FORUMS: list search recent posts

Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Chris Harlan
Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 9:33:10 pm

I've been reading back over the leaks and rumors of the last two and a half years, and have found a surprising amount of information that turned out to be correct. I also noticed that FCP veered off course on a timeline that is relatable to the timeline of Steve Jobs' declining health. Early leaks talk of waring development factions with unreconcilable visions of what FCS should be. Reading about those strong disagreements in direction, I can see how FCPX turned out to be the odd sort of sewn together monster that it has turned out to be. What is so perplexing about the software is the degree to which it seems to be a duck's head sewn on to a dog's body. There is a committee feel to the software, where different divisions seem to have won out with different aspects of the software, creating something that is neither this nor that, but a glob of compromise to satisfy internal company needs.

Is this where Apple is going? As Steve Jobs' health continues to fail, will entrenched internal divisions continue to war? Will more and more future releases smell more and more of internal compromise? Apple almost died once before. The unique, singular focus that Steve Jobs provided turned that around into something amazing.

So, is this odd FCPX release the first sign of a collapsing Apple?


Return to posts index

Greg Burke
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 9:42:59 pm

I don't think its a sign of apple collapsing, (Aren't they to big to fail?). Its just a sign that they are jumping ship in the pro industry to focus on iCrap. I think thats what all the backlash is about (That and cutting support for FCS3) And that is what everyone is shocked by including me. I just don't understand why they can't do both? Please professionals and Consumers, and with Lion coming out I wouldn't put it behind myself that Apple will drop "Macpro" towers in the next few years, in favor of nothing but gimmicky handheld devices, Great Handheld devices but small consumers products never the less.

I wear many hats.
http://www.gregburkepost.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 9:49:06 pm

[Greg Burke] "I just don't understand why they can't do both? Please professionals and Consumers,"

Read this and you might have some more insight:

http://digitalcomposting.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/x-vs-pro/


Return to posts index


Bob Woodhead
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 9:59:00 pm

http://digitalcomposting.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/x-vs-pro/

That is the most "inside" view I've read of Apple's relationship to the professional world. And everyone here should read it. Thank you Jeremy for linking it.

"Constituo, ergo sum"

Bob Woodhead / Atlanta
Quantel-Avid-FCP-3D-AFX-Crayola
Panasonic HPX500/AF100


Return to posts index

Greg Burke
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 10:01:47 pm

True..good read. But My boss wont install FCP-X in our house cause there is no deck control. And not having that option at the gate cost apple a future customer We were going to buy and Install 3 new macpros with FCS4/FCPX but now he has canceled his orders and bought 5 PCs with Avid MC 5.5. I was bummed...

I wear many hats.
http://www.gregburkepost.com


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 9:50:49 pm

Greg, that was my first reaction, and it certainly is one of the largest elements of what is wrong with FCPX, but even if it were that simple--and maybe it is--the handling of the transition is such an epic PR fail that I think you have to ask why? It should have been obvious.


Return to posts index


Greg Burke
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 10:07:38 pm

But the problem is some "vets" who own there on houses look at it say "..Its a toy.." Thats what my boss called it when I was trying to show him what it did.

I wear many hats.
http://www.gregburkepost.com


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 11:07:41 pm

[Greg Burke] "But the problem is some "vets" who own there on houses look at it say "..Its a toy.." Thats what my boss called it when I was trying to show him what it did."

Back when I worked in broadcast, and not the guy that writes the check for the gear, some of us production guys were bending the GM's ear at an after party. The subject of how our online bay used to be the best in town, but now was not came up.
He put down his drink, and told us the job of the station was to make money. Not to acquire every piece of new equipment that hits the floor at NAB.
This was coming from a guy that not only was the GM, but a partial owner, and a guy that wrote the checks.
It was then I realized it was a lot easier to spend money that isn't yours.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com

I have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed...

"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair


Return to posts index

Ronald Lindeboom
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 10:17:12 pm

[Greg Burke] "I don't think its a sign of Apple collapsing. (Aren't they too big to fail?)"


This year, Wall Street is predicting the end of Nokia, the onetime leader in cell phones who held Number One status for years. Experts say that Nokia should be rolled up and put away by this time next year.

Also to go is onetime Number One food franchisor, A&W, who was the first to introduce the concept of fast food and had more restaurants than anyone in years gone by. Today, they are so weak they won't last the year out.

Sears Roebuck & Co. was once the world's largest and most respected retailer, they recently bought K-Mart who was once the largest discount retailer. Now? Experts say that Sears/K-Mart will be gone very shortly and that their lifespan will be in months, not years.

General Motors was at one time the largest corporation in the world. Recently, they had to restructure and spun off brands like SAAB, which is in such troubled status that they likely will not introduce 2013 models. Hummer, Pontiac and Saturn were shut down. Oldsmobile was once the largest and oldest continuously running auto nameplate in America. They've been gone years, joining Plymouth and others from the Chrysler line-up.

Some of the largest and most trusted names in home electronics, computers, hard drives, etc. -- onetime leaders at the top of their respective stacks are now gone, or survive as nameplates only, tacked on to other people's products for the sake of milking past goodwill. RCA, Zenith, Connor, Magnavox, Sylvania, Packard Bell, Compaq, Seagate, Quantum and many others, are gone -- though someone may have picked up the rights to the name at a fire sale somewhere.

Being the leader doesn't save anyone. It merely gives one the opportunity for survival. But it's never guaranteed.

Best regards,

Ronald Lindeboom
CEO, Creative COW LLC
Publisher, Creative COW Magazine

Creativity is a process wherein the student and the teacher are located in the same individual.

"Incompetence has never prevented me from plunging in with enthusiasm."
- Woody Allen


Return to posts index


Greg Burke
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 10:23:46 pm

Wow. I had no Idea. Thanks for the Insight.

I wear many hats.
http://www.gregburkepost.com


Return to posts index

Ted Levy
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 10:48:16 pm

"........Packard Bell, Compaq, Seagate, Quantum and many others, are gone......."

Seagate is far from gone. Still the same publicly-traded drive manufacturer it's been for years. In fact, today:

http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2011/06/28/seagate-fbn-ups-to-buy-...


Return to posts index

Ronald Lindeboom
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 12:03:53 am

The Seagate of today is -- at least according to the #1 NY Times best-selling book 'The Innovator's Dilemma' by Clayton M. Christensen -- is not the same Seagate that people think of. It has fought, lost, been bought, had its name assumed and is a name people recognize and so like Quantum, is in use. There is good will associated with the name.

It is much like NewBay buying Millimeter Magazine. Does it exist? yes, but not really. The people are gone and the name is there, but the product is not the Millimeter that people knew over the years.

It's like buying an RCA or a Zenith television, is it RCA or Zenith? No, those companies are gone but their nameplates live on.

According to what I remember reading in The Innovator's Dilemma, nearly every one of the major drive companies of the last 30 years or so are gone. But many of them live on in name.

It's a little off topic but I remember my Dad asking me years ago to buy an American television when I was looking for a new one. So I asked him if he'd like me to buy the Mitsubishi (which was then) built in Santa Ana, California, or the RCA that was built in Japan.

Often there is more going on than many corporate nameplate suggests.

Best regards,

Ronald Lindeboom
CEO, Creative COW LLC
Publisher, Creative COW Magazine

Creativity is a process wherein the student and the teacher are located in the same individual.

"Incompetence has never prevented me from plunging in with enthusiasm."
- Woody Allen


Return to posts index


TS O'Grady
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 11:05:45 pm

Really? An Apple death knell? Really?
It's interesting to hear people claim that the pro market is unimportant to Apple, who would gladly give it up so it can make so much money with the prosumer market, while simultaneously elevating the status of the pro market to such an extent that ignoring it will mark the demise of Apple.



Return to posts index

Marco Solorio
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 3:02:32 am

Apple certainly does not care about the professional market. They've bought and EOL'ed so many pro apps it's laughable. I'd actually laugh, but those EOLs directly effect me and my business. Shake, Color, Cinema Tools, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack Pro, Final Cut Server, and a little app called Final Cut Pro versions 1 through 7 to name a few. At this point, I'm more worried about MacPros hitting the chopping block, because the pro apps are definitely at the end of the line.

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

Again, Apple doesn't care about the pro market, nor will their loss of owning it kill their profit margin, and definitely will not spell out their demise. They have enough iProducts in the world to keep them running for a very long time.

Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | ORM Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Media Batch


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 12:02:08 am

[Ronald Lindeboom] "Some of the largest and most trusted names in home electronics, computers, hard drives, etc. -- onetime leaders at the top of their respective stacks are now gone, or survive as nameplates only, tacked on to other people's products for the sake of milking past goodwill. RCA, Zenith, Connor, Magnavox, Sylvania, Packard Bell, Compaq, Seagate, Quantum and many others, are gone -- though someone may have picked up the rights to the name at a fire sale somewhere.

Being the leader doesn't save anyone. It merely gives one the opportunity for survival. But it's never guaranteed."


Ron,
Very well said.
Let me throw in Ampex. Not only were they a leader, but they invented almost every important device that got us to where we are today. And if they didn't invent it, they built it. You couldn't go in a station or post facility that wasn't all Ampex or RCA gear. Until Sony came along in the mid to late 70's. About the only thing RCA built, that Ampex didn't was transmitters.
This is a partial list of Ampex key inventions and developments.
First (radio) show to be tape delayed 1948
First data instrumentation recorder 1950
First multi-track audio recorder 1954
First practical video tape recorder 1956
First to use helical scan video recording 1961
First frame accurate tape editor 1963
First high band color VTR 1964
First portable VTR 1967
First video slo-mo system 1967
First robotic spot playback system 1970
First 1" C format VTR, first VTR to do slo-mo 1976
First practical electronic still store 1977
First video paint system 1978
First digital real time video special FX unit to do rotation and perspective 1981
First digital (composite) video recorder 1988
First digital post production system with image compression 1992

And where are they now? In 2008 Ampex received an Emmy for lifetime achievement, they also filed chapter 11 that year. The only place you will see their gear is in someones collection, or museum. No one lasts forever.
Yes, I'm fan, and I was lucky enough to work for them for a while.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com

I have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed...

"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair


Return to posts index


Mark Onat
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 8:47:09 am

My unused roll of Ampex 456 is gonna look real pretty when I unfurl it in the wind and videotape it....but no, I will not let it blow away into the environment. Hey, let's not forget Cibachromes - hottest gloss out there. Well, the new metallic inkjets are pretty cool, though.


Return to posts index

Pete Appleby
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 12:21:37 am

I have to agree with you, sorry to say. Like the iCrap product name, maybe you should see if the domain name is available. We can all buy iCrap at the CrappStore!

Seriously, though, I don't think there will be a Mac Pro in 3 years, just like you said. Xserve gone, rack mounted Mac Pros? Lots of other warning signs like many others have posted...


Return to posts index

Greg Burke
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 12:46:17 am

Its not that getting rid of Pro Apps is bad, I mean nothing last forever. Its just sad to see that apple is continuing down this path. Shying away from Towers and Software into TVs and on the go devices.

I wear many hats.
http://www.gregburkepost.com


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 9:53:23 pm

[Chris Harlan] "There is a committee feel to the software..."
Hi
I'm not sure about that.
Here's an archived posting from 2003 about Randy Ubilos' intrangency over FCP:
I think we're all agreed that the scratch disk settings do not work the way we'd like...
FWIW I had this discussion with Randy Ubilos - lead architect for FCP - and on the basis of that conversation I gave up any hope of it ever changing from the current system. Since I don't bother fighting battles that are pointless and have no chance of success, I've just decided to learn to live with it. Makes me happier, but storing scratch disks with projects (not global preferences) will be a high prioirity on my feature request list.

Philip Hodgetts.
http://forums.creativecow.net/archivepost/8/309943

I reckon its a committee of two - Randy and Steve.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 10:06:05 pm

Yeah, that was 2003. And, in 2003, I think it probably was a committee of two. My point is that the drift in the direction of Final Cut Pro is analogous to Steve Jobs becoming severely ill. The investment community is very worried that Steve Jobs IS Apple. If I were a deep pockets investor with huge stake in Apple, I would really have my eye on what is happening with FCPX. That's why articles have been showing up in Fortune and Money. You can bet that there are analysts pouring over this forum for deeper insight.


Return to posts index

TS O'Grady
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 10:56:38 pm

The consistency of the UI in FCP X is obvious. I think your committee argument is backwards. It's actually FCS that looks like it was designed by committee, not FCP X, and for good reason - it was a mix of Apple bought and Apple developed software. In fact it was the mix of different UIs and inconsistant features that FCP editors wanted fixed in FCS.



Return to posts index

David Johnson
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 11:21:06 pm

As far as I know, it's not from an insider like Ron Brinkmann, but another one of the best evaluations of the situation I've read is this post from a fellow COW member: http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/5792

Both Ron Brinkmann's blog and that COW post say basically the same things and both are spot on. As Ron Brinkmann, put it ...

"'Doesn’t Apple care about the professional market?' ... In a word, no."

So, perhaps the question posed in the title of this post is based on a faulty premise ...

"Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?"

Perhaps the transformation of FCP is not at all blindness or accidental, but a calculated direction shift that has been in the works for many years. In other words, it's not about Steve Job's health ... or battling factions within Apple ... it's about business/money. Having become more successful than ever by focusing all resources on the mass market instead of the tiny pro market, why would anyone expect Apple to care about the pro market once it had gotten what it needed from that market? What did it need? Simple - a boost up from oblivion that lasted long enough to develop and market hot consumer products that are selling by the millions. So, perhaps a cheap App Store download that perfectly complements those consumer market iDevices is not at all indicative of short-sightedness or Apple's imminent demise ... in fact, perhaps just the opposite. In other words, FCPX will sell like hotcakes ... just not to the same people who were buying FCPS (once the give-it-a-try wishful thinking wears off). It's just basic math - sell a few thousand $1000 products that require major recurring R&D investment; or, sell millions of $300 products that only require re-printing a version number on the box ... oops, I forgot ... no box either.


Return to posts index

TS O'Grady
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 11:40:41 pm

[David Johnson] "It's just basic math - sell a few thousand $1000 products that require major recurring R&D investment; or, sell millions of $300 products that only require re-printing a version number on the box ... oops, I forgot ... no box either."

FCP has 2 million users and has always cost at least $1000. Do the basic math.



Return to posts index

David Johnson
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 12:08:38 am

[TS] FCP has 2 million users and has always cost at least $1000. Do the basic math.

I appreciate your thoughtful assistance, but I don't think I said that pre-FCPX versions of FCP cost less than $1000. And, I apologize that I haven't counted how many copies of the pre-FCPX versions of FCP Apple has sold as you obviously have, but you seemed to miss the point and hone in on a vague generalization ... or, perhaps you really are suggesting that Apple sold more copies of the pre-FCPX versions of FCP than it does iPods, iPhones, iPads, etc. ... individually or combined, you choose.


Return to posts index

TS O'Grady
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 2:06:10 am

If Apple sold 2 million copies of FCP, a professional editing program, how could they come to the conclusion that an upgraded version of FCP, with all the professional features, would sell only a few thousand? They wouldn't, and they wouldn't turn their back on the professional user base that, in part, made it a success. FCP was considered a toy by many when it first came out, in part because the average Joe could now plug in his DV Cam via firewire and start editing. Your contention that professional software is a small market completely ignores FCPs history and it's ability to span several markets successfully. So no, I wasn't trying to point out that you had FCP's price wrong, I was trying to point out that your view of the market is wrong and FCPs history proves it.
BTW, many on these forums contend that Apple's embracing of the amateur DSLR users, with their Mac Book Pros and copies of FCP X, proves that FCP X is a consumer product. Sound familiar? History repeats itself.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 11:46:02 pm

David, the answer might be "no" but the fault isn't the question. Even if you think FCPX is perfect and well focused--which I don't--the release was grotesquely mishandled. If we can't agree on at least that, then we won't find any commonality at all.

I certainly don't disagree that Apple can make more on a consumer product than they can on a Pro product, but as zillions of others have pointed out--why not both? Or, at least, why not ease out of the Pro market in a less passive/aggressive fashion? That kind of behavior is not very good for business, especially when the PR department has been waving the "Pro" flag since Cold Mountain.

And if you go back two years and start reading the leaks that were coming out of Apple you will find that it WAS very much about battling factions. The startling thing for me about X is that it seems to be a hodgepodge--a neither/nor. Its got a few really great pro features, and some very useful consumer features--but a huge gap in-between them. 4K but built in Facebook link. Smells like committee compromise to me.


Return to posts index

David Johnson
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 12:59:55 am

Chris, I appreciate your thoughtful reply and seeking commonality ... I don't necessarily disagree with your stated perspective at all ... I just don't think Apple sees the product release as having been mishandled or that it did anything other than exactly what it set out to do ... capture the largest market share possible ... just of a different market than you and I would have preferred.

Just to clarify, I never said that I think "FCPX is perfect and well focused" ... the point I'm trying to make is that I think how that question is answered depends on for whom one asks whether it is perfect and at whom one asks whether it is well-focused? It seems to me that Apple wouldn't have released it had they not thought it was perfect for and well-focused at exactly the market they were aiming at ... and they may very well be right about that. The issue for you and I is just that they clearly weren't aiming at our market.

I absolutely agree that the release and everything leading up to it was grossly mishandled, but that's from my perspective as a professional editor who partially relies on FCP to earn a living. It seems the perspective of the target market will be that it was handled perfectly ... arguably, what may likely become the best consumer-level video editing software on the market, cheap, immediately downloadable and easy to use.

As far as the valid points of "Why not both? Or, at least, why not ease out of the Pro market in a less passive/aggressive fashion?", I obviously can't answer for Apple so I'll give my opinion as to the answers to those questions. As mentioned in my initial post, both costs money ... lots of it ... "major recurring R&D investment" for a pro product versus relatively little for consumer products. As far as the "less passive/aggressive" part, that's just not the Apple/Jobs style ... has no one ever noticed until now the arrogant, passive/aggressive, when-we-want-your-opinion, we'll-give-it-to-you approach to everything that has always defined Apple's business practices? If not, perhaps take another look at Ron Brinkmann's comments and how he developed his opinions of what is happening now.

I first dabbled with FCP in its first version however many years ago as I transitioned from various NLEs that were far more established at that time (most of which are also gone now) so I don't need to go back and read the leaks again to understand your points. I'm not saying that battling factions within Apple don't exist ... just that I think that was not at all the main factor that brought FCP to where it stands now. In other words, would anyone really suggest that Steve Jobs just didn't know what FCP was being transformed into every step of the way and was somehow powerless to make it what he wants it to be? Perhaps it had to have "a few really great pro features" for two reasons: to somewhat mitigate the backlash from the pro community and because what are now considered "pro features" are very likely to be commonplace consumer features 5 years from now.

With that all said, I'm very sorry if I've offended anyone ... I am only here to gather information and opinions from others and share my own ... not to engage in conflicts about things over which I have zero control. My opinion is that I simply don't believe that Apple made FCP into FCPX by accident (or QTP into QTX, for that matter) and that I don't have to agree with the rationale in order to understand it ... I actually regard what Apple appears to be doing as very similar to a classic bait & switch con tactic ... only on a massive scale never seen before ... applied to an entire industry.


Return to posts index

John Godden
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 4:30:24 am

I'm a longtime aapl owner and am deeeeeeep into it at this time.

Linking this debacle to SJ's declining health is pretty ludicrous. If anything, it's SJ's management style and interests that lead to this mess.

cheers
johnG


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 10:49:14 pm

[Chris Harlan] "There is a committee feel to the software, where different divisions seem to have won out with different aspects of the software, creating something that is neither this nor that, but a glob of compromise to satisfy internal company needs. "

Meanwhile other detractors are claiming it's the singularly evil vision of the megalomaniacal Randy Ubillos.

As far as I can tell, there is nothing about the initial release of FCP X which is not explained as follows: Apple was working on a shiny new media architecture and editing paradigm. They wanted to get an app based on it to market as soon as possible. Well, prosumers need X + Y. Pros need X + Y + Z. So, how do you get an app to market as soon as possible? Implement X + Y and ship. Then work on Z for a while. The full set of X + Y + Z will arrive for pros at essentially the same time, but you get to sell a bunch of copies of your app to prosumers in the meantime.

The counter to this is to point to consumer-only features in FCP X and say "They spent time on this instead of that pro feature I wanted". That could demonstrate that Apple has actually made decisions that required pros to wait longer, so consumers could get functionality sooner. Several people have made this argument. But the features they can point to, as far as I've seen, are either trivial, not as exclusively consumer-oriented as they're claiming, or both.

The "It's because Jobs wasn't there" theory makes no sense, because FCP X's target market, and probably the list of features to implement before initially shipping, would have been established years ago. It's not like FCP X was written in the last six months.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 11:50:45 pm

Chris, Steve Jobs' health has been a serious issue for Apple for the last 2.5 years, not just the last six months.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 11:41:39 am

[Chris Harlan] "Chris, Steve Jobs' health has been a serious issue for Apple for the last 2.5 years, not just the last six months."

Well, if you count like that... Apple launched the iPad, basically the most successful new product in the history of the company, within the last 2.5 years.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Jerry Alto
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 1:02:11 am

The real disappointment for me was the NAB roll out of FCPX. How could they possibly push all other Super Meet presenters out and 'introduce' a NON-BROADCAST product? Then dodge broadcast specific questions with the response 'STAY TUNED' when they KNEW the answer.

That's not avoiding the question.... that is LYING.

Can you imagine how embarrassing it was for those presenters to go on stage?

To me there is no question Apple has abandoned the broadcast professional market.

It was a fun ride while it lasted.

MacPro 2.93 Quad
FCP7
Sony Z-1
GV-HD700


Return to posts index

Mike Chedwick
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 28, 2011 at 11:40:37 pm

All successful companies founded and run by visionaries tend to decline when the one with the "Golden Touch" dies. Apple has been centered around a "Cult of Personality". It is ripe for ruination.


Return to posts index

David Johnson
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 1:41:15 am

[Mike Chedwick] All successful companies founded and run by visionaries tend to decline when the one with the "Golden Touch" dies.

Mike, As you obviously know, history has proven time and again that you are absolutely right about that part.

[Mike Chedwick] "[Apple] is ripe for ruination."

However, I respectfully disagree with that part ... I just don't think FCP's possible exit from the pro market indicates that Apple is either on or approaching the downside of its growth curve as a company. In fact, although I don't have Apple's balance sheet in front of me as some other posters seem to, I would be extremely surprised if FCP sales in the last few years represent any more than a tiny fraction of the company's overall revenue. It seems far more likely that iPods, iPhones, iPads, etc. represent the bulk of the company's value and I don't think we'll see the end any time soon for iDevices and the kinds of massive market share they garner.


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 12:53:43 am

I have to say, the one thing that is getting left out of this discussion is the blatant bullocks Apple pulled on the pros with this App. Backsliding ads er...I mean..."pro" write ups with titles like "Apple didn't forget the pros" in a blatant misinformation campaign during superlies er...sorry again, "supermeet"...

They may have left some products in the dirt in their recent past, but they have never propelled products under patented names that I can recall this absurdly and this disingenuously...

Trust was shaken...and that has the potential (and has) to cause some real long term damage in my opinion...the fanboi's will defend them till the bitter end...but you can only sustain the brand you created so long as you maintain it....


Return to posts index

David Johnson
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 1:12:01 am

[Jamie Franklin] "I have to say, the one thing that is getting left out of this discussion is the blatant bullocks Apple pulled on the pros with this App"

You're absolutely right Jamie ... but it was only left out thus far because I was still writing the last paragraph of my last reply.

And, you're absolutely right that the FanBoy's will defend to the end ... I work with quite a few of them so I know it to be definitively true and also very sad that so many pledge blind loyalty with no reciprocity whatsoever ... it's very cult-like. Perhaps recent events explain why so much time/money/effort was spent nurturing a large crop of FanBoy's ... because they're the only target market now and those of us who make tool decisions based on merit are no longer needed.


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 1:26:42 am

You might have also left it out because there is a 50,000 response thread below you about ever trusting apple again...

I'll scroll faster next time


Return to posts index

Scott Thomas
Re: Is the blindness that Apple showed in the FCPX release a portent of Apple's future?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 2:42:33 am

I was wondering if Apple had recently hired Medhi Ali and Irving Gould from the old Commodore to run the ProApps devision. They did a amazing job of running Commodore into the ground, why not the ProApps?

Of course Irving Gould is dead, but I'm thinking his spirit lives on.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]