or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Dissatisfied Final Cut Pro X customers receive refunds from Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dissatisfied Final Cut Pro X customers receive refunds from Apple - Page 2

post #41 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by katastroff View Post

It's not like FCP7 suddenly ceased to work or suddenly became obsolete.

Permanently removing a product from production is the very definition of obsolete. There will be no upgrades, no new versions. It's dead - it has no future. It's obsolete.
post #42 of 168
I could see switching to FCPX if it was much better than FCP 7 but it isn't. It renders faster because it is 64 bit and can use all the memory and cores available which the older version is really inefficient at, but in almost every other category it lacks the features of FCP 7.

Professionals would sacrifice the time and effort to make the transition if it was more advanced. Sort of like they did when they switched to FCP from Avid many years ago.

Apple should have named it iMovie Pro.

The professionals may have eventually embraced iMovie Pro in a few years when it started becoming apparent that it was superior to FCP 7

The main problem is Apple unexpectedly EOL-ed FCP 7 when the successor was in no way capable of replacing it.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #43 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Can all FCPX engineers, and other staff report to my office at 13:00 (yes, that's in three minutes!)
SJ

I feel another "you should all hate each other for letting each other down" speech coming on

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #44 of 168
It seems to me that Apple has not made a mistake, but taken a conscious business decision. They see that the market for prosumer product is much greater than that for high end pros. There are already good options for them such as Avid. Instead of putting resources into a product for a relatively few elite users, they'd rather create the best product for all the rest.

It sucks for the pros. I feel your pain (sincerely).
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #45 of 168
I don't think it was wrong for Apple to reboot Final Cut. The big problem I see is simply the abrupt EOL of their legacy FCS3 product, relied upon by an entire industry that has very specific needs. While FCPX might soon me a much better product than FCS3 in terms of creative workflow, there are critical needs that video and film producers have, such as outputting to a broadcast monitor that are simply unsupported at this point.

What Apple should do is offer a free FCS3 license with a purchase of FCPX. It will get the industry playing with the new product and allow them to buy seats to continue working on current projects, and as well as give them the ability to keep working in the status quo environment while FCPX matures. Secondly, Apple should publicly commit to support FCP7 on Mac OS X through version 10.8 (Lion is 10.7 - for all intents and purposes, the current version of the Mac OS). This would remove a lot of the anxiety that exists, as I'm sure Apple will be working at high speed to get the missing features and 3rd party support into FCPX.
post #46 of 168
I don't see why they're complainingl. If you like the previous version, stick with it. Or you could've waited for the reviews and then bought it after reading other experiences.
post #47 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by katastroff View Post

It's not like FCP7 suddenly ceased to work or suddenly became obsolete.

From my experience, you NEVER upgrade immediately on a major release. You finish your mission critical stuff on your current pipeline. If you need to start a new project, you use that pipeline.

Then slowly on the side, you start building up your new workflow. It takes a while. By the time you get comfortable with it, the software is more mature and bugs/features have been addressed.

These things take a few years anyways. Look at the original FCP conversion. Everyone was calling it "prosumer-at-best", and now, FCP7 is a pretty complete Pro App.

That being said, they redesigned the software to make it more user-friendly and possibly decrease the learning curve. That will increase the user base, and possibly eat at Premiere's designer/prosumer marketshare.

By the time it's fully mature, it will have a much larger user base, and be used by amateur cinematographers and pros alike.

Oh, also, what Teejaysplace24 said. :-) The email looks fake, or someone's getting fired.

I agree except the problem is keeping the 7 version available and supported in the mean time, if Apple do that then there is time for X to mature I hope.

BTW Do we assume Aperture too will be dropped one day as iPhoto gets a little slicker? None of this helps Apple's Pro end and only helps Adobe (I hate to say!).
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #48 of 168
Yesterday, there were hundreds, if not thousands of professional editors swearing at their computers running Avid and Final Cut Pro because either their computers, their software or their staff just could't get it 'right' fast enough.

Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.

Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.

Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.

For further reading: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ide..._film_editing/
post #49 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

They also only charged a "prosumer" $300 for it, not the standard $1000+

You are correct.

As long as editors are not being misled about what they are being sold, they should have no complaint. I think there is enough information out there now to set the record straight about what a FCPX buyer will be getting.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #50 of 168
Wow man, if you just think it, it will happen. Let's all hold hands and wish real hard and maybe FCPx will have the needed features.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Yesterday, there were hundreds, if not thousands of professional editors swearing at their computers running Avid and Final Cut Pro because either their computers, their software or their staff just could't get it 'right' fast enough.

Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.

Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.

Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.

For further reading: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ide..._film_editing/
post #51 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougDolde View Post

They obviously blew it but what do I care, I don't do video anyway.

Finally something negative the trolls and haters can really sink their teeth into. The catch has been sparse these last few years. This will feed them for a day or two.
post #52 of 168
I bought two copies of FC Studio 3 (FCP 7) upgrade from BH Photo the day FCP X was released. They'll be hitting Ebay tomorrow. I thought for sure Apple would reverse their decision and rerelease FCP, but it hasn't happened. And BH shows the upgrade and the full license as discontinued. That is a change from yesterday when they still had full licenses.
post #53 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Yesterday, there were hundreds, if not thousands of professional editors swearing at their computers running Avid and Final Cut Pro because either their computers, their software or their staff just could't get it 'right' fast enough.

Today, there are a hundred or so 'Steven Speilberg's' cutting their first "spectacular' on Final Cut Pro X.

Tomorrow, there will be hundreds if not thousands of studios doing likewise. And those that just couldn't get past their heads that progress takes patience and understanding, or anything can ever be great if it doesn't cost as much as they have already invested.

Film editing is not rocket science. Like art, it takes talent. As Leonardo and Michaelangelo have done with a piece of lead or charcoal or the great editors that spent hours sifting through miles of film on the cutting room floor, these people will survive no matter what the technology is at hand. Like those Speilberg wannabes, who will never attain their stated goals, not because of the tools in their hand but the matter in their heads.

For further reading: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ide..._film_editing/

Just get the required 10,000 hours in and even you (yes, YOU) could be a pro editor!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #54 of 168
For all the people saying apple should've waited longer to release FCP X, have you simply forgotten about all the pro's griping after every single conference how the pro's were forgotten, how apple didn't care about FCS etc. It had been years since an update and to say people were antsy is an understatement.

Then there are those saying apple should just sell both 7 and X. I agree with you, but this wouldn't solve the problem of people whining. Then there'd be a whole circus of customers complaining that they bought 7, but that now they need to upgrade to X, but now they have to pay full price or some such nonsense. Inevitably, a ton of people would get confused, buy 7 in late 2011 and be furious when it never got upgraded again.

Basically, what people are saying is that apple is good for professionals and businesses because they constantly try to improve and redefine how we use our computers. If your business is so inflexible as to be drastically effected by the inability to buy new machines for legacy software, then maybe the problem is with your archaic business model.

Given the opportunity, poorly run companies will keep using outdated, terrible software forever, just look at IE 6 marketshare. So yes, if you're a terribly managed, head in the sand style production company, apple isn't the hardware/software vendor for you.

If, however, your trying to constantly prove your business, then having the opportunity to start learning FCP X on new little side projects and continuing to use FCS 7 for your current major products is a wonderful way to bridge this transition period.
32G iPhone 4, 32G iPad 2, late 2009 15" mbp
Reply
32G iPhone 4, 32G iPad 2, late 2009 15" mbp
Reply
post #55 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleStud View Post

They also only charged a "prosumer" $300 for it, not the standard $1000+

I don't know if you recall before FCP was bundled with Studio, but then the standalone app was also around $300.
post #56 of 168
All i can imagine is that Steve is probably asking the engineers like what he did with the mobule me group and will ask wat it does, and then says"why the F*** doesnt it do that?" LOL
post #57 of 168
Part of this screwup deals with Apple's own culture...at least the culture of product development. In recent years, Apple has been comfortable with introducing a new product and jettisoning the old own immediately. Usually Apple upgrades are so good, this isn't a big problem. But every now and then, it is and blows up in Apple's face. This is one of those times.

What's interesting is that this happened before with iMovie years ago and Apple ended up backpeddling and kept the old iMovie HD around for awhile. So you think that Randy Ubillos would have wanted to avoid that situation this time around. So it's mystifying how Apple could have gotten themselves into this mess.

But some of it has to do with a blind spot toward pro users in general, despite having a previously good relationship with this market and doing their best to blow up the pro video market over the past several years. For comparison, if any of Apple's major technology vendors like SAP or Oracle made a new version of something and then just dropped support and availability of the previous version, Apple IT Services would be screaming bloody murder right now.

Final Cut Pro X will get it's act together at some point. No one is saying that the new version doesn't do the things it does support. The issue are the things that were left out.
post #58 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by jebco View Post

I also received a refund, no questions asked, from the Apple iTunes store.

The body of the email was:


"Greetings from Apple iTunes, before I address your issue I would just like to take the opportunity to address myself. My name is XXXX and I look forward to working with you to resolve any issues you may have. Now, I understand that you have purchased "Final Cut Pro" however it has less functionality then the previous version "Final Cut Pro 7." I can certainly appreciate your eagerness to have this issue resolved, rest assured I am more then happy to help!

First and foremost, I would like to extend an apology for the delayed response to your email. iTunes Support endeavors to send a reply within 24 hours; however, due to new product releases and features for the iTunes Store we are experiencing higher volumes than normal. We appreciate your patience and understanding.

XXX, what I have done for you is, I have gone ahead and reversed the charge for this purchase.

In five to seven business days, a credit of $299.99 should be posted to the credit card that appears on the receipt for that purchase. I sincerely apologize for any inconveniences this issue has caused.

Should you have any further questions or concerns in regards to this issue, please do not hesitate to reply to this email, and I will gladly address them for you.

Thank you for choosing iTunes as your source for online entertainment, and I hope you have a fantastic day, XXXX!

Sincerely,

XXXXXX
iTunes Store Customer Support

Please Note: I work Friday, Saturday and Sunday 12:30-9:30 pm EST

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to assist you. You may receive an AppleCare survey email; any feedback you provide would be greatly appreciated"


It's was a refreshing reaction by Apple to a very misunderstood and botched product launch.

It reminds me a bit of when Coca-Cola took away a product loved by millions and replaced it with a product more favored by kids. In the end of course, Coca Cola bowed to pressure from their fans and brought back the product that everyone knew and loved.

Let's hope that Apple can remedy the FCP-X debacle with equal success! How about FCP 8!


That e-mail I believe. I do not believe the one posted in the OP is authentic. There is no way an Apple employee is going to apologize for the "inadequacies" of Apple's product, nor is he going to write: "I understand that Final Cut Pro X does not work as well...."

No way. A real refund with an altered e-mail...that's what's most likely.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #59 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by iChase View Post

I don't know if you recall before FCP was bundled with Studio, but then the standalone app was also around $300.

For FCP5, the last version that was available without purchasing FCS, the upgrade was $399 and $999 for standalone. FCS was $1299.

http://www.macworld.com/product/2665...cut_pro_5.html
post #60 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by teejaysplace24 View Post

Not sure if they were able to verify the authenticity of this email, but it's overall tone somewhat calls that into question. First of all, the email keeps referring to the department as 'iTunes" or the 'iTunes Store". Obviously, as a Mac product, this purchase was handled by the Mac App store and not the iTS. They might be the same team internally, but Apple doesn't usually mince words when it comes to product identification.

Further, I simply can't believe that any Apple employee would be given license to describe their own product as "inadequate", even if it was. After all, this is the same company that designed the hockey puck mouse, which Steve Jobs summarily described as "the best mouse ever created", despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. When Apple does admit to mistakes - such as the iPhone 4's antenna-gate fiasco - it's usually preempted by a 20 minute presentation explaining how much better the new product still is than it's competition, followed by somewhat begrudging attempts at keeping everyone happy (and quiet). This email made no mention of Apple standing by the redesign or how great the new features were, etc. Either they've turned over a new leaf or someone is going to be having a long conversation with their manager tomorrow.

So for their sake, I hope this is fake.

That's what I think, too. I've never seen anything like that from ANY company, much less Apple.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #61 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

Re-release FCP 7 and call it a day. Rebrand FCP X as FCE until X is ready to replace 7. It's called a transition period.

I agree that Apple should make FCS available again!

I think Apple should keep the FCPX branding and keep FCE EOLd.


I've posted on other threads that I think that FCPX is an amazing product as far as it goes -- and likely will be the platform to build upon for Appe's Pro apps.


Some things you should realize...

Apple probably released FCPX when it needed to -- to make a statement of and show the advantages coming from a total rewrite of FCP designed to exploit the latest technology.

FCPX is by necessity incomplete -- FCS grew over many years, and over time was refined. One very important refinement is 3rd-party plugins. The latest FCS included quite a few of these 3rd-party plugins.

Because the plugins were built for a different code base, they cannot run on the rewritten FCPX code base, nor exploit the hardware with OCL and GCD.

Therefore, there was no acceptable way for FCPX to open most FCP7 projects -- they used plugins that would not work on FCPX.


But this is changing! The FCPX plugin SDK is now available and some 3rd-parties have already converted their plugins to run under (and exploit) FCPX.


Some of the other missing things will come. Apple has already identified some things it will add and said FCPX is just the beginning.


So, Apple has drawn a line in the sand and said this is where we're going and we believe that within 12-18 months, the FCPX product suite will be fleshed out by Apple and 3rd-parties alike -- to the point it will surpass whatever we know today as FCS.

Or, Apple could have just done a minor refresh to FCS (no XCode-base, no 64-bit, no OCL/GCD) -- no path to the future, no big deal!


Finally, Apple could have handled it better -- though we all enjoy seeing the "Big Guy" get his comeuppance... if just a little bit.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #62 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronHeadSlim View Post

Well, nice apology. Apple knows they made a prosumer app.

Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

This is what the people arguing FCPX is fine don't understand. They have obviously never seen a professional edit house and simply have no clue that multiple edit suits require a known path ahead in terms of software to justify the huge cost of high end Mac Pros and trained staff. They have to know their investment is going to keep working or else they have to jump ship to Premiere or Avid

This product is a great prosumer product no question but edit houses have to have upgrade paths for ongoing projects (i.e. the same data and projects as used in 7) and training and support and as you say the ability to buy more of what they have.

I seriously hope Apple keep FCPX as a prosumer product but return 7 to the stores and look very hard at updating 7 with a workable path for professionals to move up.

I am not a pro video editor, but I reject this "iMovie Pro" or "prosumer" app argument. Read Pogue's article. It's missing a few features it seems some pros need, but it seems the vast majority (to say the least) are there.

http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/...nal-cut-pro-x/

That being said, I can see some support for the "Apple made a prosumer app" argument. For one thing, they utterly ruined iMovie by removing the timeline, making it unusable for what I do (I would say I'm definitely a prosumer...I create 45 minute videos for narrated school lessons, family videos, etc--with coordinated narration and soundtracks). I now use iMovie HD instead. And the same argument was made with the 2009 MacBook Pros--that they were not for "pros" at all. Overall though, I think one has to evaluate the product on its own. In that regard, FCP appears to be suitable for the majority of Pro editors. No?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #63 of 168
Everyone says it's 1.0 but Apple is stressing that it is X as in 10.0.

But when I look at the rush to pull FCP 7 off the shelves (reportedly even of other retailers) combined with this version that in the charitible interpretation they just didn't have time to complete, I'm wondering if the rush is because FCP 7 isn't going to work well with Lion and they don't want to support it.

Personally, I thought Apple took WAY too long to upgrade FCP to 64-bit, multi-core, graphic processor, etc. Premiere got it done right away. I'm not interested in waiting until they maybe decide to add some key features back in. They've lost me to Premiere and they'll have to do something REAL compelling to get me back.
post #64 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I am not a pro video editor, but I reject this "iMovie Pro" or "prosumer" app argument. Read Pogue's article. It's missing a few features it seems some pros need, but it seems the vast majority (to say the least) are there.

Except that to call it an upgrade to FCP, one would assume that it should open and convert files saved in the most recent version of FCP prior to the new version, which it doesn't do. It does, however, open and convert older iMovie projects, so in functionality, it is closer to an upgrade to iMovie than to FCP.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #65 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Overall though, I think one has to evaluate the product on its own. In that regard, FCP appears to be suitable for the majority of Pro editors. No?

You're not keeping up. FCPX is missing key features that make it unusable for many pros.

It may gain these features back as updates get rolled out. That seems to be Apple's plan.

There is subtle but real difference between consumer apps and pro apps. If a consumer app is missing a certain 'feature' but is desirable in other respects then it may be successful and well received. But for 'pro' apps expectations are different. It can do the job or it can't. Its a tool that you can use to complete a task....or it isn't. Having other desirable qualities won't make up for missing key features. FCPX has this problem. I'm not going to rehash all the missing features, they're better addressed in other posts. Check them out in the other FCPX threads.
post #66 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

Re-release FCP 7 and call it a day. Rebrand FCP X as FCE until X is ready to replace 7. It's called a transition period.

Go find another platform to work on. That'll be sooner to happen than Apple moving backwards.
post #67 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post


Steve said that Apple interviews "customers" and listens to what they have to say. Apparently, Apple needed to ask a few more people regarding these changes and maybe avoided some of this?!
/
/
/

That is an interesting observation. It seems that Apple did interview Pro Editors and Larry Jordan said it would be 'jaw dropping' if I remember correctly. What were these people thinking? Or were they too busy making training videos and the such to actually let Apple know that there were serious features missing?
post #68 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

You're not keeping up. FCPX is missing key features that make it unusable for many pros.

It may gain these features back as updates get rolled out. That seems to be Apple's plan.

There is subtle but real difference between consumer apps and pro apps. If a consumer app is missing a certain 'feature' but is desirable in other respects then it may be successful and well received. But for 'pro' apps expectations are different. It can do the job or it can't. Its a tool that you can use to complete a task....or it isn't. Having other desirable qualities won't make up for missing key features. FCPX has this problem. I'm not going to rehash all the missing features, they're better addressed in other posts. Check them out in the other FCPX threads.

A pro-app also needs to be able to speak to a range of pro level hardware and software that no consumer would ever need. The road from an off line edit to broadcast is treacherous.
post #69 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by CineFilm View Post

Everyone says it's 1.0 but Apple is stressing that it is X as in 10.0.

But when I look at the rush to pull FCP 7 off the shelves (reportedly even of other retailers) combined with this version that in the charitible interpretation they just didn't have time to complete, I'm wondering if the rush is because FCP 7 isn't going to work well with Lion and they don't want to support it.

Personally, I thought Apple took WAY too long to upgrade FCP to 64-bit, multi-core, graphic processor, etc. Premiere got it done right away. I'm not interested in waiting until they maybe decide to add some key features back in. They've lost me to Premiere and they'll have to do something REAL compelling to get me back.

I don't know premier, so I am asking these to try and understand your reason for converting from FCP7/FCS.

1) Can you open FCP7 projects in Premiere?

2) Does Premiere have the Tape I/O features of FCS?

3) Does Premiere have have the collaboration features of FCP?

4) What compelling features does Premiere have that are missing from FCP7?

5) Approximately how many FCP7 projects do you have completed?

6) How long will it take to convert your legacy FCP7 projects to Premiere so that you can discontinue FCP7/FCS altogether (remove it from your system)?
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #70 of 168
Here we go again with the gnashing of teeth and pulling of hairs as if Apple is the most unresponsive company in the world. In fact Apple is pretty good at fixing snafus. This is how they operate though:

1. They will not talk about it while they are gathering information and devising and testing a solution. Most of the time they won't even acknowledge the problem but that doesn't mean they're not aware of and working on it. If they say anything at all it will not go beyond" we're aware of the problem and are working on a solution". More than that will just extend the news cycle on the problem. It's just bad p.r. to draw further attention to the cockup

2. They will not happy-talk the complainers by soothing their feelings with "yes, a bad thing has happened to you poor baby and it's totally not your fault, it's ours." It's just bad pr to have too many Apple mea culpas floating around cyberspace.

3. And after what always seems to be an interminable wait (this perception mainly due to #1 above), Apple will come out with a solution that most people are happy about. With one caveat: If Apple's strategic plan calls for killing FCP7 then no amount of histrionics will revive it. Which probably means backward compatibility for FCP-X is never going to happen.

So if people disregard the PR strategy, which is first and foremost about shortening the news cycle, and just pay attention to what they do and not what they say, then there would be a lot less gnashing of teeth and pulling of hairs.
post #71 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulk001 View Post

That is an interesting observation. It seems that Apple did interview Pro Editors and Larry Jordan said it would be 'jaw dropping' if I remember correctly. What were these people thinking? Or were they too busy making training videos and the such to actually let Apple know that there were serious features missing?

Well, maybe they saw the POTENTIAL of the new app. Maybe they had a glimpse in to the future and their jaws dropped. Maybe the conversation that came afterwards has been less well reported.
post #72 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

FCPX is missing key features that make it unusable for many pros.

I think FCPX is a fairly adequate application for professional work if you aren't already using FCS.

For example: A new TV commercial, first launch, it runs 30 sec. Then we re-edit it to be 15 seconds after the initial campaign. Then finally down to 10 or even 5 seconds. Another example is we have several takes and we mix and match scenes.

When you already have everything logged and captured in FCP you don't want to go back and reinvent the wheel to continue working with a project. You want to open the project and save it as a new name and make some modifications, FCPX does not work like that or even open up the original FCP 7 project file.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #73 of 168
I just hope that Apple doesn't turn the next version of Logic into Garageband Pro.
post #74 of 168
Apple has damaged their reputation to the point of burning down bridges. This isn't just about FCPX, this is about Xserve and enterprise.

Steve's management style of ignoring the present for the sake of the future may work for some things, but if you want to convince businesses that you're a reliable PARTNER you need to keep selling a product so long there is demand for it. This is why Microsoft is kicking Apple's ass in enterprise. They don't try to sell you a tractor when you want a mule.

I don't work in a video-editing environment, but I have been a developer and have had technologies dropped from under my feet by Jobs. Working with this company is not for the feint of heart (or perhaps those without a day-job or rich family).
post #75 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Except that to call it an upgrade to FCP, one would assume that it should open and convert files saved in the most recent version of FCP prior to the new version, which it doesn't do. It does, however, open and convert older iMovie projects, so in functionality, it is closer to an upgrade to iMovie than to FCP.

That's an oversimplification!

FCPX projects and events are a superset of iMovie projects and events. Apple owns all the iMovie code and thus can write FCPX equivalents to support iMovie content and still take advantage of the enhancements in FCPX (OCL, GCD, etc.)

FCP7 projects include a lot of 3rd-party effects and filters. This 3rd-party code will not run without change on the FCPX code-base. Even if Apple could "simulate" these 3rd-party additions, they would not perform up to par with the FCPX UX -- no real-time presentation without rendering, etc. Apple does not own this code, therefore it cannot upgrade the code to exploit FCPX.

Apparently, once the initial features of FCPX were solidified, the FCPX plugin SDK was made available to some developers.

There are a few 3rd-party plugins already rewritten for FCPX.

The FCPX plugin SDK is now generally available, so I expect many more developers will convert their plugins to FCPX.


You say: "It does, however, open and convert older iMovie projects, so in functionality, it is closer to an upgrade to iMovie than to FCP."

FCPX can do some things, now, that FCP7 will never be able to do without a total rewrite -- probably taking 2-3 years to deliver a robust and reliable replacement.

I suspect that within 18 months, FCPX will have enough features to satisfy most pro needs.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #76 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by strobe View Post

Apple has damaged their reputation to the point of burning down bridges. This isn't just about FCPX, this is about Xserve and enterprise.

Steve's management style of ignoring the present for the sake of the future may work for some things, but if you want to convince businesses that you're a reliable PARTNER you need to keep selling a product so long there is demand for it. This is why Microsoft is kicking Apple's ass in enterprise. They don't try to sell you a tractor when you want a mule.

I don't work in a video-editing environment, but I have been a developer and have had technologies dropped from under my feet by Jobs. Working with this company is not for the feint of heart (or perhaps those without a day-job or rich family).

I hate to be the one to tell you, but Apple could do quite well if they discontinued every one of their computing and software products except the iPhone. It's worth that much to them now.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #77 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottiB View Post

For FCP5, the last version that was available without purchasing FCS, the upgrade was $399 and $999 for standalone. FCS was $1299.

http://www.macworld.com/product/2665...cut_pro_5.html

You are right.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #78 of 168
Its funny reading this thread that most of the Apple apologists have no idea how FCP and FCP Server work versus the people that actually do professional post production work know what they are talking about. No, taking movies with your iPhone or a camera from Best Buy does not count as professional.
post #79 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I hate to be the one to tell you, but Apple could do quite well if they discontinued every one of their computing and software products except the iPhone. It's worth that much to them now.

Its not about making smartphones. Its the integrated ecosystem of hardware and software that gives customers a good user experience when using Apple devices. You won't get that with just the iPhone alone.
post #80 of 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

great point - this is a perfect example of why enterprises dont adopt apple, even if they are better, which fo general business, I argue they are not, in a professional enterprise one needs to know that their platform is going to be there - For example Office 2010 has been out for over a year and 2007 is still availible to business licensees.

This is kind of a catch-22 for Apple. Apple is famous (infamous??) for their secrecy about products cooking in their skunkworks. It's a strategy that has worked thus far in the consumer marketplace, because it generates a huge amount of anticipation and media buzz, plus, it keeps competitors in the dark, so they can't slip something in the day before a major Apple product announcement.
The downside to this is there's no way that enterprise and other big entities can make use of this. In fact, it's dangerously counterproductive. Large enterprise entities need to be able to plan months or years ahead, and they need to make sure that their tools will work and that the manufacturer (in this case Apple) will be always available for support.

What I've thought for a while is that Apple should open an enterprise division that would have a completely different market strategy from its "consumer division" (which is currently all of Apple right now). The enterprise division would dispense with the secrecy, and try to find that elusive balance between transparency and not letting the competition get the jump.
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Dissatisfied Final Cut Pro X customers receive refunds from Apple