Rumor: Apple axed 'evolutionary' 64-bit Final Cut Pro 8 for 'revolutionary' FCPX

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Apple may have canceled production of an "evolutionary" 64-bit Final Cut Pro 8 update in favor of what it viewed as a "revolutionary" update with what eventually became the controversial Final Cut Pro X [updated].



Richard Harrington, founder of RHED Pixel, said in a recent talk that Apple killed production of a 64-bit Final Cut Pro 8 after officials with the company were not satisfied with what they saw. Harrington's comments, discovered by fcp.co and highlighted by Cult of Mac, were made in reference to American University's decision to train its students in Final Cut Pro X.



"There was a Final Cut Pro 8, and it was 64-bit and it was done," Harrington said. "And they looked at it and said, 'This is not what we want to do. This is evolutionary, this is not revolutionary.' And they killed it."



Update: Harrington later provided clarification via Twitter, saying he did not hear the information first-hand, but rather that it was simply a rumor passed along with an off-hand comment.



"Comment was misunderstood," he wrote. "I just heard efforts were well underway then killed."



The video has since been pulled from the Web. But if the rumor is accurate, it's an indication that Apple originally considered following along the same path as Final Cut Pro 7, before it decided to take its professional video editing software in an entirely new direction.



Those considerable changes made in Final Cut Pro X rubbed many video professionals the wrong way when the new $299 software was released this June. Apple also worked quickly to release an update for Final Cut Pro X to add some of the most requested features, like Xsan and Rich XML support.



Apple has also promised that it will add multicam editing and broadcast-quality video monitoring to Final Cut Pro X in early 2012. The software has also been made available for a 30-day free trial to let professionals try before they buy.



The changes in Final Cut Pro X caused a significant controversy in the video editing and production business. The attention became so great that even comedian Conan O'Brien had a bit on his show poking fun at the new software.







Apple also responded to customer dissatisfaction by offering refunds, and the company even offered some customers the ability to buy the previous generation Final Cut Pro Studio with Final Cut Pro 7 for $999. Sales of Final Cut Pro Studio were made available only over the phone, and were said to be in "limited quantity" for customers who needed the older software for ongoing projects.



AppleInsider first reported in May of 2010 that Apple was scaling Final Cut Studio applications with a significant makeover that would better target Apple's mainstream "prosumer" customer base, rather than high-end professionals. After the public release of Final Cut Pro X, some in video editing circles began to deride the software with the name "iMovie Pro," referring to Apple's consumer-oriented video editing software, iMovie.
«1345678

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 148
    Just more evidence that Apple needs to split if they want to provide products to both professionals and consumers.



  • Reply 2 of 148
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by strobe View Post


    Just more evidence that Apple needs to split if they want to provide products to both professionals and consumers.







    Im your typical dad who does slight video editing of basic vacations, etc. I like Final Cut Pro X better than 7 because I was more familiar with iMovie. But Apple obviously has made the move to consumer (i.e. Aperture and FCPX) and left Adobe to pick up the pros (i.e. Photoshop and Premiere). I definitely like FCPX vs Premier Elements. So they have my $ there. And my wife prefers Photoshop elements over Photoshop CS5 (and oddly- prefers iPhoto over Aperture 3).



    Different strokes for different folks. I think it was a smart move by Apple as FCPX will sell more and they can't justify having two paid programs for video editing- even though it sucks for the FCP 7/8 fans.
  • Reply 3 of 148
    When Apple was "Apple Computer, Inc." they were more concerned with making powerful Macintosh computers that were used by the publishing, graphic arts, film making, and other creative industries. The higher-end models even echoed some of the high-end workstation-class systems from NEXT. To have an G5 Tower used to be the mark of an accomplished power user. The Apple website would have a front page link to the Pro Story of the week, talking about some business or government or University that deployed a huge IT solution using Apple Pro software and Pro-level Macintosh systems.



    Then Apple went consumer, got into making iPods and selling music, and iPhones, and had a whole ton of non-pros using their products, many of whom thought Macs were too difficult to switch to. So Apple worked on making Macs easier to switch to and even easier to work with those consumer products the non-Pros were buying.



    Then, Apple became "Apple, Inc." They are getting way more money from non-Pros and pro-sumers than the actual Pros... and they've shifted.



    Apple's target market went from University/IT/Creative Pros to middle-to-upper class households that drink Keurig Coffee while they use iPads to read books on their IKEA couch, pondering which wine to have with their Chicken & Gnocchi soup for dinner tonight, as their MacBook Pro is downloading the latest iTunes Movie Rental over 50MB broadband in the living room of a $150K house or $2000/mo apartment in the city, while their Ugg boots dry nicely in the corner beside their North Face winter coat.
  • Reply 4 of 148
    ^ True, but Ikea doesn't make good sofas
  • Reply 5 of 148
    Courage is what make me respect Apple, more than ITs products.



    Courage IS SO undervalued in techWorld.
  • Reply 6 of 148
    ^ agreed!
  • Reply 7 of 148
    Everyone keeps saying that Apple has made a shift from prosumer to consumer with this software... but I'm not convinced. I think that Apple has simply made an intelligent wager on this paradigm shift with FCPX which has, for the time being, reduced its feature set. However, over time when they regain these features they'll be 5 legs up on other pro editor apps, already prepared to interface with future hardware changes in the industry (such as touch screens).



    And guess who controls the future of hardware in the industry.
  • Reply 8 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vandil View Post


    Apple's target market went from University/IT/Creative Pros to middle-to-upper class households that drink Keurig Coffee while they use iPads to read books on their IKEA couch, pondering which wine to have with their Chicken & Gnocchi soup for dinner tonight, as their MacBook Pro is downloading the latest iTunes Movie Rental over 50MB broadband in the living room of a $150K house or $2000/mo apartment in the city, while their Ugg boots dry nicely in the corner beside their North Face winter coat.



    Perfect summary. I miss the days of "pro story of the week". It was inspiring to see what the big boys were doing while we tinkered and toyed around and tried to emulate the things they were doing. Now, there is nothing inspirational there anymore. Now it is watch the iCloud video, watch the latest iPod ad or engrave your latest product. Even Steve is gone so yet another layer of inspiration gone. Nobody wants to be Tim Cook. Maybe Jony Ive.



    I've seriously been considering a switch back to Windows because I can get the latest and greatest hardware, gaming, and speed without paying a premium for OS X. It used to be that the best apps were on OS X only, but that is not the case anymore and you ultimately end up paying a premium on hardware just for OS X. Struggling with that decision. Abandoning the Mac Pro and Final Cut Pro doesn't help their case to keep me. If they want to go consumer, then so be it. Back to Windows I go.



    Also, have you been watching Fight Club lately? :-)
  • Reply 9 of 148
    And AI was wrong about FCPX being prosumer.

    Repeating it doesn't make it right.



    J.
  • Reply 10 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Filmantopia View Post


    Everyone keeps saying that Apple has made a shift from prosumer to consumer with this software... But I'm not convinced. I think that Apple has simply made an intelligent wager on this paradigm shift with FCPX which has, for the time being, reduced its feature set. However, over time when they regain these features they'll be 5 legs up on other pro editor apps, already prepared to interface with future hardware changes in the industry (such as touch screens).



    Below is the Mac Pro Refresh Schedule from MacRumors. If this isn't enough to convince you they are abandoning the Pro's...also - by the time they have those features studios will have cross-graded already. Apple has given ZERO assurances that they are not abandoning the Pro's. During the FCPX debacle they begrudgingly caved and they have done nothing to counter the Mac Pro death rumors. If they want us to buy iMacs that we cannot get in and out of easily for 3rd party cards and upgrades then why bother? It is going to take a long time for manufacturers to catch up with Thunderbolt so what happens in the mean time? Can get faster hardware cheaper and the days of apps being exclusive to OS X are gone as Windows developers have come a long way. Basically you are paying a premium for OS X. I am struggling to understand why they are abandoning power users and Pros. Makes no sense to me. Again, if they give us some assurances then my arguments will go away but having been a life long Pro Mac User it is disheartening.



    ???

    491 days



    07/2010

    511 days



    03/2009

    420 days



    01/2008

    279 days



    04/2007

    240 days



    08/2006

    292 days
  • Reply 11 of 148
    If FCP8 was done





    Where's Carbon Quicktime 64-bit? I've never seen mention of it
  • Reply 12 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blur35mm View Post


    Below is the Mac Pro Refresh Schedule from MacRumors.



    Which remains completely wrong. There was no update in 2008. Apple added a processor. Absolutely nothing about the Mac Pro changed in the 518 days between the release of the W… Wolfdale (is that what it was called?) and the Penryn Mac Pro. Not price, not specs.



    Quote:

    If this isn't enough to convince you they are abandoning the Pro's...



    … then you're well-versed in Intel's release schedule and know that Apple can't possibly update any faster than new chips are made available.



    Quote:

    …the days of apps being exclusive to OS X are gone…



    Weren't those days gone by 1987?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    Where's Carbon Quicktime 64-bit?



    Do you mean Cocoa? I'm not sure why people would be waiting for a Carbon version of anything.
  • Reply 13 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ochyming View Post


    Courage is what make me respect Apple, more than ITs products.



    Courage IS SO undervalued in techWorld.



    What's courageous about taking the easy path?
  • Reply 14 of 148
    Having actually used FCPX, I laugh whenever I read that it isn't for "professional" customers. True, it's missing a lot of functionality, and isn't the tool I would recommend everyone to switch to right now full time. That is a temporary problem, however. In time, this app is going to morph into something that can be used to quickly cut anything from vacation footage and promo videos to full length feature films. Hell, it *already* does that. It just needs a few plugins and features to satisfy a majority of users out there, and they are coming.



    I question a lot of the criticism out there. How much of it are legitimate complaints, and how much of it are simply people refusing any sort of change. While there are things I miss from more traditional NLEs, and can name a few quirks I despise in the current version, FCPX has a lot of promise and potential that will definitely improve with time. When you get a good workflow going, it's shockingly fast cutting together video is compared to what I used to do with Adobe Premiere.



    Plus, FCPX is a *huge* value proposition. If you figure that the typical suites from Avid and Adobe cost around $2500, while FCPX along with Motion and Compressor total $400, you can basically get the editing license *AND* the hardware for the same price you'd pay just for the software alone from the competition. If you're looking to expand your production house, you can save a lot of money by going with Apple. Man, how often do you hear that statement?
  • Reply 15 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post








    Do you mean Cocoa? I'm not sure why people would be waiting for a Carbon version of anything.



    No. I think the thing that is odd here is that FCP 7 and earlier used Quicktime 32 as its core which was Carbon 32-bit. In order for FCP-8 to be 64-bit, Carbon would also have to be 64-bit and Apple killed that project pretty early
  • Reply 16 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blur35mm View Post


    Perfect summary. I miss the days of "pro story of the week". It was inspiring to see what the big boys were doing while we tinkered and toyed around and tried to emulate the things they were doing. Now, there is nothing inspirational there anymore. Now it is watch the iCloud video, watch the latest iPod ad or engrave your latest product. Even Steve is gone so yet another layer of inspiration gone. Nobody wants to be Tim Cook. Maybe Jony Ive.



    I've seriously been considering a switch back to Windows because I can get the latest and greatest hardware, gaming, and speed without paying a premium for OS X. It used to be that the best apps were on OS X only, but that is not the case anymore and you ultimately end up paying a premium on hardware just for OS X. Struggling with that decision. Abandoning the Mac Pro and Final Cut Pro doesn't help their case to keep me. If they want to go consumer, then so be it. Back to Windows I go.



    Watch out. ConradJoe will add you to his Enemies List

    Don't take yourself so seriously. You declare your intention to go back to Windows like the world should take notice? Should I announce my intention to switch brands of motor oil? You know, because its really important for the Internet to know my personal choices! (Yeah right). Apple perhaps made the wrong call, but I thought serious (read: Pro) editors cut on Avid anyway. Oh sure, there were Hollywood editors using FCP, and they've denounced FCPX. But you're not one of them, are you? You're not complaining about Apple borking your editing toolchain. You're complaining about OS X "premiums" and how it cramps your lifestyle choice. If that's the case, then I would say you never valued OS X to begin with. I pay whatever extra it costs to have a Microsoft-free computing experience
  • Reply 17 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    If FCP8 was done





    Where's Carbon Quicktime 64-bit? I've never seen mention of it



    That's because I don't think the 64-bit version of FCP8 was ever "done." I'm sure it was being worked on, but trying to get a behemoth like FCP7 upgraded to 64-bit along with *every* accompanying process would have just been too difficult to do. You basically need to do a rewrite of everything, which is what Adobe likes to do every few years anyway.



    Apple made a decision along the way to say that if they are going to rewrite the fundamental architecture of this program into Cocoa, this is their chance to rethink the entire experience end-to-end, from UI and media management to distribution and price. They knew that the old Final Cut Pro could not carry them into the next decade as far as what goals they've set for themselves. Sure, Apple screwed a lot of editors over the short term, just like they screwed over developers when they axed OpenDoc or screwed their users when they eliminated the floppy drive. History is on their side, but time will tell if their decision with FCPX proved to be right.



    Put it this way - Apple is quick to eliminate anything it doesn't see important to their bottom line. If they seriously did not care about their pro customers, they would have ceased all development on Final Cut Pro and continue to be satisfied selling more iPads. Instead, they rebuilt from the ground up a brand new system that has a lot of flexibility and room to grow with, ensuring it will be around for quite some time. Who knows? We me actually see a full fledged version of FCPX on iOS someday.
  • Reply 18 of 148
    gustavgustav Posts: 819member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blur35mm View Post


    Below is the Mac Pro Refresh Schedule from MacRumors. If this isn't enough to convince you they are abandoning the Pro's...



    Don't let actual facts get in the way of your innuendo. Facts like Intel's high-end Xeon chipset won't be ready until early 2012. Gee, and what does Apple use in their Mac Pros?
  • Reply 19 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Conrail View Post


    What's courageous about taking the easy path?



    You're kidding, right? They may or may not succeed in porting it into a totally professional paradigm. But the move definitely had balls. If they succeed, it's a workflow game changer.
  • Reply 20 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gustav View Post


    Don't let actual facts get in the way of your innuendo. Facts like Intel's high-end Xeon chipset won't be ready until early 2012. Gee, and what does Apple use in their Mac Pros?



    First versions of the Sandy Bridge Xeon E3 processors ship in December, while the high-end chip won't ship until March. Apple is most likely working with Intel to get these machines ready and out the door as soon as they can.



    It's the same reason why Apple kept the Core 2 Duo around in their lower-end MacBooks years after the original i5 and i7 chips were released - the on board graphics capabilities of those earlier chips didn't support OpenCL, and Intel wasn't licensing the socket type to other chipset makers. That meant Apple was forced to use the older CPUs in order to be able to rely on nVidia's integrated graphics solution, which allowed for OpenCL and decent graphics performance without sacrificing the design of their products to fit in a discrete graphics chip.



    But then again, this is the Internet we're talking about. Facts have no place, here .
Sign In or Register to comment.