for an app to be usable for absolutely every single professional in a market, then FCP 7 wasn't a pro app either, because many people were using Avid MC due to certain missing features on FCP 7.

If a pro app needs to satisfy everyone, then probably only Avid came close, but if it needs to satisfy some pro's, then both FCP 7 and FCP X are pro apps.

 

[NAG]

Thing is, the only way to really get folks to change is to force it. So long as DVDs are still around, folks will demand them. What 'you' want won't matter. But if you take the DVDs out of the game then folks will have to change or live without

It really does read exactly like what happened to floppies and to some extent ADB and SCSI. Apple dropping ADB and SCSI was also another claimed "huge middle finger to the pros" (at least they said that at the time). Maybe people who think Apple is actively hating them (whether they identify themselves as pro or not) should take deep breath and look at the situation. Nah, it is much more fun to rant on internet forums and blogs!

 

[iphonepiephone]

It really does read exactly like what happened to floppies and to some extent ADB and SCSI. Apple dropping ADB and SCSI was also another claimed "huge middle finger to the pros" (at least they said that at the time). Maybe people who think Apple is actively hating them (whether they identify themselves as pro or not) should take deep breath and look at the situation. Nah, it is much more fun to rant on internet forums and blogs!

LOL @ SCSI - never did quite work out all that crazyness with cables and terminating resistors... what a nightmare, and GREAT thing to abandon!

 

[Rodimus Prime]

It really does read exactly like what happened to floppies and to some extent ADB and SCSI. Apple dropping ADB and SCSI was also another claimed "huge middle finger to the pros" (at least they said that at the time). Maybe people who think Apple is actively hating them (whether they identify themselves as pro or not) should take deep breath and look at the situation. Nah, it is much more fun to rant on internet forums and blogs!

Apple dropped the floppy before their was a good replacement for them.
At the time Apple dropped the floppy please tell me how you would move small files between computers. Oh wait that was done by floppy.

Remember at the time Blank CD were 2-3 bucks a piece IF you could find them. On top of that burners at the time were several 100 bucks so again they were very costly.
Flash drives did not existed so that was not an option.
Email at the time was text only and file attachment was not easy to do if all all. These were the days of dial up. Download speeds was at 10 mins per meg. Inbox sizes were maxing out at 1-2 megs.

So please tell me how would you transfer files between computers?

No one is arguing that floppies were on their way out. We could all see they would be phased out. Optical media still has years left in it. We do not have a suitable replacement really in place yet. We do not have the bandwidth really out there to download those files. Until we get down to 1 gig per min in terms of download speed it just is not happening. Right best case is 10 min per gig. When that gets down to 1/10 the speed for cheap price then yes we optical media will be dead but until then not going to happen.

As for SCSI I believe those are still used today but more in server environments. Something Apple has not really had any real operation in for years so not really an issue there.

Now Apple really should offer ESata ports at the least or Esata/USB since those plug directly into the SATA controller on a computer and you basically get the speed of it being a native hard drive. Apple lags in those departments.

 

[slackpacker]

As an owner of Final Cut X this is going to be an interesting ride

 

[ryanlaing]

Jesus, I just read some of the most upvoted comments on from the front page of this article.. The bias for apple on this site is disgusting. People saying 'get used to it, it's just differnt, its the same guy who made fcp7, people would love fcpx if they never had fcp7, i'm a pro and i'm loving this.'

Everything here is mostly positive. These are NOT the average opinions of people who legitimately know and use Final Cut.

Honestly, none of you have any idea what you're talking about. I really think there a bunch of apple fans on this site hiding from the truth. This program is good for the average user. There are some needed improvements. But compared to FCP7, it is just missing too many features and the interface has been dumbed down too far to be put in a pro category. Pro as in professional and pro as in productive. There are simply too many limitations.

People who truly take advantage of the complexity of FCP will not welcome the new version. Simple as that. People who are learning FCPX as their first form of editing will be missing out on much of what has become necessary to know. It has a solid core to build from, and I really hope Apple will. But I'm genuinely worried they are leaving true FCP behind.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Now Apple really should offer ESata ports at the least or Esata/USB since those plug directly into the SATA controller on a computer and you basically get the speed of it being a native hard drive. Apple lags in those departments.

a $19.00 dollar bracket is all you need.

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/NewerTech/MPQXES2/