-
FCP X Six Months Later – Blog Post
-
[Craig Seeman] “[Chris Harlan] “It is equally silly to wonder if cell phones and tablets are pro or not. If they are useful in business, they will be used in business. In any way that they can be used. Right?”
Thank you very much for arguing my point. There are MANY here who keep saying Apple has become a “consumer” company. That’s absolutely false IMHO. I believe Jobs also said they would simply make the best product and the end users would use.”
Yes, I’m arguing your point. But I’m also saying you don’t have a point to argue. You are hung up on semantics. Are pens consumer or professional devices? Who cares?
[Craig Seeman] “[Chris Harlan] “The argument “If iPhone, then FCP X” is not a valid one.”
It certainly is valid.”
No. It is not. It might be true, but the argument itself is not. By the rules of logic, it just isn’t.
It might work out that way, but it is just a possibility. Maybe people are going to edit on their phones. Maybe they are going to find it a hassle. Maybe the Google pad will eclipse the iPad in the next couple of years. Maybe all kinds of things. What you put forward is a possibility that can be disrupted by many other possibilities.[Craig Seeman] “Seriously, think this thing through. Apple is about ecosystems. Apple is not a consumer company. Apple has become a “commodity” company with a different and more profitable business model in commodification.
Before analyzing anything, look at Apple’s business model, please.
“Damn, you can be condescending. I value your point of view, Craig. Very much. But you also often talk in the type of grand absolutes that I find more than a bit illusory. There is a sharp difference between possible and inevitable.
-
[Walter Soyka] “I think Apple would resist your commodity characterization very strongly. “
They wouldn’t like the characterization but I can’t think another business model to analyze them under. They seem to be looking for higher volume, lower component cost model.
They aren’t sacrificing quality for the sake of price per se but every step they take, especially when you look at supply chain purchasing (and Tim Cooke’s specialty is supposedly in supply chain management), that seems to be the direction.[Walter Soyka] “unless you think the iPhone is just another cell phone, you’d have to agree.”
iPhone 3GS free with 2 year account from ATT, iPhone 4 $99, 4S is certainly price competitive with Android. Again, it’s NOT that Apple looks to make the cheapest phone. They look for high volume and controls over components that drive down cost. That direction is “commodification” in my book.
While they’re not going to make a Kindle Fire but if you look at iPad pricing against anything close to feature competitive you can see how Apple’s price compares well against the competitors. Apple is moving beyond the days of “overpriced” IMHO.
MacBook Airs are also a sales leader in the category. Again, they’re not looking to make the cheapest but when you compare price performance and volume sales, this is not a high priced niche product.
While iPhone isn’t “just another phone,” iPad “just another tablet.” MacBook Air “just another netbook” they are high volume sellers and rather than increase costs with “kitchen sink” (kitchen sync?”) every possible hardware addition, they’ve trimmed the hardware and negotiate high volume component purchases and, in some cases, invest in component manufacturing.
-
[Craig Seeman] “They wouldn’t like the characterization [of commodification] but I can’t think another business model to analyze them under. They seem to be looking for higher volume, lower component cost model.”
Selling high volumes at low cost doesn’t make an item a commodity. You’re misusing a technical term. Just because Apple has been more successful at moving their highly-differentiated products into the market doesn’t mean they’re giving up differentiation and moving toward commodification.
Commodity items are fungible, which means that they can be freely substituted for one another. It doesn’t matter if you put Mobil, Shell, Hess, or BP products in your car; they’re all gasoline, and there’s very little room for differentiation.
The iPhone, on the other hand, is highly differentiated from other phones: it’s got the carefully curated Apple user experience and it’s got the Apple ecosystem. It cannot be simply substituted with another product.
The products that Apple integrates (screens, ICs, etc.) are commodities (and have been for decades), but they products that Apple sells (iPhones, iPads, Macs, etc.) are not.
I agree with your point that Apple is moving toward higher volume sales, but their core philosophy is unchanged: make good, highly-differentiated products that aren’t necessarily based on current user needs or product pre-conceptions.
FCP Classic and the Pro Apps of the early 2000s were the aberration, in that they were products built specifically for the current needs of an existing set of users.
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 -
[Chris Harlan] “Are pens consumer or professional devices? Who cares? “
Then I can say the same for the future of FCPX. It’s not a “consumer” product. It will be used by those who find it useful. I expect that to be Professionals. I expect its market share to improve as its features improve and as the OS integrates features that improve Server and SAN use and meta data flexibility.
If Consumer vs Pro is moot then it is moot. Thank You. I’m glad you don’t care. You’ve shattered many of the arguments on this forum. Thank you.
[Chris Harlan] “Maybe the Google pad will eclipse the iPad in the next couple of years.”
Currently Gannett seems to be purchasing iPhones and iPads and one would expect a compatible facile workflow. Facility (ease of use) is the point of using iPhones and iPads. It’s certainly not that their quality competes with professional shoulder mount ENG cameras.
[Chris Harlan] “There is a sharp difference between possible and inevitable.”
But when possible actually starts to happen, whether it be purchasing iPhones for ENG use or the expansion of online episodic television, the next steps become a bit clearer in the short term at least. Certain trends are quantifiable. Next steps after that involve prediction. If you think there’s any truth to ‘I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been” analogy Apple is either trying to predict or control (a combination of both actually) so Apple certainly considers that a viable business model. Again that’s why I say follow Apple’s business model. They are trying to predict (and control) the future and I’m speculating on what they are involved in. If Apple just sold thousands of iPhones and iPads to Gannett, then they certainly have the puck. It doesn’t mean they’ve won the game nor even determine the value of this particular score . . . but it’s an indicator. I examine indicators.
Granted the sale is rumor but we’ll know soon enough but:
Gannett, a major journalism publishing company . . . who also provided venture capital to Mogulus/Livestream.com is now buying Apple iPhones and iPads for journalists . . . may well have been the kind of think Apple was anticipating.When I see companies like Vizrt doing this:
https://www.vizrt.com/products/viz_reporter/There’s changes taking place in ENG as well as live news. Again it’s not going to replace the shoulder mount camera. It’s just that it expands journalistic accessibility to fast and live reporting.
Just maybe Apple sees high volume sales of FCPX based systems to people editing the increasing volume of iOS created content . . . from professional journalists.
-
Hey. Its all possible.
-
[Chris Harlan] “Hey. Its all possible.”
I’m just trying to connect the dots in guessing why Apple is doing what it’s doing. I have no idea if they’ll hit their mark. Sometimes when skating where the puck will be, you end up out of position due to an unanticipated event.
I’d guess Apple sees more pieces to the evolving puzzle than I do think they saw a direction and they’re trying to get their first. Then again please raise your digital digits if you’ve used Ping regularly or even a few times. If you ask what Ping is . . . there’s certainly no guarantee Apple is sending the puck in the right direction.
I do find where ENG seems to going/expanding given CNN’s moves regarding iReport and apparently this now from Gannett, very interesting.
-
If a post house sees a well edited reel from an applicant their first question may be “what did you edit this on” and when they say FCPX, I think the answer will be “You did THIS on THAT? You’re a better editor than I thought.” It’s not about the interface, it’s about the talent in orchestrating pictures, sound and emotion in a real time experience.
If you were applying for a job at a post house or broadcast/theatrical job they sure as hell care what you did it on because they’re all Avid. If it takes you nine days to cut the first scene of a show because you don’t know the software your job security will be in serious jeopardy.
FCP7 had a chance of changing things. It was headed for total dominance. ‘Psych’ was cut on FCP7. Movie & TV editors were starting to embrace the software. But FCPX squashed all that. It’s buggy, missing important features, and hampered by presets.
Boy, now I’m really depressed…
Every frame has its own unique place in space and time.
-
[Nelson Torres] ” It was headed for total dominance. ‘Psych’ was cut on FCP7. Movie & TV editors were starting to embrace the software”
Not sure that’s correct, FCP only had a tiny fraction of the Feature and the larger broadcasters market. Perhaps that’s why Apple moved in a different direction?
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
-
A number of independent producers and production companies were using FCP 7 and while it seemed to have a bit more of a foothold on the east coast, institutionally you are quite correct. The FCP presence there was (and is) minimal.
Tim
-
[Steve Connor] “Not sure that’s correct, FCP only had a tiny fraction of the Feature and the larger broadcasters market. Perhaps that’s why Apple moved in a different direction?
“Much smaller, yes. Tiny, no. At least here in LA. In fact, it was just passing the point where you could drop the “much” off of “much smaller” when FCP X arrived.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up