[Herb Sevush]

And it will in Lion.

Without a dot point upgrade to FCP7?

Keep dreaming.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

Two years ago, the “Apple doesn’t care about pros” crowd was using the lack of an FCP rewrite as its primary evidence in favor of that position… yet someone, when it was confirmed Apple was rewriting FCP, their position never got reconsidered.

No, it turns out they were totally correct. Apple didn’t re-write FCP, they created, as you have rightly been calling it, an entirely new ap and stuck FCP’s name on it. I am still awaiting the FCP re-write – it’s just that it will probably be written by Adobe.

If you look at the technical issues involved with moving projects over, it’s clear that while it could be done, it couldn’t be done well.

Of course, as even you have agreed on previous posts, this was totally within Apple’s control. If they wanted to create an Ap that was upgradeable they would have. This is proof of their re-targeting. They knew this was important to their facilities base but they didn’t care enough to incorporate it into their new design.

I believe Apple fully intends for existing users to move over by simply continuing to work on FCP 7 projects in FCP 7 during a transitional period.

Then why did they EOL FCP7? How does that make it easier to continue working along side FCPX. This is the part you really REFUSE to look at.

I’ve seen elsewhere your repeating the nonsense about running FCP7 on Lion. There has never been a single operating system upgrade from Apple that didn’t result in multiple bugs and editing problems over time; they all had to be addressed by a dot point upgrade, but now with Lion everything is going to be perfect right off the bat? BS. Personally I am no longer doing ANY upgrades for ANY Apple software on my primary editing system for fear of crashes.

It’s true that some shops may need to regularly reuse sequences or portions of sequences from projects years old, but most do not.

But I do.

“The fact that this doesn’t seem important to you is simply proof of your youth and inexperience.”
Kind of hilarious in a post that you start off by chiding me not to be patronizing.

It was intentional Chris, it’s called humor, based on giving you what you’ve been giving to others, glad you got the joke.

It is really not especially obvious that either of these vendors is less risky than Apple long-term.

I don’t trust Adobe precisely because Premier is not their main Ap, it’s the poor stepchild to AE and Photoshop, even in the Creative Suite. And Avid is the most vulnerable financially. Do you think I’d be this pissed off if I had a good option. If their was a good place to go, I’d already be gone.

I’ve edited with PP and while it’s OK it has some severe limitations for the way I work. I’ve never been a fan of Avid, editing on it feels liking f**king with a rubber. As for FCPX, when and if it get’s upgraded enough to mesh with my workflow I’ll evaluate it. So I can happily look forward to having to make a choice between the 3 little pigs in about a year. Thank you Apple.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

Chris –

I had resolved not to respond to your posts because it is pretty pointless, however I have to try this one last time.

You are obviously very knowledgeable and very helpful when you clear up misunderstandings about what FCPX can actually do, as opposed to the basic freak out that occurs when users try a new program.

However your offensive patronizing insistence that all the experienced editors on this board are behaving like children is so completely off base that I can’t reconcile it with the rest of your posts.

most of the panic has not been about what Apple has done

You couldn’t be more wrong. WE ARE ANGRY AT WHAT APPLE HAS DONE. They’ve killed FCP7 with no notice and with no replacement. FCPX is not yet a replacement. It is easier for a FCP7 editor to migrate to Premiere Pro than it is to migrate to FCPX and that is the way Apple wants it. That is a fact. They have no interest in any migration path for FCP7 users. If they did they would have built one. The fact that this doesn’t seem important to you is simply proof of your youth and inexperience.

people have convinced themselves that Apple no longer cares about high-end users,

We didn’t convince ourselves, Apple has convinced us.

and will not deliver software suitable for them in the future.

I have no idea what type of software Apple will produce in the future. The point is I no longer care.

to quote Simon Ubsdell:

“Contrari-wise we look at Apple (now) and we see a business that only happens by chance to be traveling the same path as we are. Somehow we have chosen to ignore this for a number of years – suddenly the truth of it is inescapable. We have everything to lose, they have virtually nothing. Whether or not they are committed to carrying on along the same path as us, we have been made aware of how precarious the relationship is on our side. We have been very lucky so far, but now we realize that it was indeed luck all along.”

I am not angry about FCPX. Until they come up with a serious multi-cam function it’s simply useless to me. I am very angry at the way Apple has treated me and my business. And I will infer from their actions a corporate direction that is no longer compatible with mine. As do many others. It’s a reasonable inference. Either that or I have to figure the folks at Apple are a bunch incompetent boobs when it comes to marketing their products. It’s one or the other.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

Because those are only “basics” to a very narrow slice of the overall programs user base.

But it is that narrow slice that is here on the Cow. We are that user base, and because there are others like us we can exchange information. And the information we are exchanging is that Apple is no longer interested in creating products for us.

Only work done in the “traditional workflow” model necessitates the tools you mention.

Correct again. And since that model will still be dominating the broadcast and film industries for at least the next 2 years, any product that doesn’t take that into account is by the definition of this small slice, not “pro.” Whether you can make money with it or not.

I’m sure there are many video forums around where the users are thrilled all to pieces with FCPX. It’s just that the editors on those forums are not producing network and cable tv shows and theatrically released features. No one is saying FCPX sucks, we’re saying it sucks for us.

(Actually some people are saying it sucks, but it flowed better the other way.)

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

Fredy –

Your being much to nice to David. If you swell his head it might mess with his golf game.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

She is very bright and has some real talent and had grown past Imovie which she found too limiting. FCPX seemed perfect for her. She’ll probably post something on Youtube that will make her famous and, if I’m lucky, I’ll be working for her within 2 years. Then I’ll have to eat my words and use X.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

DRW –

I even have a couple (of clients) who already are using FCP X on my recommendation

That’s nothin’. I just told a friend of mine to get his 12 year old daughter a copy of FCPX to do her school projects on. You know – the right tool for the right job.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

If you think Apple isn’t attempting something larger than FCPX you may be underestimating them.

I’m not underrating them, you may be entirely right about this. It’s just that it has nothing to do with my decision making in the next year. If Apple takes over the world, I’ll deal with it. I just hope they implement a nice multi-cam feature when they do.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

Does Avid depend on Apple Quicktime at all?

They use it, I don’t think they depend on it.

You do realize that their is a lot more to our business than editing – you know all those cameras, recorders, sound equipment thingies – The ONLY place in Broadcast /Film that Apple even has a presence is in post, and there they have just left the arena. Apple could disappear tomorrow and the Broadcast / Film industry would hiccup once and then move on.

This whole take that Apple is the master of broadcast / film media is laughable. It was only by playing up to, servicing and yes even fawning on the Film / Broadcast media that enabled Apple to get a foothold. Their ability to “steer” the industry ended when they just took a dump on it.

And yet this is all beside the point – you started this post by suggesting that those of us switching platforms should have second thoughts. Why? Nothing you have insinuated is going to happen for years. FCPX needs a year just to catch up with where it should have been, while the other “A’s” are moving forward. Even if your wildest imaginings are true it will take years to play out. Why then should someone trying to earn a dollar take that into consideration now, especially considering it’s mostly idle speculation.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Herb Sevush]

Matt –

At this point I’m definitely thinking of a platform switch, the idea of investing any money into Mac Pro’s seems very risky indeed.

On the other hand I have no doubt that if either Adobe or Avid get involved in AV Foundation products, those will be designed with pro editors in mind. This false notion that AV Foundation is the reason for the magnetic timeline or the lack of pro features is ridiculous.

Apple was switching to AV Foundation and they CHOSE that point to re-target their video products. One didn’t cause the other, but the fact that it happened simultaneously blinds people into believing a false causality.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions