-
Jobs’ advice
Relevant to why FCPX is what it is today.
https://qz.com/884489/steve-jobs-saved-apple-and-nike-with-the-same-piece-of-advice/
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
11 Replies
-
How so? Apple never made more than 2 editing apps, one for consumers and one for pros. It’s just the definition of pro that’s been up for debate.
Noah
FCPWORKS – FCPX Workflow
FCP Exchange – FCPX Workshops
XinTwo – FCPX Training -
[Noah Kadner] “How so?”
I think it explains why some things folks have clamored for since day one simply aren’t – and probably won’t be – part of FCPX.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
FCPX is still in active development with a long term roadmap, so I’d say it’s more a question of prioritizing maximum utility of a feature for widest number of users vs. ruling anything out.
Noah
FCPWORKS – FCPX Workflow
FCP Exchange – FCPX Workshops
XinTwo – FCPX Training -
[Noah Kadner] “FCPX is still in active development with a long term roadmap, so I’d say it’s more a question of prioritizing maximum utility of a feature for widest number of users vs. ruling anything out.”
Well said. And pretty much nails it imo. ????????
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
I’d say…
“Just get rid of the crappy stuff and focus on the good stuff.” (can you e.g. say ‘EDL’?)
and
“By focusing on less, you give yourself the time to build a product that solves a problem in an incredible way.”… sums it up, yes. That certainly fits FCP X imo.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Robin S. Kurz] “… sums it up, yes. That certainly fits FCP X imo.”
Which was my point in posting the link.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “Which was my point in posting the link.”
I figured no less. ????
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
And Photos has (according to Apple but not pros) replaced iPhoto AND Aperture. I was thinking at the time that Apple would get rid of iMovie and Photos would evolve into a true Aperture replacement like FCP X has NOW for FCP 7. Rough transition but better late than never. I’m hoping Photos will get there. $300 is a bit steep for a consumer app and with free updates incredible price for pros, well off kids, hobbyists, schools.
Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.
-
“Winners focus; losers spray.” This is a very old adage of business speak that I first heard cutting a PBS documentary 30 years ago.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin\’ attached to nothin\’
\”Deciding the spine is the process of editing\” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “”Winners focus; losers spray.” This is a very old adage of business speak that I first heard cutting a PBS documentary 30 years ago.”
But it could also be argued that a company that makes two-thirds of its money from selling phones (not even counting its share of phone app sales and services) is “spraying” by bothering with editing software at all.
When you look at the range of what Apple is betting on, including solar farms, AI, headphones, watches, original TV programming, and cars, you could just as easily argue that there’s no company on the planet less focused, and more inclined to spray, than Apple — with the possible exception of Alphabet, who recently passed Apple in the race for world’s most capitalized company.
So, yeah, treating each product silo within its own four walls, okay, Apple is maybe pretty focused. Kind of. ???? But we did also recently have a thread about how — leaving the Genius Bar aside (that’s what I’m now calling the Touch Bar, because Apple are clearly geniuses for confining touch to a bar, rather than letting you smear your greasy mitts all over Apple’s gleaming screens) — Apple’s laptop lineup lacks the focus it did just a few years ago.
In fact, you could argue that focus CAN (not always, but CAN) result in MORE products. Isn’t that part of the friction that so many people here have expressed? That Apple’s reaching for wider circles of users with fewer products has resulted in less focus overall? Some Nike shoes HAVE to have cleats, and some have to NOT have cleats, or there’s no point in staying in the athletic shoe business.
For what its worth, Nike no longer makes most of its money from shoes, athletic or otherwise, any more than Apple makes most of its money from computers. Ironically, a 2015 article called “How Nike Makes Its Money” describes the company’s strategy as “Just Do Everything.” The biggest pile of their money comes from the crap you wear when you (don’t ever, ever, ever) go to the gym that isn’t shoes — consumer shorts, tank tops, sweats, etc.
Among athletic shoes, Chucks are pretty much the opposite of Air Jordans, but that sure didn’t stop Nike from buying Converse in 2003. Nike’s growing faster, but Converse is indeed growing too. Neither are growing as fast as good ol’ mesh tank tops. Turns out that the widening of the product line is what’s driving Nike’s growth.
Focus vs. spray, good stuff vs. crappy stuff — pretty slippery considerations over time.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up