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

12346»

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 120
    aknabiaknabi Posts: 167member
    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.



    There's the blind fanboi comment true *professionals* were waiting for to laugh at...



    It's catering to this cult mentality that will cost Apple the professional creative market... and in real estate and tech the masses typically follow the paths laid down by professional creatives
  • Reply 102 of 120
    xsuxsu Posts: 401member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by danielgomes View Post


    I know *some* people are up in arms about this but from what I've read on the internet, FCP X also has made huge leaps forward in how it handles editing that no other competitor can currently match.



    Apple rewrote it from the ground up and I reckon it's ground breaking. As soon as Apple adds support for importing and exporting to/from certain formats, I reckon it will be wiping the floor with the competition.



    Apple have always had the courage to do what they think is best, despite initial criticism, and in the end they are always right.



    Remember the mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad? Many of those projects were criticised by others (ahem..Steve Ballmer) and look how great they all turned out.



    FCP X will soon be regarded the no. 1 movie editing software package again, and those who go with Adobe are making a serious mistake. Seriously, most Adobe products are rubbish and don't hold a candle next to Apple's products.



    Well done Steve and Apple for having the balls to lead the way forward.





    I think the Apple was right to move to FCPX. However, they should have given the user base a much earlier disclosure of what it will be. They should also have kept FCP7 around during the transition phase where users start to get used to FCPX.



    IMHO, Apple really should have handled the transition in two phases.

    Phase 1. release this current FCPX, at the same time also release a few long asked for updates to FCP7. Then announce a date in the future, say maybe in 1 year, when FCP7 and associated products will be EOL.

    Phase 2. Release updated FCPX with most of the popular features in FCP7. EOL FCP7 and associated products.



    Apple is handling this release like their consumer products. Which is completely wrong for a professional application. If Apple's strategic plan see themselves getting out of that market, they should have sold the FCP franchise to someone else. To do anything else would be irresponsible, both to the user base and the share holders.
  • Reply 103 of 120
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post


    A lot of people commenting in this don't even realize just HOW bad this thing is. It's nit just functionality, it's the whole package. How do you install it on 300 workstations legally? Do you need 300 iTunes accounts to get it from the app store? Why can't you import old projects? So I'm working on a documentary since 2005, I have to keep it on an old workstation? Why can't I open multiple projects at the same time? What about multiple libraries?



    You can't even share projects amongst different editors or export to other professional software. If the sae treatment is given to Logic, Apple's professional credibility will be shot.



    Check out this podcast



    http://library.creativecow.net/harri...iscardi/FCPX/1



    I use Logic Pro, A LOT more than I use Final Cut, I am a musician. I have just recently started using Logic Pro, and Final Cut, and one thing I seem to miss when it comes to these types of software is, unless there is some crazy new feature or set of tools, why do you even need to upgrade? For example....I have a friend who recorded an entire album, that sounded GREAT and sold well, and it was done a few years ago using the first version of Logic 8. He is now going back in the studio, and using that same version, YEARS AND VERSIONS later not to mention on a MAC that is still running three versions back of Snow leopard with only 2gbs of RAM.....when i asked, will you upgrade to Logic 9? He said, NO, why would I need to? I recorded my last album with features and tools that were just fine, there is nothing new or THAT much better, so I still use 8 and still make great music, and it still sells well, and I save $500.......



    I completely understand the frustrations of people who did buy it, and were expecting one thing and got another. And biggest issue I see right now, is the Liscense situtation via the app store thing, but in the case of the example above, and your documentray from 2005, I am missing why you need ANOTHER work station, I thought FCPX, installs next to FCP7 allowing you to still use both. I mean, oscars for editing were won, in 2005 by people using this stuff, so why can't you still make GREAT HIGH QUALITY edits, with software that is a year old.....in other words, if FCPX did not release last week, would your business grind to a halt for some reason?? Would you still be going to Adobe or Avid?



    You used FCP7 yesterday, why can't you use it today, and then when new features and things come out in FCPX.whatever - come out, you buy it then?? I guess people HAVE TO HAVE the latest and greatest thing. Or maybe i missing somehthing there. I still know editors that use CS3 to design stuff and they still paid lots of money. I know people that still run business' on Windows XP, I know people who still use excel 2003 and they are high finance business people.



    I guess what I am asking is, what about the release of FCPX, now makes everything you did yesterday on FCP7 not work anymore??
  • Reply 104 of 120
    frankiefrankie Posts: 372member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post


    The true problem isn't that FCP X sucks, but Apple's corporate DNA is so against how professionals need them to work, it's probably in everyone's best interest to move to a different environment completely.



    Apple has screwed us once, what's to stop them from doing so again?



    There is not a single 'Editor worth their paying for and with half a brain' that switches to using any brand new software immediately after it is released, as a professional and stable environment in which to work with clients.
  • Reply 105 of 120
    nhtnht Posts: 4,487member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Neruda View Post


    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.



    If folks are that agile and will switch from FCS back to Avid at a drop of a hat then when FCPX is better then they'll switch back. Or to Adobe. Or whatever. No long term loss as long as Apple can execute well enough to make FCPX as much an advantage as the original FCP was.



    On the other hand, if folks aren't complete idiots they'll wait a little bit to see how things work out unless they have an immediate need to make any decisions and make whatever transitions as required. Especially if Apple does the smart thing and start to bundle FCP license keys/seats with FCPX.



    Frankly, folks willing to resort to childish behavior like calling it iMovie Pro are looking for an excuse to dump money back into Avid anyway so they could feel superior again to prosumers.
  • Reply 106 of 120
    nhtnht Posts: 4,487member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by frankie View Post


    There is not a single 'Editor worth their paying for and with half a brain' that switches to using any brand new software immediately after it is released, as a professional and stable environment in which to work with clients.



    Yes, which is why these stories about how folks were all set to buy a whole bunch of Mac Pros and FCPX for their new project sound idiotic.



    Even IF FCPX was the 2nd coming of NLE with all the pro features from 7 intact with full import capability from 7 it's STILL going to be buggy and without known work arounds yet for those bugs. That's the last frigging thing you need with a looming deadline is to be the first one to run into a show stopping bug for your workflow that might not get fixed for weeks or months or ever.



    Let the other poor sap do the bleeding on the cutting edge.
  • Reply 107 of 120
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 479member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quevar View Post


    If they switched to Dvorak, it would actually be a good thing. The QWERTY keyboard was initially designed to b as inefficient as possible, so switching would be good for everyone, but, like so many current technologies, it won't ever become commonplace because most people don't want to change if it is good enough.



    In regards to Final cut, apple would have been better off to call this the new final cut express, which they have killed in this process, and then called it final cut once they added all the features back into it.



    It is less about changing the layout as it is about features - would you call it change though if a new keyboard left off a couple of letters, some of the of numbers and a few of the punctuation keys we have right now? That would make it a slightly better analogy. Though there are some here who would support anything Apple did like if they decided to drop say the letter "k" because "c" essentially could do the same thing.
  • Reply 108 of 120
    I've been following this thread amongst many others, but also I've been doing some research and whilst I'd agree with the points made about backward compatibility and exporting via xml, what I can't agree with is all the shouting over something that, in essence, is a storm in a tea cup.



    Apple have handled the launch of FCPX badly, in fact it has been so badly launched that it is a complete disgrace in marketing terms. Apple do appear arrogant, but then so do the 'pros' by passing judgement on a completely new piece of software, without spending any real time getting to learn the new way of doing things.



    Apple have misjudged the market and their customer base, because they have made claim to FCPX to be a 'pro' editing suite. Clearly there will be a number of updates to bring it closer to what is needed. Yet, having spent all day watching training videos from a number of individuals, it would appear that FCPX is closer to being a new form of professional editing suite than the complaining 'pros' would have you believe.



    Apple have probably realised, unlike the 'pros' that tomorrows editors cut their teeth on iMovie, thus it makes more sense to design a piece of software that naturally follows from one editing suite to another without too much disruption. That scenario makes perfect sense both from a creative point of view and also a long term business direction.



    Everyone understands Apple's need for secrecy, but in this case they now need to step forward, hold up their hands and say 'sorry but we got it wrong' Yes, they need to go on the record as saying this is what will happen over the next six months in terms of updates. Those in the complaining 'pro' camp should now be quiet and move on, because it's not helping anyone.



    Apple has made a big blunder and I've no idea what they were thinking, and objectively FCPX is a good editing suite, if not a great one yet.
  • Reply 109 of 120
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 479member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    Yes, which is why these stories about how folks were all set to buy a whole bunch of Mac Pros and FCPX for their new project sound idiotic.



    Even IF FCPX was the 2nd coming of NLE with all the pro features from 7 intact with full import capability from 7 it's STILL going to be buggy and without known work arounds yet for those bugs. That's the last frigging thing you need with a looming deadline is to be the first one to run into a show stopping bug for your workflow that might not get fixed for weeks or months or ever.



    Let the other poor sap do the bleeding on the cutting edge.



    We have been waiting for years for Apple to update FCP7 which is why we waited to see what they would do with the next update but at the same time many editors started testing options like PPro, Avid etc. and given that FCPX does not meet our needs, we will start all new projects on PPro. Adobe has made it incredibly easy to switch - like mapping keyboard shortcuts etc. for FCP users. With its integration with AE, PS and AI and its ability to play some of the newer codecs without transcoding it is a very appealing package and removes the need to be the poor sap on the bleeding cutting edge. And it is available right now - no need to wait for anything to be added in some future update.
  • Reply 110 of 120
    9secondko9secondko Posts: 929member
    Apple's agenda to tie people into the iTunes model has shot them in the foot here.



    Apple has made the best software in this category and could even have eliminated any question anyone could ever have of purchasing a Mac - the inclusion of Blu-ray drives.



    But Apple doesn't want to support the optical disc format because they have become too greedy. they want everything to be a download from their own servers, with app makers having to give them a sizeable cut for having done nothing.



    A workflow that leaves out the DVD or Blu-ray suits apple's agenda and so they are trying to steer indusrty pros in that direction.



    Unfortunately for apple, no one wants that crap. Downloads are good. but the optical disc isn't going anywhere.



    the magnetic timeline is great, but it could easily have been added to FCP 7 and that product have been given the interface overhaul. If they would have done nothing else, it would have been great.



    but instead, they took the professional grade industry standard ruler of them all and gave their competition a reason to laugh.



    In my office, I am always having to fight to improve things. Finally went with Macs throughout. Next was FCP. then this happened. One of my colleagues is a Microsoft fanatic and completely anti apple just to be anti apple. guess who won the argument over which video editing software to upgrade to... it won't be made by Apple.
  • Reply 111 of 120
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post


    - apple listens to feedback. it's why the ipod touch has volume buttons, for example.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    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.



    First, people are encouraged to send feedback to Apple. But when Apple adds requested features, the Apple apologists turn around and say "Your complaints don't matter. Apple was planning to add those things anyway".



    Apple will not make a video iPod. Nobody wants to watch video on an iPod. Apple was already planning to make a video iPod.



    Apple should not allow third parties to create native iPhone applications. Nobody cares about native iPhone applications. Web apps are really SWEET. Apple was already planning to release an iPhone SDK.



    Apple will not add copy and paste to the iPhone. Nobody cares about copy and paste. Anybody who wants copy and paste is a whiner. Apple was already planning to add copy and paste.



    Apple will not add multitasking to the iPhone. Nobody cares about multitasking. Anybody who wants multitasking is a whiner. Apple was already planning to add multitasking.



    Apple will not make a tablet device. Nobody cares about tablet devices. Anybody who wants a tablet device is a whiner. Apple was already planning to make a tablet device.
  • Reply 112 of 120
    9secondko9secondko Posts: 929member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    Steve says you're merely a truck driver.



    Welcome to iOS, where "Back to the Mac" means reducing a computer to a phone.



    That, my friend, is exactly the nightmare I had when I first heard him say that.



    Instead of increasing the capabilities of Macs, I am afraid the success of the iPhone is going to make Jobs think the thing to do is to make the Mac as dumb as a "smart" phone.



    sure, a "smart" phone is smart for a phone, but dumb for a computer.



    I think apple is seriously starting to make some missteps that will have ramifications for at least a couple of years. the scary thing is that those mistakes are at the fundamental idealogical level, so they will influence every product to come out of cupertino.
  • Reply 113 of 120
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzmsngr View Post


    I use Logic Pro, A LOT more than I use Final Cut, I am a musician. I have just recently started using Logic Pro, and Final Cut, and one thing I seem to miss when it comes to these types of software is, unless there is some crazy new feature or set of tools, why do you even need to upgrade? For example....I have a friend who recorded an entire album, that sounded GREAT and sold well, and it was done a few years ago using the first version of Logic 8. He is now going back in the studio, and using that same version, YEARS AND VERSIONS later not to mention on a MAC that is still running three versions back of Snow leopard with only 2gbs of RAM.....when i asked, will you upgrade to Logic 9? He said, NO, why would I need to? I recorded my last album with features and tools that were just fine, there is nothing new or THAT much better, so I still use 8 and still make great music, and it still sells well, and I save $500.......



    I completely understand the frustrations of people who did buy it, and were expecting one thing and got another. And biggest issue I see right now, is the Liscense situtation via the app store thing, but in the case of the example above, and your documentray from 2005, I am missing why you need ANOTHER work station, I thought FCPX, installs next to FCP7 allowing you to still use both. I mean, oscars for editing were won, in 2005 by people using this stuff, so why can't you still make GREAT HIGH QUALITY edits, with software that is a year old.....in other words, if FCPX did not release last week, would your business grind to a halt for some reason?? Would you still be going to Adobe or Avid?



    You used FCP7 yesterday, why can't you use it today, and then when new features and things come out in FCPX.whatever - come out, you buy it then?? I guess people HAVE TO HAVE the latest and greatest thing. Or maybe i missing somehthing there. I still know editors that use CS3 to design stuff and they still paid lots of money. I know people that still run business' on Windows XP, I know people who still use excel 2003 and they are high finance business people.



    I guess what I am asking is, what about the release of FCPX, now makes everything you did yesterday on FCP7 not work anymore??





    FCP Studio and FCP X can be installed on the same hard drive, but it is not a straightforward process and you have to jump through some hoops:



    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4722





    The other concerns are:



    If you need additional copies of Final Cut Studio now for your current projects, where do you get them?



    If your current Mac or Macs that you use for running Final Cut Studio were to break and they are out of warranty, do you spend the money on out of warranty repairs or do you buy new Macs. If you buy new Macs which require a newer operating system, will they be able to run Final Cut Studio?
  • Reply 114 of 120
    sasparillasasparilla Posts: 121member
    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



    It'll be interesting on this. I hope they do start selling it again - FCS 3 has already dried up on eBay (mostly academic licenses left), but it's very unusual for Apple to "undo" stuff (basically admitting they were wrong). It'd be a no brainer at almost any other firm to bring FCS 3 back until FCP X is close to ready, but it seems like a long shot, IMHO - probably the best we could hope for would be additions to corporate licensing with Apple.



    You are right about OS9, however I think Apple has changed their policies since then. As an example, my dad had a G5 iMac and he waited to get Leopard until after Snow Leopard was out (not understanding that Snow Leopard had dropped support for the 64 bit G5's), figuring it'd be no problem. But Apple had done the same thing there, all copies of Leopard had been pulled on the day of Snow Leopard release and Apple purchased them back from the channel so you couldn't get them anywhere. On eBay I noticed that they reached 3 times retail (since it was the last PowerPC OS X)...they may have gone higher but I didn't follow it...they're down lower now since alot more people have dropped Leopard. Apple didn't bring Leopard back for the G5 users even though they were screaming. This policy seems to be standard operating procedure for Apple on software releases these days.



    I hope Apple brings FCS 3 for sale, but I'd be surprised.
  • Reply 115 of 120
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,222moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jlandd View Post


    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? :-)"



    The part that saddens me the most is at the end:



    'he is complimentary of Apple's products and describes them as an "incredible bargain in terms of price-performance", but that "if you?re really a professional you shouldn?t want to be reliant on software from a company like Apple." In the end, he says "your heart will be broken. Because they?re not reliant on you."'



    I had the impression that's what some people in charge at Apple cared about - allowing people who have a passion for what they do to do it in the very best way they know how. Not overriding it so that it sells to people who could take it or leave it.



    It makes sense from both sides because nobody likes the condescending professionals who talk down to you because you don't know enough about their field of expertise. Nobody ever likes that and their customer-facing Genius bars full of friendly teens and personal shoppers is great to avoid it but it's not necessary to dismiss higher-end development entirely.



    Just find people who understand what people genuinely need to do a good job who are open-minded enough to hide it sufficiently from people who will never need it. Mac OS X is the perfect example and why I regard it as the best OS I know of. On the face of it, it's shiny and simple. Underneath it's a full BSD unix system with every tool you can imagine an OS would need. People expect this from apps like Final Cut Pro. Shake had it, Motion does not; Quicktime Pro had it, Quicktime X doesn't in SL and FCPX doesn't have it so far. Power and simplicity make for a great combination when you have enough of both.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna


    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.



    Bryce??



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKYQ5ibxslI



    Pixar still have to cut their films together - they ain't doing that in Maya or... Bryce. They are doing it in (wait for it):



    http://www.pixar.com/artistscorner/steve/interview.html



    Avid.
  • Reply 116 of 120
    wooliewoolie Posts: 34member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by newchannelmedia View Post


    I appreciate your thoughts but think that you are over-simplifying the situation. I know of major studios such as Paramount, that have a significant investment in FCP - products, hardware and skills. They have massive archives of FCP files that, now, cannot be transferred to FCPX. This is not just about individual FCP users being stubborn old farts - this is a major, enterprise-level challenge. FCPX is clearly NOT years ahead else it there would be no concerns about backward compatibility, multi-cam support, and many other features which have disappeared overnight. Sure, if you are producing YouTube videos or stuff to upload to Facebook, FCPX is probably perfect. But if you want to produce the next Social Network, I strongly suspect that studios will be looking elsewhere.



    Agree with you completely, Apple people still have a hobbiest mentality... In big corporate America where profit margins are slim and training budgets virtually non-existant... Buying software that is not back compatible and missing key pre-existing features, with vague promises of future updates is business suicide... Apple's software team lives in a secret world walled off from the real world and I feel sorry for them... I am sure they are embarrassed about putting out crap ware... Meanwhile another American enterprise gets its name tarnished because of their arrogance... Apple can do way better than this, but unfortunately Steve is off fighting for his life and does not have the time to hold their hands... I wish Steve the best and hope he comes back and put his company back on the right track...
  • Reply 117 of 120
    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.



    But the most important reason is that Pixar has been using Avid this whole time, not Final Cut Pro.



    Its amazing how fast the retail avenues for Final Cut Studio 3 have dried up, at this point there are only a few copies on eBay (just a couple, literally).
  • Reply 118 of 120
    kfdankfdan Posts: 81member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by newchannelmedia View Post


    I appreciate your thoughts but think that you are over-simplifying the situation. I know of major studios such as Paramount, that have a significant investment in FCP - products, hardware and skills. They have massive archives of FCP files that, now, cannot be transferred to FCPX. This is not just about individual FCP users being stubborn old farts - this is a major, enterprise-level challenge. FCPX is clearly NOT years ahead else it there would be no concerns about backward compatibility, multi-cam support, and many other features which have disappeared overnight. Sure, if you are producing YouTube videos or stuff to upload to Facebook, FCPX is probably perfect. But if you want to produce the next Social Network, I strongly suspect that studios will be looking elsewhere.



    I have to agree with what is being said here. Video production is a fast paced business and if you are a studio ... so many people are involved that it's difficult at the best of times to keep the ball rolling on schedule. Schedule is the key word here. It would have been better to release FCPX with all of the capabilities of FCP7 and then some. Those capabilities were there to transcode into the new product ... that would have been a good starting place to move on. That didn't happen and hence, editors, producers, director and the like are looking at an immature NLE. It's interesting to say the least ... but leaves a lot of people scratching their heads. I, for one, have serious $ invested in apple products ... in FCP7 ... in all the plug-ins needed to stay professionally capable ... that is the bottom line! I'm not a big production house but still ... the end of FCP7 leaves me pretty high and dry ... ! I understand the anger and hope Apple gets it together soon!
  • Reply 119 of 120
    nhtnht Posts: 4,487member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bulk001 View Post


    We have been waiting for years for Apple to update FCP7 which is why we waited to see what they would do with the next update but at the same time many editors started testing options like PPro, Avid etc. and given that FCPX does not meet our needs, we will start all new projects on PPro.



    The point is even IF FCPX met all your needs you'd STILL be an idiot for buying it for immediate use on new projects from paying customers at release. There would be something wrong with it, pretty much guaranteed. It's software. Even software from Apple is buggy.



    So the only intelligent decision was between buying more FCS vs new PPro seats. Assuming you did your homework that you wanted PPro and not Avid and were prescient that FCPX was going to be a real horror story (paint me skeptical).



    If you really think that FCPX will never improve to meet your needs then yes, transitioning to PPro is the right move but there was no indication of that prior to release.



    In actuality, there no real indicator at this moment that FCPX won't improve enough to be usable within a reasonable time frame. When the next release will occur and how much gets added is the first real indicator of how rapidly (or not) FCPX will be supported and improved by Apple.
  • Reply 120 of 120
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post


    You see, for 300/400 bucks a lot of small shops will have of the editing power of the major studios. There are a lot of talented up and coming students who will take advantage of FCP X and start releasing short films and shows and podcasts in the new internet era. It's a brave new world and the big old dogs at the major studios who are foolish enough to reject FCP X will lose in the long term.



    What year were you born?



    I love the enthusiasm of youth, but the naivete part.... well....





    gc
Sign In or Register to comment.