You lump Avid as a pro-sumer option? Or, did I read that wrong? I have cut tons of award-winning commercials on my Avid systems that no pro-sumer could afford at $75,000 per seat. Avid Media Composer IS professional grade, not pro-sumer. Like Apple, Avid had to bring out a low-end version for marketing reasons, but other than mucking up the landscape, it was not pro-grade. FCP v7 was as close to Avid as it comes. Avid is still a faster system for basic editing which is 90% of what I do. All the bells and whistles, the "Jack-of-all-Trades" add-ons only slow everything down in a professional studio setting. While all the graphics and color grading software is nice, I tend to divide that work among experts in their field, i.e., a audio engineer to mix, a colorist to do grading and a Flame artist or After Effects specialist for graphics and special effects.
Then, by definition, FCPX or FCP7/FCS is not for you.
Did you expect them to be?
When you upgrade, what will you upgrade to.
I have read that Avid is not making enough money catering to the high-end market place -- maybe that's why they had to introduce a low-end version.
If Avid were to go out of business (EOL all their products) where would that leave you? In 5 years?
I am asking serious questions, not from an Apple perspective -- but from one of progress, technology and economics.
Well, maybe they saw the POTENTIAL of the new app. Maybe they had a glimpse in to the future and their jaws dropped. Maybe the conversation that came afterwards has been less well reported.
If I misquoted Larry Jordan I apologize but in a quick search it seems he did say that the next version would be 'jaw dropping'. You one of the beta testers paxman or know Larry Jordan and his intent?
I've never seen ANY company refund a 300$ software.
I had purchased Final Cut Studio 2 six weeks before FCS (3) came out. Granted, it was just an upgrade from FCS 1, but it was still $449 (they gave me a discount). Imagine my disappointment when Apple released FCS (3) out of the blue (I was following all the usual rumor sites like this and there was no mention of an imminent release) for a $299 upgrade price. And to add insult to injury, it was possible to skip FCS 2 altogether and go straight to FCS (3).
Well, FCS 2 was installed and active on my machine and it appeared that there was nothing I'd be able to do but plunk down another $299 for the latest version. For the hell of it, I called Apple to see if they could do anything for me. To my surprise, they generously issued me a full refund (even before I committed to buying FCS (3) 2 days later).
So yeah, Apple issued me a $480.54 refund for the discounted upgrade price of FCS 2.
Well up until last week Avid Media Composer was $995 for the full boxed set if you have a full box set of FCS which you turned in to the dealer. Promotion ended June 17.
Maybe they should bring the promotion back. I think a lot of people might take them up on it now.
Well up until last week Avid Media Composer was $995 for the full boxed set if you have a full box set of FCS which you turned in to the dealer. Promotion ended June 17.
Maybe they should bring the promotion back. I think a lot of people might take them up on it now.
Is that the low-end Avid product that @Bruceedits was dissing? Is there nothing between that and the $75,000 per seat High-end he was using to create thousands of commercials?
The normal AVID Media Composer price is $2,295.00 – $2,495.00.
Anyway, if the AVID Media Composer is a functionally competitive product they should bring back the special -- might get pretty interesting.
P.S. Maybe that's why Apple pulled all the FCS product from resellers.
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
No need to imagine, there's a comic with pictures :
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.
I don't see it as iMovie Pro either for the long term. As of right now, I'd say it is but then you could describe Final Cut Pro as iMovie Pro if you ignore the file import/export and judge it on the ability to cut a movie.
There is one feature though that needs to be changed and that's the file reconnection. Multi-cam is really just an extra feature, it doesn't stop you doing an edit if you don't have it, although their suggestion of using two tracks and hitting a key to disable one in the mean-time is a bit like pissing on a fire - it doesn't put the fire out and it just makes everything smell bad.
With the file connection the way it is though, you aren't allowed to replace footage with a different format or a different file transparently.
For example, previously you could work on a file in AE or whatever while FCP was open, move one of the clips to trash and replace it and just bring FCP to the front and it reconnects the clip to the new version automatically. Now because files have identifiers inside FCP, it will tell you that clip is offline and you have to reimport it and replace it manually.
For the odd file, it's not a huge deal but it is if you do a proxy edit. Say you have 4K sources and you want to edit on a laptop, you can create a set of proxy files from the source, edit up a cut no problem and then reconnect to the highest quality sources for the final output. In FCPX, it will tell you to relink every single cut individually. nothankyou.jpg
Simple changes though, so I expect it to be just a matter of time - right now, I'd guess they are in the 'working their asses off' stage and the apology event comes later. We have to have a name for it though like antennagate. Maybe the 'didn't make the Final Cut Pro X' event or the 'Final didn't quite Cut it Pro X' event. It's all creatives involved in this so I'm sure somebody will come up with something.
Somehow I would respect the likes of this man's opinions and open minded opines before I would accept the rhetoric expounded by many of the whom profess to be experts on just about everything.
FCP X – FIRST MUSINGS by David Leitner, Filmmaker Magazine.*
I agree with what you say -- especially about the part of supporting existing users.
But, i must point out that those pioneers you describe as "at the bleeding edge of technology for decades" -- are now using decades old technology!
Realistically, if you want to take advantage of the latest post technology in the next few years -- you'll need to move to FCPX or move to another vendor's products. I believe there is zero chance that Apple will upgrade FCP7/FCS.
One problem facing many of those entrenched with FCP7 is that they will face the same pressure that caused them to move to FCP initially -- the old way was to difficult and too expensive -- and FCP is good enough!
The guys using FCP are cleaning our clock!
Someday soon, FCPX and/or a competitive product will be easier, faster and provide better workflow and deliverables than you get from FCP7/FCS.
Nothing you say I disagree with (except the high end of video editing is decades behind). All I can say is if Apple are changing direction this fast (i.e no ability to read existing files, use plug ins etc) then edit houses simply can't change over night and Apple need to allow for a transition period by continuing to support 7 while they, Apple, get the new product up to scratch, not end it like it was iWeb or some consumer product. Professional users invested a vast amount of money in human effort, equipment and risk all based on a software program Apple released for professionals and Apple should be proud of that and return the favor by continuing to support them.
FCP X is clearly not close to ready for pro studio use.
We bought a copy the morning it was released. Spent a week carefully going through everything. There are some very amazing tools that we really, really liked. But in the end, the missing workflow abilities, 3rd party hardware support, and collaboration tools are a deal killer. FCP X was DOA for us. We're sticking to FCP 7 for the time being with the plan to adopt FCP X if they fix it within 12 months. If that doesn't happen, we're already looking towards alternatives to replace FCP in our studio.
And yes.... we got our refund.
I look forward to reading a more in-depth review from your professional perspective. Unfortunately, there are very few professionals who have the moxie to identify themselves compared to the many who hide themselves in the bloggesphere.
Is that the low-end Avid product that @Bruceedits was dissing? Is there nothing between that and the $75,000 per seat High-end he was using to create thousands of commercials?
The normal AVID Media Composer price is $2,295.00 – $2,495.00.
Anyway, if the AVID Media Composer is a functionally competitive product they should bring back the special -- might get pretty interesting.
P.S. Maybe that's why Apple pulled all the FCS product from resellers.
Yes and there's also a software only version of Avid DS for $10k. Full compatibility, all extended features supported, (red, raw, DPX, Arri raw, 2k 4k etc etc.) just no hardware, but you can always add it later and it's a perfect solution for an offline edit suite or a laptop on set. Avid Media composer kicks ass too (for the price). Thank god they got rid of that horrid DV express. What a POS.
On topic, I guess it's an official "disaster" for Apple.
It's pretty clear reading these posts that some people understand what its like to depend on a piece of software for your livelihood, and some simply don't; Unfortunately Apple falls into the latter category. And, that's really the issue. When you depend on technology, you don't want to have to worry that its about to get taken away from you next month. You want to know you can train new people on it, and the time won't be wasted. You want to know you can purchase new seats, buy new hardware and add-ons, without the money being wasted. Learning a complex application at a pro level, and integrating it into a multifaceted workflow is a serious investment. Apple just said "Hey y'all, go f*k yourselves."
There are ways to manage a transition like this. Look at what Adobe did with transitioning Pagemaker to InDesign. It was a long process. It took years. And, in the interim they kept updating Pagemaker. This gave people time to get up to speed on InDesign. It gave InDesign time to mature; and it gave third parties time to release new plug-ins. Apple did none of this.
To everyone that says "just keep using FCP," you just don't get it. You don't keep using an important tool that has no future. You don't start new projects in a dead program. At this point FCPX does not look viable to many users, and it won't open old FCP projects anyway, so, better transition now than later... Unless Apple does some serious back-peddling, and soon... even then, their cluelessness has been revealed. Once trust is lost, it's hard to go back.
There are ways to manage a transition like this. Look at what Adobe did with transitioning Pagemaker to InDesign. It was a long process. It took years. And, in the interim they kept updating Pagemaker. This gave people time to get up to speed on InDesign. It gave InDesign time to mature; and it gave third parties time to release new plug-ins. Apple did none of this.
Nothing you say I disagree with (except the high end of video editing is decades behind). All I can say is if Apple are changing direction this fast (i.e no ability to read existing files, use plug ins etc) then edit houses simply can't change over night and Apple need to allow for a transition period by continuing to support 7 while they, Apple, get the new product up to scratch, not end it like it was iWeb or some consumer product. Professional users invested a vast amount of money in human effort, equipment and risk all based on a software program Apple released for professionals and Apple should be proud of that and return the favor by continuing to support them.
I agree with everything you say about the future! My comment about FCP7 is that it really is old technology. There are AV APIs and frameworks in Cocoa that will never be available in Carbon. FCP7/FCS is built with Carbon. There are things in. Cocoa that are specifically designed for AV and AV editing -- that's why the good bits in FCPX are so appealing. FCPX, while incomplete, is today's state-of-the-art technology.
It is like FCP7/FCPS is built with cement and FCPX is built with aluminum, or titanium. It is not impossible to make cement float, but it is a poor solution when compared to the alternatives.
I'm making a point. If Apple chucked everything right now and transitioned dev tools to PC, they could do quite well by leveraging MacOS (if they licensed Lion to run on PCs), iOS and the iPhone (which of course would still include iTunes).
They could wipe out Microsoft and simplify their product line to the point of it just being silly.
Spam, I respectfully disagree with you. I very much doubt that Apple wants to be held hostage or host their dev tools on Windows or Linux. Believe it or not there is a huge group of people that want nothing to do with mainstream PC hardware no matter how low the cost. We are part of that group. Even Microsoft has realized that in order to give customers a consistent user experience you have to build the whole ecosystem.
There are ways to manage a transition like this. Look at what Adobe did with transitioning Pagemaker to InDesign. It was a long process. It took years. And, in the interim they kept updating Pagemaker. This gave people time to get up to speed on InDesign. It gave InDesign time to mature; and it gave third parties time to release new plug-ins. Apple did none of this.
Excuse me, but that is a complete fabrication. Adobe did not keep updating Pagemaker, but you know what? Printing pros kept using PageMaker and switched to InDesign when it met their needs - which was at release, a year later, or multiple years later. What they didn't do is take to the Internet in droves and cry like little babies.
Quote:
To everyone that says "just keep using FCP," you just don't get it. You don't keep using an important tool that has no future. You don't start new projects in a dead program. At this point FCPX does not look viable to many users, and it won't open old FCP projects anyway, so, better transition now than later... Unless Apple does some serious back-peddling, and soon... even then, their cluelessness has been revealed. Once trust is lost, it's hard to go back.
Last I checked FCP7 still works. It is not dead. And in the coming future, FCPX will have everything you need in FCP7 and more. The real pros understand that, just like the printing pros that eventually moved to InDesign.
If they're coming from Final Cut Pro 7, then they still have Final Cut Pro 7 and can use that.
if the first version of Final Cut they're using is Final Cut X, then they have no metric against which to compare this software, and therefore shouldn't really be complaining about it.
No idea about Kona, sorry. What plug-ins I do have run fine, however.
You keep repeating "They still have 7" like it is some mantra that magically answers all the serious questions. I am not attacking Apple, hell I worked for them and have spent over 30 years evangelizing Apple. We don't have 7 unless Apple state they will support and update it. No one wants to pay to train a bunch of people and buy tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment to run an application the manufacturer has withdrawn. The replacement product as of this time can't do the same job, period and there is no conversion path anyway.
I suspect (hope) Apple will respond and do the right thing which is to prolong the life of 7, they usually do the right thing in the end. It is not about being anti progress or still having 7 it is about being able to transition.
I truly looked forward to X becoming fully operational and paradigm shifts are no problem, heck I used an Apple ][, a /// then a Lisa before getting Macs!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav
Last I checked FCP7 still works. It is not dead. And in the coming future, FCPX will have everything you need in FCP7 and more. The real pros understand that, just like the printing pros that eventually moved to InDesign.
You are 100% correct except you forget to include the requirement for 7 to not only work but be supported and what about being still for sale in the interim?
BTW I helped the 'printing pros' you mention move from type setters to PageMaker so I do understand changes in technology.
I agree with everything you say about the future! My comment about FCP7 is that it really is old technology. There are AV APIs and frameworks in Cocoa that will never be available in Carbon. FCP7/FCS is built with Carbon. There are things in. Cocoa that are specifically designed for AV and AV editing -- that's why the good bits in FCPX are so appealing. FCPX, while incomplete, is today's state-of-the-art technology.
It is like FCP7/FCPS is built with cement and FCPX is built with aluminum, or titanium. It is not impossible to make cement float, but it is a poor solution when compared to the alternatives.
I agree, I love FCPX, I am having great fun with it and can see it being amazing in time. I just don't want to see the high end studios abandon Apple because of what is basically a PR snafu. They need to know Apple will help them transition. I believe they will and hopefully blogs like this will help in that process.
I agree, I love FCPX, I am having great fun with it and can see it being amazing in time. I just don't want to see the high end studios abandon Apple because of what is basically a PR snafu. They need to know Apple will help them transition. I believe they will and hopefully blogs like this will help in that process.
And to think only last week I was berated for even suggesting that Apple offer trial periods for apps to see if customers find sufficient value in them.
Comments
You lump Avid as a pro-sumer option? Or, did I read that wrong? I have cut tons of award-winning commercials on my Avid systems that no pro-sumer could afford at $75,000 per seat. Avid Media Composer IS professional grade, not pro-sumer. Like Apple, Avid had to bring out a low-end version for marketing reasons, but other than mucking up the landscape, it was not pro-grade. FCP v7 was as close to Avid as it comes. Avid is still a faster system for basic editing which is 90% of what I do. All the bells and whistles, the "Jack-of-all-Trades" add-ons only slow everything down in a professional studio setting. While all the graphics and color grading software is nice, I tend to divide that work among experts in their field, i.e., a audio engineer to mix, a colorist to do grading and a Flame artist or After Effects specialist for graphics and special effects.
Then, by definition, FCPX or FCP7/FCS is not for you.
Did you expect them to be?
When you upgrade, what will you upgrade to.
I have read that Avid is not making enough money catering to the high-end market place -- maybe that's why they had to introduce a low-end version.
If Avid were to go out of business (EOL all their products) where would that leave you? In 5 years?
I am asking serious questions, not from an Apple perspective -- but from one of progress, technology and economics.
Well, maybe they saw the POTENTIAL of the new app. Maybe they had a glimpse in to the future and their jaws dropped. Maybe the conversation that came afterwards has been less well reported.
If I misquoted Larry Jordan I apologize but in a quick search it seems he did say that the next version would be 'jaw dropping'. You one of the beta testers paxman or know Larry Jordan and his intent?
I've never seen ANY company refund a 300$ software.
I had purchased Final Cut Studio 2 six weeks before FCS (3) came out. Granted, it was just an upgrade from FCS 1, but it was still $449 (they gave me a discount). Imagine my disappointment when Apple released FCS (3) out of the blue (I was following all the usual rumor sites like this and there was no mention of an imminent release) for a $299 upgrade price. And to add insult to injury, it was possible to skip FCS 2 altogether and go straight to FCS (3).
Well, FCS 2 was installed and active on my machine and it appeared that there was nothing I'd be able to do but plunk down another $299 for the latest version. For the hell of it, I called Apple to see if they could do anything for me. To my surprise, they generously issued me a full refund (even before I committed to buying FCS (3) 2 days later).
So yeah, Apple issued me a $480.54 refund for the discounted upgrade price of FCS 2.
How many times $300 is the price of Avid?
Well up until last week Avid Media Composer was $995 for the full boxed set if you have a full box set of FCS which you turned in to the dealer. Promotion ended June 17.
Maybe they should bring the promotion back. I think a lot of people might take them up on it now.
Well up until last week Avid Media Composer was $995 for the full boxed set if you have a full box set of FCS which you turned in to the dealer. Promotion ended June 17.
Maybe they should bring the promotion back. I think a lot of people might take them up on it now.
Is that the low-end Avid product that @Bruceedits was dissing? Is there nothing between that and the $75,000 per seat High-end he was using to create thousands of commercials?
The normal AVID Media Composer price is $2,295.00 – $2,495.00.
Anyway, if the AVID Media Composer is a functionally competitive product they should bring back the special -- might get pretty interesting.
P.S. Maybe that's why Apple pulled all the FCS product from resellers.
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
No need to imagine, there's a comic with pictures
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/636/finalcut5.jpg
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.
I don't see it as iMovie Pro either for the long term. As of right now, I'd say it is but then you could describe Final Cut Pro as iMovie Pro if you ignore the file import/export and judge it on the ability to cut a movie.
There is one feature though that needs to be changed and that's the file reconnection. Multi-cam is really just an extra feature, it doesn't stop you doing an edit if you don't have it, although their suggestion of using two tracks and hitting a key to disable one in the mean-time is a bit like pissing on a fire - it doesn't put the fire out and it just makes everything smell bad.
With the file connection the way it is though, you aren't allowed to replace footage with a different format or a different file transparently.
For example, previously you could work on a file in AE or whatever while FCP was open, move one of the clips to trash and replace it and just bring FCP to the front and it reconnects the clip to the new version automatically. Now because files have identifiers inside FCP, it will tell you that clip is offline and you have to reimport it and replace it manually.
For the odd file, it's not a huge deal but it is if you do a proxy edit. Say you have 4K sources and you want to edit on a laptop, you can create a set of proxy files from the source, edit up a cut no problem and then reconnect to the highest quality sources for the final output. In FCPX, it will tell you to relink every single cut individually. nothankyou.jpg
Simple changes though, so I expect it to be just a matter of time - right now, I'd guess they are in the 'working their asses off' stage and the apology event comes later. We have to have a name for it though like antennagate. Maybe the 'didn't make the Final Cut Pro X' event or the 'Final didn't quite Cut it Pro X' event. It's all creatives involved in this so I'm sure somebody will come up with something.
FCP X – FIRST MUSINGS by David Leitner, Filmmaker Magazine.*
* http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/new...first-musings/
I agree with what you say -- especially about the part of supporting existing users.
But, i must point out that those pioneers you describe as "at the bleeding edge of technology for decades" -- are now using decades old technology!
Realistically, if you want to take advantage of the latest post technology in the next few years -- you'll need to move to FCPX or move to another vendor's products. I believe there is zero chance that Apple will upgrade FCP7/FCS.
One problem facing many of those entrenched with FCP7 is that they will face the same pressure that caused them to move to FCP initially -- the old way was to difficult and too expensive -- and FCP is good enough!
The guys using FCP are cleaning our clock!
Someday soon, FCPX and/or a competitive product will be easier, faster and provide better workflow and deliverables than you get from FCP7/FCS.
Nothing you say I disagree with (except the high end of video editing is decades behind). All I can say is if Apple are changing direction this fast (i.e no ability to read existing files, use plug ins etc) then edit houses simply can't change over night and Apple need to allow for a transition period by continuing to support 7 while they, Apple, get the new product up to scratch, not end it like it was iWeb or some consumer product. Professional users invested a vast amount of money in human effort, equipment and risk all based on a software program Apple released for professionals and Apple should be proud of that and return the favor by continuing to support them.
FCP X is clearly not close to ready for pro studio use.
We bought a copy the morning it was released. Spent a week carefully going through everything. There are some very amazing tools that we really, really liked. But in the end, the missing workflow abilities, 3rd party hardware support, and collaboration tools are a deal killer. FCP X was DOA for us. We're sticking to FCP 7 for the time being with the plan to adopt FCP X if they fix it within 12 months. If that doesn't happen, we're already looking towards alternatives to replace FCP in our studio.
And yes.... we got our refund.
I look forward to reading a more in-depth review from your professional perspective. Unfortunately, there are very few professionals who have the moxie to identify themselves compared to the many who hide themselves in the bloggesphere.
Is that the low-end Avid product that @Bruceedits was dissing? Is there nothing between that and the $75,000 per seat High-end he was using to create thousands of commercials?
The normal AVID Media Composer price is $2,295.00 – $2,495.00.
Anyway, if the AVID Media Composer is a functionally competitive product they should bring back the special -- might get pretty interesting.
P.S. Maybe that's why Apple pulled all the FCS product from resellers.
Yes and there's also a software only version of Avid DS for $10k. Full compatibility, all extended features supported, (red, raw, DPX, Arri raw, 2k 4k etc etc.) just no hardware, but you can always add it later and it's a perfect solution for an offline edit suite or a laptop on set. Avid Media composer kicks ass too (for the price). Thank god they got rid of that horrid DV express. What a POS.
On topic, I guess it's an official "disaster" for Apple.
There are ways to manage a transition like this. Look at what Adobe did with transitioning Pagemaker to InDesign. It was a long process. It took years. And, in the interim they kept updating Pagemaker. This gave people time to get up to speed on InDesign. It gave InDesign time to mature; and it gave third parties time to release new plug-ins. Apple did none of this.
To everyone that says "just keep using FCP," you just don't get it. You don't keep using an important tool that has no future. You don't start new projects in a dead program. At this point FCPX does not look viable to many users, and it won't open old FCP projects anyway, so, better transition now than later... Unless Apple does some serious back-peddling, and soon... even then, their cluelessness has been revealed. Once trust is lost, it's hard to go back.
There are ways to manage a transition like this. Look at what Adobe did with transitioning Pagemaker to InDesign. It was a long process. It took years. And, in the interim they kept updating Pagemaker. This gave people time to get up to speed on InDesign. It gave InDesign time to mature; and it gave third parties time to release new plug-ins. Apple did none of this.
Like hell they did.
Nothing you say I disagree with (except the high end of video editing is decades behind). All I can say is if Apple are changing direction this fast (i.e no ability to read existing files, use plug ins etc) then edit houses simply can't change over night and Apple need to allow for a transition period by continuing to support 7 while they, Apple, get the new product up to scratch, not end it like it was iWeb or some consumer product. Professional users invested a vast amount of money in human effort, equipment and risk all based on a software program Apple released for professionals and Apple should be proud of that and return the favor by continuing to support them.
I agree with everything you say about the future! My comment about FCP7 is that it really is old technology. There are AV APIs and frameworks in Cocoa that will never be available in Carbon. FCP7/FCS is built with Carbon. There are things in. Cocoa that are specifically designed for AV and AV editing -- that's why the good bits in FCPX are so appealing. FCPX, while incomplete, is today's state-of-the-art technology.
It is like FCP7/FCPS is built with cement and FCPX is built with aluminum, or titanium. It is not impossible to make cement float, but it is a poor solution when compared to the alternatives.
I'm making a point. If Apple chucked everything right now and transitioned dev tools to PC, they could do quite well by leveraging MacOS (if they licensed Lion to run on PCs), iOS and the iPhone (which of course would still include iTunes).
They could wipe out Microsoft and simplify their product line to the point of it just being silly.
Spam, I respectfully disagree with you. I very much doubt that Apple wants to be held hostage or host their dev tools on Windows or Linux. Believe it or not there is a huge group of people that want nothing to do with mainstream PC hardware no matter how low the cost. We are part of that group. Even Microsoft has realized that in order to give customers a consistent user experience you have to build the whole ecosystem.
There are ways to manage a transition like this. Look at what Adobe did with transitioning Pagemaker to InDesign. It was a long process. It took years. And, in the interim they kept updating Pagemaker. This gave people time to get up to speed on InDesign. It gave InDesign time to mature; and it gave third parties time to release new plug-ins. Apple did none of this.
Excuse me, but that is a complete fabrication. Adobe did not keep updating Pagemaker, but you know what? Printing pros kept using PageMaker and switched to InDesign when it met their needs - which was at release, a year later, or multiple years later. What they didn't do is take to the Internet in droves and cry like little babies.
To everyone that says "just keep using FCP," you just don't get it. You don't keep using an important tool that has no future. You don't start new projects in a dead program. At this point FCPX does not look viable to many users, and it won't open old FCP projects anyway, so, better transition now than later... Unless Apple does some serious back-peddling, and soon... even then, their cluelessness has been revealed. Once trust is lost, it's hard to go back.
Last I checked FCP7 still works. It is not dead. And in the coming future, FCPX will have everything you need in FCP7 and more. The real pros understand that, just like the printing pros that eventually moved to InDesign.
This makes no sense at all.
If they're coming from Final Cut Pro 7, then they still have Final Cut Pro 7 and can use that.
if the first version of Final Cut they're using is Final Cut X, then they have no metric against which to compare this software, and therefore shouldn't really be complaining about it.
No idea about Kona, sorry. What plug-ins I do have run fine, however.
You keep repeating "They still have 7" like it is some mantra that magically answers all the serious questions. I am not attacking Apple, hell I worked for them and have spent over 30 years evangelizing Apple. We don't have 7 unless Apple state they will support and update it. No one wants to pay to train a bunch of people and buy tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment to run an application the manufacturer has withdrawn. The replacement product as of this time can't do the same job, period and there is no conversion path anyway.
I suspect (hope) Apple will respond and do the right thing which is to prolong the life of 7, they usually do the right thing in the end. It is not about being anti progress or still having 7 it is about being able to transition.
I truly looked forward to X becoming fully operational and paradigm shifts are no problem, heck I used an Apple ][, a /// then a Lisa before getting Macs!
Last I checked FCP7 still works. It is not dead. And in the coming future, FCPX will have everything you need in FCP7 and more. The real pros understand that, just like the printing pros that eventually moved to InDesign.
You are 100% correct except you forget to include the requirement for 7 to not only work but be supported and what about being still for sale in the interim?
BTW I helped the 'printing pros' you mention move from type setters to PageMaker so I do understand changes in technology.
This isn't about the cult of Apple Inc. This is about people trying to use their computers to DO THEIR WORK! Apple used to be about THAT.
Back before form meant more than function.
I agree with everything you say about the future! My comment about FCP7 is that it really is old technology. There are AV APIs and frameworks in Cocoa that will never be available in Carbon. FCP7/FCS is built with Carbon. There are things in. Cocoa that are specifically designed for AV and AV editing -- that's why the good bits in FCPX are so appealing. FCPX, while incomplete, is today's state-of-the-art technology.
It is like FCP7/FCPS is built with cement and FCPX is built with aluminum, or titanium. It is not impossible to make cement float, but it is a poor solution when compared to the alternatives.
I agree, I love FCPX, I am having great fun with it and can see it being amazing in time. I just don't want to see the high end studios abandon Apple because of what is basically a PR snafu. They need to know Apple will help them transition. I believe they will and hopefully blogs like this will help in that process.
I agree, I love FCPX, I am having great fun with it and can see it being amazing in time. I just don't want to see the high end studios abandon Apple because of what is basically a PR snafu. They need to know Apple will help them transition. I believe they will and hopefully blogs like this will help in that process.
Hear, Hear!