Final Cut Pro X Released

[John Bellari]

... Initial Cut Premature X-user

 

[Michael McLaughlin]

Time to push it over 100... for me, and hopefully others, that in itself is a statement.
Especially in the short amount of time it has taken to accumulate just this much.

: - )

 

[Michael McLaughlin]

Yoda looks over..."the hate is strong in this one."

 

[Bruce Allen]

RELEASE THE KRAKEN!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Tim Morten]

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/blog/2011/06/apples-final-cut-pro-draws-backlash.html

No idea if this is any more accurate than any of the other indirect statements attributed to Apple (but it certainly seems to mesh with what they actually released):

Apple says that it is targeting the "prosumer" with Final Cut Pro X, people who want more video editing capabilities than the company offers on its iMovie software. It says features aimed at higher-end users will be added in the future.

 

[Paul Nordin]

Good for Apple. This is one higher-end user that is not going to wait. No more apple-coolaide

 

[Barend Onneweer]

They called it "Final Cut Pro X", which to me signals a transition of similar scope to the OS X transition. Which I think is fairly accurate.

And by this you're doing exactly the same thing you accuse others of: you're projecting an intention onto a very ambiguous name.

Geez... I can't believe that this thread is still going on, feeding on FUD and name calling. Why can't some people wait for Apple's next move before already bashing them for what they think it will be (and calling anyone not sharing their point of view a fanboi)?

Well, this WAS Apple's next move. You can always wait for the next move - but it seems some people are becoming nervous of Apples style of communication and feel that Apple doesn't understand their needs.

 

[dillont]

Hi there,

Count me as one of those who makes purchasing decisions at a major University for 2 computer labs full of FCP. Our annual license agreement expires in August, and I'm scratching my head at what to do. We'll go ahead and get our free update to software (as how the agreement works for an annual fee), but it may be the end of the road for FCP in our labs.

Apple screwed up with this release. It's stupifying. They mislead us into believing the next version of FCP would be an advance above what is currently available to teach in the University. Instead of giving me the new advanced version of FCP, they gave me a totally new program, with the same name. Minus the pro features that made FCP 7 pro.

I budget based on evolving technology but keep a sharp eye on what is used in the industry and dictate purchasing decisions to give students the best exposure to professional level tools possible.

Without direct communication from Apple regarding this, we may decide to sever our contract with Apple and pursue a tighter relationship with Adobe and/or Avid.

What a shame. A surprising shame.

Dillon N. Thomas

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Well, this WAS Apple's next move. You can always wait for the next move - but it seems some people are becoming nervous of Apples style of communication and feel that Apple doesn't understand their needs.

And this move the whole industry waited for. To erase all the professional features you need for daily work and focus on Imovie, Iphone and uploads to Facebook tells you something about what Apple has put their focus. The question is also, can we really expect to get ALL the professional features back in time to make it useful in our professional life before FCP7 becomes too old? I'm not so sure about that.
Even if they bring back one or two things there's still a lot left to be done.

They have undone a lot of the progress they made from the first releases of Final Cut Pro. They rewrote the wrong editing software, instead of Final Cut Pro they rewrote Imovie.

I believe that much of the anger in here and elsewhere isn't about FCPX being crap but against Apple being arrogant and doing what they think is best, not what really IS best for the professional community.
Is this the type of supplier that we want? One who is so unpredictable that other future releases could throw you off guard rendering your NLE useless.
For my Avid station I do not need to know how the next release really is, when it's here I upgrade because I know they aren't messing around like Apple does. I KNOW that my old projects work, I KNOW that everything is still there, but better.


Thing is, if you want to make something revolutionary, create a new software, keep the old. This is exactly what Avid is doing right now. They are developing a cloud-based NLE for editing with the footage at a server location rather then at your station. But they don't throw anything out the window because of it.
When they discontinued Avid Xpress Pro, they made good deals to give people an upgrade to Media Composer, they still support Xpress Pro even though they don't continue developing it and this is years after it was discontinued. We have one station where I work that have Xpress Pro installed. While it doesn't work very well with other new Composer station it's still working for the stuff it's good at.
And of course, when they took the decision to end Xpress Pro development, they told the professional community this a LONG TIME before they discontinued it. Not over night with another release we knew litte about.

Apple is a closed off company who think that everyone will steal their ideas if they present them before release. That's why they sue so many and also gets sued (because others doesn't know what they are doing and when something gets released it might be someone else's technology (they never show all the facts about their hardware).
But even so, working together with the professionals, being open about what and where they are going with Final Cut would probably have made it the best NLE on the market.

What if they had presented it last year, all the features, all the drawbacks and still aim for a 2011 summer release? Then people wouldn't have been so angry, they would have said; "It looks awesome, but we still need this and that to be able to work with it" and if Apple listened they would have worked on those things presenting an NLE with all the professional features it now lack.

But Apple has changed their philosophy, the entire software stinks of it and I'm not so sure that they will jump onboard and putting everything good back in because "they made a mistake".
They KNOW people in the industry use OMF, XML, EDL's and they know they need to open old projects. They aren't stupid, they know exactly what professionals need (if they don't then they truly are stupid, really... I mean astonishingly stupid). But they just don't focus on those people anymore, they have changed philosophy about FCP and they focus on another market then these professionals.

That is why I'm not so sure every let down FCP professional will be happy in couple of months.

 

[Chris Kenny]

And by this you're doing exactly the same thing you accuse others of: you're projecting an intention onto a very ambiguous name.

The use of 'X' in this way is somewhat obscure, in that Apple couldn't reasonably have expected most users to understand the implications, but I don't think it's at all ambiguous. It is, analogously, a very clear statement written in a language most people don't speak.

And this move the whole industry waited for. To erase all the professional features you need for daily work and focus on Imovie, Iphone and uploads to Facebook tells you something about what Apple has put their focus.

And right here we see precisely how the "Apple doesn't care about pro users" narrative is, fundamentally, founded on misrepresentation. Apple did not "erase all the professional features" in FCP X. FCP X has many features that make no sense in a consumer application: video scopes, 4K, ProRes 4:4:4:4 support, OpenEXR/DPX exports, audio role metadata, etc. For that matter, I seriously doubt Apple would have bothered with a GPU-accallerated 32-bit floating point rendering engine for a consumer product.

But the "Apple doesn't care about pro users" crowd has basically redefined "professional feature" over the last week to mean "feature in FCP 7 but not in FCP X".

And I'll note once again: pros publish to social media all the time these days. We regularly use Vimeo for client review. FCP X saves several steps.

Also, consult this FCP 7 screenshot:

So, basically, FCP X's list of social media sites is more up to date because it's newer, and Apple reorganized the menu structure to make all the export options more prominent... and this is really supposed to be a significant indication that Apple intends to abandon the pro video editing market?

They KNOW people in the industry use OMF, XML, EDL's and they know they need to open old projects. They aren't stupid, they know exactly what professionals need (if they don't then they truly are stupid, really... I mean astonishingly stupid). But they just don't focus on those people anymore, they have changed philosophy about FCP and they focus on another market then these professionals.

And that's what about 80% of this is about: people are projecting specific motivations onto Apple in the absence of actual information, and then making assumptions about future actions and future product capabilities on the basis of those imagined motivations. The people doing this are, for the most part, the same people who understood Apple's motivations so poorly that they didn't anticipate major UI changes and didn't anticipate that features might be cut. Meanwhile, I said this over a year ago:

I suspect this is precisely where they’re headed with FCP. We’re going to get the OpenCL and Grand Central Dispatch goodness that everyone wants. But we’re not going to get an app with a strict superset of Final Cut Pro’s functionality. Instead, we’re going to get an app that Apple believes is better overall for the tasks video editors perform, even if some features are cut. And we might also get a significantly overhauled UI; something that results from a process of sitting down and questioning every assumption about how editing interfaces currently work.

But what I'm saying now about Apple's motivations and likely future actions gets dismissed as "fanboyism" because it doesn't fit the "Apple doesn't care about pro users" meme some people seem to have become really attached to.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

people are projecting specific motivations onto Apple in the absence of actual information, and then making assumptions about future actions and future product capabilities on the basis of those imagined motivations.

You mean the same way as you predict fixes and how Apple will solve everything "very soon" and so on? You might have information directly from Apple that no one has? Or are you also saying stuff in the absence of actual information?

imagined motivations.

The "imaginary" predictions comes from looking back at how Apple both treated the professional community and how their philosophy around communication is. It's predictions made out of how Apple has done stuff before. I don't see them changing over night. If I wake up and see them officially starting to talk about their development well, that's a paradigm shift which would be revolutionary to say the least.

I really don't know how less "imaginary" all the predictions made by supporters of FCPX is.


The "share" image you posted has nothing to do with how Apple focused FCPX on such deliveries, it just shows that you could do it before. It also has nothing to do with sharing a project.

And I'll note once again: pros publish to social media all the time these days. We regularly use Vimeo for client review. FCP X saves several steps.

Again, sharing work on Vimeo is not the same thing as final delivery to Vimeo. Apple changed their focus on delivery, it's about delivery to the net, not delivery through colorists, sound designers, telecine etc.

But what I'm saying now about Apple's motivations and likely future actions gets dismissed as "fanboyism" because it doesn't fit the "Apple doesn't care about pro users" meme some people seem to have become really attached to.

As said, you don't know Apples motivations. How can YOU say that what you think they will do is more likely then what I and others say? If there's huge change in focus on the market FCPX aims against then what's more likely that they are gonna fix everything they took out during the coming months or not? How can you dismiss anything we say and say that what you believe is the most likely way? That's more dismissive then anything.

As I see it, the supporters of FCPX dismiss EVERYTHING that we say and hide behind "don't punch me and call me a fanboy". I'm not really doing that I'm answering what you said.

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

But what I'm saying now about Apple's motivations and likely future actions gets dismissed as "fanboyism" because it doesn't fit the "Apple doesn't care about pro users" meme some people seem to have become really attached to.

It's not a 'meme'. It's a fact.

Apple a has a history of buying great pro apps then killing them.

http://www.onerivermedia.com/blog/?p=322

 

[Scott Crawley]

Shake is still great. It's moving closer to the fringes and further from the bleeding edge of tech, but it is still a great and useful tool if you have it... Just like the Red One, just like FCP 7. I agree, it is sad that it is no longer in development.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Apple a has a history of buying great pro apps then killing them.

Exactly! And we are basing our theory about how Apple will handle this out of how they have done things before. What are you, Chris, basing your "likely" assumptions on?

 

[András Puiz]

Sorry, but I found the lack of respect to come from the ones who praise FCPX, they can't just handle people criticizing FCP or Apple. Probably the same people who raged the Avid vs FCP war the last ten years.

I resent your quoting me in there. My point is, and has been all along, the following:

* Apple screwed up the roll-out of a completely rewritten pro app;
* Knowing Apple, there will be a statement in the next few days;
* Most people here jump to conclusions about the future of FCP;
* I believe these conclusions happen to be wrong, but you don't know and I don't know;
* BUT WE'LL SEE IN A FEW DAYS

Hardly anybody is talking about what's wrong with FCPX per se. Most people whine about how a Facebook menu item spells doom for the entire industry, which I find ridiculous. People complain about a superficial resemblance to iMovie (which by the way started out as an FCP feeder application before getting repurposed as the new iMovie), and go out of their ways to find any and all indication that Apple is giving up on pro users. And finally, people pretend that their perfectly working copies of FCP 7 suddenly disappeared overnight, "taking away their livelihood."

By now, it should be clear for anyone that Apple screwed up a product launch; that the future of FCP is unclear; that nobody should switch from FCP7 to FCPX and expect to keep working as before. It's also glaringly obvius that Apple will address this situation in a big way. Any pre-whining on what Apple will do in the immediate future according to some people's speculation is just wasted breath in my opinion.

Also, people who make hastened decisions today because they can't wait a few more days until the situation is cleared up are certainly overreacting in my book, and I wouldn't say that those people are showing great judgment at the moment.

And finally, sure, anyone posts whatever they will... It's just that there's a bit too much FUD and mass hysteria over here right now, which is never a very good thing.

 

[Tim Morten]

The use of 'X' in this way is somewhat obscure, in that Apple couldn't reasonably have expected most users to understand the implications, but I don't think it's at all ambiguous. It is, analogously, a very clear statement written in a language most people don't speak.
[SNIP]
And that's what about 80% of this is about: people are projecting specific motivations onto Apple in the absence of actual information, and then making assumptions about future actions and future product capabilities on the basis of those imagined motivations. The people doing this are, for the most part, the same people who understood Apple's motivations so poorly that they didn't anticipate major UI changes and didn't anticipate that features might be cut.

So on the one hand you indulge in wild speculation (Apple is sending us a message with "X"), and then on the other you criticize people for drawing conclusions based on information that was publicly reported as coming from Apple (Apple chose to focus on the consumer market first): http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/blog/2011/06/apples-final-cut-pro-draws-backlash.html

Apple says that it is targeting the "prosumer" with Final Cut Pro X, people who want more video editing capabilities than the company offers on its iMovie software. It says features aimed at higher-end users will be added in the future.

Perfect example of why I call you a fanboy. There is no point engaging with fanboys - they ignore evidence, and cling to their own specious opinions no matter what. Go ahead, tell us all how wrong we are again. Maybe if you keep repeating it, it will make it true!

- Tim

 

[Jerrod Cordell]

Remember that not everyone is in a home studio, editing in their underwear (not that there's anything wrong with that).

That's the best way to work!

Not gonna lie, I bit the bullet and downloaded Larry Jordans FCPX tutorial series and I have to say that now I know more about FCPX it is definitely an awesome piece of software. Once it actually includes the necessary features we've all been demanding these past few weeks, everyone will start loving it. But Apple is just retarded in the way they're marketing this. Like Jim said, they better say something quick or a lit of people will jump ship.

My recomendation.

Everyone write a list of all the features needed (XML, SDK for RED, multicam, etc) and just bombard that feedback button until we either hear an official statement or Apple's server crashes.

 

[Daniel Dávila]

I haven't read all the 100 pages of this thread, if it's already discussed, sorry... ¿does anybody know if FCPX addresses the RGB 8-bit processing limit? ¿Does it handle file sequences? ¿How's the gamma and color management? I think if those things work fine (which are core technologies) there's some hope, I believe there will be some kind of plugin upgrade method, so you'll build your custom system from your requirements (if you have a kona card, Aja should develop the output module for it, like BMD that will make a communication plug for Resolve). Maybe the cost will be from the third party, maybe we'll have to pay for it.
BUT, if the core system is still depending on QT and can't handle high end image processing, the we're in problems...

 

[Tim Morten]

Apple's response (if there is one), might well be: "Don't hold it that way". Just sayin'...

Certainly bits of information that Pogue allegedly received from Apple point in that direction:

No solution in sight. Plenty of video-editing companies still traffic in EDL files, but Apple thinks these crude files should be retired. There are much better formats (read on).

 

[Scott Crawley]

Ignorance is accidental while stupidity is deliberate.

"That's all I'm going to say about that."

If Thoreau were alive today he might have written: "Most men who are waiting for an Epic, or a fully functional copy of FCPX lead lives of quiet desperation..." and still others run their mouths like girls in the beauty parlor.

Tyler Durden on the naming of Final Cut Pro X: "Sticking a feather up your ass doesn't make you a chicken."

No intelligent idea can gain general acceptance unless some stupidity is mixed in with it.
Fernando Pessoa