Apple prepping Final Cut Pro X campaign to win back video editors
Final Cut Pro X debuted in 2011 to groans from many in the professional video editing community, and now Apple is planning a marketing push to win those users back from its competitors' software.
Apple on Thursday is set to launch a campaign aimed at getting pro video editors to take another look at Final Cut Pro, according to The Los Angeles Times. That campaign will feature users like Julian Liurette, video editor for Toronto's Globe and Mail. Liurette says that, having used the software a year after its release ? with the benefit of multiple Apple updates ? he was satisfied enough with its performance that he began moving his publication's video operations to the new version.
"Its interface is 100 times more interesting," Liurette said. "And it's much, much faster."
Apple's campaign is timed to coincide with the National Association of Broadcasters convention, beginning April 6 in Las Vegas. It will include testimonials from professionals like Luriette on the Final Cut Pro X website. In addition to Luriette, the site will feature famed Hong Kong cinematographer Tsui Hark and editors from telenovela production company TV Azteca.
Final Cut Pro X has seen seven updates in the two years since its release, as Apple has attempted to address complaints from pro users that Apple's changes to the suite's features watered down what had been a professional-level software offering.
Apple's subsequent updates to the software added features that pro users had been requesting, but the effectiveness of those additions is questionable. No marketing company reliably tracks video editing software market share, but Apple's competitors, Avid and Adobe, say they saw increased usage in the wake of Final Cut Pro X's release.
Apple on Thursday is set to launch a campaign aimed at getting pro video editors to take another look at Final Cut Pro, according to The Los Angeles Times. That campaign will feature users like Julian Liurette, video editor for Toronto's Globe and Mail. Liurette says that, having used the software a year after its release ? with the benefit of multiple Apple updates ? he was satisfied enough with its performance that he began moving his publication's video operations to the new version.
"Its interface is 100 times more interesting," Liurette said. "And it's much, much faster."
Apple's campaign is timed to coincide with the National Association of Broadcasters convention, beginning April 6 in Las Vegas. It will include testimonials from professionals like Luriette on the Final Cut Pro X website. In addition to Luriette, the site will feature famed Hong Kong cinematographer Tsui Hark and editors from telenovela production company TV Azteca.
Final Cut Pro X has seen seven updates in the two years since its release, as Apple has attempted to address complaints from pro users that Apple's changes to the suite's features watered down what had been a professional-level software offering.
Apple's subsequent updates to the software added features that pro users had been requesting, but the effectiveness of those additions is questionable. No marketing company reliably tracks video editing software market share, but Apple's competitors, Avid and Adobe, say they saw increased usage in the wake of Final Cut Pro X's release.
Comments
Originally Posted by gwmac
You need more than an updated Final Cut to win them back. You need that elusive updated Mac Pro. Video editing needs all the horsepower you can get.
Hopefully WWDC will be interesting from a pro standpoint.
Of course, after it's over we'll have dozens of trolls on here whining about how "all the products were updated at once; that means Apple is failing".
News flash, idiots: Apple doesn't get to choose when the chips come out. If Intel releases them all at once, then Apple should probably update as soon as possible. We'll likely see the Haswell iMac, Mac Mini, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air roughly around WWDC, and maybe they'll have the Mac Pro done by then, too. If not, hey, they should take their time.
Err.... Sandy Bridge Xeons have been available since last June. It's Apple who chose not to upgrade the Mac Pro with them. There would have been no complaint if Mac Pro updates follow Intel's chip release schedule. It makes things much easier to plan for the pro users.
I've been saying it for years; Apple's abandonment of professionals blunts the tip of the testimonial spear, and it will cost Apple in the long run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
You need more than an updated Final Cut to win them back. You need that elusive updated Mac Pro. Video editing needs all the horsepower you can get.
Question: I use iVI to convert lots of videos (add metadata, etc) and include them on iTunes.
I do this on i7 2011 air, and this little beast converts them at 100% Cpu (obviously) during a whole day non stop (and a few hours to rest) and even during conversions, it doesn't get uncomfortably warn and is still perfectly useful. I do this a lot, and it looks like it doesn't even need to stop... I never thought (when I bought it) that it would be THIS good.
What's like to do the same thing on a fully loaded beast like the Mac Pro? Can you describe it? I never used a computer like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoffdino
That sounds cool enough. How about giving us a new Mac Pro? I'm dying to buy 6 of them for my studio. If nothing comes out by the end of this year, I'm moving to Windows.
Well then go. If you are that upset about it stop the crowing and get on the Windows 8 bus!
Quote:
Originally Posted by godrifle
They'd better focus on higher ed. I know first-hand of multiple universities that have completely dropped Final Cut Pro (the platform they previous taught) to Adobe. That's hundred of video editors being minted every year that are being educated about Apple's abandonment of the professional marketplace in a failed bid to chase the "prosumer" market. Turns out there are hobbyists, there are professionals, and vastly fewer prosumers.
I've been saying it for years; Apple's abandonment of professionals blunts the tip of the testimonial spear, and it will cost Apple in the long run.
Same here. Zurich Art University has dropped Final Cut Studio and is migrating to Adobe products and Avid, depending on the department. Final Cut X has been evaluated and is not considered professional enough. Students have started moving to Windows and Linux in large numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
[...] maybe they'll have the Mac Pro done by then, too. If not, hey, they should take their time.
DING DING DING! We have a winner, folks!
The topic of this article is EXACTLY why they should, as you point out, TAKE THEIR TIME. Apple has spent two years trying to undo the damage they did to their pro editing market. Taking a product to market before it's ready for its target users is not a working program. Just ask the Maps team.
I have software with bugs that are fixed by an update I can't install until I get a newer machine, so I'm anxious for an updated Pro, too. I don't want a rushed machine though, as its likely to introduce as many problems as it solves. I'd much rather put up with the issues I know and understand a while longer so that when I plop down what is sure to be a dump truck full of cash I don't wind up with something that's two years short of being useful and reliable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
Question: I use iVI to convert lots of videos (add metadata, etc) and include them on iTunes.
I do this on i7 2011 air, and this little beast converts them at 100% Cpu (obviously) during a whole day non stop (and a few hours to rest) and even during conversions, it doesn't get uncomfortably warn and is still perfectly useful. I do this a lot, and it looks like it doesn't even need to stop... I never thought (when I bought it) that it would be THIS good.
What's like to do the same thing on a fully loaded beast like the Mac Pro? Can you describe it? I never used a computer like that.
Well, you pretty much already understand how it works. The Mac Pro just has the advantage of having a lot more cores and also the ability to add a lot more RAM. That extra horsepower when all cores are being used can chew through video a lot faster than an iMac. Even an older Mac Pro can still run circles around the latest iMac for tasks that can use all cores. Another advantage is being able to easily upgrade your video card and hard drives. I just bought a EVGA Geforce 680 which is a really fast card. You can use any PC card now for a Mac Pro though you won't see a boot screen since they lack EFI. But I have an old Mac ATI card in there as well in case I need to boot into CLI
That's silly. Hardware is refreshed constantly. You don't need years of development to update a processor or add USB 3 and thunderbolt. Apple updates its laptops 1-2x a year and they are more complex than desktops.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Hopefully WWDC will be interesting from a pro standpoint.
Of course, after it's over we'll have dozens of trolls on here whining about how "all the products were updated at once; that means Apple is failing".
News flash, idiots: Apple doesn't get to choose when the chips come out. If Intel releases them all at once, then Apple should probably update as soon as possible. We'll likely see the Haswell iMac, Mac Mini, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air roughly around WWDC, and maybe they'll have the Mac Pro done by then, too. If not, hey, they should take their time.
Apple updated the Mac Pro in 2012... to chips that were released in 2011 and STILL hasn't updated to the latest chips that were already shipping in PCs at the time of that refresh. Further, there is no Thunderbolt, USB 3.0, not even SATA III... how long have those technologies been available? Not to mention that video cards have perpetually been a year or more behind what is available in the PC world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maltz
Apple updated the Mac Pro in 2012... to chips that were released in 2011 and STILL hasn't updated to the latest chips that were already shipping in PCs at the time of that refresh. Further, there is no Thunderbolt, USB 3.0, not even SATA III... how long have those technologies been available? Not to mention that video cards have perpetually been a year or more behind what is available in the PC world.
Yeah, video cards are a real sore spot for us Mac Pro users. Since EFI never took off and looks like it never will on Windows PC's, looks like our options will still always be limited. The good news now though is you can use any PC video card you want, you just won't get a boot screen. But if you have a dual monitor set up and keep the low end Mac card not an issue. I didn't really need the Geforce 690 so just got a 680 instead but this is a big change from a few years ago when we had no options but really outdated cards
silly comment. i have a dust hippo© in the corner of my apartment that's 100 times more interesting [than the dust bunny under my bed]. that doesn't make it better.
Originally Posted by Maltz
Apple updated the Mac Pro in 2012...
I don't consider that an update. I mean, really. It wasn't. They just moved chips around.
But they explicitly stated it's getting one this year.
Apple's problem with both Maps and Zinal Cut is marketing. They were major undertakings that in the case of maps should have been labeled as a beta product and in the case of Final Cut a light version that would quickly see updates.
It is hard to get upset if you know the products still need some work.
For us the eroded trust isn't just a matter of FCP X, (which I really like by the way) - it's about a perceived pattern - Apples absence from NAB, dropping Xserve, dropping Final Cut Server, a lack of MacPro updates and the FCP X issues.
So for us, we're waiting to see if this is a campaign of words or of actions. I'm hoping for the latter!
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmcboston
I'm waiting for an update Aperture. Light Room is getting cooler with each release while Aperture languishes...
Apple needs to seriously improve their relationships with the pro crowd. Video, graphics, photography are areas where I think Apple needs to spend money and ensure that both software and hardware remains at the cutting edge. Its not about selling lots of high margin kit to professionals - its more about the marketing value of the cachet that being the number one choice in these ares bring. Generally in those circles marketing in terms of the mass market is less relevant. In fact, I imagine that exposing the general public to the marketing aimed at the pro's is the wrong thing to do and may well be counter productive.
If Apple is initiating a marketing campaign for Final Cut using the video editor for Toronto's Globe and Mail as a spokes person I wonder if they are giving up on the 'real' pro's (TV & Movies) and instead going for the (much larger) general media market. I am not saying that is a bad decision, its just an observation.