Well, first off, you can't buy it, so I assume you already bought a valid copy and have the updates available?
You're planning to impliment and deploy a system with the hope you can get the metadata and media out later on? seems like planning for a failure right from the start. I really doubt we will see this feature set return very soon from Apple if at all.
It's a very big gamble to start off knowing the product is dead with no future info at all ........
I've been a really enthusiastic evangelist for FCSvr for 2 years now. Written all sorts of scripts and background automations for FCSvr to customize it for our organization. Quite honestly, if I knew even a year ago what I know today, I would have looked for other options then. My hope was that Apple would either open source or sell FCSvr to another company, and then it could become something even greater than it currently is. I hoped that with a more focused, more pro-dedicated developer on the product (like it used to be before Apple bought it) it could become something truly remarkable. It still may, and I hope it does. If I knew for certain that it would, I would not have to consider other options. But what has Apple said on the matter? Nothing. Probably because they're dealing with fallout resulting from their poor handling of the FCPX release. I would not be doing my job if I didn't consider as many options as possible and weigh advantages and disadvantages before making a decision to begin or continue with an EoL product. Assuming you can just "port the data" and everything will open up merrily in another solution is a little naive. The data you input may transfer and survive, and if that's all your'e doing, you may be fine. But as you and your users get more comfortable with FCSvr you'd be likely to improve upon it, make it do more for you, etc. It won't just be a collection of data anymore, but a vital workflow and project management tool. Looking at both our FCSvr and a potential installation of another product (say CatDV), my head is spinning a little on the amount of work that would need to be done to get our catalog ported, automations recreated and scripts rewritten, and people retrained. It's not a light issue. Other asset managers work differently from FCSvr, so relearning and retraining alone is not a trivial matter. Take all of this into consideration before deciding whether to begin distribution of FCSvr throughout your institution.
Check out Xsanity.com for porting hints.
I'm advising my clients to run as fast and far away from FCSvr as they can. It has been leaked from a London meeting with Apple and vendors that both cheap and expensive 3rd party MAM solutions for FCP X are on the way. How well will the port from FCSvr libraries? I'm assuming these folks will want that large client base ASAP, and will provide that.
FCSvr is dead, the serious bugs will never be fixed, Apple left tons of large installations high and dry. Why trust them any longer? Send the box back, get a refund, start looking for another solution.
Thanks for the feedback.
It's good to hear opinions from others on the matter since I keep going back and forth on it. I swing daily from thinking it would be ludicrous to entertaining the notion that yes it's dead but it's still a kick-*** MAM that we can get up and running fairly quickly (owing to the time we've invested researching it). One of the posters over at Xsanity.com kind of sums up that side of the argument for me -
What has been useful will still be useful to our customers no matter what NLE they use: simple raw asset management, age-based archiving for admin-free maintenance of free space on their shared storage, and most importantly, end-of-process deliverable file creation and distribution, along with manicured metadata. That was always the software's power and will continue to be for our customers who use it.
For goodness' sake, there are folks who still use Artbox for what it was good for: still image management and delivery, who wouldn't think of replacing it with an alternative because it works for that portion of their workflow.
That said, the consensus seems to be that it's hardly prudent to install and and run an EOL piece of software that will become an integral part of our workflow so I'm going to spend a while researching CatDV and though my initial experiences with it are less than positive (the set-up for the server edition is hardly intuitive) it does seem like the only live show in town at the moment.