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.
Reality TV Producer Bunim/Murray Drops Final Cut For Avid
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, we can say "good job" to them as that's the general idea - you're not supposed to know - or at minimum not think about it.
A slightly less repulsive brand of "reality tv" is the stuff you fin all over the "home channels" where they make it look like a team of 3 or 4 beautiful people give a house a makeover (or whatever) in one day. If you look around and behind the camera (which you can't, of course) there are bunches of people flyin' all over the place doing the real work while the beautiful people film the show while doing "see how I paint this wall <*insert gleeming smile and sleek hair*>".
Also, for Avid to claim this guy or company or whatever "it is" that ruined MTV with these "shows" is a joke. Hopefully Avid will go down the toilet with them. (No idea why that would happen, just wishing ill will on the social parasite that is reality tv.)
Also, that Avid thinks this company/person/whatever was "pioneering" -- they are no such thing. "reality tv" has been around since the 1940's. Look it up.
The only thing they pioneered was the ruination of MTV.
-Matt
----------
Umm....try that medicine before you go handing it out, eh?
You may not have considered it this way, but you are flogging the oldest, deadest horse in the anti-Apple stable.
Did you get a chance to read any of the general press covering Apple between say.....1977 and 2001? At least you didn't say "beleaguered" or infer that they're going to go out of business now...or did you? Hrm.
The reality of that whole period is that the market distortion that was the IBM-Microsoft IT monopoly was all that kept Apple (and some of the other platform alternatives - yes, plural - not just Apple) from doing much better than they did.
Outside of the period when they gave co-founder of Apple, Steve Jobs, his walking papers* and when they invited hum back, they as a company have pretty much had their eye on the ball. Even without Steve they managed to only be two or three times as good as their competition - just never showed in sales. (This is not to say they've been without faults....just not enough of them to explain history.)
-Matt
* Something "business-American-style" has convinced itself is a good thing for companies to do.
----------
This makes me think you've never, ever, seen porn.
"Practically" not true by almost 20 years. We may all find this interesting.
Or not.
-Matt
----------
I know this wasn't your main point, but I think it's generally worth pointing out:
If anyone out there finds a perfect company, either that person isn't paying very close attention, or they've died and gone to heaven.
-Matt
Last edited:
Only NLE? No. First ever NLE? No. But Avid was instrumental in the demise of cutting celluloid editing and the linear editing of videotape. It became synonymous with 'NLE' for a reason
If you feel like geeking out beyond Wikipedia's incredibly abbreviated history you should check out a great book called Droidmaker: George Lucas And the Digital Revolution.
Lethal
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
And your sorely mis-guided if you think the consumers love fest with Apple will continue indefinitely. It's pure logic - and we can see from history that nearly all consumer products fall in an out of favour for whatever reason. Nothing anti-apple about it .
You may not have considered it this way, but you are flogging the oldest, deadest horse in the anti-Apple stable.
Did you get a chance to read any of the general press covering Apple between say.....1977 and 2001? At least you didn't say "beleaguered" or infer that they're going to go out of business now...or did you? Hrm.
The reality of that whole period is that the market distortion that was the IBM-Microsoft IT monopoly was all that kept Apple (and some of the other platform alternatives - yes, plural - not just Apple) from doing much better than they did.
Outside of the period when they gave co-founder of Apple, Steve Jobs, his walking papers* and when they invited hum back, they as a company have pretty much had their eye on the ball. Even without Steve they managed to only be two or three times as good as their competition - just never showed in sales. (This is not to say they've been without faults....just not enough of them to explain history.)
-Matt
* Something "business-American-style" has convinced itself is a good thing for companies to do.
----------
This makes me think you've never, ever, seen porn.
Your statement is right on the money and I stated this before also. People can compare FCPX to all other editing software all they want, you can talk about adding more functions, but right now, as it is, the architecture of the basic software is not working properly. Adding more features is not the answer at this point. We can talk all about the word "professional" and the semantics associated with that but fixing what has already been developed is the priority & answer
It's like a car with no air conditioning and the power windows don't work. You can add all kinds of features within the car and it's dashboard but if you can't modify the temperature while driving, no one will want that car
This next update is crucial. If the basic architecture is not fixed in regards to the enormous amount of issues and bugs, there is no way you can promote this product further without people getting more and more frustrated
As I said, I'm sure you didn't intend it that way....but you fit lock step in their footprints. Make of that what you will.
Of course trends don't last (by definition, almost)...Windows has run its course. If that can, anything can. Apple refreshes itself....no one-trick pony like Microsoft.
I think we're off-topic by now though.
-Matt
What do you mean basic architecture?
I agree there's a lot wrong with FCP X - but there's a lot right to.
One thing that bugged me in particular over the past three day's of intensively editing on X is lack of control over screen layout. You can work round it but its a pain. In my case I've been editing with the viewer on a 2nd display (cutting on a MBP). The timeline list is totally incredible but why can't I move it above so its in-between the inspector and event list.
Final Cut Pro X has a safety built in.
If the content of edited material falls below brain dead, it shuts off.
This is the only reason why reality TV may not be editable with FCP X.
FINAL CUT PRO / Not all editing is the same / Apple can't be trusted
-----
As someone who has edited since the ripe age of 11, and professionally for HBO since age 15, when there was only film, 2-inch Quad videotape, 1/2-inch reel-to-reel EIAJ video recorders and finally 3/4-inch cassettes (there was no Betamax or VHS in the home yet), I worked my way up to post supervising The Academy Awards (R) and The Primetime Emmy (R) Awards, and ask to please allow me humble input on this subject in my first-ever MacRumors post/reply.
1. Not all editing is the same. When you see things like 'Oscar (R)(TM)-winner 'The Social Network' edited on Apple Final Cut Pro, you may not realize that most motion picture off-line (creative) editing is done as simple CUTS and maybe a few dissolves. The "finishing" happens in the "on-line" edit, with Digital Intermediate or negative cutting. An effects heavy film like Spider-Man will have just the main cuts done while all the effects shots are composited elsewhere and brought-in as completed clips to give the editor, director and producers an idea of what will happen later.
A timeline for a t.v. show or t.v. promo, and in some movie trailers -- with flying motion graphics, interstitials, effects, is a much more complex editing timeline, and that's where Final Cut repeatedly fought you versus Avid flowing with you. A reality show can have 24 or more cameras with 50+ video/audio tracks all sync'd on a timeline -- much more advanced than a movie that has 1 or 2 video tracks with simple cut, cut, cuts.
The move by the respected Bunim/Murray is a major statement; as was Disney/ABC's frustration with trying to upgrade over 2,000 Final Cut editing stations one-by-one because of Apple's repeated missteps.
2. Let's not kid ourselves: While I love Apple, the only reason Final Cut Pro made any imprint in theatrical, broadcast and professional industries was its low entry cost. At a time when Avid was the defacto standard, but its software cost $50,000 and exclusive hardware to connect it all was another $50,000, FCP's software-only entry at $1,000 made a lot of sense. A school could set-up 100 desks for the cost of 1 Avid. That didn't mean FCP was better because they quickly grabbed market share. The Betamax was a far superior home VCR than VHS, but Sony was initially greedy and controlled all Betamaxes - while VHS licensed it to whomever wanted to make one (is there a parallel to Windows and Apple here - the better OS always being in Apple's domain, but Apple's exclusivity led to higher prices, and so the public went cheap with ubiquitous IBM/MS-DOS instead?)
FCP did force Avid to look at their cocky ways and re-invent itself, and lower their prices drastically. FCP's early trade ads were even mis-leading, showing a $75,000 FCP edit suite with a bold headline "Edit for $995." The $995 was only for the software and not all the things in Apple's picture, showing a Miramax feature being edited on a $50,000 Sony HD monitor and about $200,000 worth of needed gear.
With Apple, many high schools and colleges could now afford editing via FCP - which was great. Greedy career editing adult schools would continue to fool naive first-timers by loading laptops with the best John Williams score and Steven Speilberg-shot stock footage, ask students to grab a mouse and put some clips together - then voila, hit the play button and see how "easy" it was to become a well-paid editor. These students were "editing," - they weren't "editors." When giving lectures, I can stand in a room full of 30 students; we can all grab a spray paint can and paint the wall blue. Maybe only 1 in the class is Picasso. Editing has, and always will be an art based on something that isn't "taught" -- human emotion. Avid, FCP, PremierePro, Vegas, Media 100 and the like are tools, but they don't make an artist. I still force editing students to cut film and even edit with two VHS machines or (3) Betacam SP analog decks with a controller, editing linearly, before I sit them down at a non-linear editor.
I really wanted to LOVE FCP. I ended-up investing a lot of time and money for external boxes and forced half my projects to go with FCP; leaving the remaining to Avid. And I appreciated the low cost entry-point for democratizing what used to be a nearly impossible field to enter in due to its restrictive cost (I grew up in the projects and had to force myself into a black-and-white training films post facility to earn my chops at age 11).
We would yell at Avid saying, "remember when you were scoffed at as the new kids on the block in 1995? Remember the lesson in Sony's mistake with the Betamax? Your software came down to $2,495, but you won't open your hardware to third-parties, so that still costs $25,000. This is where FCP has got ya." Avid finally listened, and Avid 5 and the new 6.0 is now open.
3. Apple and Steve Jobs got cocky - they never listened. Having a grandfather who was a WWII hero, who instead of taking a purple heart, asked to re-enlist with his men on the front line, he taught me that I should talk to the people on the front line and consider all options before making any decision as a leader. Apple becoming iGadget lost its way, and said, "You are going to do it our way - we are reinventing editing." Editing didn't need to be re-invented. I can't tell you how many times AVID listened to me when I was a nobody in the industry and actually implemented changes. Final Cut Pro could have been made 100% better by 7 small changes in the way it does things; instead, Apple blew it up and re-invented a wheel when all we wanted was some power-windows, navigation, and better air conditioning. I've showed the small changes of Avid vs. FCP in systems side-by-side.
Apple TOLD the world how the iPhone and iPad would be, and for those consumer products, that was great.
The writing was on the wall with them destroying "SHAKE," ignoring Blu-ray, and not keeping their MacPro Workstations up-to-date. I bought my first Apple PowerBook when it was the first with a 17-inch screen; the first with a WiFi antenna built-in instead of having a USB stick protruding out of it; the first with a DVD burner; the longest battery life and then a cheap Final Cut Pro to edit on location with. That was the best $5,000 investment in hardware I ever made, and even used it on a live Fox Sports national broadcast, impressing my producers and the director. But I still often had to do 5 steps for every 1 I did in Avid. The old Apple Computer would not have waited for Thunderbolt - they would have been the first with USB3 and Blu-ray burners as the mid-step. And people like me would have bought 3 systems for our home edit suites.
I am still holding out for a new MacPro workstation, but am worried that like with FCP-X, Apple will screw it up. I love Apple's OS and it is an example of improvements done right. SHAKE should be #1 and be giving NUKE a run. MacPro's should be setting trends, not following them 2 years behind. Apple should bite the bullet, kill FCP-X and call it iMovie Plus, and make the small changes to FCP-7. The "PRO" has left Apple's soul, and making plans for the next 5-10 years, Apple is proving it can't be trusted.
So are you listening, Apple? Your die-hard fans are holding hope.
www.KitchenTableEditorial.com
Hollywood
-----
As someone who has edited since the ripe age of 11, and professionally for HBO since age 15, when there was only film, 2-inch Quad videotape, 1/2-inch reel-to-reel EIAJ video recorders and finally 3/4-inch cassettes (there was no Betamax or VHS in the home yet), I worked my way up to post supervising The Academy Awards (R) and The Primetime Emmy (R) Awards, and ask to please allow me humble input on this subject in my first-ever MacRumors post/reply.
1. Not all editing is the same. When you see things like 'Oscar (R)(TM)-winner 'The Social Network' edited on Apple Final Cut Pro, you may not realize that most motion picture off-line (creative) editing is done as simple CUTS and maybe a few dissolves. The "finishing" happens in the "on-line" edit, with Digital Intermediate or negative cutting. An effects heavy film like Spider-Man will have just the main cuts done while all the effects shots are composited elsewhere and brought-in as completed clips to give the editor, director and producers an idea of what will happen later.
A timeline for a t.v. show or t.v. promo, and in some movie trailers -- with flying motion graphics, interstitials, effects, is a much more complex editing timeline, and that's where Final Cut repeatedly fought you versus Avid flowing with you. A reality show can have 24 or more cameras with 50+ video/audio tracks all sync'd on a timeline -- much more advanced than a movie that has 1 or 2 video tracks with simple cut, cut, cuts.
The move by the respected Bunim/Murray is a major statement; as was Disney/ABC's frustration with trying to upgrade over 2,000 Final Cut editing stations one-by-one because of Apple's repeated missteps.
2. Let's not kid ourselves: While I love Apple, the only reason Final Cut Pro made any imprint in theatrical, broadcast and professional industries was its low entry cost. At a time when Avid was the defacto standard, but its software cost $50,000 and exclusive hardware to connect it all was another $50,000, FCP's software-only entry at $1,000 made a lot of sense. A school could set-up 100 desks for the cost of 1 Avid. That didn't mean FCP was better because they quickly grabbed market share. The Betamax was a far superior home VCR than VHS, but Sony was initially greedy and controlled all Betamaxes - while VHS licensed it to whomever wanted to make one (is there a parallel to Windows and Apple here - the better OS always being in Apple's domain, but Apple's exclusivity led to higher prices, and so the public went cheap with ubiquitous IBM/MS-DOS instead?)
FCP did force Avid to look at their cocky ways and re-invent itself, and lower their prices drastically. FCP's early trade ads were even mis-leading, showing a $75,000 FCP edit suite with a bold headline "Edit for $995." The $995 was only for the software and not all the things in Apple's picture, showing a Miramax feature being edited on a $50,000 Sony HD monitor and about $200,000 worth of needed gear.
With Apple, many high schools and colleges could now afford editing via FCP - which was great. Greedy career editing adult schools would continue to fool naive first-timers by loading laptops with the best John Williams score and Steven Speilberg-shot stock footage, ask students to grab a mouse and put some clips together - then voila, hit the play button and see how "easy" it was to become a well-paid editor. These students were "editing," - they weren't "editors." When giving lectures, I can stand in a room full of 30 students; we can all grab a spray paint can and paint the wall blue. Maybe only 1 in the class is Picasso. Editing has, and always will be an art based on something that isn't "taught" -- human emotion. Avid, FCP, PremierePro, Vegas, Media 100 and the like are tools, but they don't make an artist. I still force editing students to cut film and even edit with two VHS machines or (3) Betacam SP analog decks with a controller, editing linearly, before I sit them down at a non-linear editor.
I really wanted to LOVE FCP. I ended-up investing a lot of time and money for external boxes and forced half my projects to go with FCP; leaving the remaining to Avid. And I appreciated the low cost entry-point for democratizing what used to be a nearly impossible field to enter in due to its restrictive cost (I grew up in the projects and had to force myself into a black-and-white training films post facility to earn my chops at age 11).
We would yell at Avid saying, "remember when you were scoffed at as the new kids on the block in 1995? Remember the lesson in Sony's mistake with the Betamax? Your software came down to $2,495, but you won't open your hardware to third-parties, so that still costs $25,000. This is where FCP has got ya." Avid finally listened, and Avid 5 and the new 6.0 is now open.
3. Apple and Steve Jobs got cocky - they never listened. Having a grandfather who was a WWII hero, who instead of taking a purple heart, asked to re-enlist with his men on the front line, he taught me that I should talk to the people on the front line and consider all options before making any decision as a leader. Apple becoming iGadget lost its way, and said, "You are going to do it our way - we are reinventing editing." Editing didn't need to be re-invented. I can't tell you how many times AVID listened to me when I was a nobody in the industry and actually implemented changes. Final Cut Pro could have been made 100% better by 7 small changes in the way it does things; instead, Apple blew it up and re-invented a wheel when all we wanted was some power-windows, navigation, and better air conditioning. I've showed the small changes of Avid vs. FCP in systems side-by-side.
Apple TOLD the world how the iPhone and iPad would be, and for those consumer products, that was great.
The writing was on the wall with them destroying "SHAKE," ignoring Blu-ray, and not keeping their MacPro Workstations up-to-date. I bought my first Apple PowerBook when it was the first with a 17-inch screen; the first with a WiFi antenna built-in instead of having a USB stick protruding out of it; the first with a DVD burner; the longest battery life and then a cheap Final Cut Pro to edit on location with. That was the best $5,000 investment in hardware I ever made, and even used it on a live Fox Sports national broadcast, impressing my producers and the director. But I still often had to do 5 steps for every 1 I did in Avid. The old Apple Computer would not have waited for Thunderbolt - they would have been the first with USB3 and Blu-ray burners as the mid-step. And people like me would have bought 3 systems for our home edit suites.
I am still holding out for a new MacPro workstation, but am worried that like with FCP-X, Apple will screw it up. I love Apple's OS and it is an example of improvements done right. SHAKE should be #1 and be giving NUKE a run. MacPro's should be setting trends, not following them 2 years behind. Apple should bite the bullet, kill FCP-X and call it iMovie Plus, and make the small changes to FCP-7. The "PRO" has left Apple's soul, and making plans for the next 5-10 years, Apple is proving it can't be trusted.
So are you listening, Apple? Your die-hard fans are holding hope.
www.KitchenTableEditorial.com
Hollywood
The future has pimples...!
Dinosaurs indeed. While Avid makes truly wonderful equipment (heck, I used the stuff many years ago!), they ARE NOT the future of media. Instead of being shot with thirty-thousand dollar cameras (that likely weigh thirty pounds as well) and edited on $250,000 Avid suites by chain-smoking fifty-something hippies, the "future" of media production is much more likely going to consist of visionary pimple-faced teens and twenty-somethings, shooting footage on two hundred dollar 3D-HD iPhone 5/6/7's, and editing/publishing directly on their Cloud enabled iPads; resulting in an interactive end product.
But don't worry, these "new" artists will set aside plenty of time to go and visit their grandfather over at the old folks home/Avid studio for an occasional glass of tea. They are good kids, mind you!
Dinosaurs indeed. While Avid makes truly wonderful equipment (heck, I used the stuff many years ago!), they ARE NOT the future of media. Instead of being shot with thirty-thousand dollar cameras (that likely weigh thirty pounds as well) and edited on $250,000 Avid suites by chain-smoking fifty-something hippies, the "future" of media production is much more likely going to consist of visionary pimple-faced teens and twenty-somethings, shooting footage on two hundred dollar 3D-HD iPhone 5/6/7's, and editing/publishing directly on their Cloud enabled iPads; resulting in an interactive end product.
But don't worry, these "new" artists will set aside plenty of time to go and visit their grandfather over at the old folks home/Avid studio for an occasional glass of tea. They are good kids, mind you!
Well said.
I'll answer for them: Not here.
Hopefully you took the time (or will) to put that into feedback they will be listening for.
http://www.apple.com/feedback/finalcutpro.html
-Matt
Thank you, Matt.
I did manage to get it posted on Apple's forum, but in about 45 min. the administrators took it down and sent it instead to corporate feedback privately, and I understand why. In the past, I have defended Steve Jobs and received thank you's from corporate (New York Times selected comment on the iPad Page-Turn effect http://tinyurl.com/2w9rkr7)
When A.C.E. (American Cinema Editors) went to Apple years ago and said, "We'd like to see these things in Final Cut Pro," Apple just said "thanks" and ignored us. Ditto for many involved with the prestigious Directors Guild of America (DGA) who earned our chops editing (Steven Soderbergh couldn't afford time code options in early 3/4-inch machines when time code was a luxury, so he "cuts-only" edited "Sex Lies & Videotape" and manually wrote-down time code numbers burned into a window on the screen on both the source side and the record side for the entire movie - giving that to his negative cutter!)
When the professionals (and even struggling ones like me) went to Avid and said, "you guys need to change this; and don't change anything else," they listened.
I appreciate a CEO's job is to maximize shareholder return, but there are past lessons in corporate history, legacy and responsibility to the arts that have preceded Apple that it could learn from. After all, Apple tends to be a progressive-thinking company.
There are great parallels with the automobile industry and broadcast/professional electronics in my industry. In the 1960's and 1970's, bigger was better, and companies like Ampex (inventors of the first 2-inch videotape format - 3 refrigerator sizes long and $120,000 in 1970 dollars) and RCA were the kings. When Sony and Panasonic came along with little 1/2-inch reel-to-reel video machines that barely made a picture, the Americans laughed. Surely, the Toyotas that could barely climb a small hill would never out-sell the gas-guzzling Cadillac.
In the late 1970's that started to change. As a kid who was awed by Ampex and RCA's 2-inch videotape technology made by brilliant engineers, it was sad to see that these two pioneers were asleep at the wheel. Today, both Ampex and RCA (and most American manufacturers) are out of the broadcast business. And Mr. Akio Morita's Sony and Matsushita's Panasonic are at the top of their heap, surely helped by their Betamax and VHS inventions.
The point is that those consumer gadgets - by mass sales - helped the companies R&D on the high-end side of what is today HDCAM-SR video recorders (MSRP $120,000) and Panasonic D5-HD ($100,000). Digital Betacam ($60k, 1994) is the defacto Standard Definition delivery standard.
While Sony may sell some 70,000 HDCAM VTRs worldwide, they probably sold a hundred million VCRs, CD and DVD players and TV sets. Yet they never give-up the R&D on the broadcast/professional markets, and even maintain the industrial/medical and pro-sumer markets as well. A ton of Sony and Panasonic equipment is used to make the programming that the consumer watches at home.
Apple could use its iGadget dominance to do the same, and not treat its pro market as a bastard child.
Very interesting read, your last few posts Film35HD.
I'm a DP (that also had a few semesters cutting on pic syncs and steinbecks in film school, the last that actually cut on film physically in my school)
I went from shooting film to digital video and now own a RED Epic. I invested in final cut as I sometime needs to edit myself. I was not happy to have to buy Premiere a few months back so I could edit and sync my RED footage. Spending time re learning editing software is not something I like to do (as I'm not a pro editor, but someone that needs to hand out rough cuts from time to time)
(I figured out FCPX quite quickly, but it dosent work for me (yet)
I really don't like Premiere that much, but I does with with my footage easily.
Wish Apple sorted this out
I'm a DP (that also had a few semesters cutting on pic syncs and steinbecks in film school, the last that actually cut on film physically in my school)
I went from shooting film to digital video and now own a RED Epic. I invested in final cut as I sometime needs to edit myself. I was not happy to have to buy Premiere a few months back so I could edit and sync my RED footage. Spending time re learning editing software is not something I like to do (as I'm not a pro editor, but someone that needs to hand out rough cuts from time to time)
(I figured out FCPX quite quickly, but it dosent work for me (yet)
I really don't like Premiere that much, but I does with with my footage easily.
Wish Apple sorted this out
Thank you, Mr. Yoak - I appreciate your time as my rants were long-winded, but I am very passionate about our industry and craft.
Congrats on having the advantage of having celluloid in your hands - letting your soul have something malleable to get a grasp on. When executive producers ask me for an analogy on what Avid, Final Cut Pro and Premiere (non-linear editors) meant for film and video, I would reply that editing linearly on film or on tape versus today's NLE's was like going from a manual typewriter - where you had to really think before you typed; to a word processor, which allowed you to flow ideas carelessly and then "cut-and-paste" re-arrange them as the after-thought. But it is still an art - a word processor didn't make everyone better writers (me included!)
I also want to congratulate you on your new baby - Red Cinema and their EPIC is a pretty amazing feat - and something that I as a Japanese American that once admired the Ampex and RCA's of the world - can be proud of again that American creativity and tenacity showed the world that nothing is really impossible.
I wish you all the best in your future projects.
- Keoni Tyler
Film & Television Director-Writer-Editor
If you spend more that a few minutes reading the Apple Discussion forums - especially on a controversial topic like this one - you'll see it full of people advising others to stop making complaints and feature requests there and to also send them to feedback (as linked above).
This is sensible advice to me - Apple shouldn't be spending a whole lot of time trolling through endless hate-blather, so I hope they are not. This is not to say that corporate isn't privately reviewing your posting as you suggest, but it seems unlikely in my experiences reading that forum.
It's wonderful to vent and be heard - apparently you are doing well on that front. It's also nice to fill the supplied feedback channels for maximum effect if it's a product you have reason to care about. Most companies the size of Apple don't go to this extent/make it this easy to get feedback from their customers, and while not perfect by a stretch, they have earned a reputation of taking this feedback into account.
-Matt
Apple like to do things in stages. I don't believe for one minute that so much effort and resources developing FCPX is purely for the prosumer. If that was the target market Apple could have developed iMovie. In a short time we will see where this is headed and after reading all the threads my impression is that many people may have jumped or are considering jumping without any real need to. As a hobbyist, I find myself wanting to use FCPX much more than I did FCPS simply because the workflow is less tedious and more enjoyable.
Mark Raudonis wrote an article detailing the decision called "Real World" Editing: From Avid to FCP and Back Again.