- April 20, 2012 at 4:47 am
Just got back from NAB 2012, and lots of people asked me, ” If you hadn’t changed yet, would you still make the same decision today to switch to Avid ?” My answer? “Unequivocally, YES I would.”
There were plenty of announcements of new products, lower price points, and promising technology at this year’s NAB. I saw heated competition in the NLE arena on land and even more so in the CLOUD. But the fact remains, one year later, FCP -X is still not a viable replacement for how we currently use FCP 7. So, yes, in my situation, I would still have to conclude that I can NOT wait for the required features we need to appear in “X”.
To all of the passionate supporters of “X”, I say “Good for you.” I’m glad that you’re able to work with it. For me, and the kind of projects (or is it events?) that we do, there are still too many missing pieces of the puzzle.
I hold no grudge. I have no hard feelings. It’s NOT personal. It’s business.
- April 20, 2012 at 5:14 am
Interesting Mark. Is that partly because AVID is working now and CS6 is still unproven or is there something about AVID in your workflow that puts it ahead anyway.
MC6 or Symphony?
- April 20, 2012 at 5:20 am
Hey Mark – great to meet you at the AJA booth. There was a lot of NLE buzz at NAB for sure – Smoke seemed to completely steal Avid’s Symphony thunder and Premiere was everywhere.Thinking back to last year and the FCPX Supermeet takeover and June release fiasco – I wonder how many facilities that were FCP7 would have just waited it out if Apple had kept X under wraps until this year and shown 10.04 as the new FCP? Would all of the them still have switched or would more be making the transition to X? Not in your facilities case but in general?
Writer, Editor, Director
- April 20, 2012 at 5:57 am
Delaying shipment for another year wasn’t an option. Too much pressure to Ship… something, anything. So in Vegas terms, we end up with an Elvis impersonator, rather than the King himself. Even a year later, with the updates and “restored” features currently available, my decision stands. Moving forward, you have to answer two questions: WHEN will it do what I need? and… will it EVER do what I need. I think putting $100 on the craps table gives you better odds than the likelihood of guessing the answers to those two questions.
- April 20, 2012 at 8:43 am
Business for Apple meant releasing FCPX in its infancy so newbies can grow with it. Newbies who don’t know/care about NAB or what prose use. It’s $299 plus a Mac that makes Apple phat with this NLE. The silent majority has “spoken” and reportedly FCPX sells pretty well on the App Store. Apple know$ wha$$up!
- April 20, 2012 at 12:58 pm
[Mark Raudonis] ” It’s NOT personal. It’s business.”
It’s business for me to.
The odds seemed stacked a year ago and they seem even more stacked now.
Apple can afford to give edit software away for free. That’s tough to compete with if you can’t do the same.
It would be like AT&T saying that they are going to start editing for people for 20 bucks.
They would still do their phone crap, but just jump in our mix also. That would be bad for me.
It seems like AVID needs to blow the doors off fc to stay, and I don’t see them doing that.
- April 20, 2012 at 1:50 pm
[Lance Bachelder] “I wonder how many facilities that were FCP7 would have just waited it out if Apple had kept X under wraps until this year and shown 10.04 as the new FCP?”
The SCRI numbers (which show no market share erosion for Apple) and what we’re seeing from our clients seems to suggest most people did just wait it out. Is this really that surprising? Editors/facilities often take a year or more just to install incremental updates to their current editing systems. That implies that a) there was no reason to expect FCP X to spark a sudden large-scale migration to other NLEs and b) even if FCP X 10.0.0 had shipped with more conventional features and had a more conventional interface it probably still would have seen very little immediate high-end adoption.
I said this last year — that because the high-end market wasn’t, for the most part, going to do anything very quickly, FCP X’s 10.0.0 feature set probably wasn’t going to be a big problem as long as Apple diligently filled in the more important gaps over the subsequent months — which they were saying they would do, and which they have now actually done.
Meanwhile, of course, Apple has sold a lot of copies of FCP X to the (much larger) mid-range market, to the point where they’re saying FCP X already has more users overall than FCP. And given its App Store ranking, it’s probably one one of the best-performing Mac app in the world in terms of revenue. This makes it pretty hard to fault Apple’s strategy of shipping a mid-range product ASAP and only subsequently adding higher-end workflow features.
Yes, they took a bit of a PR hit in forums like this in the process, but did this really do widespread long-term damage? Will a significant number of high-end FCP 7 customers for whom X is a good choice on its merits really choose something else as they finally do start to migrate away from 7 just because X had a rocky introduction that’s now more than a year in the past? I was always skeptical of this. Internet firestorms around Apple products aren’t all that rare, and never seem to hurt sales much.
I guess we’ll find out over the next 18 months or so.
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.
- April 20, 2012 at 2:31 pm
[Lemur Hayop] “Newbies who don’t know/care about NAB or what prose use.”
Unless they want to get into the business…move to Hollywood or NY or other major market and find work. Then they want to know what the pros use. But if they are doing their own thing…FCX is fine.
I too think it has come a long way, and if Apple released FCX 10.0.3…the features that it has in 10.0.3, the reaction would have been a lot different. I wouldn’t have thought they didn’t care about the pro market. But now it is too late, I’m back to Avid for most of my broadcast work for more than one reason (still using tape being a big factor), and FCP 7 and Adobe CS6 for the rest.
I think that FCX 10.0.4 is great software, and that many will get great use from it. I, like Mark (because we do pretty much the same sort of TV…but I to TV docs) find that Avid MC6/Symphony 6 better suit our needs.
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def
- April 20, 2012 at 2:31 pm
[Chris Kenny] “Yes, they took a bit of a PR hit in forums like this in the process, but did this really do widespread long-term damage? Will a significant number of high-end FCP 7 customers for whom X is a good choice on its merits really choose something else as they finally do start to migrate away from 7 just because X had a rocky introduction that’s now more than a year in the past?”
You keep referring to “forums like this” as if this is the only place that has anything negative to say about X. I don’t know what its like in NYC, but here in LA that is far from reality.
And “really choose something else?” “Migrate away?” FCP X is something else. The only thing it has in common with FCP 7 are the words “Final Cut Pro.” Using other companies’ software is actually a closer experience to using FCP 7, than using X. How is choosing X not choosing something else? How is going with it NOT migrating away from FCP 7.
I’m open to finding and using the benefits of FCP X, but right now its missing a lot of little tools that help me do my work, especially in audio, but also in basic things like sync indicators. And Roles may work, and hooray for someone who likes the approach, but they don’t work for me.
- April 20, 2012 at 3:00 pm
[Chris Kenny] “Will a significant number of high-end FCP 7 customers for whom X is a good choice on its merits really choose something else as they finally do start to migrate away from 7 just because X had a rocky introduction that’s now more than a year in the past?”
I work at what I feel is a fairly large broadcast production facility (Approx. 40 FCP seats in full-service editing suites, with another 40+ seats as offline “producer” seats), and as of right now we’re not planning any other major Apple software purchases. While some of the producers or departments on their own may choose to migrate to FCPX, there is no over-arching plan to convert our FCP seats to FCPX. Instead the plan is, as machines and suites enter their upgrade cycles, to transition over to Adobe. This can be done as a pretty seamless transition process over the course of the next two-plus years since PPro will run on both Macs and PC’s, so there is no need to replace all the Mac hardware with PC’s and PPro at once. Additionally, Apple notebooks are still top-rank, so it would be nice to have the option of both platforms for the foreseeable future. In the end though, the years of Apple spurning our requests for forward-looking information and roadmaps has taken it’s toll, and FCPX was the nail in the coffin that Apple created for themselves. We’re tired of waiting for “secret” hardware updates (i.e., new Mac Pro’s), and also tired of being left out of the feedback loop on their software roadmap. At the moment, Adobe is listening, Apple is not, so it’s really not a difficult decision on our part.
Log in to reply.