-
Is FCP X part of your five year business plan?
-
[Andrew Kimery] “The final upgrade to version 7 in ’09 was anemic at best and looking back I think it’s clear the team at Apple had other priorities.”
I agree. The rumor that they had FCP 8 pretty much finished in 64bit then scrapped it at the last minute supports that statement.
It makes sense that they would make something completely different no longer having to create a GUI that makes it easier for editors to adapt from cutting film on flatbeds. (A kem was my first NLE) FCP X 10.0 is really the first version that Apple made completely on it’s own since legacy FCP was bought from Macromedia.
Other than gang sync there really isn’t anything I can’t do using FCPX that I could do in FCP 5-7.
-
[Herb Sevush] “What value does Unity/Isis have outside of it’s relationship to Media Composer?”
[Craig Seeman] “I do think it’s important to understand who the “money making” technology is in that relationship. I’m about to say something highly speculative but what should happen if Avid’s solution is to focus on Isis, it’s management utilities, services fees, and drop Media Composer and focus on working with other NLE developers with better integration. Neither Adobe or Apple have any kind of competing product.”
I would see that as a massive step down for Avid and for their customers.
Avid’s project sharing is a core strength that stems from the fundamental architecture of their system as a whole, spanning both the NLE client and the storage. They’re built for each other, and I don’t think Avid would be able to offer much to anybody with only half a system that they couldn’t get elsewhere.
Basically, I’m re-iterating Herb’s point. You may be right that Isis makes the money, but Herb was talking about value. Why do people buy Isis? Surely it’s not the Avid management utilities and service fees.
Also, I’m curious why you wouldn’t consider Adobe Anywhere to be a competing solution. Are you just talking about the hardware there?
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 Conlee] “neither company has a product that can take advantage of Isis like Media Composer”
[Chris Conlee] “I think Avid needs both to be successful and to differentiate themselves from the competition at a certain level.”Avid doesn’t need Media Composer so much as a way to facilitate other NLEa to use Isis. They need to sell more Isis, not Media Composer.
I’m not sure how much R&D Avid puts into Media Composer but I could see, if the company did a shake up, of focusing resources on developing for other NLEs and allowing MC to fade. Avid makes money on hardware and they may want to focus on expanding their potential hardware sales without depending on MC and the development resources that uses.
-
[Herb Sevush] “What would shock me speechless is if it offered those services while killing off MC.”
One of two things could happen in that regard. Avid allows MC to wither over time while it works with other NLEs to improve integration. Avid sells Media Composer to someone who wants to add an NLE and has the business model to profit from it. No they wouldn’t kill it immediately, they’d just create a framework so other NLEs can eventually do the same job as MC as far as integration is concerned. At that point they could EOL or sell MC.
Maybe not yet the best comparison but consider EditShare’s business model regarding integration. It’ll be interesting to see what really happens to Lightworks development over time regarding their efforts and/or open source.
-
We’re just gonna have to agree to disagree on this one, Craig. Media Composer has the best project sharing on the market, and the core Isis technology facilitates that. I don’t see Isis being of value to other NLEs beyond the basic shared storage; but it’s definitely overkill for that.
Chris
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Would Adobe and/or Apple want to play ball with Avid and collaborate by giving access to deep hooks inside PPro and FCPX? If not, what would differentiate Avid’s shared storage offerings from Promax and EditShare?”
Actually you point very well to Avid’s potential Achilles heal. Avid can assist Adobe and Apple or one of Avid’s competitors will. Avid may have to decide whether it’s better for them to do R&D for other NLEs vs R&D for MC. Keep in mind that Avid simply can’t continue doing what they’re doing and, amongst other hardware sales, have to find ways to expand Isis sales. At this point their “differentiation” isn’t doing well enough for them, it would seem. In fact, working towards multi NLE support may fend of EditShare encroachment over time.
-
[Walter Soyka] “Avid’s project sharing is a core strength that stems from the fundamental architecture of their system as a whole, spanning both the NLE client and the storage. They’re built for each other, and I don’t think Avid would be able to offer much to anybody with only half a system that they couldn’t get elsewhere.”
And if Avid focuses on providing the tools so Adobe and Apple users can hook in, they can expand their Isis sales.
I personally have to wonder why Avid tried to cut MC prices to sale to user base that has no interest in Isis. I don’t think Avid can make MC a money maker. It’s the wrong direction for them. Given they have limited R&D resources in their current financial state, using that R&D to support other NLEs.
If Adobe starts to creep further into collaborative Broadcast and Cinema markets, Avid would benefit by supporting them (and FCPX if it get there eventually).
-
[Craig Seeman] “One of two things could happen in that regard. Avid allows MC to wither over time while it works with other NLEs to improve integration. Avid sells Media Composer to someone who wants to add an NLE and has the business model to profit from it. No they wouldn’t kill it immediately, they’d just create a framework so other NLEs can eventually do the same job as MC as far as integration is concerned.”
Let’s put this another way — why would anyone want Isis who didn’t have other options. If I were looking for a networked storage system for any NLE other than MC, Avid would be the last place I’d go. Their ONLY competitive advantage is the tie-in with MC – other than that they are simply the most expensive option out there, with the worst record for customer service. Without the demand for MC’s sharing capabilities in the large facility niche, Isis is dead. Separating MC from Isis when analyzing Avid is absurd. While it’s true you can use MC without Isis, it is, as you have pointed out, a money loosing situation, but you can’t sell any Isis units without it. The only way they grow Isis sales is by growing MC sales, which is why they will keep developing it.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Craig Seeman] “And if Avid focuses on providing the tools so Adobe and Apple users can hook in, they can expand their Isis sales.”
Isn’t that the other way around? Adobe and Apple would have to give Avid access to the underpinnings of their NLEs, right? EditShare and Promax, for example, keep playing a cat and mouse game with Avid in regards to project sharing. They figure out a way to mimic ISIS-like project sharing functionality and Avid breaks it with an update. They figure it out again and Avid breaks it again. And if Adobe and Apple are planing their own shared storage solutions then why would they help out Avid?
Speaking of EditShare and Promax, they have been around for years but, AFAIK, they’ve never officially partnered with Adobe or Apple (hence their picking up Lightworks)? What would make Avid any different? Maybe FCPX and PPro just aren’t built to be used in a shared storage, multi-editor environment like Avid is so there’s not much point in going down that path at all? It’s easy to have multi-editors share an Avid project since the saving happens at the bin level instead of the project level. When saving happens at the project level I think it becomes much more complicated to have multiple people share the same project.
PPro, for example, can’t open more than one project at a time but you can use the Media Browser to basically get read access to another project and view/copy contents as needed. Adobe’s approach seems to be every editor is an island but there’s built in, read-only tunnels connecting them all.
-
[John Davidson] “The number one thing on the list is exploring new avenues of creative and challenging myself and the team to never settle for passable work.”
That would make a perfect t-shirt ’cause it really is the hard part.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up