Will Final Cut Pro on Mac Get Every New Feature Without a Subscription? Here's What Apple Says

[lilkwarrior]

Enough with the subscriptions already. Apple is effectively making the same moves as some third-party developers have done, Deliveries being one that comes to mind. It’s insanely user-hostile, and the lack of transparency around why this is happening now out of nowhere doesn’t help. This simply serves to dilute the Apple brand and the product line, especially when terms like “premium content” are being thrown around, as though Apple doesn’t already make premium devices with premium user experiences. What is happening to this company?

It’s not user hostile necessarily. Have you made software? It has continuous costs in which one-time fee is arbitrary and actually more user hostile in many cases arguably as it’s asking an arbitrary money upfront instead of the dev(s) earning that over time.

In reality non-tech-literate people are sobering up the the real costs of ongoingly supported software that can’t always have stuff continually free when they be continually charged providing specific features—especially utilizing features like cloud-processing/storage-based ones that have continual costs that grow exponentially in costs if a particular software becomes increasingly popular.

It’s essential sound business. Make a lemonade stand and charge an upfront free promising unlimited refills. See how well that does—same with software

 

[grammatica]

So, essentially if you don't use the AI features or "premium" templates, you're good?

 

[Brother Cavil]

Exactly this! It's wild that this isn't common knowledge at this point. Apple wants its 30% cut from every subscription payment and has forced this model through the App Store onto everyone. There are still developers who want Apple to offer the option for paid updates, like it was before the subscription economy took over. But Apple obviously doesn’t want to do that, since it means less money for them.

Exactly. I get so tired of Apple fans complaining about subscriptions when it's Apple who is 100% responsible for them becoming the norm! But cognitive dissonance has always been a thing when it comes to Apple fans.

 

[Haiku_Oezu]

I couldn't care less about generative AI features so I think I'll be fine with the free version of iWork

 

[k1121j]

Oh, you can count on constant nagging and push notifications to get you to subscribe. It's just Apple's way nowadays. They prohibit such tactics for apps in the App Store, but use them themselves.

So annoying if I get prompted to subscribe to peacock one more time on my Apple TV app I’m gonna go nuts an no I didn’t want see the Brad pit movie Apple but you shoved it in my face way to much.

 

[GtrDude]

People need to stop subscribing to every conceivable app that’s out there.

It’s the only way to stop these endless subscriptions.

 

[Alan Wynn]

I'll wait to see what's available by default (I already purchased all those apps), and if it makes sense to get the extra content, I'll consider that possibility.

That is the question, what will be available only with a subscription.

There should be a lower tier price just for the extra content available to those who already purchased the apps.

Yes, that is my feeling.

 

[Astuces iOS]

I feel like Final Cut Pro is not dead, they promote the app with Final Cut Pro 11 last year… they will promote it again when new macs release… chill

 

[Brother Cavil]

It’s not user hostile necessarily. Have you made software? It has continuous costs in which one-time fee is arbitrary and actually more user hostile in most cases as it’s asking an arbitrary money upfront instead of the dev(s) earning that.

In reality non-tech-literate people are sobering up the the real costs of ongoingly supporterd software that can’t be free—especially utilizing features like cloud-processing ones that have continual costs.

It’s essential sound business. Make a lemonade stand and charge an upfront free promising unlimited refills. See how well that does—same with software

I agree with you for the most part but there are a lot of apps that are very overpriced under the subscription model and this rubs people the wrong way.

Parcel is a great example of an app that charges a (more than, in my opinion) fair subscription price. Parcel's developer gets it. Then we have apps like Fantastical that feel overpriced. I'm not going to pay $5/month for my calendar forever, especially when there's a pretty decent one included with my device for free. And then there are entire categories of apps that have ridiculous pricing. Prime example: habit trackers. Habitify costs an eye-watering $7.50/month for a habit tracker. It's absurd.

Pre-subscription, you bought an app, used it for around 2 years before a major update was released, and only upgraded if that upgrade had value. Now you are often expected to pay more for less. The kind of app that might have cost $50 for a perpetual license is now $5 or more per month. Forever. Furthermore, as a user, I'm forced to pay for future features I may not want. Under the perpetual license model, I only paid for an upgrade if that upgrade was compelling. Plenty of people I know, myself included, upgraded every other Photoshop version, for example.

The SaaS model makes a lot of sense for business, short-term, or intermittent use. It's more problematic in the long-term use consumer space because it often feels overpriced.

 

[Gyrene]

I will say that I have seen the writing on the wall for some time now. With the advent of "free" apps (iWork) and apps that had huge price reductions (Logic, FCP, etc) it was only time until Apple needed to either stop supporting them or start charging in some form via either price increases or subscription models. For years I have seen people begging for updates to software, making them "pro" apps again. The problem is that if you do not have the money going back into the developers via larger retail pricing or reoccuring fees, then it's hard to fund the upkeep of application growth.

Apple hardware has been dropping in price as well so you can't just assume that hardware pricing will cover development costs. It all has to balance out somehow.

I remember when Apple annouced free upgrades on OS software, bundling iWorks with MacOS for free, and reducing prices on "Pro" software. People at that time where dancing in the streets. No one thought about the long term road map and how it would lead to lesser support for apps and the loss of the professional feel. Money has to come in if you want growth and development to keep up with everyone else.

We have reached a crossroads, much like those in the Adobe universe had. You either stick with your old versions, switch to subscription models for latest features, or uninstall and buying something else. So far the subscription model is working very well for Adobe and I think it will fair well for Apple as well.

On a side note, who remembers that days when you could download free apps on the iOS app store? Now you are lucky if you can find an app that does not include a yearly fee or pay to play model. And most productivity software is on a subscription model.

Welcome to the future.

 

[Hornby]

This is false. iWork used to cost $79.

Exactly. People seem to forget, or we’re not around when it cost money (as did OS updates)

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

This is what hiring an internal CEO will look like going forward. Hire Tony Fadell and light a fire under these dossers.

 

[Shirasaki]

If there’s an article about it with a whole bunch of explanation, the answer is definitely “no”

After reading the article, I fail to understand exactly what is available and what is not. Apple being dodgy on this question clearly shows they do not want customers know what exactly will be missing between one time purchase and subscription version. Considering traditionally how expensive these softwares are, this is a very scummy move by Apple.

 

[Shirasaki]

Exactly. People seem to forget, or we’re not around when it cost money (as did OS updates)

Yes people do forget. And frankly, I kind of want Apple going back to this model and ask customers to pay a small fee for iOS updates and some of their apps. Small fee though, not $1999.99 or even $199.99. Financial incentive might help Apple developers building a better operating system, rather than making it perpetually beta and unfinished.

 

[roklanhavok]

As a person with an Intel Mac this is also a bit of an issue as Intel is not getting certain features already. I have Final Cut Pro but when I upgrade my Mac I will probably move to Creative Studio because I want the other apps too.

 

[Brother Cavil]

Yes people do forget. And frankly, I kind of want Apple going back to this model and ask customers to pay a small fee for iOS updates and some of their apps. Small fee though, not $1999.99 or even $199.99. Financial incentive might help Apple developers building a better operating system, rather than making it perpetually beta and unfinished.

I don't think that charging would change anything in terms of everything being perpetually beta. In my opinion that's the result of our always-connected world. It's simply too easy to push updates these days. The good old days of paid updates died with the DVD drive.

 

[goonie4life9]

It is siloed, and quite common in mega-corps. I saw similar in my time in them (not Apple, another). Subscriptions though, are soiled, IF they remove the buy-once product.

Mostly I am starting to think that this subscription was intented to pay for the power/water datacentre costs of it's AI features. For those who don't use AI in their creative work, the software will retain a 1:1 equivelence. However, if you wish to use AI instead of your own creativity, then it's likely expected you need to pay for the ongoing (substantial) compute of it.

(I admit the trouble in my theory is with on-device stuff like the image warp.)

Don't subscribe and AI stay aways from your devices would be a great opt-in for the hallucinating mechanical parrot.

Speaking of which, maybe View attachment 2596066 should have had 6 fingers.

I think charging for the AI use makes sense. Sadly, Apple's "secrecy above all else," and siloed approach prevents them from just coming-out and saying that. So, we get this disjointed communication because each siloed group's information is just mashed together.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Maybe this will encourage Apple to finally invest a bunch to make pages, numbers, and keynote a tier one office software to directly compete with MS

Mac has a fraction of the market share that Windows does. Why would any Windows user ditch MS for Apple? As it is, the Apple software that runs on Windows feels like minimum effort.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

I own FCP and Logic Pro for years now. This kinda sucks... We should get some kind of credit for owning the apps.
It's great for first time users but not for some of us...

If you've bought it and used it for years, don't you think you've gotten your money's worth?

 

[haemolysis]

Apple really needs to institute an api for notification types, that way we can choose which types we receive (Apple apps excluded of course 🙄)

Desperately needed!

However, when it comes to profit, effectively all apps are "Apple apps": Apple profits from notification spam whether it is a first-party app or not. They still get a 30% cut.

So for this reason, pigs may sooner fly than Apple actually crack down. They are increasingly turning towards SPAM, advertising, and subscriptions as a new business model.

 

[vbctv]

Can't believe how badly this has been handled, it's not rocket science;

All apps are the same & updated the same between paid for & subscriber versions.

This means those that have bought them all (including myself) use what they are used to & continue to get updates/security updates for core functions as they are now.

All the subscriber editions do is unlock certain parts & as there's no minimum term, people can dip in & out as they need, so not only do apple get loads of new folk on board, they can hoover up existing users.

No magic answers need to be given or any confusion, simples.

No it won't be that simple, according to Apple there will be 2 different version of these apps...

About Apple Creator Studio - Apple Support

Learn how to subscribe to Apple Creator Studio, which apps are included, system requirements, intelligence features and requirements, and more.

support.apple.com

So this of us that had a one time purchase can keep using out version, and if we subscribe we download the Creator Studio version. And the 2 different apps can be installed at the same time... So yes it sounds like they plan to give us less features that did one time purchases...
The icons seems to also be only for Creator Studio versions. So I'm guessing us who purchased the one-time purchase of the app won't even get an updated version?

 

[Shirasaki]

I don't think that charging would change anything in terms of everything being perpetually beta. In my opinion that's the result of our always-connected world. It's simply too easy to push updates these days. The good old days of paid updates died with the DVD drive.

Paid software still exists everywhere else, despite the die down (but not disappearance) of DVD drives. It’s just that sometimes being paid to do the work may entice people to work harder rather than “yeah free software so I’ll just do whatever bare minimum”.

 

[ddhhddhh2]

My view is that if Apple really believes what it previously said — that the subscription version comes with a lot of genuinely exciting AI features — then I’m fine with there being some differences between the subscription and the one-time purchase version.

But those differences shouldn’t be about features. They should be about resources.

Something like Adobe’s AI credits would make a lot more sense. Every legitimate one-time purchase account could come with a basic amount of AI credits that work across all the AI features in the Creator Studio apps. Users could see their monthly usage somewhere, and add more if they need to.

Even then, it’s probably not the cleanest solution. Given Apple’s scale, it feels a bit odd to be this strict about AI usage costs, especially now that GPU compute is becoming cheaper and more widely available. At this point, AI compute feels like it should be part of the platform itself. Offering it as a baseline for Apple ID creative users would actually reflect better on Apple as a whole.

Still, I assume Apple has already considered these trade-offs. I think, in the end, what Apple is really factoring in isn’t just avoiding direct comparisons with other services. More importantly, what it wants is a deeply locked-in, ongoing relationship with its users.

 

[God of Biscuits]

And three years from now, it'll be called Apple Creative Studio 365.

 

[wikiverse]

What is happening to this company?

They've reached market saturation for people willing to pay those prices and get trapped in a walled garden.

The only way for the business to 'grow' is to extract more money from the people that have already bought in - either because they think they can afford it, or because of sunk-cost. Apple can do that through accessories like watches and airpods, or through software and services. Only Software and services attract ongoing revenue.

Spent $3000 on a macbook pro? Better pay another $13 a month to get the most value out of it, otherwise it was a waste.

This is what every company does and they're all doing it at the same time. It's getting exhausting and expensive.