Previous 1 2 3 Next 31 Replies Latest reply: Jun 25, 2011 9:17 PM by Rosco188 Branched to a new discussion.
Peter Wiley1 Level 1 Level 1 (5 points)

As reported by CNN/Money

 

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/06/22/the-final-cut-pro-x-debacle/

 

"Since the early 2000s," according to itsWikipedia entry, "Final Cut Pro began to develop a large and expanding user base, mainly video hobbyists and independent filmmakers." By 2008, according to a surveypublished by the American Cinema Editors Guild, more than one in five members had abandoned Avid's (AVID) Media Composer and were doing their post-production work on Final Cut Pro.

Which makes what Apple (AAPL) did with the new version released Tuesday such a mystery."

Not, I think, the play Apple was perhaps hoping for.

  • Rosco188 Level 1 Level 1 (40 points)

    ironic since within fcpx you can share straight to CNN ireport, btw i'm not going to shut up about this until someone responds with some logical (or funny) answer...

  • nlbford Level 1 Level 1 (140 points)

    Not, I think, the play Apple was perhaps hoping for.

     

    You assume they care about the professional market. They clearly don't. They have married themselves to the iOS business model. Which is why they have have taken their "Pro" Apps division and  dumbed it down to the "YouTube" division.

     

    I think Apple is more than OK with the "play" they have recieved because it seems obvious they are more concerned with "sharing" than they are with POST PRODUCTION which is the core of a professional delivery environment.

  • BhudsonIndy Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    A debacle indeed!

     

    I bought into the hype and was seduced by the low price of Final Cut Pro X. I purchased and downloaded it on the first day. My initial impression (or rant!) of Final Cut Pro X is one shared by many long-time FCP users: FCPX looks like iMovie on steroids.

     

    One disappointing first revelation of FCPX is that it imports iMovie projects and not Final Cut Pro projects! Another disheartening revelation is the inclusion of iMovie titles like the amateurish looking "bubble clouds."

     

    I have been a user of FCP/Studio since version 1.5. All totaled, I have invested better than $4000+ on updates and plugins to support FCP workflows. FCPX seems to mock that investment by not supporting third party plugins and permitting the importing of FCP projects. Also FCPX changes/hides features and commands familiar to dedicated FCP users. We have to learn a whole new program, without the benefit of a printed user manual. The manual is in the “cloud.” (Of course!)

     

    Apple should have called FCPX something different, since it is all new software with a whole new editing paradigm. In fact, iMovie users will have more of a leg up on using FCPX than FPC users.

     

    In time, being a Final Cut Pro editor will carry no special distinction, since non-professionals will be able to produce decent video using the many presets, templates, and iMovie-like features of FCPX. Heck, users can create a video project in iMovie and simply import it into Final Cut Pro X and call it a Final Cut Pro production.

  • bit4bit Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    'Debacle'? I was inclined to think 'fiasco'. But you yanks always talk different to us Limeys. Well this one thing we at least agree on...what a bloody mess.

    I was a little suspicious of the FCP7 iteration so waited to see what would happen. Never expected this. In dear olde England I was the first of the few rather than last of the many. Started with the IIfx and hung in there all these years. At one time I was the only Apple user in a company of 6,000 souls. Oh dear do I feel cheated, all the investment in the third party stuff, the time spent enthusing PC owners, all those long nights fixing what Snow Leopard did to FCP. I dare not consider what Lion has in store.

    Anybody got Randy Ubillos Facebook addy? I feel he is doing what he did to Premiere just before Apple dropped it and moved to FCP. He and his team wrecked that.

    Something is a foot here and its not twelve inches.

    best regards from over the big shinning water.

  • Daniel Slagle Level 7 Level 7 (22,415 points)

    As a "pro" iMovie user I still find the export options too limiting.  Since this new Pro app could not possiably connect to my FCP studio version of compressor I am stuck having to pay another $50 or do a 2-step export process.

     

    iMovie also does not crash as much as FC X seems to

  • oogie Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Here here from Australia.

    What a shambles

    Bit like the debacle with the new MacBook Pro

     

    https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2768351?start=0&tstart=0

     

    95 pages and still going

  • bit4bit Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    'day mate...so you fellas call it a 'shambles' did you know the expression 'shambles' comes from an old English word for slaughterhouse?  lots of animals running around with their heads cut off..yep you got right there.

     

    Rumour: Sony dropping the XDCAM transfer software! so even file based editing is looking shaky along with tape capture.? I wonder is HDV tape still working.

  • C5Z Level 1 Level 1 (30 points)

    debacle, fiasco don't even begin to describe what Apple has done......it is an extraordinarily mismanaged product introduction, actually, it is a shameless toss it over the wall and run situation......and to think that they silver tongued Applers are hyping iCloud, iOS5 and Lion.....enter at your own peril

  • Peter Wiley1 Level 1 Level 1 (5 points)

    The thing I am having trouble with is that Apple is a company that understands marketing pretty well. Given that assumption, it just baffles me while they would roll out the program in the way that they have.  If they had really consulted "pros" in a systematic way pre-release, a lot of complaints made above would surely have surfaced. And yet they decided to go ahead -- for reasons, I bet, that have little to do with the app itself. Would it not make sense to say out loud this is the first step in a long development road and that provide a clearer roadmap. Yanking FCP 7.0/FCS 3 without explanation surely did not send the right message.

     

    (As an aside, I wonder if the reason they pulled 7 is they didn't want the new product competing directly with the new one.)

     

    It smacks of internal corporate politics, and a certain hubris, and a worrying lack of thinking important issues trough. Frankly, it makes me wonder about the consequences of Steve Job's illness.

     

    I'd bet that somewhere in a bar in Cupertino there's a bunch of Apple employees saying "we told them, but they wouldn't listen."

     

    Looking at the FCP marketing page, what's striking is the lack of focus of the message on the needs of ANY group of users. The claims are basically four:

     

    1) FCP makes editing "faster, more fluid, and more flexible than ever before."

     

    2) FCP makes organizing media easier. (I guess this is why FCP server is not longer needed.)

     

    3) FCP is fast.

     

    4) FCP "is a single application for the entire post-production workflow." (THE workflow? Aren't there many?)

     

    What' striking is that these are fairly broad, vague statements even by marketing standards, and suggest to me this is a product that Apple's marketing team does not know how to sell. That could be because the whole redevelopment effort has been poorly focused and/or the subject of significant internal debate and/or apathy. This is the best case Apple could make for a "revolution"? Give me a break.

     

    What missing is marketing that one used to see for FCP -- the video of the BBC executive saying how critical the product would be to his organization's future and how its features were not available on other products etc. The white papers on the feature and innovations etc.

     

    Interestingly, as of this morning, if one goes to www.apple.com/pro , the pro video app was still being represented by a photo of a FCS 3 box.

  • overeasy Level 2 Level 2 (185 points)

    This isn't a PR nightmare, because Apple knew exactly what to expect.  They are turned their backs on the pro market.  Simple as that.  What other evidence do we need?  They clearly looked at the numbers and figured it's better to sell X-number FCP-X installs @ $300 vs a limited number of FCPro installs for a lot more.  They WANT the hobbyists and bloggers and viral video people -- and they will likely get many of them.  Indeed, by crippling this once quite elegant app, they INTENTIONALLY created PR spin which comes out to this;  "FCP X is a no longer a complicated professional app."  The people who are now their core customers will revel in this. 

  • oogie Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    overeasy --- you are absolutely correct

    The "professional" quality aspects of FCP7 are obviously too hard for the hobbiests and prosumers to master and imovie is a bit ... well mickey mouse.

    Apple's marketing obviously told them that improving iMovie and selling say 300,000 @ $300 was a lot better than selling say 10,000 @ $1,000.

    I am guessing at the numbers but I am sure this is the scenario.

    So f*** the pro users - who needs them?.

  • R Miller Level 2 Level 2 (175 points)

    I've read almost every thread on a number of forums, I generally don't post much these days, but I must commend you on every point you've made - especially the lack of a "pro with serious credentials" explaining how the've used this over the last year while it was being developed... blah blah blah.... and how it will let you continue with legacy workflows while opening up an entirely radical way to work with emerging technologies etc.

     

    No doubt the reason FCS3 was pulled was the knowledge that FCPX would sit "idle in the cloud" once all was revealed.

  • Matthew Morgan Level 7 Level 7 (22,595 points)

    In time, being a Final Cut Pro editor will carry no special distinction, since non-professionals will be able to produce decent video

     

    God forbid!

     

     

     

    Matt

Previous 1 2 3 Next