-
Screenlight: Will Accounting Woes at Avid Spark Big Changes or an Acquisition?
-
[Chris Kenny] “There has been a fairly extensive discussion about why I believe Avid needs to consider a ground up rewrite, and your post pretty much ignores all of it.”
Yes, I’ve been following it, but I choose not to get into the nitty-gritty of it, largely because I don’t agree. It’s easy to offer suggestions of why something should change, especially when you don’t use or like it. While I do agree that a lot can be improved, the suggestions offered don’t necessarily hold water. For example, complaints about applying effects. That’s funny, because the process for applying effects in MC is pretty much the same as in X. Open a palette, apply an effect, open an inspector, move sliders. Quite frankly I think both methods (MC and FCP X) are poor.
[Chris Kenny] “Twelve years after the OS X transition, if we think about what that would look like, I think it’s very clear it would have been a huge mistake”
While I agree, you should also note we lost something in the move from OS9, such as the ability for the users to greatly customize the OS to their liking. The benefit is a more solid, buttoned-down OS.
[Chris Kenny] “I believe that Avid is making such a mistake right now.”
You may be absolutely right. However, it’s far easier for Apple to do so with FCP X because it can financially afford to treat ProApps like a hobby. I’m not saying that it does – just that it has that luxury. Avid doesn’t.
I think Avid’s problems have very little to do with whether MC needs to be more rewritten more than it has been.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Of course its that way, Brett. You just can’t see it.
Actually, if you’d been following the thread you might have noticed that my rather harsh remarks were in response to a squabble Chris Kenny and I were having over Avid’s UI, and that my response was really about some of his notions about what Avid users can and cannot see about their own software. So, it was meant to be an outrageous, over-the-top statement.
As to the rest of your extrapolations, I do’t quite understand where you are coming from. I don’t think X is a toy. I relish documentaries. I will do any kind of work that is available to me. I don’t quite understand your explosion.
As to X’s UI–yes, it is a bit candy-like for my taste. I find the animations wasteful. Is it a deal breaker? No.
-
[Chris Kenny] “Even if that were the case, replacing code one ‘module’ at a time doesn’t really provide an opportunity to rethink the basic structure of an app, which is a big part of what Media Composer, in my opinion, requires.”
Luckily, not everyone shares your view.
-
[Oliver Peters] “I think Avid’s problems have very little to do with whether MC needs to be more rewritten more than it has been.
“Yes! I think making Avid X would be the final bullet in the brain pan.
-
Good point Aindreas, let’s ban colourists from expressing an opinion
Steve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I kind of don’t get why a colorist comes in and starts lecturing the room on anything he can think of.”
Good point. What could a colorist, online editor and post facility owner, who regularly uses all of the major NLE environments as part of complex workflows, has software development experience, and has considerable knowledge about the history of the computing industry, possibly have to say about video editing software or the future of video editing?
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Oliver Peters] “I think Avid’s problems have very little to do with whether MC needs to be more rewritten more than it has been.”
Technically true, in the sense that MC isn’t actually a huge fraction of Avid’s revenue. Avid’s downturn really started as commodity hardware got powerful enough to displace their specialized hardware. That trend is ongoing and irreversible.
But finding a wider market for their video editing software could perhaps help offset some of that.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “Good point. What could …. video editing?”
I’m not piling on here, so forgive the question. You seem to be a fan of FCP X. No problem, but for the sake of clarity, how much seat time do you have editing with it in a client-supervised environment?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Chris Harlan] “Yes! I think making Avid X would be the final bullet in the brain pan.”
That’s exactly the problem. Given the likely reaction from Avid’s present user base, that might very well be the case. But the alternative is for Avid to slowly waste away. This is not a prediction — it’s what has been happening for years now.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “Avid’s downturn really started as commodity hardware got powerful enough to displace their specialized hardware.”
Agreed. Hardware is a factor for the make up of the company in its current situation. That’s why BMD chooses to give away Resolve, but limit the I/O to BMD cards, plus selling very expensive panels. I doubt they make money on Resolve software outright.
[Chris Kenny] “But finding a wider market for their video editing software could perhaps help offset some of that.”
Doubtful, unless there’s a huge restructuring. Look at Autodesk. They can afford to do what they have with Smoke, because M&E is a small chunk of Autodesk and editing/effects an even smaller portion within M&E.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up