-
A bit worried about Apple – would like some feedback
-
[Jeremy Whaley] “The truth about FCPx, as I see it, is probably that this is a great software that will help a lot of wanna be video producers have a lot of fun doing videos and take their videos to the next level. Eventually it may even be an amazing pro application. BUT IT’S NOT FINAL CUT! Where Apple went wrong here, and why the outrage is so intense, is they promised “an amazing new Final Cut Pro”. And like some many have said, what they delivered is the end of their actual FCP application that could do something powerful, and replaced it with imovie deluxe. ”
They did not. They replaced it with an application that is, in broad strokes, a very worthy successor to FCP 7… but that is, in its first iteration, missing a handful of features film/broadcast folks need. Some of those folks, as a consequence of those missing features, some superficial similarities with the iMovie interface, and a whole lot of preexisting paranoia, have completely freaked out.
What people need to understand is that developers have different priorities at different stages in an app’s lifecycle. Apple’s priority with the initial release of FCP X was to get a solid foundation in place, and deliver a feature set sufficient to make the app useful to the median FCP user (who is not a film/broadcast editor). They have done this. This required a huge amount of work: creating a new media framework and rendering engine, working through all the details of the new metadata-based footage organization system and connection-oritend timeline, etc.
Now they can turn their attention to adding features for the film/broadcast market (what everyone keeps calling the “pro” market, though it’s only a small fraction of the people who get paid to edit video). And the FAQ, while light on details, indicates that they’re doing precisely this.
YES – Maybe you are correct that they have a new foundation, but my point is it’s a NEW SOFTWARE. Change the name, continue support for FCP7 and Apple would have been seen as a genius. Instead they’re trying to stop a social media outcry!
-
[Jeremy Whaley] “YES – Maybe you are correct that they have a new foundation, but my point is it’s a NEW SOFTWARE. Change the name, continue support for FCP7 and Apple would have been seen as a genius. Instead they’re trying to stop a social media outcry!”
I agree they should have left FCS3 on sale. But I still don’t think a name change was really necessary. Or, rather, it got a name change. It’s not FCP anymore, it’s FCP X. Yes, I know the X is theoretically the version number, but a) that version number is fictitious (it’s a 1.0 release of a new app) and b) as with OS X they’re going to leave the X there basically forever and just increment the decimal (this is already spelled out in the section of the license agreement dealing with minor/major updates). The X is really part of the name, and is clearly intended to signal the same kind of radical transition as Mac OS X.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
Chris, we have disagreed on many things in the past two weeks, but I think these points you’ve made are right on. I see that a few people have disliked this post, but I hope that they can see that these are true:
[Chris Kenny] “First, the app is, in fact, targeted at the median Final Cut Pro user. Folks doing feature film or broadcast work, like most of us on this forum, just have a very unclear picture or who the median FCP user is.”
[Chris Kenny] “Second, having shipped an app that targets the median user, Apple is immediately proceeding to fill in feature gaps”
The big open questions are:
- How many of these feature gaps will be filled?
- How long it will take to fill them?
- What will happen to the disenfranchised FCP users who need these features today?
- How will Apple’s competitors react?
- Will the “professional” editorial market function differently than the consumer markets do?
- Will FCPX’s crossover appeal continue to affect how Apple develops it?
- If so, will that harm broadcast/film editors at the expense of larger editorial market segments?
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
I wouldn’t sell just yet, I think Apple may just survive this PR disaster.
Steve Connor
Adrenalin TelevisionHave you tried “Search Posts”? Enlightenment may be there.
-
Here’s an excerpt from Canada’s “Glob & Mail” newspaper (Toronto-based) that was printed in their “Report on Business” insert, March 22, 2011:
It’s a myth that the return of the Prodigal Geek [Jobs] triggered an instant reversal in fortune. In 1997, as the tech industry was soaring, Apple lost more than $1 billion. The iMac gave the company a brief lift, but by the early 2000s, Mac sales had flatlined again. Apple was no longer bleeding, but it still wasn’t very profitable.
What saved Apple over the next few years was not Jobs, but the rampant theft of music online—and the failure of a fat-and-complacent Microsoft to conjure up a device and music service to compete with the iPod and iTunes. The music industry jumped aboard the iTunes phenomenon, in the belief that getting a few dimes from Apple was better than getting nothing from music pirates. Even then, it wasn’t until 2005 that Apple earned a $1-billion profit. This year, profit is expected to crack $20 billion.
The full article: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/is-apple-once-again-riding-for-a-fall/article1951654/
WAS published over three months ago, and has, obviously nothing to do with the X-edition of Final Cut. But something is bad at the bottom of that barrel.
I’ve only been in the Apple game since 2005 (well, after a holiday in-between hand-building an Apple ][e out of a Radio Shack supply) but since coming back, because Final Touch looked like a viable alternative to $1M dollar grade suites, it quickly became apparent to me, and not just this spring, but years ago, that quoting myself … Apple is going to have to decide if its a computer company or a record store.
Well, I guess they have chosen.
jPo
You mean “Old Ben”? Ben Kenobi?
-
[Jeremy Whaley] “YES – Maybe you are correct that they have a new foundation, but my point is it’s a NEW SOFTWARE. Change the name, continue support for FCP7 and Apple would have been seen as a genius. Instead they’re trying to stop a social media outcry!”
I thought of this too. But the truth is that if Apple had done this, it would only ever be considered a niche editor and Pros would never have looked at it. It would be denigrated as “Advanced iMovie for the plebs” (as it has anyway).
I don’t like the way they HAVE done this, but I see why.
____
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”
-
Pretty much solidified the road I was beginning to take with Apple. I’ll never buy another Apple product again.
-
@ Jeremy.
Here is a solution for your dislike of the Apple Store:
https://www.theonion.com/video/new-apple-friend-bar-gives-customers-someone-to-ta,17693/I’m surprised the Onion hasn’t been able to do more with Apple, or maybe its just too easy, like making Broadway.com jokes about Les Mis or Wicked or Phantom.
But this one still resonates:
https://www.theonion.com/video/sony-releases-new-stupid-piece-of-shit-that-doesnt,14309/
Warning:
(Not office friendly).Oh, and I correct my statement re: Sirius Cybernetics… it was the marketing department who were the bunch of mindless jerks.
jPo
You mean “Old Ben”? Ben Kenobi?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up