[Jim Giberti]

As a guy that owns a communications firm I have to ask, why the !*$# do they not take the time to explain that type of radical yet positive change as part of the process of introducing you countless users to your new paradigm?

Why should the people who pay (some of) your bills have to scratch their heads and have lights come on after lengthy use and discussion, when a simple explanation of key changes and their value would be so simple by the people who decided to make them?

Regardless of how x sugars out, Apple should be embarrassed at their horrid communication and PR regarding it.

[Jim Giberti]

Thanks Andy, I was asking specifically about Motion/Premiere integration and wondering if Adobe saw any value/possibility of Motion 5 publishing to PrP.

Ironically AE is no further behind than FCPX in the ability to import Motion projects.

[Jim Giberti]

Thanks Dennis, now I’m really intrigued…I mean that you imported a Motion project. I love what AE can do and it’s the tool that my team has always used for compositing and motion graphics. As creative director I interact daily with Dreamweaver, Ps, Ai and pretty much everything Adobe, but as a hands on tool, AE is my black hole. Maybe it’s destiny that I add it to to the mix.

I mentioned it before, but the very first non linear piece we produced was with Premiere 2.0 in ’92. Then I invested in Media 100 seats and then FCP. There would be a certain poetic justice to come full circle back to Premiere Pro.

[Jim Giberti]

I like this Aindreas.

[Jim Giberti]

Bill it was a joke and you are way too aggressive in your tone.
I understand that you’re angry about FCP X but take it down a notch or three.

[Jim Giberti]

Definitely a better creative approach than making it an enemy.

[Jim Giberti]

Actually Gary he’s not.
He doesn’t once mention the software being a hit – You did, not him.
He’s talking bout the buzz around the launch.
He offered an interesting non-judgemental thought posed in the form of a question

Bill’s simple (and as a communications strategist) accurate point is that it has created enormous buzz including by the COWs standards. And then he quoted an oft used PT Barnum reference, which we’ve used many times in political consulting – there’s no such thing as bad press.

These are general, broad points and that’s all Bill was reflecting on.

And his header ends with a question mark.

He posed an interesting question.
You responded with the same emotional responses that he’s pointing out including two personal comments about “grasping at straws” and that he needs more time before he posts.

If you’ve got a good point I, for one, would respect it more if your weren’t angry and personal in making it.

I’ve read a number of Bill’s posts and I don’t recall him ever responding that way.

[Jim Giberti]

I also think this little timeline contributed to Apple’s poor release strategy.
I certainly fit your point Andrew.

We did our first NLE film with the first PP and a Quadra 840AV.
We did a couple of other TV spots with it and that was the last time I even thought of PP after quickly moving to Media 100.

After moving to FCP v.1 I never even considered PP even though we have multiple seats of Adobe Suites.
It was after glancing at a piece on the Mercury Engine, native playback and some other things that I was getting tired of waiting for with FCP that I looked back at PP after about 15 years.

I think Apple was well aware that a lot of us were disenchanted after FCP 7’s ho hum release and that Adobe and Avid were offering much more competitive products.

I think that played into the “Hey look over here at the new 64 bit upgrade you’ve been waiting for” diversion at Super Meet. Show enough to look slick and innovative but don’t have any specifics at all about 3rd party and workflow integration. Divert your customer bases attention from the competition even though you know it’s not ready for professional use in many/most facilities.

They’ve been playing catch up since (like the recent new messaging comparing features to these competitors on the X page).

I think this is very calculated. People Like Larry J warned them of the fall out, which I doubt they needed be told. They made the decision to get it out as is and honestly did an astoundingly piss poor job of it.

I think the program deserves a lot better treatment than they gave it. They should have been very direct about it’s short comings so that the anger didn’t over shadow the potential.

Nice first generation/infant program.
Bush league release strategy and PR.

[Jim Giberti]

“The only questions left, IMO, is who needs to stay where editing IS for very defensible and sensible business reasons – who is ready to buy into the possibilities that FCP-X might hold for a better future – and who’s going to get STUCK unable to decide what they should do – and for how long.”

This pretty much sums it up Bill.
I didn’t need and wasn’t looking to make a professional decision of this importance right now.
“Stuck” is a pretty uncreative place though so I made the decision and fortunately all of our upcoming work fits within the initial limitations of X.

I know that we are fortunate vs a lot of our brethren (and sistren) who simply cannot use this software as it is and have to make tougher choices.

One thing I have to say about X in general though, it’s so different that it’s fun learning it.

[Jim Giberti]

The comments about this not being a professional tool are becoming old. I’m certainly a pro and make a good living much of it centered around FCP. Accepting the obvious missing features as understood, I can’t fathom how anyone spending serious time with X can think that Apple put all of this back end development into it for a lark or to attract soccer moms – it’s an absurd proposition.

This program was rewritten at 64 bits and at great cost for the future not to piss off editors. Now they’re launch and communication is a head scratcher in many ways, but in other ways not so much.

If you’re not comfortable with it then that’s understandable. I’ve vacillated on the subject. But now, after investing time into X (which on my schedule isn’t easy, so I’m a prime candidate to be resentful) I’m really liking it and the way I can interact with it, including grading and a lot of things I discover each day.

That’s because it’s not an amateur tool. It’s different but much of that difference is very smart and to dismiss it as lightweight and prosumer is off he mark. It’s deep.

Also calling their integrity into question (the shill theory) every time someone writes something positive about it is pretty tired. That could be suggested of every review of everyone who profits from anything, including all the folks who are now vocal proponents of PrP.

But I take them at their word as I do people who write intelligently of their FCP X experience.
If we want a free and honest flow of opinions and information it’s a good idea to encourage it without questioning motives.