Troubled development, 2011 launch rumored for Apple's Final Cut Studio

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
A new rumor claims that Apple will release a new version of its Final Cut Studio suite in 2011, but that the project has suffered setbacks in the development process due to "fundamental differences of opinion."



According to French Apple site HardMac, Apple initially hoped to launch the new Final Cut Studio in 2010, but the project has allegedly been delayed until 2011. In addition, it is rumored that the scope of the project has been reduced from its original, more ambitious plans.



In May, AppleInsider reported that Apple was working on a significant makeover of its Final Cut Studio suite, in an effort to better target the software toward mainstream users rather than high-end professionals. In response, Apple quickly issued a statement in which it said the next version of Final Cut would be "awesome," and that professional customers would "love" it.



According to HardMac, originally Apple hopes to have a unified interface with the Final Cut Pro suite, but that has been abandoned. Citing a source, the report alleged that the separate teams working on Shake and Motion could not reach a compromise.



"Some fundamental differences of opinion about the ideal interface have hamstrung this part of the project which has now been deferred to the next version, in 2013," the report said.



It also noted that a "structural issue" has caused problems with the development of Final Cut Pro, as Apple has allegedly reassigned a "significant number of its most qualified engineers" to concentrate their efforts on the booming iOS mobile operating system which powers the iPhone, iPad, iPod touch and Apple TV. The report claims that Mac OS X and associated applications are now considered "less urgent" within Apple.



Final Cut Studio was last updated in July of 2009, adding more than 100 new features to new versions of Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, Color and Compressor. The No. 1 professional video editing application also saw its price reduced $300 to $999, while upgrades for existing users are available for $299.



Recent rumors reported by HardMac have missed the mark, with the site claiming in July that Apple would soon add USB 3.0 to its Mac Pro and iMac desktop machines. Eventually released later that month, the new Mac Pro has USB 2.0 and FireWire 800 ports.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 78
    "The report claims that Mac OS X and associated applications are now considered "less urgent" within Apple."



    Even though I am not surprised at this statement, I still don't like the sound of it.
  • Reply 2 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 2 cents View Post


    "The report claims that Mac OS X and associated applications are now considered "less urgent" within Apple."



    Even though I am not surprised at this statement, I still don't like the sound of it.



    I agree that it's a bit sad, but I don't know how anyone could dispute the obvious truth of the statement. If you were in charge of Apple right now, you'd probably agree with it, no?
  • Reply 3 of 78
    If we all had a nickel for every "rumor" about an Apple hardware or software product, none of us would ever have to work another day in our lives.



    (I wonder how Tim Cook's doing at GM and HP right now. It must be tough holding down TWO jobs like that.)
  • Reply 4 of 78
    I don't know if I believe this or not. Shake has been discontinued for a while now:



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_(software)



    I have a feeling it'll be 64-bit and Apple may drop the prices more. Other than that, I have no idea about features. On video production boards, some people complain there aren't more features like Premiere Pro CS5, but Adobe updates their apps every 18 months or so. Who wants to pay out for an upgrade that often?



    mpstrex
  • Reply 5 of 78
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    In a professional environment, upgrades are not that big of a deal unless there is one particular feature that was missing and dearly needed. As long as everything is working I would rather just maintain the status quo. Major upgrades to OS or Pro Apps are something that I reluctantly adopt on my pro machines as it tends to interrupt the workflow and could potentially introduce unexpected incompatibilities. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
  • Reply 6 of 78
    HardMac's story is total BS.
  • Reply 7 of 78
    I do agree with that.



    A lot of the video pros on the message boards usually aren't part of a major or even minor company, so it's a little harder and costlier to move to new versions.



    Heck, the last company I worked at refused to upgrade to Snow Leopard or Final Cut Studio 3 until it was stable, ie, at least two updates came down. I think they went S.L. in May and FCS 3 in July!



    heath
  • Reply 8 of 78
    Apple had better not mess with its "Pro" apps. For one thing, the people who depend on it for their livelihood don't like hearing that they are second priority. I mean, these apps cost more than an iPhone. Sure, it's a small market, but unless Apple wants to only be known as the company that sells cool to the masses, it should not abandon the Pro apps.
  • Reply 9 of 78
    Here's the reality... and I hope SOMEONE from Apple's reading these posts (we've even tried to call them directly)...



    My studio uses almost every pro Ap from Apple. We're a media production company. We recently switched from FCP to Adobe Premiere. We don't like it, but it's a really decent update that's moving with the times and the formats.



    I am hoping that we don't get TOOOO far down the road with Premiere projects before Apple comes out with their supposedly AWESOME version of Final Cut Pro. But if we have to wait until 2013 then we might have moved more over to the Adobe eco system, Lightroom and Aperture are neck and neck as far as I'm concerned but Adobe have my respect (as a pro) these days because they aren't TOTALLY preoccupied with consumer electronics products. Apple has spread themselves too thin for me.
  • Reply 10 of 78
    Consumer products will always sell more and make a company more money than pro products. I can almost guarantee that Adobe makes more money on their Elements line than their pro line, at least as far as numbers go. Prices are WAY different, of course.



    I have both Final Cut Studio 3 and Adobe Master Collection CS5, but I just don't like editing with Premiere Pro. I've been a Final Cut Pro guy since 99 and I still love it. I even have Avid Media Composer 4.5, and it's a tough nut to crack, that user interface.



    mpstrex
  • Reply 11 of 78
    Maybe Apple should create a wholly owned subsidiary company for its software applications business. Merge in the Filemaker business and acquire Adobe to create a full set of pro and consumer applications. Just keep iOS and OSX development in house.
  • Reply 12 of 78
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,225member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    In a professional environment, upgrades are not that big of a deal unless there is one particular feature that was missing and dearly needed. As long as everything is working I would rather just maintain the status quo. Major upgrades to OS or Pro Apps are something that I reluctantly adopt on my pro machines as it tends to interrupt the workflow and could potentially introduce unexpected incompatibilities. If it ain't broke don't fix it.



    Agreed and I definitely don't want a dumbed down version for prosumers. I am sad that those of us paying the big bucks for high end MacPros, ACDs and Pro apps are being sidelined because of iOS. I love iOS but Apple have the $s to do both surely?
  • Reply 13 of 78
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,225member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post


    Maybe Apple should create a wholly owned subsidiary company for its software applications business. Merge in the Filemaker business and acquire Adobe to create a full set of pro and consumer applications. Just keep iOS and OSX development in house.



    OMG not with FileMaker Inc. Maybe an Apple Pro Division is a good idea but I always assumed that already existed.
  • Reply 14 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    HardMac's story is total BS.



    Beacause...



    If you want to be taken serious you might want to atleast support your opinion with one citation or reference.



    When is the next version of OS X due anyways?
  • Reply 15 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jtography View Post


    . . . Apple has spread themselves too thin for me.



    Agreed.

    Apple has a great habit of doing a ton of work very efficiently with a minimum of people. They don't just throw personnel at a problem.

    Unfortunately, the flip side is that their frugal ethos tends to make them wait too long to staff up projects that urgently need attention. Hire some more people for Pete's sake! The whole pro app market and it's accompanying prestige and synergy is nothing to toy with.
  • Reply 16 of 78
    z3r0z3r0 Posts: 230member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Citing a source, the report alleged that the separate teams working on Shake and Motion could not reach a compromise.



    I hope the Shake guys win out. Motion comparable to After Effects as it is layer based and thats a problem because layer based compositing is no where near as scalable or powerful as a node based compositing. Apple made the mistake of not enticing Ron Brinkmann to stay and lead Apple's video and vfx software. Nuke has quickly risen to the number one compositing package used in film, all the recent major successful films have used Nuke.



    On the 3D side of things Houdini is king for vfx and its starting to gain traction thanks to its node based system. Video workflow/asset management software is another area where node based GUIs are causing a revolution. Check out Telestream Vantage if you haven't: http://www.telestream.net/vantage/overview.htm



    I'm hoping Final Cut Server picks up a node based workflow, it would increase usability dramatically and reduce the amount of scripting in workflow creation.



    Nodes are the standard! Here are some links to node based solutions:



    xmEdit (Node based non-linear editing)

    Nuke (Node based compositing)

    Houdini (Node based 3D & vfx)

    PFMatchit (Node based match moving)

    Color FX (Node based color correction in Color)

    Vantage (Node based encoding/transcoding asset management)

    TouchDesigner (Node based interface design)
  • Reply 17 of 78
    This comes as no surprise. Apple has definitely changed from the Artists and Creatives computer, to the Average and Consumer products. Having an Apple computer these days isn't so much about being creative as it used to be. It is a sad reality, even more so seeing the decline of the Pro apps that used to make Apple shine. How sad would it be if Apple lost more Pro customers to Adobe? If they continue on their iOS/iPhone/iPad/iPod way of thinking while detracting on the Pro side, their pro customers will significantly drop.
  • Reply 18 of 78
    The studio is still carbon, isn't it? So we're talking a cocoa re-write to make it 64bit, and on top of that they want to unify the interface even though many pros don't use all of these apps (and those who do use all, learn them all).



    Sounds.... awesome!



    ...sorry, reality distortion field got me for a second. A project that ambitious + being a low "apple priority" (not iOS, not magical) => delay.
  • Reply 19 of 78
    There is a certain level of truthiness to the statement that borders on the ominous.
  • Reply 20 of 78
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 2 cents View Post


    "The report claims that Mac OS X and associated applications are now considered "less urgent" within Apple."



    Even though I am not surprised at this statement, I still don't like the sound of it.



    Hardmac is a joke these days. It has become a total tech tabloid. I would not give any weight to anything they say. Too many 'unnamed sources' and too many questionable details. In this case, the mention of Shake is a head shaker. Why is there is team for a program Apple discontinued over a year ago. And the difference of opinion comment. Seriously. They want us to buy that one. The only opinion that matters is Job's. If you don't agree with it, too bad. You will give him what he wants because that's part of the job.



    My guess is that Hardmac was hyping a 2010 release and now they release it won't happen so they are pulling a CYA and trumping up reasons for a delay. But their reasons are illogical. A smart site playing that game would claim patent licenses, or a similar.





    As for delays in updates, consider this. Apple knows that these programs are being used by professionals. And in the case of Final Cut, major professionals. The last Julia Roberts movie was cut in FC for pete's sake. These are NOT folks that want to spend money on mediocre updates (like Adobe likes to toss out there). And they are not folks that can suffer a half baked program. Imagine a bug in a Final Cut screwing with your project. It can easily cost you thousands per day. Even the move from 32 to 64 bit has the potential of introducing something buggy. So Apple is going to release an major update when there is something worthy of it, and it is ready for prime time. But until then they will release fixes etc (as they have).



    They are NOT ignoring professional users, the potential developments have just reached a temporary plateau. But the programs are still very much usable. And are being used. By major names, including whole studios.
Sign In or Register to comment.