Adobe continues assault on Apple's Final Cut Pro X with 'switcher program'

123578

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 150
    Oh a half-price Adobe product? What does that come to? 4 million dollars?



    Sorry, but fuck Adobe (can I say that on the Internet?) and their ridiculous price points.



    I've replaced them for nearly everything I do in Illustration. I have a feeling we'll see more apps emerging from the Mac App Store to replace everything else Adobe does in the near future. I can't wait until they realize someone moved their cheese.
  • Reply 82 of 150
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iamdeadfish View Post


    Sorry, but fuck Adobe (can I say that on the Internet?) and their ridiculous price points.



    But they're it. Period. No one makes any software comparable to what Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign do. If you need them, you have to have those. Period. So they can charge whatever they want.



    Dreamweaver's a whore, easily supplanted by Coda or even TextEdit. Flash is tied up in my basement being cheese grated to death while Hype starts to take the stage.
  • Reply 83 of 150
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Haggar View Post


    As another example, what is more significant? Hearing that the top 10% of a company (CEO's, Executive VP's, Senior VPs, etc) uses Macs, or that the remaining 90% uses PCs?



    That was Apple's business for a long time, they felt that if the important opinion informers used Apple that eventually they'd win out in the desktop space. It turned out not to work that way and resulted in Apple's near death experience in the 90s.



    Modern Apple is the house the iPod built, Apple has discovered that it can win with consumers by focusing on consumers, not by relying on some mythical pro->consumer trickle down effect. The entire focus then changed, with a product emphasis on tools that are useful to a mass market.



    Does Apple still want pro users? Sure it does, and especially it wants you to keep buying Mac hardware, even if you're not using Apple application software. But it doesn't love Pro's enough to hold FCP-X Pro back from prosumers for the year or so it will take to get it to be a real pro statement.



    Honestly I think much of the emotion in this is because of the sense that Apple doesn't love Pros anymore as much as it loves Consumers. Pros feel like the hot girl they brought to the dance has dumped them to hang out with a jock.
  • Reply 84 of 150
    spinthis!spinthis! Posts: 16member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iamdeadfish View Post


    Oh a half-price Adobe product? What does that come to? 4 million dollars?Sorry, but fuck Adobe (can I say that on the Internet?) and their ridiculous price points.



    If you mange to fuck a whole company, that should deserve an award of some kind. Go for it!



    Frankly, bitching about pricing tells me everything I need to know—you're not a professional (which is fine). Like all pro tools, you expense them out and write them off. If you can't make enough to pay for the entire suite, you're not charging enough or you're a hobbyist.
  • Reply 85 of 150
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 86 of 150
    thinkknotthinkknot Posts: 51member
    Thank goodness we have Adobe to step up to the plate with an advanced, modern editing system that will open our legacy Final Cut Pro 7 files unlike Final Cut Pro X!



    Ah, wait a minute. Nevermind what I said.
  • Reply 87 of 150
    thinkknotthinkknot Posts: 51member
    Adobe is no better than Apple.



    Examples:

    We used PageMaker at work, screwed as Adobe killed it

    We used Freehand at work, screwed as Adobe killed it

    I owned GoLive, screwed as Adobe killed it

    I own many, many versions of Photoshop, screwed everytime a new version comes out as they won't update camera RAW import plugins for older versions.



    Fuck you Adobe.
  • Reply 88 of 150
    nicwalmsleynicwalmsley Posts: 117member
    It is utterly shocking that FCPX does not have backwards compatibility.



    If Apple will do this to their video editing software, what other programs might they "upgrade" and leave out backwards compatiblity?



    Imagine if they upgraded Keynote, and you couldn't use old presentations. Or pages.



    If you are an enterprise manager, you're left wondering about Apple's reliability.



    If they can treat ten years of professional video editing with such contempt, what else may fall victim to "the Apple future".
  • Reply 89 of 150
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,031member
    I'm so lucky to be a member of this site.



    When I read a thread about a legal issue, I get all these posts from lawyers and IP experts debating the merits.



    When I read a thread about publishing, I get all these posts from publishers, magazine editors and marketing experts debating the merits.



    When I read a thread about iDevice supply, I get all these posts from supply chain experts debating the merits.



    And now, when I read a thread about video production, I get all these posts from video pros and film execs debating the merits.



    There is so much talent here, and it all is reposed in the same handful of people.



    Remarkable.



    What I read (from a person who used Prem 6 a long time ago and liked it, and cut a couple of home movies on iMovie and liked it) is not that the editing workflow is so problematic, even if it revolutionary, but rather the severely restricted interoperability and import/outpu options currently hobble the product for true professional use.



    Good on Adobe for going after disgruntled pros. It's only business. Nothing personal, as they say.
  • Reply 90 of 150
    backdocbackdoc Posts: 18member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Conrail View Post


    But if you went to buy a new Honda and found out they no longer offer air conditioning, would you feel obliged to buy it anyhow because of your past experiences with their cars?



    No. Why would I? I guess I don't see your point.



    If I bought it, knowing they didn't include AC and had no plans to add AC and told me that I can not add AC later myself, I would not buy it because it's a feature I want. I certainly wouldn't buy it and blame them and complain to other people about it. Likewise, if you buy a phone, knowing in advance that it is missing a feature that is important to you -- first of all, you're stupid -- second of all, you have no right to bitch about it.
  • Reply 91 of 150
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    Yes, accept those same people will complain that the iPhone is slow or crashes a lot. Apple will pay the price for Flash's short comings.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alien987 View Post


    So Apple deliberately blocking Flash in iPhones and iPads is a better culture? People should be able to choose whatever they want, no what one person wants.



  • Reply 92 of 150
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,650member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Conrail View Post


    The discounted price for the Production suite is $150 cheaper than the retail price for either After Effects or Photoshop. Even if you're staying with FCP 7 or are completely thrilled with FCP X, this is a great deal.



    Exactly - I'm probably going to pull the trigger myself later tonight. I just need to make sure I have enough disk space for it
  • Reply 93 of 150
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,611moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    Most of the built-in effects in FCP 7 are not yet available in FCPX -- so the import wouldn't be able to do anything but log them as missing. That may have caused more frustration.



    Maybe but one thing it does is provide a nice security blanket. You have some assurance that you are getting a starting point instead of Apple unhooking your dinghy from the back of the motor boat and waving as they speed off into the distance without you.



    It's also the best way to really try out the system because you can't have both apps open at the same time so importing a complex edit and seeing it all there in order is just a big relief because you have some future-proofing.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    Elsewhere, I've posted that Apple may have done the FCPX release, as they did, to get everybody's attention -- they certainly did that!



    That's true, the bucket of cold water treatment certainly gets people out of their slumber pretty quick and is likely to encourage manufacturers to get on the case ASAP. The FCP scene was very old and crusty and there needed to be radical change so it gets everyone rushing to fix everything but it can also scare people off.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    I don't recall Apple ever doing a beta with an app.



    They really should but people can't be trusted to keep a secret. Even people in the highest positions can't be trusted because having the information everyone wants gives people an urge to let it out and be hailed the hero. Then they don't get invited back. The only people that can really be trusted are the people who have too much to lose by leaking it and they are already working on it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iamdeadfish


    Sorry, but fuck Adobe (can I say that on the Internet?)



    You can but the NSA have recorded it and it will be raised at your next job interview.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil


    Dreamweaver's a whore



    Expensive though and expensive whores are ok. I'd say Dreamweaver is more like the bloated wife. Reliable, dependable, goes through the motions but has put on a bit of weight, has loads of in-laws that piss you off, doesn't really excite you and doesn't keep up with the competition because they know you ain't going anywhere.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ThinkKnot


    Adobe is no better than Apple.



    Examples:

    We used PageMaker at work, screwed as Adobe killed it

    We used Freehand at work, screwed as Adobe killed it

    I owned GoLive, screwed as Adobe killed it

    I own many, many versions of Photoshop, screwed everytime a new version comes out as they won't update camera RAW import plugins for older versions.



    Yeah, they've made a lot of shifts but they generally make sure to have something ready in the end. They've even taken on board subscription pricing now so you can license their apps as and when you need monthly and you get free updates to the latest version. That's really cool of them to do that.



    The difference between Avid, Adobe etc and Apple is that Apple doesn't need this business to survive, the others do. That dependence forces them to not make stupid decisions or they may well go out of business. In some ways, that has given Apple more respect because of the fact they choose to be a part of it when they don't need to and they may well have just thrown it away.
  • Reply 94 of 150
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,650member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpinThis! View Post


    It's not just lack of features. Fundamentally, FCPX is a whole different product. Pros weren't expecting that.



    They they seriously weren't paying attention to the demo at the supermeet. I'm not a pro editor, but even to me it was blindingly obvious that FCP X is a completely different application.



    Really, I think Apple's two main mistakes were A) stoppling sale of FCP 7 and B) not pro-actively addressing some of the missing features like multi-cam that they have now repeatedly told people that will be coming "soon".



    Stopping sales of FCP 7 is the main kicker - if they hadn't done that so quickly, I think there would be a lot less consternation. Heck, they offered the original iMovie HD for some time after the release of the new version...
  • Reply 95 of 150
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Maybe but one thing it does is provide a nice security blanket. You have some assurance that you are getting a starting point instead of Apple unhooking your dinghy from the back of the motor boat and waving as they speed off into the distance without you.



    It's also the best way to really try out the system because you can't have both apps open at the same time so importing a complex edit and seeing it all there in order is just a big relief because you have some future-proofing.



    Yeah... What's that all about? FCPX and FCP7 each don't use a lot of resource when they aren't doing anything. Why can't they both be open at tha same time?



    I have a 2 yo iMac 24 with a 23" Cinema display. To run both at tha same time I must do a 2-hour install of FCS on a Mini (won't run FCPX) and run under screen sharing -- just so I can view the FCP7 timeline and the FCPX storyline at the same time.
  • Reply 96 of 150
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    They they seriously weren't paying attention to the demo at the supermeet. I'm not a pro editor, but even to me it was blindingly obvious that FCP X is a completely different application.



    Really, I think Apple's two main mistakes were A) stoppling sale of FCP 7 and B) not pro-actively addressing some of the missing features like multi-cam that they have now repeatedly told people that will be coming "soon".



    Stopping sales of FCP 7 is the main kicker - if they hadn't done that so quickly, I think there would be a lot less consternation. Heck, they offered the original iMovie HD for some time after the release of the new version...



    As far as I remember, the pre-NAB demo briefly displayed a representation of an FCP7 timeline...



    It gave the impression that FCPX could open FCP7 timelines. They didn't say they they could -- but what they showed immplied that theY could.
  • Reply 97 of 150
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,650member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    As far as I remember, the pre-NAB demo briefly displayed a representation of an FCP7 timeline...



    It gave the impression that FCPX could open FCP7 timelines. They didn't say they they could -- but what they showed immplied that theY could.



    Yes, I don't dispute that. I was more reacting to his comment of "CPX is a whole different product. Pros weren't expecting that."



    Which I think is silly.



    I was taken aback by the not opening previous versions too. Even if it was just a partial open or a separate converter utility, it would imply more continuity than a clean break. Coupled with the halting of sales of the previous versions, I can understand why Pros are more than a little on edge. That was, without a doubt, their biggest blunder - esp. since there was no real reason to kill FCP 7 totally.
  • Reply 98 of 150
    cloudgazercloudgazer Posts: 2,161member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    Does Apple Insider believe that Avid and Adobe are the same company?



    Here's how the headline reads on a site less agenda-driven than AI:



    Adobe and Avid Target Final Cut Pro Users With 'Switcher' Discounts

    http://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/01/...her-discounts/



    You're misreading - AI is saying that Adobe is offering a switcher discount to users of Avid too, which macrumours is also saying



    The new program offers a 50% discount on either Creative Suite CS5.5 Production Premium or Premiere Pro CS5.5 to current users of Apple's Final Cut Pro or Avid's Media Composer.

  • Reply 99 of 150
    bad_ikabad_ika Posts: 10member
    Thank you for screwing up, Apple. I was going to pay a lot more for the Production Suite.
  • Reply 100 of 150
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    I read the thread you mentioned!



    It was informative... from his perspective.

    But he claimed that Apple has no interest in the pros.

    How does he know that?

    How does he explain Apple bringing several leading pros to Cupertino to show FCPX (under NDA)?

    How does he explain Apple making a presentation at NAB (first in several years, AFAIK)?

    I believe there were 4 or 5 Apple managers doing the preso to the pros -- why would they bother if they weren't interested in them?

    I have worked for several companies at a job level corresponding to Sachin Agarwal's -- basically an employee, a worker.

    I have also worked as a team leader and in top management.

    My experience is that every level of employee or manager does not (and need not) understand all the intentions, motivations and reasons for the decisions that are made.

    I would be surprised if a team leader or first level manager would tell the workers that "Apple isn't interested in the pro market".

    What would be gained by telling them (anyone) that?

    Rather, I can see the same manager motivating his employees by telling them: "We are going to make FCPX the best Prosumer video editing app available". Maybe adding "It will be so good it will take sales from our competitors pro apps -- maybe even our own FCP".

    There is also the need to avoid destroying the motivation of those working the older product, FCP7 -- which will eventually be replaced by the newer product, FCPX.



    So, with all that considered, I submit that Sachin Agarwal offered his opinion that "Apple wasn't interested in the pros" -- and wasn't privy to what was Apple's opinion or its intentions.



    OK you and I both wear big boy pants in the tech world (I assume anyway) and we both have been around enough to know that corporate culture permeates all levels of workflow. Moreover you and I have been privy to all the cultural commentary and leaks over the years about how Apple and in particular Steve Jobs does things. I have insider friends all over the place, Apple, Microsoft, Adobe, Google - all the heavy hitters of this industry. Apple is a necessarily (if secretive) FLAT organization by design - it's the way Jobs likes to run the business - the polar opposite of Microsoft in fact - which has a bloated, entrenched toxic culture replete with turf wars, protectionism and the usual nasty stuff. Not saying Apple is "better", just different. And different in ways that make Agarwal's statements closer to what's probably true than not. Apple is not silo'd like most organizations, the teams work collaboratively and consistently together. In some cases the team are "recombinant" that is smaller teams come together to form larger teams to ensure the level of awareness needed in bringing a product together.



    Looking over the behavioral landscape Dick it makes sense for Apple to bring in the pros to see the changes (massive unilateral and workflow-changing changes), to say "this is what's coming, get ready". Not, "hey guys what do you think of us completely rewriting how your favorite cheap video editing tool works - tell us how you really feel". The smart ones saw it for what it was and went out and bought extra licenses of FCP7, the blindly optimistic ones said, "Apple wouldn't really do this to us" and ignored the writing on the wall. The rest were dumbfounded, shocked (shocked I tell you!), and OUTRAGED when it hit the street and was exactly what Apple showed them.



    In the final analysis with the significant differences that are Apple corporate framework practices, you have to be careful extrapolating corporate behaviors that are not accurately matching what goes on in Cupertino. I've held enough positions at different levels in enough Fortune 50 companies (apparently like you) to comfortably agree with Argarwal, in principle if not in complete detail. The details don't really matter.



    The bottom line is this, Agarwal is either accurate in what he presented, or he isn't. If he is, then Apple was deliberate and focussed in what they did - which potentially makes sense from their past acts, their culture as well as from a market perspective. IF he is not, then Apple is guilty of arbitrary and capricious behavior which not only alienates a "loyal" (sic) market segment, but does so in the most ludicrous way possible short of simply killing the application suite.
Sign In or Register to comment.