Well, this just got interesting. There’s been a bit of a backlash over Apple’s Final Cut X Pro, which is considered a step down from previous versions by many professional videographers, as they claim it lacks countless features – leading to the nickname ‘iMovie Pro’. Former Shake product designer and former Apple employee Ron Brinkmann has now weighed in on the situation. His advice to professionals? Don’t rely on companies like Apple.
Ron Brinkmann isn’t some random nobody – he co-founded Nothing Real, the company that developed the image compositing software Shake. He was a product designer for Shake, and before that, worked on the special effects in Hollywood movies – he won a BAFTA award for his work on Speed. In 2002, Nothing Real (and thus, Shake) was bought by Apple, and from then on until 2007, Brinkmann worked for Apple.
His point is that the professional market is simply of little interest to Apple, as it’s too small, but still requires a lot of attention. “From a company perspective high-end customers are a pain in the ass,” he argues, “Before Apple bought Shake, customer feedback drove about 90% of the features we’d put into the product. But that’s not how Apple rolls – for them a high end customers are high-bandwidth in terms of the attention they require relative to the revenue they return.”
Apple doesn’t really know how to deal with these professionals, Brinkmann argues. “After the acquisition I remember sitting in a roomful of Hollywood VFX pros where Steve told everybody point-blank that we/Apple were going to focus on giving them powerful tools that were far more cost-effective than what they were accustomed to… But that the relationship between them and Apple wasn’t going to be something where they’d be driving product direction anymore,” he recalls, “Didn’t go over particularly well, incidentally, but I don’t think that concerned Steve overmuch…”
He further details that the way Apple works internally is not conducive to the creation of high-end products for the professional market. Most features in these types of products are not very ‘demo-able’, and in Apple’s company structure, that’s a problem.
“See, here’s the thing with how features happen at Apple to a great extent – product development is often driven by how well things can be demoed,” he explains, “Maybe not explicitly – nobody ever told me to only design features that demoed well – but the nature of the organization effectively makes it work out that way. Because a lot of decisions about product direction make their way very far up the management hierarchy (often to Steve himself).”
“All the mid-level managers know that they’re going to have a limited window of time to convey what makes a product or a feature special to their bosses,” he continues, “So they either 1) make a sexy demo or 2) spend a lot of time trying to explain why some customer feels that some obscure feature is worth implementing. Guess which strategy works best?”
His conclusion is that if you’re a professional, you really shouldn’t want to depend on a company like Apple, and considering his recollections, that’s advice that strikes me as very sensible.
“So if you’re really a professional you shouldn’t want to be reliant on software from a company like Apple. Because your heart will be broken. Because they’re not reliant on you,” he concludes, “Use Apple’s tools to take you as far as they can – they’re an incredible bargain in terms of price-performance. But once you’re ready to move up to the next level, find yourself a software provider whose life-blood flows only as long as they keep their professional customers happy. It only makes sense.”
Who is going to buy Mac Pros when all the Pro Software is gone? Who kept Apple alive in the late 90s?
Rome is burning yet, but Steve just bought matches.
Yup, with so much profit and enough cash in the bank to buy most of the mobile industry (or the film industry), they’re clearly dying from this mistake.
Wake up, move on people, before it gets nasty. The Mac is a quarter of their business. iOS is the new thing and you pros don’t matter. You’re legacy. You’re being phased out.
Long live the prosumer!
Now that was a bit harsh, wasn’t it? It’s kinda awful that it rings so true…
Well, except, of course, for the fact that professional users are reliable. Consumers (and ‘pro-sumer’ is a bullshit word some consumers use because they know how to find certain buttons in Photoshop) are fickle, and all it takes is the next best thing not to come out of Cupertino and shits will hit fans.
Just look at Nintendo.
Ignoring customers that have been with you since day one, through thick and thin, is never a good idea – even if you don’t rely on them anymore. The world is a harsh place, especially the hip and trendy consumer market, and as the great Yahtzee once said about Nintendo – “al it takes is a few Virtual Boys” and Nintendo is back at square one. And lo and behold, that’s exactly what’s happening right now.
Apple is relying on a group of customers that will, surely, for the coming years provide them with decent sales. However, these customers largely resemble magpies, and will jump onto the next shiny object when it arrives. They’re a fickle crowd.
Especially for that reason it is incredibly short-sighted from Apple to treat its professional customers this way – let’s face it, it was these people that ploughed them through their dark ages. Kicking them out now seems like an incredibly stupid thing to do – even it doesn’t hurt the bottom line right now.
Ignoring the hardcore gamer market with Wii seems to have paid off quite well.
Ignoring the HC gamer market is exceptionally profitable. Yet 2 years down the road, when the casual gamer starts requiring the same stuff that HC gamer requires today, you’ll feel the heat. It’s the same as enthusiast class PC components; today it’s overpriced e-penis extension tool, tomorrow it’s in every midrange PC.
With the price of XBox360 and PS3, Wii can hardly compete today. MS and Sony just brought in the causal gamer into their platforms, while Wii will never get the hardcore gamer on their side.
I don’t know that I buy that narrative. The sales numbers tell a different story. also, Nintendo is now making a play for the HC market again, presumably, having saturated the casual market – a market which they once owned BTW, back in the NES days. Many Wii games remind me of old NES games.
I find their Wii U strategy nothing short of genius. The possible stumbling blocks are their online strategy and getting their OS software quality up to iOS or Android levels at least.
There is no reason they shouldn’t be able to compete with the more general purpose iPads out there – if they notice and take advantage the opportunity (and the form factor of their new controller alone signals that they do).
You mean the sales numbers that have been dropping every single quarter for the last 4(before they dropped the price)? They managed to sell 9mil over the holiday season, only due to the radical price drop. And after that, they are back on their downward trend of dropping the sales numbers…
Isn’t that normal in their release cycle (which is actually a bit extended this round)? They seem to be right on target (just a just a bit behind) to get on with new hardware.
They also haven’t had any exciting software releases – none of the big ones – Zelda, Metroid (Other M didn’t count *grumble*), Mario (except a mid cycle sequel – which itself is uncharacteristic of Nintendo) – even a Mario Kart.
I bet the numbers tick up this year with the coming Zelda release, and a few other notable titles.
BTW, 3DS – according to the dominant narrative – had disappointing sales numbers. Again, the figures say they sold more than expected – but it wasn’t a stellar release against other console releases that came along with flagship software. But the soothsayers in the media, really want that narrative to be about the coming sea change – the switch from specialized hardware to general purpose hardware (eg, Apple’s hardware) – so they select their evidence carefully to cater to their confirmation bias.
We’ll see what happens when Nintendo comes out swinging with AAA software – watch how the narrative changes then. 😉
One last thing. Chasing the quarterly numbers – sounds like a losing game to me (just ask Barack Obama).
And yet today they are loosing sales left and right with Wii. While XBox360 and PS3 are picking up steam.
If they can get their fortunes back on track, then good for them. But they will have to sink a lot of development $$$ into their new system*. While MS and Sony can deliver something value added to their devices.
I bet Sony will be making money off PS3 for a good 5 more years. They are still making money off PS2 today… And PS3 is the only console today that can do stereoscopic gaming.
* – Wii is previous generation console. Current gen is PS3, XBox360 and WiiU
Well obviously the Wii has pretty much filled it’s potential market space and is losing steam very quickly, but let’s be realistic, there’s no way x360 and ps3 are ever going to catch up. Here are the last worldwide figures I’ve seen:
Wii – 86.01 million as of 31 March 2011
Xbox 360 – 55 million as of 4 June 2011
PlayStation 3 – 50 million as of 31 March 2011
And I seriously doubt Sony (or Microsoft) will be making any big money from their respective current-gen consoles for another 5 years, hence them likely working hard on their next-gen consoles.
Well, Wii wasn’t really next-gen to begin with but rather a souped up Gamecube, didn’t stop it from becoming the best selling console by far of the big three.
PS3 has not yet exhausted it’s capabilities. I can’t say anything bout XBox360.
Microsoft is definitely working on the next gen, but I doubt that Sony is doing anything beyond thinking about next gen.
There is this thing called economics that says that Sony will not release the next gen console for at least 3 years. Why? Their PS3 business became profitable not too long ago. They need to get back to balance. Microsoft is a bit better, but still will not release anything before 2013 holiday season.
Edited 2011-06-30 19:55 UTC
Rumors – Wii U is faster then xBox 360 1,5 times.
Carmack’s rumor – new xBox will be faster 10 times then current one.
So go ahead – buy Wii U expecting for hardcore games (aka stuff that only people older then 12 could grasp), sure you’ll get Battlefield 3, Timesplitters 4, Crysis 3, four years passes – 8th gen consoles will have another 6+ and you won’t have hardcore games for those 6+ years.
Yeah nintendo aiming for hardcore market… If Metroid 17, Super Mario 37 or Zelda 41 is enough for your hardcore needs – buy the Wii U.
There there. Many of us use a PC for the “hardcore” stuff anyways. The Wii is simply a great fun console to play together with family and friends and a stellar one if you are into platform gaming.
But wasn’t this article about something completely different?
Wii U comes out in 2012 – when do the next versions of XBox and PlayStation come out? Timing matters here, for any of your comments to hold true.
Additionally, if the current rumors (of 2015 for the next XBox) are correct, that means Nintendo should just be a year or two out for their normal product refresh – with a 3 year window where their hardware is the most capable.
BTW, I don’t think “core” gamers and “adult” gamers are the same. Core gamers seem to favor violence, boobs and conformity above all else (all the countless CoD games and clones, and anything with sex in it). Adult gamers are already sticking it out on Wii with the likes of Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, and Mario – all of which they can play with their kids. Adult gamers favor challenge and substance over everything else.
Games with violence and boobs – I don’t know why they became known as “adult” games, they really should be called “male puberty” games, since they mostly appeal to teenage boys. When I was a teenager, I really appreciated Duke Nukem and Mortal Kombat. How time changes things. 🙂
Also, there is a huge overlap with “male puberty” and “core” gamers – “casual” gamers often just means girls (with some other smaller segments mixed in).
That’s just Thom showing off his usual bias. Because the 3DS hasn’t sold aswell as the DS did Thom sees the opportunity to spell doom and disaster for Nintendo. It’s getting old.
It’s true that NDS (and Gameboy Advance before that) totally dominated the handheld game market, but obviously there are tougher times now with the mobile phone segment moving in hard aswell as the PSP having gained alot of ground with a strong software lineup.
So no, I can’t see the 3DS sell nearly as good as the DS did, but only those with agendas (like Thom) will try to translate this into Nintendo ‘being back on square one’.
I think Thom you’re being a bit mellow dramatic – the only thing Apple did do wrong with the launch of Final Cut Pro X was the failure to provide the FAQ when it was launched and prematurely stopping the sale of Final Cut Pro 7 to those people who rely on it (they should have kept selling it and provided a free upgrade to Final Cut Pro X who wanted it once the features they need had been added). They re-wrote it from the ground up and failed to communicate with the customer base, both existing and potential, that it was a clean slate and many features that might have existed in version 7 had to be re-written. The lack of communication by Apple has always been a killer but this goes back to this paranoia Steve Jobs has about making a ‘big splash’ with ‘lots of razzle dazzle’.
With that being said Apple is developing for the pro segment of the market but they aren’t going to be dictated to by 0.0001% of the marketplace who sit there pointing their finger and screaming across the table demanding xyz features to be added. Microsoft has been the bitch for the enterprise market for 20+ years that has pretty much crippled any expansion beyond the Office/Windows duo (yes, they do offer middleware but it pales in comparison to the duo of Office and Windows) – Yes I am happy that Apple is going to focus on the bulk 95% of end users out there rather than pandering to the niche 5% whose demands never corresponded to an equal volume of purchases to cover the costs.
Lion is a testament to the new ‘business approach’ given the features they’ve added – do you add all the crap that so-called ‘power users’ want or do you fix up Finder to address long standing complaints that come from real end users – you know, normal people who use their computer on a regular basis? I mean, good lord, you swear as though some people on the internet have a lofty sense of entitlement believing that some how Apple owes them – last time I checked when I bought my Mac I wasn’t signing up for a cult, support group or an unpaid member of the ‘Army for the protection of Apple’.
Kaiwai
(Lion is a testament to the new ‘business approach’ given the features they’ve added – do you add all the crap that so-called ‘power users’ want or do you fix up Finder to address long standing complaints that come from real end users – you know, normal people who use their computer on a regular basis?)
Why not do both? Most other companies do. Then again, most other companies don’t have a dictator at the top!
Just because the pro market stayed loyal to Apple does not mean that Apple wants to stay loyal to them. They’d be happy to throw away their pro customers if they get 10x as many prosumers. It’s business. The software sells for the same amount of money, either way.
Ironically, the whole idea of a prosumer is based on selling dreams that will later be shattered. For every person who makes it big in Hollywood thanks to the democratization of production tools, there are 100 waitresses who are shelling out real money to chase their dreams in film/TV. Final Draft, for example, costs as much as the home edition of the Microsoft Office suite.
Funny you mentioned the film industry, the harddisk manufacturers-industry is also bigger than the music and film industry combined.
I always thought that was funny, with them complaining about piracy and all that 😉
Do you have a reference to back up that claim?
No sorry, not “on me”. Don’t know where I read it, it is a while ago, maybe 5 or 6 years.
But I think I recently read the game industry is bigger than film too, but I could be wrong.
That might be easier to imagine as they are both the part of the entertainment-industry.
Actually both are neck and neck. Hollywood is about 9bn (according to USATODAY) and HDD market is about 9bn(according to iSuppli)
So I guess something changed in the last few years…
Yup, brand and corporate loyalty is for suckers.
Also, the word prosumer is stupid but then again prosumers are mostly people who think they know more than they do so it’s quite fitting that it’s stupid.
Edited 2011-06-29 16:20 UTC
The pros that kept Apple alive weren’t using Apple applications on top of classic Mac OS. They were using third party applications on Mac OS. Apple started investing in third party applications when classic was dying and OSX was new. It was a requirement to help keep the whole platform ( classic and OSX) alive as third party apps were starting to baulk at continuing classic aps and/or porting to a completely.
So yes, its stupid to rely on Apple as a media app developer. No, its not stupid to rely on them as a OS provider for media apps.
I would say the same for Microsoft as well ( Expression Studio for example).
Absolutely agree with that statement. Apple do not hide the fact that they don’t care about professionals and enterprise.
But calling Apple’s customers prosumers is giving too much credit to most Apple’s customers. The absolute majority of their customers are by definition consumers. And Apple is making sure that they stay that way…
And how is this different than users on any other operating system other than maybe UNIX? It is certainly true for Windows and game consoles, etc. Very few people are “developers” / “Pros”. Based on that, Microsoft is arrogant too.
As for Apple not supporting the enterprise. They tried with XServe to break into the low end sever market and did not succeed.
Approach #2 is to basically do what Microsoft and IBM did with PCs and then servers. First get users to use Apple products at home and then have them want to use them at work too. This is happening now. Once enough people use Apple computers at home and at work then Apple may reconsider about servers again.
On that last note, I think that Apple would be more inclined, server wise, to do more of what Amazon is doing by hosting applications on their servers for companies instead of rolling out Apple servers for companies to install inside their own computer networks. Obviously I’m not Steve Jobs so I can only speculate.
Nowhere did I glorify any other system. Probably the only OS that would be professional oriented was IRIX.
Please don’t drag Microsoft into this. Microsoft of all companies has the best relations with professionals on their systems. And I dislike Microsoft a lot…
They did. They failed, because they treated their XServe customers like consumers(The “STFU! We know better” approach). I still remember, when my Apple fanboi friend was banging his head(literally) after he bought XServe for his business… As a result he’s server room is 100% Dell today.
And that is exactly the opposite way IBM PC became dominant at home. First IBM PCs became the thing that you used every day at work and only then people didn’t want to learn any other OS at home. Brilliance with that move was that people don’t have a choice of what they use at work.
I’m not going to go round and round about this but I personally have friends that got screwed with Microsoft’s pro software. Developers are treated very well. Pros using their software aren’t. They talk a good game but when it comes down to delivering … that’s a different thing.
I don’t disagree about XServe. I think someone talked Steve Jobs into it and I believe he regretted it from day one. I’m surprised it too so long to kill it. I’m guessing contacts.
I was wrong about how PCs got into homes. You are correct about being in companies first. I was one of those that used an IBM XT at work with Lotus 1.01 for DOS… It was only when 286 computers came out that I bought one for home.
As for buying a home computer, Microsoft did a great job of controlling distribution channels and locking out other companies with OSs for PCs from getting into stores. If Jane and Joe don’t physically see it in a store, they won’t know that it exists. That’s why Apple finally had to build their own store chain.
To be fair, OSX had a lock on the high-end video market while Windows couldn’t go above 4 GB of RAM. Your options were a custom and expensive Unix based system, or a Mac.
Now that Windows has hit a proper 64 bits, the biggest platform in the world suddenly is viable.
Before any of our regulars start babbling about “apple-haters” – this is a very well written article. Not a hint of vitriol, just the facts. Also, it’s kinda interesting to me. Apple does some things very very well. Presenting Ideas is one of them.
Seeing how demoability (is that a real word?) determines the direction of development reminded me of my own ideas about a business I’m trying to set up. I’m fairly certain that my ideas are sound and novel, but I’m stuck at presenting those ideas to would be customers. How to do it in the most concise and simple way possible, without losing too many details? This is where Google made a huge blunder with Wave.
Wave was and still is a brilliant idea. But when it reached customers, it was so convoluted and unusual – it took me hours to decipher how things work, and I consider myself a geek. Slowness aside, I still think that all the main concepts behind wave would revolutionize (I know, big word) online communication (email, collaboration, chat, etc.) but it was presented in a such a way that confused even the most devout google fans. You had to work to figure things out. In other words, it was unpresentable. Or as some people say, it was ahead of its time.
Now most who know me around here know that I’m not exactly an Apple fan. Yet reading about how their mind works (marketing, selling ideas in general) always fascinates me. One can learn a lot from how Apple operates.
I don’t consider this a criticism of Apple. It’s just the way they do business.
Specialty customers with distinct needs, but low, low volume simply do not scale to an organization the size of Apple. They’re better served by vertical service organizations that can dedicate the time, and charge the rates that kind of service demands. Apple simply isn’t in that business.
That said, with the advances in hardware and devices, and the prices continuing to race to the bottom, mid-range and very affordable hardware is offering “pro-sumer” features.
Now I don’t know squat about FCP one way or the other. The best way that Apple can facilitate this kind of market would be to create a tool bench that’s enabled by some kind of plugin or extension mechanism. Something that works well out of the box, but if the “pros” want a feature, then ideally the market can respond through creating a plugin or providing services to integrate FCP in to the pro workflow. And those plugins and services can readily be handled by a vertical channel outside of Apple.
Providing this kind of software is important for Apple as it enables their products and promotes a world view. But that doesn’t mean they have to cater to the true specialists. It would just be nice if they can enable those that do want to.
If anything, Apple should spin off their pro tools as a subsidiary company.
Agreed 100%. Filemaker Inc is (formed from Claris), and it does a reasonable job of looking after it’s loyal user / developer base.
I had already posted this link in the comments on this thread, so it is a bit redundant. But I think you are very interrested in how Apple works, so here the link again:
http://www.pragmaticmarketing.com/publications/magazine/6/4/you_can…
Thanks – it’s one of my favourites
I still don’t agree with their decision to ditch pro users. I think Thom has a point there, and more importantly, it’s a solvable problem. Consumers can have the simple UI + functions, pro users can enable their vaunted features via a plugin (available for them in the App Store). To software would have to architected to support a plugin framework and a flexible UI, but that’s an engineering problem Apple programmers can solve with a minimum effort. Even if 10.000 customers is a miniscule market for Apple, the revenue they generate would more than just cover Apple’s investment. That way, everyone would be happy.
The killer is that it’s not like they’d be losing money on supporting a Pro product, it’s that they don’t feel like it’s worth the effort – and this is for $ amounts that most companies would kill to have. Assign a Pro-tools VP if there isn’t one and it doesn’t have to be a distraction at all. Certainly don’t have them going off making their own UI frameworks / codecs / etc. that don’t integrate in the OS (like, say, Microsoft would do between Office and their own development tools), but profit is profit, and supporting professional users just gives a better low-to-high end solution set.
Of course seeing how Xserve got ditched, it’s not surprising to see them undercutting another pro segment. Guess if the features aren’t keynote-sexy, it’s just not interesting enough. :/
Having read through Apple’s FAQ on FCPX, this appears to largely be the approach that they have taken. They just failed to properly communicate that in advance of, or at, release.
That is exactly what I’ve read too, about how Apple creates/designs product, their company structurestrategy, their workflow.
Here is an example article which details it:
http://www.pragmaticmarketing.com/publications/magazine/6/4/you_can…
Hypothetical Scenario: iThings sync to the cloud, no computer required. iThings run all the apps that most people need. XCode ported to Windows/Linux to allow developers to write applications for iThings. Sales of desktops/laptops dwarfed by the sale of iThings. Sooo… what does Apple need a desktop operating system for, in the grand scheme of things?
I’m not saying this will happen… but it looks just a tiny bit more likely every day. And I don’t really fault Apple… it’s just how their business has evolved.
But, as a working multi-platform software engineer, my days on OS X seem like they could be numbered at this point. I expect we still have a few years at least…
I think I’m likely to end up on Ubuntu or FreeBSD/PCBSD for software development… and iThings for the things iThings offer. I’m also sure I’ll be able to cope. But it will be kind of sad, too: the end of yet another era in the computer industry.
The whole brouhaha over Apple not caring about pro users is such BS and utter stupidity that it tells me that the “pros” that are complaining are as stupid as the dumbest dog you can you ever remember.
Seriously, this is version ONE.O people. ONE.O. ONE.O this is not version 5.0 of this completely from the ground up rewritten version of Final Cut.
You CAN NOT just take 32 bit code and sprinkle fairy dust on it and suddenly make it OPTIMIZED 64 code. That does not happen. What you get is code that is HORRIBLY UNOPTIMIZED because optimized 32 bit code and optimized 64 bit code are DIFFERENT.
This doesn’t take into account that they didn’t just convert the exact same code from 32 bit to 64 but TOTALLY re-imagined to ultimately make editing video a LOT easier.
HOLD ON to any comments you have. Go back to this being ONE.O for this re-imagining. There is no person and no company in the world that can totally transform/re-imagine a huge complex program and have EVERYTHING fully mature when it first comes out. Anything that thinks otherwise is a fool or an idiot or an idiot fool.
Re-imagining software is not easy and is only for the most bold. Steve Jobs being bold does not mean that Apple is moving away from Pro users. What it means that you can’t have ALL the features they are going to support like multi-camera, etc., in version one.o. And most of the other beefs that I’ve read about I’ve read about work a rounds.
Also, the previous version of Final Cut Pro didn’t suddenly stop working.
AND, the previous version of Final Cut Pro DOES run on Lion.
If you are Pro or Pro wannabe and you can’t live without some of the features from the “old” version, keep using the old version until the new version has everything you need in it.
No it isn’t going to convert your old projects into FCP X. Think about it. HOW would you convert it? This is like moving from a horse and buggy to a car. Just try to use a whip on a car and make it drive faster? Put an accelerator pedal on a buggy and what would happen? Whatever would happen would definitely be different mechanically than with a car.
The whole point of the new version is to totally throw out the stone age way of doing things and moving things into the modern age that FCP users have been clamoring for years to have. Now that Apple has shown you the first version of it I’m hearing a bunch of people crying about it.
Apple has not left Pro users. You can still use the old version, especially for existing projects. Apple cannot pull this off of your computer. You can keep it for as long as you have your computer. You may not be able to upgrade your OS to whatever is past Lion but that is at least a couple of years away. By then all the features you need plus plug-ins from other companies will probably be there so you can create new projects using the new version.
In the meantime, quit saying the sky is falling when it isn’t falling.
Edited 2011-06-29 17:11 UTC
Mmm.
Random dude on the web… Or creator of Shake, and long-time (in the tech world) former Apple employee.
Sorry, the odds are you against you, Sabon.
Except that Apple’s marketing it as being the version “X” of an existing “pro” software, not version One of an all new “pro” software.
It’s called “Final Cut Pro X”, like before the previous versions were called “Final Cut Pro 7” and “Final Cut Pro 6”.
Same product name, only the version suffix changed. And this suffix is always increasing, like MacOS X was dubbed MacOS “10” by Apple to both keep the link with older (outdated, in fact) MacOS version, so offering a great upgrade path, but with an all new code redesign.
There is no way to get from this that :
– it’s a new product, not an upgrade.
– it won’t be able to load projects done with a previous version because, hey, it’s an all new product so there is no projects made with a previous version yet 🙂
– the Pro required features won’t be the main focus anymore.
May Apple have choosed to use a new name (Final iMovie Cut anyone?) for this software, you’ll have a very valid point. But it’s not the case.
Imagine one second that next Microsoft Office version, even heavily redesigned, will lack the ability to load documents made by the previous versionn, not a very old version, no, simply the previous one.
What will you say then?
Seriously?
Sounds like your opinion is tainted here.
Edited 2011-06-29 17:27 UTC
Really? Actually they aren’t saying what you THINK they are saying.
They are saying this is the FUTURE of FCP and that for a lot of people who don’t use tape anymore and don’t need to import/convert their old projects and don’t currently need multi-camera support, then this will be a great product for them.
For the rest of FCP users, including you, this is a very tasty look into the future of what you and/or other pro users will be using.
[quote]Imagine one second that next Microsoft Office version, even heavily redesigned, will lack the ability to load documents made by the previous version. What will you say then? Seriously. [/quote]
What I would say is, IF I used Microsoft products, which I don’t, is that is a very cool look at a future version of MS Office and that I’ll stick with the old version until the new version is ready. My old version would still be there and usable.
PS: Microsoft has done that time and again already. It is not an “if” about Microsoft. It is an “they’ve already done that” and here they go again.
Edited 2011-06-29 17:27 UTC
So its the future of FCP, for users that have never used FCP before.
Its a very tasty $299 look. Me, I like my tastes with a good burgundy, or under $100.
$239,99.
I still agree with all what you said, though 😉
Ah, My eyes missed the 3.
Bill Shooter of Bul: My guess is that you are not a Pro.
Edited 2011-06-29 19:53 UTC
And?
It’s Apple job to explains better then, not mine to better reads their (quite secret) mind.
But maybe they think they don’t have to anymore.
Such attitude have a name.
Blaming your customers is not a good strategy, too.
It’s not future, it’s present: everybody can buy it *now* on Mac App Store.
It’s not stamped alpha, beta, preview or whatever, it’s stamped “Final Cut Pro X”. Aka latest new version of their “Final Cut Pro” software.
Plus Apple has (had?) a long track of products release quality, it’s part of their brand, and they communicates a lot on it.
All these is not saying FUTURE but PRESENT, sorry.
Sure.
But:
– I’m not one of them.
– These limitations are not written on the box.
The taste must be better, then. Otherwise, it could goes the reverse way. There is others NLE products. Really.
Again, if “Final Cut Pro X”, a software whose name was clearly chosen to say that’s it’s a new version of “Final Cut Pro” (it’s so obvious I’m surprised it’s not taken as is by fanboys…), is not ready, don’t sell it *now*.
Offer a “preview edition access” if you want then, but don’t sell like it’s a ready upgraded version of one of your pro-line software products.
That simple.
But Apple failed to do it here.
Maybe they don’t care that much anymore.
Which *is* a legitimate source of doubt for pro customers.
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
I don’t remember that Microsoft ever sold an Office Suite unable to load documents made by last previous version. And, believe me, I’m not a fan of their products either or proprietary formats, but I’m curious if you can provides some facts here.
Edited 2011-06-29 18:07 UTC
They’re saying exactly what he thinks; that this is version 10 of FCP. It’s not version 1, X means 10. If they mean something else they should do a better job of communicating it to the existing users. Obviously that’s not the case.
So, uh, it’s a Pro product for non-professionals.
If they have any Pro users left, that is.
On that note Apple should have been more clear on some of these points. I don’t agree with your statement about the X. I mean going from version 7 to version ten is a damn big leap don’t you think? So you have to think that the X is just a way for Apple to denote a huge change in the software. The same happened with Quicktime. Quicktime X and quiktime 7 aren’t using the same codebase. Anyone who has been following Apple over the years would know this. So did all of those these professionals, who btw were cheering their asses off when Apple demoed FCPX at NAB, but now choose to complain about what is essentially a completely different platform and software.
It really does remind me quite a bit of the same complaints people had about OSX. How did that turn out? I think they are complaining (like all pro users do) that Apple didn’t give them more of the same with shiny features tacked on. That’s exactly what the OS9 crowd complained about. Where Apple did fail is completely dropping support for FCP7, though imo, if you are a professional who uses FCP then you should already have the software. Apple isn’t going to your Mac and removing the software.
Either way I think Apple will add the features as time goes on. I don’t think they care about tape so they will probably leave that to third parties.
Edited 2011-06-29 19:31 UTC
apoclypse – I agree 100% with you.
I didn’t remember QuickTime X dropping backward compatibility or not supporting earlier versions features of QuickTime. Do you?
New codebase is neither a selling feature neither an valid excuse.
They also know that MacOS X provides backward compatibility with previous MacOS version, that QuickTime X provides backward compatibility with previous version. Even if they were new codebase.
So, how one could know by himself that FCP X wont be backward compatible or wont support at least the set of Pro features that does previous version of FCP?
By reading on the box?
Nope, nothing there.
By reading the press release?
Nope, nothing there.
FCP X “preview” was demoed at NAB. It was not released in store yet then. It is now.
And nothing inform buyers about the broken backward compatibility or the features set which don’t cover Pro ones. It was not said during NAB either.
You can twist it as much as you want, the facts are that they present it as the *new* Final Cut Pro version without saying it’s not backward compatible.
Then give it a completly different name, for god sake!
Now. But could you bet that Mac App Store won’t ever do that when upgrading a product?
What would happened if the Mac App Store upgrade process had remove FCP 7 to replace with FCP X?
Oh, sure, Apple will have fixed it a few days or weeks, but until that, no access to existing FCP projects!?
That’s money loss.
I’m sorry, but maybe that a risk consumers could accept, but pros really can’t. There is enough stuff that could jeopardize your business, you don’t need some software provider to screw your workstation.
And Apple just send the signal this risk is increasing with their FCP product.
The least pros can do is sending back the signal that they won’t accept it.
Mac: The greatest computer ever, that can be comfortably used only in dimly light rooms.
OSX: The greatest OS ever, that doesn’t run games and is not so good for most types of serious work.
iPhone: The greatest phone ever, that is not so good for making and receiving calls and is too fragile to survive a day in normal use without a protective case.
iPad: The greatest device to experience the Internet and digital media, that doesn’t support most common types of video, audio, images, ebooks, documents, archives or know what a file is.
It appears that “Final Cut PRO X” is finally becoming a true Apple product: A video editing applications for professionals, that is completely unsuitable for professionals.
So, basically what you’re trying to say is that you have never used a Mac, OSX, or iPad.
No need to waste that many paragraphs, to get to that point!
Mac, OSX, iPhone – I suggest there are millions of happy users around the world who would beg to differ.
iPad – that this whole comment got voted to 7 with this clearly (for anyone who has used an iPad) inaccurate statement brings into question the impartiality of the overall reader base, and lends some credence to the response by tylerdurden.
It was the FOSS community, not Apple, that forced VLC’s removal from iOS.
The happy users are consumers, ie people that does not count on the computer/device for their living.
Apple is a consumer electronics company and has been for the last 5 years or so. They used to have some pro users also but these are not a priority.
It’s called “humour”. Seriously, the entire comment is so much over the top, it just screams “joke”.
This whole FC thing reminds me of what Apple did when they bought up the german music software company Emagic. The company had two noteworthy products: Logic and SoundDiver. What Apple wanted, of course, was to sell an Apple-branded music production workstation. The sequencer software Logic filled that need. All the other Emagic products were discontinued and only the Mac version of Logic was allowed to survive.
Emagic’s second largest product SoundDiver, was an editor/librarian for electronic music synthesizers using MIDI. SoundDiver was the best product on the market in that particular niche. Clearly Apple didn’t think that people controlling their (sometime vintage) hardware synthesizers was their core business, so it was silently killed off and locked away.
Microsoft did something similar, many years before when they bought up Blue Ribbon Software. The difference there – was that Microsoft released the Blue Ribbon sequencer software “Bars and Pipes” (including source code) into the public domain after they decided not to support it…
these final cut complainers are late. niche computer company apple transformed into mainstream electronics company apple many many years ago. they’ve been heaving professional products overboard ever since.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/29/apple-posts-final-cut-pro-x-faq-…
That’s good advice for everyone, not just professionals.