Adobe courts video professionals in wake of uproar over Apple's Final Cut Pro X

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 120
    What can I say except that I am blown away by by the comments by many in this thread who are viciously defending Apple in what is irrefutably an utter faceplant of a release campaign.



    I won't get dragged into this shrill melee, except to add this:



    I'm a pro film editor. I currently use FCS3 (FCP7) for 80% of my work.



    I'm currently freelancing in a facility that was going to buy 7 new mac pros, all of them kitted out with the new FCPX. The owner was simply waiting for the TB towers rumoured to be coming out in August.



    Well, after test-driving the new horror-show of a product, a full stop has been put on that proposition.



    Apple will have a couple of months to sort these issues of non-usablity out before the owner can't wait any longer, and Apple will lose a good chunk of business as different workstations are bought and the facility commences a move in a different direction.



    Once they invest in alternate tech, they won't look back. Can't afford to. Business realities.



    This story is not unique - I know of one other operation that's in an identical boat.



    In one fell swoop, Apple reversed a decade of hard earned reputation and customer loyalty in this arena. Every one of my colleagues is FURIOUS.



    Whether it matters to Apple or not - whether Steve cares or not - is up for debate, but I believe that Apple had better move quickly to remedy this situation or they WILL lose the professional production market.



    And that's too bad, because it's not just about cash-cows and marketshare: the caché of being the tool of choice for creative pros is a Big f***ing Deal.



    Shame on Apple for their mind-numbingly poor handling of this transition.
  • Reply 82 of 120
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post


    i would expect apple to begin selling FCP7 seats again very, very soon.



    really i'm surprised they would stop selling it immediately as they did. they didn't do that with OS9



    The way this often works in enterprise computing circles is that if you need an unsupported old version you are allowed to buy the new version and 'downgrade' your license to the older product - generally in the face of much vendor grumbling. If Apple were to take that approach it would amount to a huge price cut on FCP7 so might help deal with some of this bad publicity.
  • Reply 83 of 120
    jlanddjlandd Posts: 873member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post


    i mean apple is essentially associated with disney and pixar through steve jobs, and if they really have complaints i would bet apple will address them very quickly



    Ironically Pixar can't use FCPX for two main reasons: It's software you can't use in huge collaborating teams, due to its lack of import/export. And its software you can't use when you work on films that take many years to finish, for the same reason.
  • Reply 84 of 120
    firefly7475firefly7475 Posts: 1,502member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wienerdog View Post


    And that's too bad, because it's not just about cash-cows and market share: the caché of being the tool of choice for creative pros is a Big f***ing Deal.



    I know you're frustrated, but I have to ask... why?



    Apple are a consumer electronics company now. They create products for everyone from teenage girls to soccer moms to kindergarten kids to grandparents.



    The way they are moving I just don't think the creative pros market is one of their priorities anymore.



    Looking at recent advertisements peppered with "it just works" and "magical" I think they are actively trying to get rid of the "elitist" aura around Apple products. They even seem to be trying to do a complete back flip and become the "tech for everyday people" company.



    Here is some food for thought.... How many years was FCPX in development for? How many hundreds (or thousands!) of hands do you think it passed through from conception to release?



    Don't you think someone along that chain would have noticed these fundamental problems and the effect they would have and maybe, you know, pointed them out?



    Or what about the alternative. That FCPX wasn't a "mistake" and was actually a very well considered and deliberate move by Apple?
  • Reply 85 of 120
    rfrmacrfrmac Posts: 88member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mrr View Post


    Wait a minute. Let me get this right.



    Editors are going to give up their current FCP7 Final Cut Studio and start using Premiere Pro, just because they don't like the Final Cut Pro X upgrade ?



    I don't think so!



    They will upgrade to Final Cut Pro when it includes the futures that they need and want and it becomes compelling to do so.



    But move to Premiere Pro from FCP7? Not a chance!



    This post makes the most sense to me. Thanks Adobe but no thanks.
  • Reply 86 of 120
    mactacmactac Posts: 315member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PBRSTREETG View Post


    Apple HAS admitted in the most significant way that FCP-X is NOT a professional grade product by issuing refunds to people that had expected that it would be an upgrade to FCP7.



    So people were wrong in assuming that the Pro in the name Final Cut Pro X actually stood for professional? Apple must use a pretty interesting dictionary for them to not think Pro means Pro.
  • Reply 87 of 120
    mactacmactac Posts: 315member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post


    what arrogance?

    - agents have given refunds and admitted faults



    No. That's called Cover Your Ass and trying to save face. Apple was known for "It Just Works". Lot's of people moved to Apple products for that reason. Apple products were powerful. Buyers knew that professionals used Macs and Apple software. Movie goers knew that Apple products were cool enough to make the movies they were watching on the big screen.



    That's a lot of PR for Apple.



    Now with the release of FCPX and the backlash from the professionals this entire PR image is crumbling. Before it was, "Cool I can use Apple products to make my own movies for Youtube like the Pros use Apple products to make Hollywood movies." Now it is, "Yeah, I can make movies with my Mac but the Pros have to use something else to make real movies."
  • Reply 88 of 120
    Who ever is leading the video section of Apple has got to go. If the push is from Jobs, then Jobs should have is head examined.



    I stopped using iMovie when Apple changed a useful consumer product iMovie 6 to the current lousy software. For professionals, I'm certain that their views are accurate, just by analogy to my experience with the products from the Apple's video software group.



    Any argument that FCPX is new software and one has to keep up with the times is bogus.



    User requirements must take precedence over any technical/programmer issues -- no, that is not strong enough. User requirements must dictate software.



    On second thought, the problem might be with Steve Jobs. Apple's penchant for quality is one of their critical success factors and should never be abandoned. But, as a user (victim) of some of there software, Pros need control / choice, and non-pros, like me, want similar control/choice at the low end.



    Examples. Movies downloaded via Apple TV from iTunes only have the choice of HD rather than SD. One, I don't want to pay the extra price. Two, the file size differences are so great that the HD download must be performed overnight compared to SD, which can be I can stream within 15 minutes of starting the download. Result: I download the SD version to my iPad2 instead.



    I was shooting movies of speaker presentations for uploading to a site for members of our group to see. Use of HD for such movies ridiculous. I don't want to spend all night editing and rendering and uploading such movies. I want and need only low quality visuals to be posted, and users only want to receive a low quality, relatively small physical image to their computers. The codecs must render small image files.



    I don't care about high quality music. I don't want to pay more for higher quality music, and I can't tell the difference and I don't care even if I could. Good enough is good enough.
  • Reply 89 of 120
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,589member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DoctorGonzo View Post


    We cannot get any further FCP7 licenses.



    We cannot get any further FCP7 updates.



    What else do you expect us to do? Hang around with a finite number of copies and no support? Sorry, not happening.



    We have no roadmap, and now, zero confidence in Apple to get us to some mythical version of FCPX that will make it possible to do our jobs.



    Reactionaries... The only true legitimate complaint is that you can't import older FCP projects into the new version. But then again, you still have FCP 7 to do the work you need to, and it will be compatible with lion. Take a deep breath and be patient while you continue to do what you've been doing on the old version until the new features are added. Which they will be, and in short order. Meanwhile Adobe, GFY....
  • Reply 90 of 120
    jlanddjlandd Posts: 873member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zeph View Post


    I'm not sure what the uproar is about.



    I worked in post for a long time, and I haven't seen many FCP users in that field. Most pros I knew used Avid or Media 100 and disdainfully considered FCP to be for wedding videos.



    That may have changed over the last 3 years, but I doubt it could have gained so much critical mass as to become the new industry standard?



    This is an interesting take from a former Shake designer:



    http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/28/...ut-pro-market/





    Thanks for the link. Excellent words. Everyone should read these few short sentences. It sums it up better than anyone else could. I'll take the liberty of quoting it, from macrumors:



    From Ron Brinkmann, from the original product design team of Shake:



    "After the acquisition I remember sitting in a roomful of Hollywood VFX pros where Steve told everybody point-blank that we/Apple were going to focus on giving them powerful tools that were far more cost-effective than what they were accustomed to? but that the relationship between them and Apple wasn?t going to be something where they?d be driving product direction anymore. Didn?t go over particularly well, incidentally, but I don?t think that concerned Steve overmuch? :-)"
  • Reply 91 of 120
    pedroupedrou Posts: 1member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eksodos View Post


    I encourage any angry professional video editor to switch to Adobe Premier and buy a PC with Microsoft Windows too at the same time. I'm sure you'll have a good time without Apple software. FCPX is a revolutionary new product at a truly remarkable price. Apple leads the way again.



    I am and we have, at work we were waiting for FCPX for new seats, now we just ordered some avid composers, and on pc's. not happy but is apples fault!.
  • Reply 92 of 120
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 93 of 120
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zeph View Post


    I'm not sure what the uproar is about.



    I worked in post for a long time, and I haven't seen many FCP users in that field. Most pros I knew used Avid or Media 100 and disdainfully considered FCP to be for wedding videos.



    That may have changed over the last 3 years, but I doubt it could have gained so much critical mass as to become the new industry standard?



    This is an interesting take from a former Shake designer:



    http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/28/...ut-pro-market/



    This is the line that struck me the most, and the best part of his excellent article:



    "So if you’re really a professional you shouldn’t want to be reliant on software from a company like Apple. Because your heart will be broken. Because they’re not reliant on you. Use Apple’s tools to take you as far as they can – they’re an incredible bargain in terms of price-performance. But once you’re ready to move up to the next level, find yourself a software provider whose life-blood flows only as long as they keep their professional customers happy. It only makes sense."



    Also, why the heck did Apple buy Shake only to kill off arguably the best Hollywood-grade compositing tool of the time? So that *some* of that tech may filter down into iMovie or Final Cut or something?
  • Reply 94 of 120
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,603member
    Apple's mistake was not to add 'BETA' after FCPx, and to announce FCP7 end of life. Much as I think an awful lot of people are being overly dramatic, throwing their arms in the air and declaring end of life for Apple, I do recognize that Apple made a big presentation blunder.



    I have no doubt that over time FCPx will gain all the missing features pro's want / need and that the pro-sumer interface so many hate will become acceptable to the sceptics. What I want to know is - assuming the software had the missing features and could talk to studio hardware and software without major work arounds - what is it about the software editors hate. What is it about the iMovieesqueness that makes editors see red? Apple think they have found a better way of working but it seems editors disagree.
  • Reply 95 of 120
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 96 of 120
    jasenj1jasenj1 Posts: 916member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jonamac View Post


    'Adobe is attempting to drum up support for its competing Premiere Pro. Public relations representatives for the company have called attention to documents assisting users in switching from Final Cut Pro to Premiere Pro, as well as testimonials from industry professionals using the company's products.'



    That is the only part of the entire 'article' that actually pertains to the title. Why was this even written???



    Because FCP stories are generating lots of hits and forum posts. Even the posts in this thread are mostly rehashes of what has been said in the other FCPX threads.



    - Jasen.
  • Reply 97 of 120
    mobycatmobycat Posts: 57member
    From what I've read on all the talk of FCPX, it sure strikes me as this:



    Those complaining - Video Professionals. You know... the one's who get PAID to do it.



    Those saying it's fine, give it time, etc - Video Hobbyists. You know... the one's who DON'T get paid to do it. The one's, more than likely, you find posting videos to youtube.



    yeah, ok... that last sentence was just mean...
  • Reply 98 of 120
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by september11th View Post


    I was thinking about this today.



    Going from FCP7 to FCPX is a major change, literally asking everyone to relearn a new editing program. It is not FCP, it is simply a new program. Had another company put this out, it would likely fail. Adobe Premiere is more similar to FCP7 than FCPX is.. and having been a FCP user for many years, if I had to choose one right now, I would go to Adobe. Their production suite is now a better solution than FCPX. Even if they add some of the features back, I really think Apple has screwed themselves.



    I think that they may have made a mistake in not releasing some info ahead of time.

    Things like:



    A reminder that this is all new software, not an upgrade.

    A warning that due to the total rewrite, importing of FCP1-7 projects would not be possible.

    Which features are being left out in favor of the small percent that need them buying software/plug-ins from the folks that own the patents. Similar to the Flash and Java thing where we should be getting better software from the source. And explaining that that notion and the price drop is why they are doing it.

    A warning that some advanced features may not be available at the first launch.



    If they had told this up front folks could have not paid money etc. That's why they are really freaking out. They paid for this and they don't know when it will be back to form. They might not even really need the features they are freaking about having 'lost', but they still don't like not having them. People would have also known to go ahead and buy FCS3 if they might need it, more seats etc. Particularly if they were reminded that Apple always cut the old stuff right away.





    But before we say that they screwed themselves we need to see some numbers. How many copies sold, how many folks actually created negative reviews, how many naysayers are from the NAB preview, how many are from actual editing houses v those that are living room prosumers. How many of those houses actually use any of the missing features and which ones. and so on.



    As for that petition, frankly I don't give it much worth. It's too easy to make tons of gmail etc emails and pad those things with falsely high numbers.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trip1ex View Post


    Talk about overblown.



    Give it some time. Features will be added. Ecosystem will develop. Folks will get some experience with it. And perspective will be gained.



    Right now you're just hearing a mob, fearful of change, picking the low hanging fruit and whining about it.



    The low hanging fruit being the easy to spot missing features. Something any idiot can whine about from the comfort of their armchair without ever having touched the product.



    Yep. The real pros know this and planned for it. Just like they planned not to convert all computers over to Lion (or to run split partitions) until they are sure all their stuff will work. It's just the name of the game. Just like paying attention to the various early details, getting that this is an all new UI etc and they will have to relearn before they can start using.



    I can't wait for a couple of weeks from now when the first updates start coming out and folks try to claim that it was due to their griping. When in fact it could have been Apple's plan all along.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post


    i agree. i don't understand the importing issue. you started a film on FCP7. You finish it on FCP7. Don't you just start your next film on the new version? where is importing needed?



    Folks are bitching for two main reasons



    1. They can't import into the FCPX to take advantage of the 64 bit etc and the speed it should be producing for them



    2. If they finish something and want to revisit it later their FCP7 might not work anymore. So they would have to start over from scratch. Time is money after all.



    The thing is, the editors don't know FCPX yet. It's a week old and these folks are busy finishing the current project. No real pro is going to switch to software he doesn't know when he's got a deadline. And by the time the whole 'revisit' issue comes up, they may have rewritten FCPX in a way that it can import FCP7 projects, created a convertor plug in or some 3rd party figures it out.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by strobe View Post


    Apple didn't merely change the architecture, but dropped API support so plug-ins will have to be rewritten. Without a production-capable platform to write plug-ins for, who would bother?



    Noise Industries for one. Their FXFactory plug in set is one of the most widely used on all platforms. Not only did they make FCPX versions of their stuff but they had it out the day after FCPX launched.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jlandd View Post


    Ironically Pixar can't use FCPX for two main reasons: It's software you can't use in huge collaborating teams, due to its lack of import/export. And its software you can't use when you work on films that take many years to finish, for the same reason.



    They weren't likely using FCS either. They do 3d animation. That's the land of programs like Maya, Bryce etc. Not FCP which doesn't due annie. So Pixar was likely never using FCS and still won't be.
  • Reply 99 of 120
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Povilas View Post


    Pro is a synonym for moron these days. There are plenty of new young qualified people to tkae their place, so nothing to worry about.



    Yeah no kidding. I'm 28 and I challenge any seasoned "Pro" to an edit off. They can use anything they want and I'll get it done faster and better in FCPX.
  • Reply 100 of 120
    nerudaneruda Posts: 427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mrr View Post


    Wait a minute. Let me get this right.



    Editors are going to give up their current FCP7 Final Cut Studio and start using Premiere Pro, just because they don't like the Final Cut Pro X upgrade ?



    I don't think so!



    Let me assure you that this is exactly what is going to happen in the professional community. Think of all of the uncertainty that FCP X represents to professionals. Avid looks like a much better choice (feature wise and from a future roadmap point of view) than iMovie Pro/FCP X.



    We are already thinking about making the transition (to Avid MC). Why wait to see if Apple can or will fix this mess when there are already better solutions from companies that are unlikely to do this kind of thing? FCS 3 for 2 more years and then its onto Avid.
Sign In or Register to comment.