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

135678

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 150
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cy_starkman View Post


    Sounds great except for one tiny issue. Premiere has never been a decent video app itself, let alone a pro video app. Leave toy town for baby land, so what exactly is their point?



    Sure Premiere has its issues - all the NLE's do. I don't think the point of this promotion is get people to immediately dump their FCP7 investment mid job, but rather seriously evaluate Premiere as an alternative to an upgrade to FCPX.



    Right now, you can't buy anymore FCP7's if you need more licenses. And you can't continue your FCP7 work in FCPX, and you can't continue your FCPX work in anything else. And there will be no upgrades, performance enhancements or major bug fixes for FCP7. It's EOL.



    So you really have only two options for the future:

    (1) Get a new NLE :Avid Media Composer or Premier Pro.

    (2) Wait and hope that some time in the next 2 years, FCPX might do most of what FCP7 and the other NLE's can today.



    The 50% off deal puts the Premiere Pro bundle at about the same price as After Effects + Photoshop, so you're basically getting Premiere for free, because you were going to buy those two anyway.



    And is at least $1500 cheaper than Media Composer. It makes sense to jump on it. If after 1 or 2 small projects, you don't like Premiere Pro, walk away and buy Media Composer. You haven't lost a dime.
  • Reply 42 of 150
    radjinradjin Posts: 165member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    They would be extremely stupid not to take advantage of the situation as ANY company would....



    Especially since they are on the failing edge of the industry.
  • Reply 43 of 150
    midiacmidiac Posts: 23member
    Well, I for one, took this as an opportunity to see your options and learn the alternative that might just be our only choice soon, if you are a true "pro" that is. All their other software kicks ass . . . well, except Flash on mobile that is.



    Hey, I love FCP X, just need options right now. Future is VERY uncertain.
  • Reply 44 of 150
    kovacmkovacm Posts: 57member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Hey Google accepted it apparently. The new Swiffy converter works surprisingly well if you want to convert a small Flash file into a large HTML5 file in order to view on iOS.



    well, forget HTML apps in general - apple work so hard to bring *native application* with *cloud functionality* (best from both world) that rest of PC industry can only "wait and see" and start to copy concept in few years...



    btw cloud = closed system in any case. question is only who has better
  • Reply 45 of 150
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 919member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    They would be extremely stupid not to take advantage of the situation as ANY company would....



    except that adobe has a very long history of producing feature-rich software that is some of the buggiest out there.



    they (adobe) should be looking at themselves as their biggest competitor and improving their software—not by increasing features, but perfecting the ones they have and not gouging the customer for a few bells and whistles for every 'update'. (5.5...really? btw, i own legit copies of all their software—and, sadly, pay the upgrade fee.)



    it's a reactive move on their part and speaks volumes (i.e., trying to play catch up) about their company mindset.
  • Reply 46 of 150
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by theguycalledtom View Post


    Very true! And I will gladly support any company that is trying to rid the internet of Flash and encourages the development of HTML5 alternatives.



    The internet is a place for open standards that can used by everyone. Even If I did have an Android device, I shouldn't have to wait for Adobe to make a stable version of Flash Player to visit a website! I should just be able to open a browser!



    Then you must gladly support Adobe as they are working really hard to provide HTML5 alternatives - http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2011/06....html#comments
  • Reply 47 of 150
    xsuxsu Posts: 401member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bulk001 View Post


    Then you must gladly support Adobe as they are working really hard to provide HTML5 alternatives - http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2011/06....html#comments



    They are not trying to get rid of flash though.
  • Reply 48 of 150
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. Me View Post


    OK, troll. Flash does not work properly on any mobile platform. So I guess Apple is so evil that it fouled-up Flash for its competitors as well as its own platform? Is that your position?



    Not meaning to troll, but on moddern smartphone hardware that ive seen, flash in some cases isnt that bad...the problem is bad flash is bad, same as on a laptop or desktop. you may be able to look at a flash based photo viewer with 1 or 2 percent CPU but a flash ad coded to annoy the hell out of the user are what cause problems imho.



    having seen flash on some android devices, I can say it isnt too bad, the problem is that I want selective flash, yes to embedded videos, no to 3MB banner ads for example.
  • Reply 49 of 150
    liquidmarkliquidmark Posts: 118member
    "The competitor to be feared is one who never bothers about you at all, but goes on making his own business better all the time." -Henry Ford



    That's not Adobe.



    Also, for the people saying that this is a good business move or it's like the get a Mac thing... please.



    1) This move simply shows Adobe's desperation.

    2) I don't recall Apple offering desperate discounts on their wares for people that didn't like Windows 7 in any of their ads.



    Apple's clearly going after the prosumer market. They'll leave Adobe and Avid will fight over the table scraps in the 'pro' market.



    Here's a little tip. $300 from a prosumer is worth just as much as $300 from a 'pro'.
  • Reply 50 of 150
    donarbdonarb Posts: 52member
    Apple sells hardware. Premiere requires a machine to run on, so Apple sells more Macs.



    Way to go Adobe, you fell for Apple's plan.
  • Reply 51 of 150
    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.



    I of course can choose to pour cooking oil in my gas tank and expect it to run just like it does on 88 octane. NOT.



    Apple is waiting on Adobe to prove that they can, with four people rewrite Flash to be a truly mobile function, not just a cobbled together semi-developed piece of dreck that stutters, judders and sucks battery life like a parched vampire.



    BTW, try the cooking oil in the gas tank thing once on your car - you will be amazed at the performance.
  • Reply 52 of 150
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jakevin. View Post


    Side note: Can't wait to see Steve Jobs mention this whole debacle publicly for the first time. Should be like MobileMe all over again, or perhaps his "Stop me if you've seen it" remark at the iPhone 4 keynote when unveiling the design - always a good laugh.



    Looking through a number of forums, everyone seems to be giving Steve a pass on somehow this piece of crap software was released 6 months to a year prematurely without his knowledge. Considering Steve's obsessive attention to detail and involvement, medical leave or not, how could he not have known the state of FCPX when it was released?



    I'm convinced Steve really doesn't care one bit about the "true pro market" and is more than happy to cede it to Adobe and Avid. If he can get 50% of the iMovie user based to move up to FCPX (iMovie Pro) it will be seen as a colossal financial success.



    IMHO releasing FCPX was a calculated business decision and everyone especially Steve was in on it.



    Just look to the enterprise/ business market that Apple say they want to play in, but has no credible plan or product offerings.
  • Reply 53 of 150
    jensonbjensonb Posts: 530member
    Whatever. I'm sure some of the Pro Editors are conservative enough and short-sighted enough to waste their time converting their workflow from centring on one outdated editing methodology to another one. Meanwhile, Apple is going to cleanup amongst smaller operations and independents - particularly the one-man (Or few-people) operations dominating online video.



    Oh Adobe, you and the Pro Editors ditching FCP are a perfect match. You just don't know how to move forward into the future. How's that Flash thing going for you anyway? What's that? Every major monetised video hosting site is taking steps to move to HTML5 and you still haven't shipped a fully functional mobile or even tablet version?



    Yeah, good luck Adobe. Apple's going to be laughing all the way to the bank.
  • Reply 54 of 150
    nerudaneruda Posts: 436member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by donarb View Post


    Apple sells hardware. Premiere requires a machine to run on, so Apple sells more Macs.



    Not unless you run Premiere on, I don't know, a PC.
  • Reply 55 of 150
    nerudaneruda Posts: 436member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post


    Look folks -- I love Apple. But Apple doesn't handle pro/business users well at all and this FCPX situation is a prime example. It's not that Apple "doesn't care" about pro users. If they didn't care about pro users, then they wouldn't have bothered making FCPX 64-bit,



    I see this the other way around. If Apple really cared about Pros they wouldn't have released this pos and EOL's FCP 7. No multi-cam editing. Really Apple? Really? You couldn't add these features before you released this pos?



    I think it is pretty obvious where Apple's allegiance lies, and it is not with the pro market. No use wrangling about this and start moving on instead.



    Trying both Premiere and Avid MC. Say what you will about Premiere 5.5, but it is a heck of a lot better than FCP X.
  • Reply 56 of 150
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    This is exactly what they should do. They are acting like a well run company with this move. As both a capitalist and opportunist I applaud them.



    I would normally agree with you, but Adobe is trying to corner a very small segment of the consumer market - the pros. Sachin Agarwal's observations are worth reviewing - especially as he was one of the team that developed FCP for Apple. I won't belabor his comments here, but Adobe IS smart enough to go after the pro editors, (who by the way are NOT universally at all accepting of the Creative Suite approach, but it may be that, or return to the Avid suite), as much of the market as it is. Their advertising is only opportunistic, with all these pros panicking over the new FCPX, they are simply trying to net a few "on the rebound". So I tend to regard them with the same mild contempt I feel for the "friend who hangs around hoping to catch an attractive date after a break-up.



    It took quite a while for pro editors to get on the FCP bandwagon anyway, and they did so primarily because it was much more cost effective than Avid (for example). FCP7 is a decent suite and the workflow for it has become entrenched as a part of editing practice.



    Right wrong or indifferent, (and I know, personally - having experienced it - what a huge pain it is to have a toolset "pulled out from under you") Apple has decided to go after the larger market of semi-pro and amateur editors with something that resonates better with the larger audience. Just like they did with iMovie, iWorks (remember AppleWorks?).



    But here, Sachin explains the thought process better than I can (or care to):

    http://sachin.posterous.com/why-appl...inal-cut-pro-x



    Pro editors - yes it sux majorly. Thousands of (justifiably)ranting words later - yes that has been made clear to those who are not in the boat with you.



    But forgive us if we express just a little delight in the fact that FCPX suddenly is a toolset for the rest of us - and in reality there are many more of us to use it. Hopefully someday it will once again be the suite that will (again) let you do that voodoo that you do so well.
  • Reply 57 of 150
    conrailconrail Posts: 489member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jensonb View Post


    But forgive us if we express just a little delight in the fact that FCPX suddenly is a toolset for the rest of us - and in reality there are many more of us to use it. Hopefully someday it will once again be the suite that will (again) let you do that voodoo that you do so well.



    Why can't we have both? Why does having powerful, easy to use software for new media types, serious amateurs, and non-broadcast types mean we have to leave the pro user out in the cold? PLEASE don't tell me this is all the fault of whiny people afraid of change, because if anyone is whining, it's the consumer user who just can't understand how pro users could refuse the gift that Steve has bestowed upon them. Don't they see how magical it is?
  • Reply 58 of 150
    backdocbackdoc Posts: 18member
    People can choose whatever they want. They can choose not to not buy Apple products. It's a ridiculous argument. It's like me walking into a Mexican restaurant and getting upset if they don't serve Thai food to me, or don't offer it on the menu.



    If you buy an Apple product, you know you're not getting flash. So, if flash is something you have to have, buy an Android phone.



    One final example, if I bought a Honda Accord, I would not complain to Honda and say that they should be forced to put OnStar in it. That's a competitor's product. Any company is free to shape their products in the way they think it will make them the most money. The worst thing a company could do would be to try to please everyone. It can't be done. It's best to stay focused, stay on purpose and produce a product that you believe delivers the best experience to your customer.



    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 59 of 150
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jakevin. View Post


    It's a brilliant opportunity for Adobe and one they're really taking seriously. It is indeed exactly like the "I'm a Mac" campaign - as soon as Vista came out and was trashed those ads attacked it and gave users an alternative: to upgrade to a Mac. It's fair marketing on Adobe's part and I think Apple's attacks on its products such as Flash over the year warrant it even further.



    I don't like that Apple is falling victim to Adobe for inferior software because it's not true to Apple's form but it's an opportunity Adobe have taken and who could blame them. Plus 50% is great for competition and hence consumers.



    Side note: Can't wait to see Steve Jobs mention this whole debacle publicly for the first time. Should be like MobileMe all over again, or perhaps his "Stop me if you've seen it" remark at the iPhone 4 keynote when unveiling the design - always a good laugh.



    I don't really think Apple is "falling victim" to anything here. This was a cool, concise delivery of an intended product. It was presented a while back to pro editors, who were in denial apparently about what they were seeing - even while applauding it. They didn't understand what Apple was doing - of course they do NOW. Hence the panic and the unbridled outrage.



    But look at the market difference here - you are talking hundreds (or even more generously thousands) of pro editors versus tens of thousand or more of potential prosumers who are shooting video in greater quantities than ever before and rapidly outgrowing the low-end consumer iMovie platform. By revamping FCP into a platform that speaks directly to nearly an order of magnitude more "editors", they generate that much more revenue. Apple sells many, many more iMacs and Macbooks and Macbook Pros than they do Mac Pros. That reflects the market reality better than any other example I can think of.



    As for Adobe, they still have to compete with Sony, Avid and Pinnacle, which is not much different than before FCP rose to popularity among pro editors. If they can quickly collect a few more editors by running a firesale on their suite before the emotionality clears and the panic subsides - heck why not.
  • Reply 60 of 150
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sranger View Post


    They would be extremely stupid not to take advantage of the situation as ANY company would....



    yes they would be. But they were kind of stupid not to start this weeks ago when the preview hit and folks say the interface etc. It was not hidden that this was brand new software not merely an upgrade so the notion of bugs, temporarily missing features etc shouldn't have shocked anyone that has been around Apple for the last few years. It's all standard course.



    The moment the first "It looks like iMovie, bleech" messages went out in April, Adobe should have jumped.



    As for the talk of refunds etc I suspect that there aren't as many as the stories make it sound like. Or even as high a share of negative reviews as they imply. Happy folks rarely get on boards and blogs to talk about how happy they are. They are too busy being happy. Pissed off folks however, scream and rant. Even when the reason they are pissed off is caused by not doing their homework and having reasonable expections. As Steve Jobs said in one of best emails "It seems like you are looking for someone to be mad at other than yourself". There are elements of that in some of the smack talk, especially by the prosumers that actually thought they were getting $1000 software for $300. Oops.
Sign In or Register to comment.