A Different Audiance
I don't feel that FCPX should be called a piece of garbage just because it no longer meets certain needs. I believe Apple is somewhat changing gears with their target market.
I am a 16 year old freelancer using FCP7 and it serves me great. When I have a friend who is interested in editing comes to my house and watches me edit with FCP7 then go into Color, Soundtrack etc they get lost and confused. Of course they haven't put in the hours to learn it, but the complexity turns them off. The majority of my friends make the occasional skiing or biking video and they have tried FCE but still prefer iMovie as it is less daunting to them.
With FCPX I think Apple is trying to reach the "Youtube" market, with people who make tech related videos or just want something more than iMovie to edit their videos. I myself am a bit puzzled about what Apple did with FCPX (No need to make the list) but I will continue to use FCP7 for a couple more months until the hype/ panic dies down and the software updates are released before I make any decisions. But for myself eventually entering film school or a production house I feel that I should have exposure to as many editing workflows as possible so I may end up getting the student versions for both Avid and the Adobe Production suite to see what I like best, out of the three and go from there.
[Vincent Varga] "I don't feel that FCPX should be called a piece of garbage just because it no longer meets certain needs. I believe Apple is somewhat changing gears with their target market. "
It's too early to say that. For all we know in six months we'll have Thunderbolt I/O devices and a Python API, which on top of the 32-bit float OpenCL/GCD rendering engine and the powerful metadata system that are already there, would make FCP X a very powerful professional tool.
The truth is, while the features that are missing are critical (to some workflows) there aren't all that many of them, and they're not that complicated compared with what has already been done. I think a lot of people are losing sight of just how much of a radical improvement FCP X is, if you look at the technical implementation of what's there instead of focusing on the features that are missing in 1.0.
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.
You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
On the other hand, many editors new to the trade or with simplistic workflows are being wowed by the bling and unaware of the importance of what FCP X is severely lacking. Hey if you like it and it works for you, more power to ya. That is NOT the case for everyone.
Avid DS / FCP / After Effects Editor
[Chris Kenny] "The truth is, while the features that are missing are critical (to some workflows) there aren't all that many of them, and they're not that complicated compared with what has already been done. I think a lot of people are losing sight of just how much of a radical improvement FCP X is, if you look at the technical implementation of what's there instead of focusing on the features that are missing in 1.0."
I absolutely agree that the all-new FCPX media engine and database are incredible, and that these features will be a great springboard for future development of FCPX.
That said, Apple is mishandling the transition, and they're scaring people. They could have pushed back the release date until they could include "not that complicated" features like the ability to import a project from FCP7, or they could actually announce that they understand that XML interchange is important and will be included in a future release.
Releasing this product as if it were finished and quietly ignoring the missing features makes it look as if Apple is not listening.
Releasing this product without interchange or third-party hardware partners on-board makes it look as if Apple doesn't care about the ecosystem that blossomed around FCP, supported its growth, and enabled advanced workflows.
I don't think it's fair to blame people for reacting on these forums with varying degrees of hysteria -- Apple is the one here who is not clear about their intentions.
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events
Really, there are only 3 features that would make FCP X stunning IMO. XML/OMF support, importing older projects, and most importantly (to me at least) multiclip editing. If they added only one of these it would at least make the software feasible with my current workflow. Lacking all three literally kills it for most of my projects, no matter how good everything else is. That's the problem. I completely agree that what it does have is amazing.
Even if key features are still in development, I think it's fine that it was released now. There's a point where something must get out the door for market reasons and at the very least, a lot of people are starting to practice with it and may use it on projects that are self contained.
I don't think Apple is changing its target so much as broadening it further. Today's 16 year old editor is tomorrow's facility editor. It's the kind of program that can work with minimal knowledge yet expand as one becomes more familiar with advanced features.
I think what frightens people is that the thinking has broken away from the "film" roots that many NLEs started from. It's no longer the digital Steenbeck. Everything from project/bin organization to a single viewer is alien to experienced editors. It's like learning a new language. It's moving from common Latin roots to Esperanto.
It's a program people will grow into as they learn the new language. It may well be easier for younger people because they don't have things to "unlearn." Ultimately if it's faster and more flexible, once all the features are added, then other NLEs, it will dominate again. Of course there's the risk of failure but what's there looks good to me. What's missing needs to be added. Waiting for that would have probably been more damage to Apple than releasing it IMHO.