-
One Year Later, redux: Apple, FCPX and The Perfect Roll-out
-
[Tim Wilson] “I’m not saying that any of this was GOOD, or done for any right reasons other than the ones I mentioned: he wanted it to look and act like Apple, and he wanted it to do something completely new.”
My point is that this works with consumer products because SJ was a consumer, he could understand their wants and needs without feedback because his feedback was all the guid he needed. This does not work with technical specialist software – neither SJ nor R. Ubilos is an editor and knows what would make for a “visionary” editing experience. They can make Imovie, a hobbyist editor, because they are hobbyists. To think that the same holds true for pro NLE editing is to think he could design a commercial airliner because he used flight simulator.
I am in no way saying your incorrect as to what actually happened at Apple. I am saying calling the rollout a “success” needs a redefinition of the word.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “I am merely pointing out that it is sometimes very Apple not to question interface assumptions. That they chose to do it here cannot be explained by the argument “but they always do that” when quite clearly they don’t “always do that.””
They almost always do it with totally new products. Compare iOS to classic PalmOS, for instance — the latter brought over all sorts of desktop interface conventions like drop-drop and popup menus and desktop-style scrollbars. iOS is much more radical departure from traditional desktop UI conventions.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Herb Sevush] “Oh, I see, you think the only changes coming down the pike will come from Apple. I’m going to guess that simplified “one click” software distribution is going to be commonplace soon, from everyone. Your so living in the past.”
If you believe Media Composer or Photoshop CS6 are showing up in the Mac or Metro app stores, you’re not aware of the restrictions Apple and Microsoft are imposing on developers. This would not be a trivial undertaking.
We’ve seen Adobe’s next big play in distribution — it’s ‘Creative Cloud’. They don’t want to join the Apple or Microsoft app store ecosystems, they want to go off and build their own thing. I’m sure their thinking is that their apps are sufficiently important and high-profile that they don’t need to benefits that come with being in a platform’s app store — but they’re creating an additional barrier for new users.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “I don’t agree with most of your premises in the paragraph above Chris. Your appraisal of Smoke as a “high-end only” product is no longer accurate. “
It’s nearly 12 times the price of FCP X, and while its UI has been improved, most new users are still going to bounce right off of it. I would be seriously surprised if as many as 5% of editors routinely cut in Smoke three years from now.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “They almost always do it with totally new products.”
We seem to be talking in circles here. Yes they take the opportunity to rethink totally new products, but FCP was not a new product. They *chose* to make it a new product because they *chose* to rethink it. It was the market leader, it needed a 64 bit upgrade, it was not a new product and they specifically chose to throw all that out when it was not the case that they did that with other applications. As is the case with Itunes they can also chose not to create new products. So it is not the case that they “always do it” – and changing language from “rethinking” to “creating new products” doesn’t change the truth of the situation.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[David Roth Weiss] “Sorry Chris, but you’re info is not up to date, at least per Adobe. If I sell you Production Premium today, I have the option of selling you the retail package or the download from Adobe. So, whatever benefit you just gave to X in that regard no longer applies.”
Selling downloadable apps from a web site (where users have to enter credit card information and download and navigate and installer) is not remotely the same thing as selling apps from an OS-integrated app store (which already has user billing information and from which an app can be installed with one or two clicks). The difference might seem trivial to tech-savvy computer folks, but it’s far from trivial, and so are its market implications.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “If you believe Media Composer or Photoshop CS6 are showing up in the Mac or Metro app stores, you’re not aware of the restrictions Apple and Microsoft are imposing on developers.”
No, what I’m saying is “one click” software distribution will not be limited to any current ap store. The distribution possibilities are endless, why do you think we/ve arrived at the end game?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “We seem to be talking in circles here. Yes they take the opportunity to rethink totally new products, but FCP was not a new product. They *chose* to make it a new product because they *chose* to rethink it.”
FCP X was a totally new product because Apple had to rewrite it for technical reasons.
[Herb Sevush] “It was the market leader, it needed a 64 bit upgrade,”
This is misleading. There was no way to ‘port’ the existing FCP codebase to 64-bit, the way Adobe presumably moved Premiere Pro to 64-bit. Classic FCP was written directly on top of, and heavily tied into, Carbon/QuickTime APIs that will never be available in the 64-bit world. Yes, Apple did have the option of writing a totally new Cocoa app that was extremely similar to the old Carbon app (they did this with the Finder in Snow Leopard), but one way or the other the thing needed a rewrite, not an ‘upgrade’. Given Apple’s MO, it was predictable that they would take the opportunity to rethink some things.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Herb Sevush] “No, what I’m saying is “one click” software distribution will not be limited to any current ap store. The distribution possibilities are endless, why do you think we/ve arrived at the end game?”
Err… you can’t do one-click installs unless you already have users’ billing information and you have installer infrastructure already on their computers. Operating system vendors have this (well, Apple has it, Microsoft will have it). Third-party developers who eschew OS vendor app stores are going to be at a disadvantage vs. those who have products and business models that work with them.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
Adobe has a similar systems in place with the AdobeID system. I have been downloading the CS starting with CS4, I believe.
I’m not saying that the App Store is easier or harder, but Adobe has this system in place and Creative Cloud will probably make it even more streamlined. They also have easier Volume Licensing if you’re in to that sort of thing.
For Herb, I would also encourage you to watch Adobe’s presentation that steamed today and perhaps gain some insight as to where content creation MIGHT be heading, obviously it’s not from an Apple perspective.
Apple isn’t the only one that’s thinking about content creation “ecosystems”. They aren’t doing it quite like Apple, but they certainly aren’t not thinking different, if you can follow that double negatory.
Jeremy
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up