Apple doesn't release half-finished features, they leave them out. Like cut and paste. And like the missing features of Final Cut Pro X.
But the question is, why did they release it at all? Or at least, why did they release it without a beta like Mac OS X or a free trial? If it was supposedly a "complete product" why brand it as "Final Cut Pro" rather than "Final Cut Express". Why take FCS off the shelves for 2 months?
They didn't take Mac OS 9 away the day Mac OSX 10.0 was released and Steve Jobs bragged for years that it was the most successful product transition in history until the PPC / Intel transition.
Would it have killed them to delay the release a couple of months? FCP7 is compatible with Lion, it wasn't going anywhere.
The people who paid $300 for the product in the first couple of months were basically guinea pigs.
Apple could take some guidance from Autodesk and have a real beta program with real professional users, then really listen to the beta team. This is why Autodesk makes great pro apps. Keeping everything top secret until launch day is great for iPhones and hardware, but not pro apps.
The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.
The products are just too different. At most you will be able to import/retain whatever is likely covered by the now added XML support - which might not be more than the sequence of clips and their in/out points. You won't move an advanced project between the two versions, and as the predecessor still runs fine under Lion (at least not worse than it used to), this is not great, but (for me/us) no showstopper. We had to redo some of our standard intros, but that was a good thing - we put that off for years and they needed it.
Apple could take some guidance from Autodesk and have a real beta program with real professional users, then really listen to the beta team. This is why Autodesk makes great pro apps. Keeping everything top secret until launch day is great for iPhones and hardware, but not pro apps.
My old company -- which is featured on Apple's site in the FCP section -- spent more than $1 million working with Apple in creating a complete FCP work flow for their production company.
They weren't consulted or made part of a beta program. FCP X came as a big surprise. They're not happy.
You should say Apple tries to never release such a product until it is perfect. Many would argue, Final Cut Pro X is perfect for what it does. The problem is many people think the program is lacking for what it doesn't do.
I think the professional backlash caught Apple off guard because it thought it was offering a significant update.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe
But Apple NEVER releases a product until it is as perfect as then possible. Look at cut and paste. They could have released a half-assed version on the first iPhone. But it took them YEARS to figure out how to do it, so they refused to release anything for several years.
Now they release a product which is lacking?
Is this a new strategy? Release an incomplete beta and add stuff if, as and when customers scream?
Isn't that a very Google-like way of going about things?
Many businesses go out of business giving the customer exactly what they ask for today. Because another business with a better vision, figured out how to give the customer what they wanted tomorrow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLoveStuff
Wow, you have absolutely no idea of what is going on with this, do you? There are serious issues with the first release of FCPX that make it impossible to work with. So yes, that is not exactly like FCP7. And if we complain, you call us "bitchers". Pathetic!
Not every professional needs this feature. It is useful if you are trying to recycle material. It is necessary if you want to finish an already started project on Final Cut Pro X. However, it you are starting a project from scratch backwards compatibility isn't needed.
I also think Apple will address most complaints to everybody's satisfaction (eventually), however, I think that backward's compatibility is the one feature that Apple can't deliver on because of the rewrite of the file structure.
That might make some people jump ship. As a whole, I think Apple will gain customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.
The products are just too different. At most you will be able to import/retain whatever is likely covered by the now added XML support - which might not be more than the sequence of clips and their in/out points. You won't move an advanced project between the two versions, and as the predecessor still runs fine under Lion (at least not worse than it used to), this is not great, but (for me/us) no showstopper. We had to redo some of our standard intros, but that was a good thing - we put that off for years and they needed it.
The more time that passes the less it will be important. Over the years, we bounced around from Premiere on both Mac and PC, which were not compatible as well as Avid on Mac and PC and also FCP. Now I guess it is FCPX's turn. It is just painful when a client from a previous project calls and asks for a minor revision. You have to decide to go back to the legacy system or redo it at your own expense. Sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and move forward.
I don't see that as too much to complain about what was missing and what was not. For $300, you test a new project in FCPX to see if it does what you want/need and let Apple know what you think is missing - all the while you work on your actual production material in FCP7 (which you paid three times as much for).
Then when FCPX is up to your expectations, you start a new production piece in it.
As for opening FCP7 projects in FCPX, why? Besides the fact that X is a complete rewrite, you never *ever* open existing projects in new versions of the software. EVER. I'm not even close to a pro, but I know that much.
I also think Apple will address most complaints to everybody's satisfaction (eventually), however, I think that backward's compatibility is the one feature that Apple can't deliver on because of the rewrite of the file structure.
Anything is possible, maybe not economically practical for Apple in this case but just as you can start a new project and pull in each element one at a time, it could be done programmatically by pulling in each piece from the timeline of the previous project. Sure, there would be some incomplete results when the project relies on a 3rd party plugin, which is my problem, in particular our subtitling extension, but it is certainly not impossible.
Note that despite supposedly vast feedback, they have done nothing about the importing of previous FCP projects. If they really are caving to feedback that should have been first on the list
Unless Apple reverses itself, they won't supply an FCP 7 import facility. Because of differences, it is likely that Apple found they could not do an acceptable job of this. Apple did leave the door open for third parties to do this.
What is needed, IMO, is a "best effort" import to FCPX, at least equal to what Adobe provides for Premiere.
Basically, bring your edits across, realizing that there won't always be equivalent constructs or features. For example, FCPX and Premiere, often, do not have equivalent effects to those frond in FCP 7.
The FCPX Storyline/Trackless structure is different from FCP 7 and other NLEs. However, this can be approximated in FCPX -- I've done it manually.
But Apple NEVER releases a product until it is as perfect as then possible. Look at cut and paste. They could have released a half-assed version on the first iPhone. But it took them YEARS to figure out how to do it, so they refused to release anything for several years.
Now they release a product which is lacking?
Is this a new strategy? Release an incomplete beta and add stuff if, as and when customers scream?
Isn't that a very Google-like way of going about things?
What you say doesn't make sense. You are claiming that iPhone is a perfect product, partly because of a perfect 'cut and paste' system, that they waited to execute until it was perfect. Isn't it what apple is doing with FCP X? They are releasing a product which only features 'almost' perfect features and a completely new workflow! the glass isn't half empty, it is half full!! Final Cut, like OSX, is beginning simple and perfect and will eventually gain more complexity as Apple figures out how to change workflows and features to the better, and how to integrate it!
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. The inverse proposition also appears to be true: A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be made to work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.
Wow that was pretty fast. Somebody got their feet held to the fire. A FREE 30 day trial to boot. It looks like the multi-cam might be a bit harder to implement but I bet we will see it shortly.
The free trial is through their website, not the Mac App Store. I was hopeful they would finally start allowing trial versions through their app stores.
Yes but it was THE biggest stink of the naysaying. Which is rather my point. If this was all about feedback as various blogs are implying, this issue would have been the first addressed. And not via using third party software as this XML export/import requires
Probably not a matter of Apple ignoring the customer's request, but a matter of Apple not able to do what the customer requested. The new FCPX's project structure is probably so fundamentally different from FCP7 that an import is impossible.
Comments
Apple doesn't release half-finished features, they leave them out. Like cut and paste. And like the missing features of Final Cut Pro X.
But the question is, why did they release it at all? Or at least, why did they release it without a beta like Mac OS X or a free trial? If it was supposedly a "complete product" why brand it as "Final Cut Pro" rather than "Final Cut Express". Why take FCS off the shelves for 2 months?
They didn't take Mac OS 9 away the day Mac OSX 10.0 was released and Steve Jobs bragged for years that it was the most successful product transition in history until the PPC / Intel transition.
Would it have killed them to delay the release a couple of months? FCP7 is compatible with Lion, it wasn't going anywhere.
The people who paid $300 for the product in the first couple of months were basically guinea pigs.
The people who paid $300 for the product in the first couple of months were basically guinea pigs.
(insert sound a guinea pig makes here)
The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.
The products are just too different. At most you will be able to import/retain whatever is likely covered by the now added XML support - which might not be more than the sequence of clips and their in/out points. You won't move an advanced project between the two versions, and as the predecessor still runs fine under Lion (at least not worse than it used to), this is not great, but (for me/us) no showstopper. We had to redo some of our standard intros, but that was a good thing - we put that off for years and they needed it.
Apple could take some guidance from Autodesk and have a real beta program with real professional users, then really listen to the beta team. This is why Autodesk makes great pro apps. Keeping everything top secret until launch day is great for iPhones and hardware, but not pro apps.
My old company -- which is featured on Apple's site in the FCP section -- spent more than $1 million working with Apple in creating a complete FCP work flow for their production company.
They weren't consulted or made part of a beta program. FCP X came as a big surprise. They're not happy.
Stop exagerating things
Yeah! Stop it!!
I think the professional backlash caught Apple off guard because it thought it was offering a significant update.
But Apple NEVER releases a product until it is as perfect as then possible. Look at cut and paste. They could have released a half-assed version on the first iPhone. But it took them YEARS to figure out how to do it, so they refused to release anything for several years.
Now they release a product which is lacking?
Is this a new strategy? Release an incomplete beta and add stuff if, as and when customers scream?
Isn't that a very Google-like way of going about things?
Wow, you have absolutely no idea of what is going on with this, do you? There are serious issues with the first release of FCPX that make it impossible to work with. So yes, that is not exactly like FCP7. And if we complain, you call us "bitchers". Pathetic!
I also think Apple will address most complaints to everybody's satisfaction (eventually), however, I think that backward's compatibility is the one feature that Apple can't deliver on because of the rewrite of the file structure.
That might make some people jump ship. As a whole, I think Apple will gain customers.
The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.
The products are just too different. At most you will be able to import/retain whatever is likely covered by the now added XML support - which might not be more than the sequence of clips and their in/out points. You won't move an advanced project between the two versions, and as the predecessor still runs fine under Lion (at least not worse than it used to), this is not great, but (for me/us) no showstopper. We had to redo some of our standard intros, but that was a good thing - we put that off for years and they needed it.
The more time that passes the less it will be important. Over the years, we bounced around from Premiere on both Mac and PC, which were not compatible as well as Avid on Mac and PC and also FCP. Now I guess it is FCPX's turn. It is just painful when a client from a previous project calls and asks for a minor revision. You have to decide to go back to the legacy system or redo it at your own expense. Sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and move forward.
FCPX was $300?
I don't see that as too much to complain about what was missing and what was not. For $300, you test a new project in FCPX to see if it does what you want/need and let Apple know what you think is missing - all the while you work on your actual production material in FCP7 (which you paid three times as much for).
Then when FCPX is up to your expectations, you start a new production piece in it.
As for opening FCP7 projects in FCPX, why? Besides the fact that X is a complete rewrite, you never *ever* open existing projects in new versions of the software. EVER. I'm not even close to a pro, but I know that much.
I also think Apple will address most complaints to everybody's satisfaction (eventually), however, I think that backward's compatibility is the one feature that Apple can't deliver on because of the rewrite of the file structure.
Anything is possible, maybe not economically practical for Apple in this case but just as you can start a new project and pull in each element one at a time, it could be done programmatically by pulling in each piece from the timeline of the previous project. Sure, there would be some incomplete results when the project relies on a 3rd party plugin, which is my problem, in particular our subtitling extension, but it is certainly not impossible.
FCP7 was what? A couple grand?
FCPX was $300?
Real pros don't care about the difference between a couple grand and a few hundred when it concerns their workflow.
Tinkerers and independent very small startups would welcome the difference, however, though it won't make or break them.
Note that despite supposedly vast feedback, they have done nothing about the importing of previous FCP projects. If they really are caving to feedback that should have been first on the list
Unless Apple reverses itself, they won't supply an FCP 7 import facility. Because of differences, it is likely that Apple found they could not do an acceptable job of this. Apple did leave the door open for third parties to do this.
What is needed, IMO, is a "best effort" import to FCPX, at least equal to what Adobe provides for Premiere.
Basically, bring your edits across, realizing that there won't always be equivalent constructs or features. For example, FCPX and Premiere, often, do not have equivalent effects to those frond in FCP 7.
The FCPX Storyline/Trackless structure is different from FCP 7 and other NLEs. However, this can be approximated in FCPX -- I've done it manually.
But Apple NEVER releases a product until it is as perfect as then possible. Look at cut and paste. They could have released a half-assed version on the first iPhone. But it took them YEARS to figure out how to do it, so they refused to release anything for several years.
Now they release a product which is lacking?
Is this a new strategy? Release an incomplete beta and add stuff if, as and when customers scream?
Isn't that a very Google-like way of going about things?
What you say doesn't make sense. You are claiming that iPhone is a perfect product, partly because of a perfect 'cut and paste' system, that they waited to execute until it was perfect. Isn't it what apple is doing with FCP X? They are releasing a product which only features 'almost' perfect features and a completely new workflow! the glass isn't half empty, it is half full!! Final Cut, like OSX, is beginning simple and perfect and will eventually gain more complexity as Apple figures out how to change workflows and features to the better, and how to integrate it!
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. The inverse proposition also appears to be true: A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be made to work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.
-Carl Emil
Wow that was pretty fast. Somebody got their feet held to the fire. A FREE 30 day trial to boot. It looks like the multi-cam might be a bit harder to implement but I bet we will see it shortly.
The free trial is through their website, not the Mac App Store. I was hopeful they would finally start allowing trial versions through their app stores.
Yes but it was THE biggest stink of the naysaying. Which is rather my point. If this was all about feedback as various blogs are implying, this issue would have been the first addressed. And not via using third party software as this XML export/import requires
Probably not a matter of Apple ignoring the customer's request, but a matter of Apple not able to do what the customer requested. The new FCPX's project structure is probably so fundamentally different from FCP7 that an import is impossible.
WTF???????