FORUMS: list search recent posts

New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
James Valenti
New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jun 30, 2011 at 11:10:43 pm

Saw this link posted on gearslutz.com

English Translation:
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/06/30/apple-issues-a-communique-following-...

French:
http://www.macbidouille.com/news/2011/06/29/apple-communique-suite-aux-crit...

"According to this information, which still should be taken with tweezers, Apple would hesitate to continue to beat a path in the market with Final Cut Pro. The decision would not formally be made, but version CPF X could be the last that Apple will release. The software would continue in the short term to progress, but would finish completely forgotten just like Shake. In this case, it would be supported 3 more years and would cease to exist in 2014."

(CPF X appears to be a typo of FCP X)


Return to posts index

Richard Clark
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jun 30, 2011 at 11:14:10 pm

Come on guys, paranoia is now swirling the Cow, time to get back to editing.

Richard Clark's kiwicafe.com
Film | Photography | Writing
http://www.kiwicafe.com/
Aotearoa New Zealand


Return to posts index

J Hussar
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jun 30, 2011 at 11:52:05 pm

HardMac is a good source - been following them for years. That said... WTF?

This would be my worst 'Apple as an IOS company' fear. Apple should make the divide, IOS division and computer professional division - IOS could feed off of advances of the professional division and vice versa.

For all my complaining I really think Mac is the best system. That's the reason I got irritated in the first place - if you saw the convoluted integration of media I do with multiple apps you would probably be horrified, but the Mac is amazing at that.

I hope that it's a false story.



Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jun 30, 2011 at 11:59:44 pm

Is it just me, or does this forum get less and less reality-based by the day?

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Tom Wolsky
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 12:02:54 am

A couple of years Steve Jobs announced at an Apple keynote that Apple is a mobile device company. There is no place for apps like FCP and Logic in a mobile device company.

All the best,

Tom

Class on Demand DVDs "Complete Training for FCP7," "Basic Training for FCS" and "Final Cut Express Made Easy"
Author: "Final Cut Pro 5 Editing Essentials" and "Final Cut Express 4 Editing Workshop"


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 12:08:22 am

[Tom Wolsky] "A couple of years Steve Jobs announced at an Apple keynote that Apple is a mobile device company. There is no place for apps like FCP and Logic in a mobile device company."

There is when Apple considers MacBook Pros with as much power as Mac Pros from a couple of years ago to be 'mobile devices'. Which it does.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index


Keith Rocheck
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 1:21:19 am

[Chris Kenny] "There is when Apple considers MacBook Pros with as much power as Mac Pros from a couple of years ago to be 'mobile devices'. Which it does."

Which is exactly the point. Apple has already clearly stated that laptop sales are driving the computer division well north of 50% of sales, but I believe I heard something like 75% in one of their keynotes (yes I could be wrong). Since we already know they drop off hardware products that don't drive a significant piece of sales ... it stands to reason that the MacPro would be the first to go.

Xserve-RAID got booted ... which actually made sense since it was outdated and they'd have to start near from scratch anyway. The Xserve, though, is an amazing piece of hardware. They are the core heart and soul of my shop. I'm not going to replace them with honking MacPros that take up all my rack space. I can't replace them with Mini's because I need Xsan and fiber channel. Regardless though ... both were killed off because of low sales - RELATIVE TO THE REST OF THE COMPANY.

I'm sure the iMac and Mac Mini will remain in the product line for years to come because they target ... anyone .. who wants a nice robust machine. MacPro is too pricey and powerful for what MOST people need, and its showing in sales. So once the MacPro is gone, and we have no way to use Xsan on these all-in-ones ... what are the Pro's going to do? Windows here we come.

It's not just one thing here, and that's what people like yourself are hung up on. I love Apple, truly I do ... I'm on a MBP right now, but they signaled to me as a professional a real disinterest in my professional needs when they got rid of the Xserve.

Back to your point ... they are a 'Mobile Devices' company, but I have never seen a professional edit bay using a MacBook Pro for day-to-day with full I/O. It doesn't happen.

Let's take a quick look at Wikipedia for some data. Including early 2009, how many times have the following products received updates:
MacBook Pro: 4 (Early 2009, Mid 2009, Mid 2010, Mid 2011)
iMac: 4 (Early 2009, Late 2009, Mid 2010, Mid 2011)
Mac Mini: 3 (Early 2009, Late 2009, Mid 2010)
Mac Pro: 2 (Early 2009, Mid 2010)

I'm sure Apple cares about the Pro desktop market, but its a shrinking segment, and once its small enough the investment will be too big to keep up with it ... poof to Mac Pro and Mac-based edit bays as we know them. And ... to the original point ... where does that leave FCPX? Hard to say, but I suspect what they are getting at is that, in reality, iMovie goes away and Final Cut becomes the sole editing app out of Apple. I honestly hope I'm wrong, but take a careful look at the historical precedent already set by this company.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 1:40:02 am

[Keith Rocheck] "Since we already know they drop off hardware products that don't drive a significant piece of sales"

Even these days, Mac Pros probably sell dozens of times as many units as the Xserve was selling. And Apple probably uses them internally.

[Keith Rocheck] "Back to your point ... they are a 'Mobile Devices' company, but I have never seen a professional edit bay using a MacBook Pro for day-to-day with full I/O. It doesn't happen."

True, but I have to say I've noticed a remarkable amount offline editing happens on MacBook Pros these days, at least in the indie feature world.

And Thunderbolt changes a lot with respect to I/O on non-towers.

[Keith Rocheck] "Let's take a quick look at Wikipedia for some data. Including early 2009, how many times have the following products received updates:
MacBook Pro: 4 (Early 2009, Mid 2009, Mid 2010, Mid 2011)
iMac: 4 (Early 2009, Late 2009, Mid 2010, Mid 2011)
Mac Mini: 3 (Early 2009, Late 2009, Mid 2010)
Mac Pro: 2 (Early 2009, Mid 2010)"


This has much more to do with Intel's processor release cycles than with Apple. For instance, new Intel processors suitable for use in the Mac Pro aren't due out until Q4 of this year. (Though there are rumors Apple might get early access, as they have with some processors in the past.)

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Keith Rocheck
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 4:09:07 am

[Chris Kenny] "Even these days, Mac Pros probably sell dozens of times as many units as the Xserve was selling. And Apple probably uses them internally."

True, but when you consider how far the iMac has come and how powerful it is would you not agree that companies are buying more of them for production work in place of the Mac Pro than they would have ... 5 years ago? Keep that trend up for 5-10 more years.



[Chris Kenny] "True, but I have to say I've noticed a remarkable amount offline editing happens on MacBook Pros these days, at least in the indie feature world."

Yes it does, but when you focus on the pro's (and I'll include indie features in there) ... it still comes back to an edit bay with all that good-old professional infrastructure behind it (regardless of scale and complexity).



[Chris Kenny] "And Thunderbolt changes a lot with respect to I/O on non-towers."

Thunderbolt does not change all that much. Reality check here, and I'm being serious, one Thunderbolt port is the equivalent of a single PCIe x4 slot. I can't put a high end graphics card on that. I can't put anything better than a 2x4Gbps fiber channel card on that, not even 1x8Gbps. Most professional I/O are PCIe x4, but use a hefty amount of the bandwidth in those 4 lanes. Notice how none of the Thunderbolt I/O devices manufactured by BMD and Matrox have loop outs? The iMac has two of these ports, but reality is that they need at least 1-2 more and that still is not the same. We need at least one connector that gives a full 16 lanes before I'll give in to iMacs and MBPs being suitable to living in an edit bay. Offline ... have at it.



[Chris Kenny] "This has much more to do with Intel's processor release cycles than with Apple. For instance, new Intel processors suitable for use in the Mac Pro aren't due out until Q4 of this year. (Though there are rumors Apple might get early access, as they have with some processors in the past.)"

True, considered that when making the point, but still made it anyway.

Thanks,
Keith


Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 1:01:57 pm

[Keith Rocheck] "True, but when you consider how far the iMac has come and how powerful it is would you not agree that companies are buying more of them for production work in place of the Mac Pro than they would have ... 5 years ago? Keep that trend up for 5-10 more years."

Sure. I mean, eventually towers will be about as common as refrigerator-sized computers currently are. But that will be because practically nobody, even high-end video pros, really needs them.

With Apple's characteristic timing, they'll get rid of them early enough to cause people to freak out, but not so early that people more interested in getting their jobs done than in freaking out won't be able to so do.

[Keith Rocheck] "Thunderbolt does not change all that much. Reality check here, and I'm being serious, one Thunderbolt port is the equivalent of a single PCIe x4 slot. I can't put a high end graphics card on that. I can't put anything better than a 2x4Gbps fiber channel card on that, not even 1x8Gbps. Most professional I/O are PCIe x4, but use a hefty amount of the bandwidth in those 4 lanes. Notice how none of the Thunderbolt I/O devices manufactured by BMD and Matrox have loop outs? The iMac has two of these ports, but reality is that they need at least 1-2 more and that still is not the same. We need at least one connector that gives a full 16 lanes before I'll give in to iMacs and MBPs being suitable to living in an edit bay. Offline ... have at it."

A single Thunderbolt port should provide the bandwidth to stream uncompressed 1080p or 2K in off of a RAID and send it out via a video interface. Remember, it's full-duplex, and these two operations move data in opposite directions. Oh, and it should be able drive an external 30" display at the same time as well, over the other 10 Gbps channel (there are two on each port).

About the only thing that really needs 16x slots are GPUs, and even that's mostly only necessary for slinging large textures around in 3D games. The kind of GPGPU processing done by Resolve or FCP X presumably just needs to send a stream of uncompressed video to the GPU and get a stream back.

Honestly, iMacs seem pretty plausible in editing bays already, if they're strictly editing bays. Tools like Resolve might need a few more years.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Devin Crane
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 2:42:16 am

[Tom Wolsky] "A couple of years Steve Jobs announced at an Apple keynote that Apple is a mobile device company. There is no place for apps like FCP and Logic in a mobile device company."

What he said that they were the largest mobile device company in the world. Not that they were a mobile device company. There is a difference, not that their focus hasn't changed to mobile devices.



Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:30:47 am

I think that pretty much says it all, Tom.

bigpine


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 12:26:25 am

I personally believe that the architectural efforts below the skin of this software, which are pretty serious, just keep searching 'relational databases' or whatever you care to off craig seeman or chris kenny, the clean stable work done is deadly serious - apple have made serious determinations about what they believe media generation and consumption should be in the medium term - let no one be in doubt that as production, they are expressing it in FCPX - the issue relates to their interpretation of tools and methodology, which is, of course, where you will find prats like me frothing on the floor - with regard to the architecture of the software - that stuff is warp core solid. we can argue like loopers for expressed methodology - but the substructure behind it is, I suspect, intellectual Ahhnollld.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 5:20:59 am

The source these guys are quoting is the same one that nailed what was going on with FCP X over a year ago. Still, tweezers.


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 5:48:14 am

Actually, I've been thinking for a few days that Apple may have completely missed the boat on this release and pricing structure. They seem to honestly have thought they were introducing a professional application which would appeal to the pro market and therefore pull the YouTube set into the fold. As it turns out, the pros aren't interested, and with the negative press it's quite possible that the YouTube set isn't that interested in spending $300-400 dollars on something that looks suspiciously like their freebie iMovie.

This release could go the way of the DoDo bird, if sales aren't what Apple expected. I've seen mention of 5 million units moving, and I'm not sure that's going to happen. For a pro, $400 bucks isn't that bad. For a kid, it's a lot of money. If the pros aren't hyping the holy hell out of how cool the program is, and instead are bitching about how much it lacks, then what's to inspire that kid in the basement to cough up his hard earned grass-cutting money to buy this thing?

And if the pros aren't buying, then what 3rd party developer is going to put serious effort into it? It's a chicken and the egg situation here. To answer Chris Kenny, no, I don't think that is so outlandish a thought. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the price drop to $99 soon as a more reasonable upgrade to iMovie, so the amateurs will be more interested, and the pros can finally just leave it behind.

Chris


Return to posts index


Bret Williams
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:48:18 am

If Aperture is any example, the price will drop to $79 after awhile. Aperture was $299 at first. And it is definitely a souped up iPhoto is the same respect that this is a souped up iMovie. Now it's $79.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 1:29:54 pm

[Bret Williams] "If Aperture is any example, the price will drop to $79 after awhile. Aperture was $299 at first. And it is definitely a souped up iPhoto is the same respect that this is a souped up iMovie. Now it's $79."

Apple dropped the price of Aperture when they put it in the App Store. Apple drops the price of everything when they put it in the App Store, presumably on the theory that it makes it so easy to buy software that they'll make more money lowering prices and going for volume.

FCP X already has App Store pricing; there is no particular reason to expect pricing to drop further in the foreseeable future.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 1:25:25 pm

[Chris Conlee] "Actually, I've been thinking for a few days that Apple may have completely missed the boat on this release and pricing structure. They seem to honestly have thought they were introducing a professional application which would appeal to the pro market and therefore pull the YouTube set into the fold."

About the only argument along such lines that makes any sense is the "FCP X proves Apple doesn't care about pro users" argument. Yes, if Apple really doesn't care about pro users, they'll leave key features out of FCP X forever, and it will never be successful in the pro market. But I think there are clear indications that argument is wrong (which I've listed off many times at this point), and that doesn't seem to be the argument you're making here.

Assuming you agree with me that Apple intends FCP X to be a pro app, and will continue expanding the feature set to make it suitable for high-end workflows, I don't see how you can reasonably say, ten days after its release, that the high-end market has permanently rejected it. If FCP X has solid support for high-end workflows in a year or two, most people will barely remember any of this noise.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index


Chris Conlee
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 1:45:48 pm

As I said, it's a chicken and egg scenario. If enough "pros" buy it to stimulate 3rd party development, it'll grow. If short term acceptance is slower than anticipated, I don't think it's unlikely to see a drastic price drop and retargeting of Apple's marketing to the tweeners.

I'd be curious to know how the sales volume jives with Apple's expectations, thus far. My hunch is it's not selling like they expected. Granted, it's listed as the 'top grosser' but compressor is well down the list, and iMovie is still on the list. Says to me, the tweeners are the one's buying, primarily.

Time will tell.

Chris


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 2:44:25 pm

[Chris Conlee] "As I said, it's a chicken and egg scenario. If enough "pros" buy it to stimulate 3rd party development, it'll grow."

What are we talking about, that Apple is really relying on third parties for? OMF? Already done. Hopefully someone will do it more cheaply once the APIs go public, but there's already an option. EDL? The idea that FCP X is going to be so unpopular that nobody will bother to write an EDL export app seems rather hard to believe. Video I/O support? AJA already has a beta. I'm sure once Apple has APIs that allow for real video I/O, AJA and Blackmagic will be there. Deck support? There are already third-party apps for this; they'll obviously take steps to work with FCP X to the extent that that's useful.

I really don't see a huge chicken/egg problem with ecosystem support here.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Keith Rocheck
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 1, 2011 at 2:20:08 pm

I think the clear point here is that we should not have to wait for them to bring back features. It shouldn't happen. Why can't we open old FCP projects? I haven't seen any indication that they will try to make this happen. Contrast that with Avid who has, except for color correction around the v3.5, v4 area, has maintained forwards and backwards compatibility in their product. Backwards capability can be meh depending on what you're doing, but its there.

The only thing close to this travesty is Adobe re-writing Audition for inclusion in Creative Suite and not supporting Audition 3 and older projects. That's the same non-starter for me.


Return to posts index

John-Michael Seng-Wheeler
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 2, 2011 at 7:45:11 pm

Audition is a very interesting Parallel. The setup is exactly the same.

A large body of users, marooned for a few years with no real changes, given a program missing critical features, no backwards compatibility, truncated output options, kepping both versions on one computer and having to use both... even a lead developer who doesn't seem to understand what pro's need. It's been very wird déjà vu with FCPX.


Except, there'e one big diference.
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/838570

That thread is the diference. It was started on apr. 14th and the posts just keep coming.

If you want some interesting reading, read through that. You might see what this could of been like if apple didn't do things the way they do.


Return to posts index

Keith Rocheck
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 4, 2011 at 8:27:36 pm

[John-Michael Seng-Wheeler] "If you want some interesting reading, read through that. You might see what this could of been like if apple didn't do things the way they do."

It comes down to core-competency. Adobe is a software company. They have a general history of building great software and building on existing software they've bought. I was scared to death for my favorite Macromedia products, specifically Dreamweaver and Fireworks. I was 100% certain Fireworks would be on the chopping block when Macromedia was bought out, but it wasn't. Dreamweaver could have been out in favor of Adobe's own GoLive. It's clear Adobe wanted Flash ... they could have taken it and let the rest go, but they didn't.

Adobe bought Syntrillium ... I used Cool Edit Pro 2.0, then Audition 1.5, etc. I've been scared for it, but Adobe doesn't have that history of being a company where good programs go to die. When Soundbooth came out I was sure that Audition would die, and I knew the reason: it's too hard to port it over to Mac. Yet, even still they haven't let it die, and have proven to me still yet they care. Now, I do want to be able to open my old projects, but now that its in CS I can do more through Premiere integration than hopefully ever before. There's good and bad, but I have CD's and other project created in Audition that I'd love to open again at some point.

The point is simple, though ... Adobe is a software company.

Apple is not a software company. Desktop applications are not their bag ... I honestly doubt they ever were. The apps were ways to compel people to buy their computers. It truly was/is (I guess). I'm not surprised with their moves because they do make good hardware, and great OS's to run on them. That's their bag ... hardware and software platforms. Software is a means to an end for them. Reality it FCP7 did that job fairly well, but FCPX will do it a lot better, save the FCP7 users that will continue to use hardware ... it's still a win for Apple.

Point is ... I trust Adobe when it comes to software. Apple, not so much.


Return to posts index

John-Michael Seng-Wheeler
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 5, 2011 at 12:04:36 am

Although there is a free conversion utility to open old sessions in AA5.5:

http://www.aatranslator.com.au/ses2sesx.html I don't know how well it works, but it is free.


Return to posts index

Michael Rooney
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 5, 2011 at 1:20:31 pm

It works exceptionally well - I know I was part of the team that wrote it ;-)

It will convert CEP ses files back to v1.2 and all AA ses files.
For AA3 it will convert all internal fx currently supported by CS5.5 and from memory the only thing it doesn't convert is EQ automation and thats probably just down to laziness.

For a donation of $20 it will convert supported fx for AA1.5 & AA2 as well as some supported external vsts.

Yes it is pretty good IMO.


Return to posts index

John-Michael Seng-Wheeler
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 5, 2011 at 3:19:14 pm

You might want to fix your site then. It kinda implies that converting fx, fades and automation ect. is only for ses files from AA2, not AA2 and 3

You simply need to delete the words: In addition from AA1.5 till AA3 and have it just say: "In addition from AA1.5" having the "till AA3" implies that this is the end of the additive list, and the features below are only for the versions specifically listed.

I know it sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but when I looked at the website I was confused, which is probably the only reason I didn't download it yet, cause I though it didn't really fully work except for AA2?

---This has been a report from John-Michael, the Rogue Copy Editer---


Return to posts index

Michael Rooney
Re: New rumor: Apple to abandon FCPX
on Jul 5, 2011 at 3:41:48 pm

Thanks John-Michael

And here I was thinking that the hardest thing I had to worry about was decyphering PT session files - I'm an Aussie what do I know about the English language - LOL

Point taken - your input is most appreciated and the site has now been modified.

Cheers
Michael


Return to posts index

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