• 1) It's off the shelf now and it's been declared EOL which is very sad because it was both easy yet professional to use.
• 2a) Hmm, yes and no. They're adding features but you have to update your OSX in order to get the latest updates which I think is unfair, unjust, and a pain in the ass especially FCPXs system requirements hasn't changed since it debuted: Intel Core2Duo or faster CPU, 256MB VRAM, and 4GB RAM. Basically, 2008 laptop computer specs. In my opinion, Apple is happy in "ProSumer land" as they discontinued the best laptop editors loved...the Late 2011 1200p Antiglare 17" Macbook Pro is evident of that even though the AMD 6770 dGPU scared them but they still used it because it had 3 USB ports.
Apple had a great thing going but when they released X, they shot FCP7 and let it bleed slowly until it died from internal bleeding. There was nothing wrong with FCP7 except the fact it was based on 32-bit architecture and you had to convert to ProRes every single time, otherwise it wouldn't be efficient. Although most cinema cameras already had ProRes as a preset so it didn't matter. 1080p which FCP7 can only accept, is now considered outdated since Premiere Pro CC can work with 6K RAW files and GoneGirl is proof of that.
• 2b) Interesting question. Only two major movies were edited in FCPX: Focus and Whiskey Tango Foxtrot. However that's comparing to over 1000 movies that were edited in Avid and few in Adobe Premiere Pro...for now. When the editors first heard of Final Cut Pro X, they immediately switched back to Avid and Avid was back in the game. However, this opened a door for Adobe with the help of legendary editor Walter Murch when they (Adobe) were developing CS6. Walter Murch used Final Cut Pro 7 and Avid Media Composer before so he was familiar with how it should feel.
The main reason that FCPX was developed was to use tapeless deliveries which is funny because modern professional NLEs including freeware ones use tapeless deliveries but Avid, Adobe, and Sony both use D/A (digital/analog) capturing. Kodak film is still used in the "Big 6" studios: Paramount, Warner Bros, Universal, 20th Century FOX, Walt Disney, and Sony Pictures.
I think editors have mixed feelings about Final Cut Pro X, but most of them would agree it's a disaster. Avid editors would agree that Avid is clunky and there's still a long waiting list for feature requests, but it soars in big productions. Premiere Pro is getting noticed in both shortfilms and 2.5 hr Hollywood films (however, Avid can do both short and long form media based projects just fine). Premiere Pro is what Final Cut Pro 8 would've if it had survived. The professional group are still pissed that Adobe dropped the perpetual license (Buy It Now price) and only offering subscription based services. If you don't use the Creative Cloud for a long period of time after 30 days or you missed a payment 30 days later, it acted like a LoJack until you pay.
The majority of editors have lost faith with Apple because it no longer caters to the professional market like they used to which helped Apple's popularity. There's still a small market for FCPX but not much to shift Apple into the professional market once again. However one can say that Apple's popularity had nothing to do with professionalism but had to do with the fact people loved the brand itself plus the fact as you guessed it...usability, integration, aesthetic and the new Productivity 2.0 or should I say Productivity 3.0.
If Final Cut Pro 8 survived and if Final Cut Pro 9 was in development, it would've been a hybrid of both Avid and Adobe by now. However, that would be speculation since editors would have different sides of the story of the coulda, woulda, and shoulda.
I'm sorry if this was a super long explanation but I tried my best not to leave anything out. My opinion was based upon other editors I work with and it was modified using my own thinking...
Super awesome post man. Thanks for the info and for sharing.