FORUMS: list search recent posts

Risk and failure

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Mike Parfit
Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 5:17:08 pm

It's always bothered me that we -- humans in general -- have a hard time accepting that stunning creative risks, which are so highly praised when they succeed, are inevitably accompanied by occasions of stunning failure.

Apple has always seemed to be a risk-taking company. One assumes that most of the failures are hidden in the folds of the company's legendary cloak. But now one has emerged into light it should probably never have seen.

All of us in this business, who either engage in attempts at creativity ourselves or spend our lives trying to shepherd it -- or both -- should be able to recognize this phenomenon in this case. So should Apple. It's part of the territory. It just requires a rapid and complete recovery, and that's what the best creative people know how to do. Not without anguish, but without hesitation.

From all the evidence -- Apple's efforts to court the pros, its touting of FCPX as a professional tool, the new FAQs -- Apple is not actively trying to abandon us. It's more likely the FCP team believed FCPX was a daring, glorious risk. But it seems clear now that it is a failure. The capable users it should have challenged and thrilled are disappointed and feel betrayed. FCP1 opened doors; FCPX in many ways appears to close them. It is not the creative breakthrough that its team expected. I suspect there is pain.

I've been lucky enough to know some effective creative people, and that pain is common, even among the best. From what I've seen the only way they get through those failures is to acknowledge them honestly and get past the inevitable defensive mode into recovery. In film and writing it's either wholesale revision or abandonment of the project altogether. A reputation often depends on whether that recovery effort is forthright or truculent.

So the main question seems to be whether Apple is willing to accept this failure and acknowledge it quickly enough to recover and advance. From what I have seen of that kind of acceptance, it helps define the flexibility and persistence that marks the most genuinely creative of individuals. Because, painful or not, the acceptance of failure can offer insights and breakthroughs that success doesn't.

The question is just whether Apple still has enough creative spirit in this field to accept the short-term embarrassment of acknowledging failure in order to continue seeking long-term achievement, or just moves away from the terrors of creativity into the safer but sadder path of mediocrity.

Good luck to everyone.

Mike

http://www.thewhalemovie.com


Return to posts index

Ted Levy
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 5:38:16 pm

Time to revisit this information:

http://www.flickgym.com/2009/10/top-ten-reasons-avid-beats-final-cut-pro.ht...


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:13:31 pm

[Mike Parfit] "From all the evidence -- Apple's efforts to court the pros, its touting of FCPX as a professional tool, the new FAQs -- Apple is not actively trying to abandon us. It's more likely the FCP team believed FCPX was a daring, glorious risk. But it seems clear now that it is a failure."

I agree with you about Apple's view of FCP X, but I strongly disagree that it's is 'clear' at this point that they have failed. The truth is, most of the backlash has not been a direct consequence of people reacting negatively to the product's substance. It has been a consequence of people erroneously believing, as a consequence of a handful of missing features, some superficial similarities with iMovie, and a whole lot of preexisting paranoia, that FCP X signals Apple's departure from the pro market.

Many people who have actually sat down to edit something with the app, giving it a fair shot on its own terms instead of merely being frustrated that it works differently, have said positive things about it. My experience has been that the new timeline is really just a lot of fun to edit with (the importance of this should not be underestimated), there are some great new organizational features, and in terms of speed and quality, the new engine is a home run.

Six months from now, you will be able to take a sequence out of FCP X an bring it into Resolve. There will probably be a way to export OMF that doesn't cost $500. You will have more control over audio track exports. You will almost certainly be able to hook up a real video monitor. While some people will still grasp at straws, and while there will still be a few gaps and limitations here and there, the claims that FCP X is not a pro app will have been pretty thoroughly undermined. Pros will start doing interesting things with it. A little later someone will cut an indie feature with it, and Apple will run a profile on them where they rave about the importance of metadata and the freedom of the magnetic timeline, and talk about how they did assembly edits on location using MacBook Pros with Thunderbolt RAIDs.

Word will get around that rumors of Final Cut's demise were greatly exaggerated.

Nobody has to believe me about this today. We'll all have to wait and see. But, not to toot my own horn too much here, I am the guy who predicted this whole present blowup, in broad strokes, over a year ago:

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.

In short, I think they’ll come up with something really interesting… that will probably cause a bunch of people to totally freak out about how Apple has ruined everything and make forceful public declarations about how they’re leaving the platform. Meanwhile, people actually willing to embrace the thing might discover it has a bit of that iPad ‘magic’.

I think I have a pretty good feel for these things.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index


Peter Steinberg
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:24:19 pm

Chris: Nice post!


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:28:47 pm

[Mike Parfit] "So the main question seems to be whether Apple is willing to accept this failure and acknowledge it quickly enough to recover and advance...
...whether Apple still has enough creative spirit in this field to accept the short-term embarrassment..."

Hi
I don't think Steve Jobs 'does' embarrasment/acknowledgement/acceptance.
He blew out IBM over the 3GHz G5 affair, and he's blowing out MobileMe - "not our greatest moment".

[Mike Parfit] "....away from the terrors of creativity into the safer but sadder path of mediocrity."
Hmmm.
I don't think I would describe the Cloud and Apple's new huge datacentre in those terms at all.

[Chris Kenny] "I think I have a pretty good feel for these things."
Maybe ;-)
But I think you're underestimating the spin-off impact of Apple's recent change of direction.



Return to posts index

John Chay
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:32:34 pm

I plan on buying it and learning it when the price of FCX drops to $100.




http://www.john-chay.com

Editor/Videographer


Return to posts index


Andrew Stone
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:34:11 pm

Chris,

You really have to drop this argument that this is all about FCP X being too much like iMovie. The majority of us are concerned that Apple has presented itself as being incompatible with the business requirements of the industry. It is about pulling the current version of FCS and has little to do with FCP X.

I have spelled this out at least once a day for the past week or so and so have many of the long time pros and so has even Apple/FCP apologists like Larry Jordan. Look deeper into this. It is about the industry's needs and continuity with licensing requirements and not the immaturity of FCP X.

Myself, I am so past this point in the discussion. Right now I am trying to figure out the best way to move forward in a business case scenario and so are many other people and production facilities.

-Andrew Stone
--
Steadicam & Camera Operator


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:40:36 pm

[Andrew Stone] "Apple has presented itself as being incompatible with the business requirements of the industry... ...the industry's needs and continuity with licensing requirements...
Right now I am trying to figure out the best way to move forward in a business case scenario and so are many other people and production facilities."


And it appears that Apple doesn't even care.



Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:48:39 pm

[Andrew Stone] "I have spelled this out at least once a day for the past week or so and so have many of the long time pros and so has even Apple/FCP apologists like Larry Jordan. Look deeper into this. It is about the industry's needs and continuity with licensing requirements and not the immaturity of FCP X."

And I have addressed this at least once a day or so for the past week. You believe temporal discounting will prove to be a relatively weak effect in this instance, while I believe it will be a relatively strong one. That, essentially, the vast majority of people will be evaluating FCP X one year from today in terms of the capability of the product, not the mess Apple made of its introduction, or what that might imply if the product undergoes another major transition in another decade.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index


Jerry Vogt
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 7:43:09 pm

>That, essentially, the vast majority of people will be evaluating FCP X one year from today in terms of the capability of the product, not the mess Apple made of its introduction, or what that might imply if the product undergoes another major transition in another decade.

Then that is when they should have released FCPX, when it is completely ready. They threw something together trying to keep up with the marketplace, but have too many irons in the fire and at this point in the competition needed to be very different.

Right now FCPX one is a no brainer, someday it may be a pro editing platform again.

Jerry Vogt


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 7:58:33 pm

[Jerry Vogt] "Then that is when they should have released FCPX, when it is completely ready."

People keep saying this, but a huge fraction even of FCP's existing user base (to say nothing of the new users Apple might pull in with the lower price point and new interface) simply does not require the features everyone here has spent the last ten days obsessing over. The vast majority of projects created day in and day out in FCP will never need to be laid out to HDCAM with specific track assignments, never be color graded in an external grading application, never have their audio exported to Pro Tools.

The truth is, the set of features we've been calling 'pro features' in this forum are really more like "post house and broadcast features". An initial release without these features was not targeted at "consumers" (who do not buy $300 video editing software), but at the (probably) nine in ten existing Final Cut users who don't work at a broadcaster or a post house. I'm not entirely sure why so many people consider it so horrible that Apple released the software for these users while continuing to add additional features for the high-end market.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

james carey
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:10:46 pm

Chris,
You are a bulldog, I give you that. It's quite possible, in the long run, your arguments will prove correct. The one rather major issue you seem to keep ignoring is the short term: the EOL for FCS. Had Apple released FCPx concurrently with retaining support of FCP7 there would have not been an uproar. It's that simple. We are asked to assume, as you have, that eventually FCPx will become a professional program, as it decidedly was not as shipped. One year ago, when first hearing about this "major upgrade" I'd be curious as to your assumptions. Would you have assumed Apple would make a major PR and possibly strategic mistake releasing this product as they have? Would yo have argued as doggedly that Apple would not let us down?

Also, the argument using the initial release of an incomplete product as FCP1 certainly was does not hold water. As the systems we were using at the time, Avid, Media 100, Premiere etc. were not discontinued as we waited for FCP to mature and catch on. I know that may seem a silly comparison, but it's true. My department continued using Media 100s, while testing FCP and when we deemed it proper, we made the switch. If it had not lived up to expectations would would not have switched, simple as that. You Apple optimists are asking everyone to assume FCPx will be supported properly, and that third party will come along. In the meantime Avid and Adobe are charging hard to grab a significant portion of the market. What happens if they grab enough that both Apple and third parties decide it's not worth pursuing this new model? You know all this uncertainty (which business hates) could have been avoided. Apple knew it too - which is why I have lost a considerable amount of faith in them as my professional editing tool provider.

Jim Carey
Director of Video, Radical Entertainment
linkedin: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/jcarey256
mobygames: http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,17212/


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:51:10 pm

[james carey] "You are a bulldog, I give you that."

that, apart from anything else, is true. If chris's perceptions of risk, reward and the future actions of the professional market here are correct, then, like about five hundred posters, myself more than anyone, are going to owe him a beer, in fact I may owe him all the beer.

It's just that I truly think, on a deep level, Apple are gone. The new XCode apparently largely demands unified single screen interfaces, said the canary in the coal mine - Apple, that weird creature, is getting ready to go off for a walk somewhere. They've thrown away nearly every pro app they've ever owned in preparation - they have, you know, emptied their pockets.


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


Return to posts index

Julian Bowman
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 4, 2011 at 12:43:50 pm

I'm not a post house. I'm an indie making a living from the not for profit sector. I work on my own, and from everything I've read about X I won't touch it with a barge pole at the moment.

In a couple of years, when all the apologists suggest X will be ready for me, i'll be long gone over to premier. Why? Well at the moment I run a 32 bit editing software programme that is already a year behind the competition because i was waiting for this 'awesome' upgrade. I'm sitting on my hands for another couple of years only to discover that all the creative advancements of X are predominantly prosumer nonsense and marketing spin when all I want is an editing package I can edit my with that makes the most of my Mac.

FCP8 could have been that if they gave me 64 bit and real background rendering (rather than what seems to be, from posts, the idle rendering in X) but instead they 'reinvented' the wheel, made a lot of fanbois gasp and apologists chastise and middle class hobbyists wonder if £180 is money well spent when iMovie is free but made people like myself... not a post house... think t0ssers, you just shat on my set up and have made me learn a new editing programme when I should be spending that time working on paid jobs.

And if i'm going to earn a new bit of editing software, is it going to be X with its flaws, bugs and limitations or Premier 5.5 with a company behind it that appears to care about the fact I edit for a living?

No brainer.

So, in summary:

* no, having FCP7 on our machines isn't solace when we've been waiting 2 years for an upgrade from 32 bit.

* no, waiting another 2 years on the off chance that X will stop being a control freak and allow me to do what I want the way I want (which I always could) isn't tolerable

* no, if i have to learn a new editing system it won't be the limited X

* and my sympathy goes out even more to those with seats and external editors who have been shat on even more than me.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 4, 2011 at 1:46:36 pm

[Julian Bowman] "I'm not a post house. I'm an indie making a living from the not for profit sector. I work on my own, and from everything I've read about X I won't touch it with a barge pole at the moment."

This sounds a lot like you haven't actually used it.

[Julian Bowman] "In a couple of years, when all the apologists suggest X will be ready for me, i'll be long gone over to premier."

Specifically what features do you need that you believe will take "a couple of years" to show up in FCP X?

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index


Julian Bowman
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 4, 2011 at 2:11:58 pm

Chris Kenny on Jul 4, 2011 at 2:46:36 pm

[Julian Bowman] "I'm not a post house. I'm an indie making a living from the not for profit sector. I work on my own, and from everything I've read about X I won't touch it with a barge pole at the moment."

[Chris Kenny] This sounds a lot like you haven't actually used it.


Actually I would suggest that to most people that fact was implicitly implied in that statement. Perhaps some people would need that point spoon fed to them, but I like to err on people reading and comprehending things. If it appeases you though, then, no, I haven't used it yet. Yes I have read lots. If you feel my opinion in invalid simply because I have read and not used then i'd suggest we stop a conversation now as i'm just going to roll my eyes at you and walk on by.

[Julian Bowman] "In a couple of years, when all the apologists suggest X will be ready for me, i'll be long gone over to premier."

[Chris Kenny] Specifically what features do you need that you believe will take "a couple of years" to show up in FCP X?


Multicam (shoot 6 camera live sessions too). Ability to put my rushes and render files somewhere different from my project files, and wherever I need/want. Open FCP7 projects. Capture from tape. Plugins. The ability to create little bits of my edit further along my timeline without it being sucked into the main edit as it is the way i like to do things. Multiple sequences in one project, rather than multiple projects just to have multiple sequences. Call me old fashioned (and please do) but a manual save option. The keyboard strokes to be the same as they are in 7.

Now a lot of this I can get from Premier, including I believe (and a tad ironically) 7s keyboard layout and the ability to open 7 projects. Some of the above may have workarounds but a workaround isn't as good as the ability to do it... at least to me.

I'm sure if i thought long enough now i'd remember other things i'd read and would need, and there are things I have read which beggared belief (can't put a dissolve at the start of a clip was one... of course there was a workaround, but why need a workaround for that?).

And if i did use it (and I would if i was given a beta copy for free to experiment with, but i'm not pissing away £170ish when I can put that towards my upgrade for CS5.5 Production suite) then I can imagine i will find more.

Now, I appreciate that Apple have said they'll be adding or trying to add or considering adding some/all of these features at some undisclosed point in the future... but then they said X was going to be an upgrade and awesome, so i'm holding no stock in ifs, buts and maybes. I have read a fair few posts on this forum already to recognise your position on all this, and mostly it appears to be 'I LIKE IT AND THIS OTHER STUFF WILL COME, SO THERE!!!) but you don't know if any of it will come, just as i don't know it won't. What I do know is I want a 64 bit editing programme I can use now and X falls far short.

Thus I'm moving on to one I know does what I want and by a company I believe I can trust. Which i believe was the whole point of my post and still utterly valid.

Thanks for the troll though... fancy a cup of tea?


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 4, 2011 at 2:19:54 pm

[Julian Bowman] "Multicam (shoot 6 camera live sessions too). Ability to put my rushes and render files somewhere different from my project files, and wherever I need/want. Open FCP7 projects. Capture from tape. Plugins. The ability to create little bits of my edit further along my timeline without it being sucked into the main edit as it is the way i like to do things. Multiple sequences in one project, rather than multiple projects just to have multiple sequences. Call me old fashioned (and please do) but a manual save option. The keyboard strokes to be the same as they are in 7."

Aside from multicam, which will probably be there in a year, you're largely asking for things to work the way they used to. I assure, none of that will take two years to show up. Because it will never show up. If your primarily objection to FCP X is that it works very differently (which seems to be the case), then leave. Because while all of the stuff about Apple not caring about pros is essentially misdirection based on screwy market definitions, it is the case that Apple legitimately does not care about people who's primary focus is on legacy approaches and legacy compatibility.

Personally, though, I find it rather absurd for you to demand that FCP X be modified to work like FCP 7 when you haven't actually invested any effort to figure out whether the way FCP X works might have its own benefits.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Julian Bowman
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 4, 2011 at 2:26:40 pm

[troll] Aside from multicam, which will probably be there in a year, you're largely asking for things to work the way they used to. I assure, none of that will take two years to show up. Because it will never show up. If your primarily objection to FCP X is that it works very differently (which seems to be the case), then leave.

Wow, thanks for the permission and the idea.... oh, hang on, already had that one. Oh, and probably falls into the ifs, buts and maybes category. Sorry, guess you're a spoonfeeder type.

[troll] Personally, though, I find it rather absurd for you to demand that FCP X be modified to work like FCP 7 when you haven't actually invested any effort to figure out whether the way FCP X works might have its own benefits.

Sorry, thought this was being sold as the upgrade to FCP. Silly me, didn't realise they'd changed the definition to upgrade. And again, returning to my original post (do actually read all the words or see a negative and decide you want to move in, ego and all?) why waste time and money learning FCPX (a new system to me) when I can learn PP5.5 (a new system to me) which does everything I want now?

Personally, though, I find it rather absurd for you to demand I waste my time learning X when you haven't invested any effort to figure out the way I work and whether that may have its own benefits to me... which is, ultimately, and funnily enough, what I care about in this specific circumstance.

Guess you didn't want a cup of tea then. Sorry, I appreciate it doesn't taste the same when the water isn't boiled on a magnetic hob.


Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 5, 2011 at 5:11:26 pm

Chris, let's say you were opening a boutique digital cinema production company that acquired on RED today. Would you choose FCPX as your editorial platform? Would it offer you everything you need to do your job if you were opening your doors today?


[Chris Kenny] "Because while all of the stuff about Apple not caring about pros is essentially misdirection based on screwy market definitions, it is the case that Apple legitimately does not care about people who's primary focus is on legacy approaches and legacy compatibility."

This isn't about "screwy market definitions" or "legacy approaches and legacy compatibility." It's about Apple opening a gap in the market that they use to cover, and current FCP users trying to figure out what their next step should be.

Anyone making a forward-looking projection about FCPX is just reading tea leaves. That includes Julian, that includes me -- and that includes you, too. I respect you for adding some balance on FCPX's positives, but what good does it do to badger people who rely on features that FCPX doesn't have?

I see four options for current FCP users:
  • They may transition to FCPX and have faith that Apple and/or third parties will provide what they need
  • They may run FCP7 for a while and try to wait out the development of FCPX to see if it will offer what they need before transitioning
  • They may transition to a different product
  • They may drop the notion of allegiance to a specific editorial platform

My money is on the last option. In a time of change, fortune favors the nimble, not the faithful.

Please note that I apply the notion of faith equally to the literal FCP transition (FCP > FCPX) as well as the "conceptual" FCP transition (FCP > Premiere?).

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 5, 2011 at 5:40:18 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Chris, let's say you were opening a boutique digital cinema production company that acquired on RED today. Would you choose FCPX as your editorial platform? Would it offer you everything you need to do your job if you were opening your doors today?"

I like what Apple is doing. I believe they have the most compelling long-term vision in this market. But there are critical features missing.

I guess my approach, if I were getting started today, would be to buy Creative Suite, because we'd need Photoshop/Illustrator/AfterEffects/Encore anyway, and use Premiere until Apple added the necessary features to FCP X. But as it is, we're just going to stick with FCP 7 until then.

We actually don't need multicam for our indie feature work, so the truth is, if FCP X supports (according to Apple's timeline) XML exporting in a few weeks, audio track assignment by the end of the summer, and 'real' video output somewhere in that time frame, we might only be two or three months from being able to integrate it into our Red pipeline. Even if Resolve doesn't add support for the new XML format right away, I could probably write a script to bridge that gap. I've certainly written enough to fill in gaps in FCP 7's functionality over the years.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 7:30:06 pm

[Andrew Stone] "I have spelled this out at least once a day for the past week or so and so have many of the long time pros"

Andrew,

You cannot win. Chris Kenny will simply wear you down.

As you already seem to have figured out, he refuses to acknowledge or respond to your salient points no matter how many times you spell them out. And, he is relentless in his use of circular reasoning and non sequiturs, which makes any discussion futile.

If you want to be ignored get yourself a cat.


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 7:37:21 pm

I still fantasise that there will be some formal japanese surrender of his position where he just like hands over his flag and breaks his mouse over his knee.
I have gone way too far down the rabbit hole here myself.


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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:56:04 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "As you already seem to have figured out, he refuses to acknowledge or respond to your salient points no matter how many times you spell them out. And, he is relentless in his use of circular reasoning and non sequiturs, which makes any discussion futile. "

I love that you're trying to portray me as some kind of zealot for saying it's too early to call an app that was release ten days ago a "failure".

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:38:00 pm

[Chris Kenny] "you're trying to portray me as some kind of zealot for saying it's too early to call an app that was release ten days ago a "failure"."

That's your spin on my position, and it's not accurate. Nor do I "portray" you - you portray yourself over and over again, constantly, without my assistance.

The problem is, the methods of argumentation you use are dishonest for the all the reasons I mentioned, just as you've been dishonest yet again here, by completely ignoring what I said, and spinning the argument in the direction that you desire.

Here, I'll repeat what I said, and I'll stick by it:

[David Roth Weiss] "As you already seem to have figured out, he refuses to acknowledge or respond to your salient points no matter how many times you spell them out. And, he is relentless in his use of circular reasoning and non sequiturs, which makes any discussion futile. "


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:45:23 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "The problem is, the methods of argumentation you use are dishonest for the all the reasons I mentioned, just as you've been dishonest yet again here, by completely ignoring what I said, and spinning the argument in the direction that you desire. "

Says the guy who essentially never replies to the substance of my posts, instead preferring to make vague insinuations about how I argue.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:01:18 pm

to be fair to chris, like any old debater - I'm also pretty ruthlessly selective in the things I respond to. Mostly here I'm trying to hit Apple on the bonce for what I think is fairly disgraceful behaviour to a creative community that was instinctively, and by long historical practise, wedded to them, their hardware and their software - you know - they were the company for our sort, he said maudlin.

Now when I say hit them on the bonce of course, I actually mean bang my gnats splayed forearms onto the windshield of the apple Audi R8 doing ninety down the future lane highway - god alone knows they can't actually see us.


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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:09:13 pm

ROTFL


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 11:53:42 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I'm also pretty ruthlessly selective in the things I respond to"

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Now when I say hit them on the bonce of course, I actually mean bang my gnats splayed forearms onto the windshield of the apple Audi R8 doing ninety down the future lane highway - god alone knows they can't actually see us"

Yeah but don't you see Aindreas. . . You're funny and witty.

Therein lies the difference.

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

Alan Okey
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:21:08 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "If you want to be ignored get yourself a cat."

David, you have obviously never owned a Siamese.

;)


Return to posts index

Buddy Couch
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:34:52 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "If you want to be ignored get yourself a cat."

More like a wife! Wait let me rephrase a wife of 15 plus years!


hehe j/k

Buddy


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 11:50:25 am

[David Roth Weiss] "You cannot win. Chris Kenny will simply wear you down."

[David Roth Weiss] "he is relentless in his use of circular reasoning and non sequiturs, which makes any discussion futile. "

David I totally agree. He just doesn't get it does he.

You have to admire his resilience though . . .

. . . don't you?

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:34:41 pm

but chris, well actually, that was an incredibly prescient posting, but still:

http://blogs.forbes.com/briancaulfield/2011/07/01/former-final-cut-pro-deve...

That like, is, you know, the guy who was coding FCP for six years, he was there when FCPX was cranking up - he definitively says FCPX is a prosumer app for a prosumer market. Thats who apple is going for. to quote him directly for a second.

"Apple doesn't care about the pro space "

and

“The pro market is too small for Apple to care about it,”

I mean well, this is going to be tricky for you Chris, I am extremely curious to see how you're going to turn this one around.

Because Chris, if the app does restore professional features like.. in and out points that sustain, markers on the timeline, and the ability to select clips without having the playhead jump to your location... ahem... it will be, to a certain extent, happy chance, it might work out, but apple is in no way focused on the professional market. That guy just said so. He seems like he would know.


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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 7:20:29 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Because Chris, if the app does restore professional features like.. in and out points that sustain, markers on the timeline, and the ability to select clips without having the playhead jump to your location... ahem... it will be, to a certain extent, happy chance, it might work out, but apple is in no way focused on the professional market. That guy just said so. He seems like he would know."

Final Cut Pro X's crossover appeal to the prosumer market is certainly no accident. In point of fact, the line between the pro market and the prosumer market is getting pretty hazy these days. I mean, what's the difference between a random guy with a DSLR, and and indie filmmaker? Maybe nothing but a couple of months involving pointing that DSLR at some actors.

This really reminds me a lot of the arguments that have been all over various Mac forums over the last few years. There, you've seen this emerging meme that Apple is a consumer electronics company, and can therefore be expected to increasingly neglect the Mac. There was a lot of paranoia about this when Apple removed the 'Computer' from its name. But the key insight here is that Apple itself sees no distinction between these markets. Computers are consumer electronics devices; Apple thought of them that way at least as far back as the original Mac.

Apple sees markets in unusual ways. People who see things differently from Apple have a tendency project motivations onto Apple that make no sense in light of Apple's own understanding, and then make what turn out to be hilariously inaccurate predictions about Apple's future behavior on that basis. It's an old, tired game.

In the video world, pros need a few tools consumers don't. Scopes. Support for formats larger than 1080p. Organizational features that support long projects. These are already in FCP X. Pros also need some specialized workflow features, which Apple will deal with by publishing an API and allowing third-party vendors to handle specific formats. Probably better than Apple did in FCP 7.

The necessary capabilities will be there. That's what matters. People are entirely too obsessed with this notion that paying attention to them is the key to Apple's long-term success in the pro video market. But the idea that tools targeted exclusively at professionals will beat out tools with crossover appeal in professional markets is highly ahistorical... or we wouldn't all edit video on "personal computers".

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 7:33:46 pm

not bad chris, you did pretty well there considering.


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


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 7:55:53 pm

[Chris Kenny] "...make what turn out to be hilariously inaccurate predictions about Apple's future behavior on that basis."
Hi
Like the fact that the bulk educational deal (hardware + software) that was there on Monday would be there on Tuesday...

[Chris Kenny] "...It's an old, tired game."
Good game! Good game!
(British TV gameshow presenter's catchphrase).

Apple have (unilaterally) decided that educational establishments and professional post businesses don't need any incentive to get this software to fly out of the App Store.

Like iPhone apps, the kids will download (= pay for) it anyway, so there's no need for ANY long term formal incentives or committments.
Does that seem a good business plan for a college or business - writing that sort of partner in?

Fine for the kids though...
When they find a Red Scarlet free in their coco-pops ;-)


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:01:49 pm

[Paul Dickin] "Apple have (unilaterally) decided that educational establishments and professional post businesses don't need any incentive to get this software to fly out of the App Store.

Like iPhone apps, the kids will download (= pay for) it anyway, so there's no need for ANY long term formal incentives or committments.
Does that seem a good business plan for a college or business - writing that sort of partner in?"


It's kind of silly to make long-term projections about FCP X's success or failure on the basis of what are pretty clearly short-term issues arising from the fact that Apple is still working through the issues associated with releasing serious software through the App Store.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:23:07 pm

Hey Chris, what is it you have to say to the educator who now has to change an entire curriculum in a month for fall semester? Or the facilities manager in mid-tranistion to FCP products? Or the consultant for large scale FCP facility implementation who is a day is having to find another job?

I guess you're message is... "It'll be great one day, don't know when, but just hang in there!" That's not going to pay the bills.

In the meantime, all these long time supporters are now scrambling, trying to figure how they are going to make a living in a very tough world. Guess they just need to get out of the way of the new folks who'll be using this "amazing" product, eh? This little culture that has been created with these Apple products just gave the boot to the people that got them where they are. It's about more than features, buddy.

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:29:16 pm

[Marvin Holdman] "Hey Chris, what is it you have to say to the educator who now has to change an entire curriculum in a month for fall semester? Or the facilities manager in mid-tranistion to FCP products? Or the consultant for large scale FCP facility implementation who is a day is having to find another job? "

That it's unfortunate that Apple has temporarily placed a small number of people in awkward situation, but that it's unlikely to have the sort of wide impact on the future of the NLE market that people keep claiming it will.

[Marvin Holdman] "In the meantime, all these long time supporters are now scrambling, trying to figure how they are going to make a living in a very tough world."

Yeah, I know, it's really been a problem for us that Apple remotely disabled everyone's copy of FCP 7.

Oh, wait. They didn't. People are just acting like they did.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:47:56 pm

Look, I'm sure you're going to rent a crap load of indie packages to all the new folks who'll be buying FCPX. More power to you, really. I am honestly happy that you have positioned yourself in such a way to benefit from all this. But I hope you understand how callous your cheerleading is sounding to those "few" people that this affects. Does FCP7 still work, sure. We'll keep using it for a few days and keep a copy around for a long while to come. I'm not nearly as savagely affected by this as several folks I've spoken with directly, and read comments from this week. I hope it all works out and FCPX turns into something great. I really do. But I'm not going to go around telling everyone that those who are devastated by this are just whiners, cause FCP7 still works and they should just wait until things get better. The impact is real and immediate for too many good people.

What I'm trying to tell you is that your (and Apple's) smug indifference to the people that made FCP7 a success is not doing anyone any favors. Basically, they slammed the doors to the bulkheads of the passenger ship before telling anyone the ship was going to sink. It was ethically wrong and frankly unnecessary. You are waving your pom-poms over the corpses of your ancestors. It's not very becoming. That's all.

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:52:36 pm

[Marvin Holdman] "What I'm trying to tell you is that your (and Apple's) smug indifference to the people that made FCP7 a success is not doing anyone any favors. Basically, they slammed the doors to the bulkheads of the passenger ship before telling anyone the ship was going to sink. It was ethically wrong and frankly unnecessary. You are waving your pom-poms over the corpses of your ancestors. It's not very becoming. That's all."

I'm not arguing that this transition won't be painful for some people. I'm not arguing that nobody should migrate to another NLE. And I'm not saying you're wrong that Apple should have left FCS3 on sale during a transitional period.

All I'm doing is pointing out that people writing off FCP X in the pro market are doing so hilariously prematurely.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:14:56 pm

Guess I'm just having a problem seeing the "hilarious" in all this.

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

james carey
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:04:14 pm

[Marvin Holdman] "Guess I'm just having a problem seeing the "hilarious" in all this."
amen, the only thing laughable (if not admirable) is the dogged determination Chris displays with his tireless apologies for Apple's screw up. I understand all his arguments, i just don't agree with most of them.
But I do admire his determination.

Jim Carey
Director of Video, Radical Entertainment
linkedin: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/jcarey256
mobygames: http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,17212/


Return to posts index

Richard Boyd
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 5:33:28 am

Chris:
That it's unfortunate that Apple has temporarily placed a small number of people in awkward situation, but that it's unlikely to have the sort of wide impact on the future of the NLE market that people keep claiming it will.

I currently have 55 seats of FCS7 in 2 different editing labs for my students. I was planning on updating this fall to the new version of FCP that we have been anticipating. Aside from all of the other issues, attempting to set up 55 different I-Tunes accounts so that we can individually download 55 different copies of FCX is absurd beyond the ken of mortal man.

So, we are considering our options - best guess we will probably move to Adobe PP. And guess what - our students will train on Adobe, buy Adobe, use Adobe, convince their friends to use Adobe, etc. We train 200 or so students a year. Multiply us by dozens of different schools and a few years, and you know what - you have a pretty wide impact on the future of the NLE market.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 11:07:40 am

[Richard Boyd] "I currently have 55 seats of FCS7 in 2 different editing labs for my students. I was planning on updating this fall to the new version of FCP that we have been anticipating. Aside from all of the other issues, attempting to set up 55 different I-Tunes accounts so that we can individually download 55 different copies of FCX is absurd beyond the ken of mortal man.

So, we are considering our options - best guess we will probably move to Adobe PP. And guess what - our students will train on Adobe, buy Adobe, use Adobe, convince their friends to use Adobe, etc. We train 200 or so students a year. Multiply us by dozens of different schools and a few years, and you know what - you have a pretty wide impact on the future of the NLE market."


Apple has already announced that volume/education licensing will be addressed. Yes, they may lose some sales this year as a consequence of not having this sorted at launch, but I doubt it'll be statistically significant in the long run.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:30:20 pm

[Chris Kenny] "It's kind of silly to make long-term projections about FCP X's success or failure on the basis of what are pretty clearly short-term issues arising from the fact that Apple is still working through the issues associated with releasing serious software through the App Store."

Almost no one is actually making this argument.

The argument that I see most -- and the one that makes sense to me -- is about trust and reputation. It's not just about FCPX as a product, it's not just about FCPX's bold new features, and it's not just about the missing functionality.

Apple's recent actions around the Pro Apps and in the professional space, going several years back and culminating in last week's release of FCPX and EOL of FCP7, have caused reasonable people to reasonably question Apple's role in the professional market.

It's difficult to divine Apple's strategy toward the pro market by watching their actions over the past few years. They are creating a tremendous amount of uncertainty.

The question is not as simple as "Does FCPX do what you need?" or "Will FCPX do what you need in a year's time?" as you might have us ask.

The larger question is this: "Can you rely on Apple to supply the products you need for your business -- or is there another vendor that understands your needs better and offers a compelling platform?" FCPX is not an upgrade -- it's a migration. If you're migrating, you may as well consider all the options on equal footing. Some have seen enough from Apple, and are moving on.

If enough people migrate away now, it may not matter to the pros if FCPX has tape I/O in a year, because another vendor will have picked up many new users who many not be willing to switch back.

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:38:04 pm

[Walter Soyka] "If enough people migrate away now, it may not matter to the pros if FCPX has tape I/O in a year, because another vendor will have picked up many new users who many not be willing to switch back."

Absolutely right - great post. In a year's time the migration will be complete and it will take something truly extraordinary from Apple to lure them back - and something even more extraordinary to make them forget the events of the last ten days.

Adobe have got a really strong offering which they have shown a massive commitment to taking forward at a very considerable pace and AVID are finally coming to realize that they need also to speak to professionals in the lower echelons of the market. They really won't have to work too hard at this point to make a compelling vcase for their products and there are already signs in just a few days that their messages are getting through.

Apple may well have left it too late to turn the game around.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:52:19 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Absolutely right - great post. In a year's time the migration will be complete and it will take something truly extraordinary from Apple to lure them back - and something even more extraordinary to make them forget the events of the last ten days."

Call me old fashioned, but I've never done an upgrade to machines that I'm using to make money for a business till the software or OS has been out for at least 6 months (though typically a year.). 2 months ago I finally took our machines up to snow leopard. Quite frankly I just don't understand the sense of urgency to make a decisions right this minute to move to adobe or avid.

[Simon Ubsdell] "Adobe have got a really strong offering which they have shown a massive commitment to taking forward at a very considerable pace"

I really think adobe is going to end up with a lot more users...but it actually won't even help them out that much. The way they started packaging their software if you needed AE and PS you might as well have bought the Production bundle. So a lot of FCP editors already have Premiere. So adobe will end up with more users, but really won't be selling that much more software.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:00:55 pm

[Matt Callac] "Quite frankly I just don't understand the sense of urgency to make a decisions right this minute to move to adobe or avid."

My point is that Apple clearly don't have the ability to "put their house in order" in any very short timescale. It is hard for me to credit that they will have a genuinely appealing product (appealing to the industry at large - I like it already, but that's not enough) within anything less than a year. "Right this minute", no - "within the next twelve months", surely yes.

[Matt Callac] "So adobe will end up with more users, but really won't be selling that much more software."

If you are an Adobe user I'm sure you can't be unaware that their business model is built on charging healthy amounts for upgrades - I have no doubt this model works pretty well for them.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:07:35 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "
If you are an Adobe user I'm sure you can't be unaware that their business model is built on charging healthy amounts for upgrades - I have no doubt this model works pretty well for them."


yep. that's why I was at CS2 for so long and just now went to CS5 (and they threw in 5.5 upgrade for free since we bought just before the release).

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:29:27 pm

[Matt Callac] "Call me old fashioned, but I've never done an upgrade to machines that I'm using to make money for a business till the software or OS has been out for at least 6 months (though typically a year.). 2 months ago I finally took our machines up to snow leopard. Quite frankly I just don't understand the sense of urgency to make a decisions right this minute to move to adobe or avid."

How long will it take you to feel comfortable with FCPX, if and when it becomes feature-complete? How do you feel about the fact that Avid and Adobe have older, longer-tested code bases?

I think that relatively few people are actually jumping ship this week. I think most people are still working on FCP7 today, because as Chris correctly pointed out, FCP7 installs haven't self-destructed.

That said, why not start to test the waters with other platforms? FCPX is not an upgrade to FCP7, and project legacy is no longer a selling point for the Final Cut platform. If you are an FCP user, your next NLE software will be a migration, no matter who the developer is, so doesn't it make sense to consider all the options?

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:48:51 pm

[Walter Soyka] "
How long will it take you to feel comfortable with FCPX, if and when it becomes feature-complete? How do you feel about the fact that Avid and Adobe have older, longer-tested code bases?"


It'll take me longer to get "comfortable" with FCPX b/c it's a different paradigm. I know I could get up and running on premiere in about a week and avid in about 2 weeks.

I'm currently learning FCPX and have been in downtime since it came out. That way once it DOES meet my complete needs I can hit the ground running.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:43:57 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Apple's recent actions around the Pro Apps and in the professional space, going several years back and culminating in last week's release of FCPX and EOL of FCP7, have caused reasonable people to reasonably question Apple's role in the professional market.
"


There. Somebody stop and photograph that sentence. That's it for me.

And there is valid reason for the suspicion: the guy who engineered FCP for six years at apple and was there for the ramp up to FCPX, has just said the following:
from his piece on his blog: http://sachin.posterous.com/why-apple-built-final-cut-pro-x

"Apple doesn't care about the pro space "

"The pro market is too small for Apple to care about it."

I mean, how much more clear do we need it?

Apple Do Not Care About The Market We Comprise.

That Is Problematic If We're Expecting To Get Software Off Them To Meet Our Needs.


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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:48:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Apple's recent actions around the Pro Apps and in the professional space, going several years back and culminating in last week's release of FCPX and EOL of FCP7, have caused reasonable people to reasonably question Apple's role in the professional market."

Some people have bought into an elaborate narrative of Apple abandoning the pro market, but the actual evidence that supposedly supports this narrative is fairly weak. For instance, this narrative really got its start, as far as I can see, when the FCS3 upgrade wasn't as ambitious as some had wanted to see. People like me were pointing out that was probably because Apple was working on a major rewrite. That turned out to be correct, but somehow none of the folks skeptical about Apple's commitment to the pro market changed their opinions... they just transferred their skepticism to the new product, and are now having a field day with the fact that the initial release is missing some features.

There's this kind of oddly inconsistent logic that I've seen several times now that goes "Even if they add the pro features I need, I won't buy it; I won't trust them because they don't care about the pro market".

But if they add these features back (and they've already explicitly said they will, with respect to some of the more important ones), that demonstrates they do care about the pro market.

Now, you can argue that you don't feel comfortable relying a company willing to do anything as radical as Apple has done with FCP X... but even Apple does this sort of thing only rarely. I doubt they're going to scrap and rewrite FCP X in the next decade, and predicting any company's behavior a decade in the future is a fairly pointless exercise. I'm not saying this is very likely or trying to spread FUD here, but one can imagine scenarios in which Avid is out of business in a decade. No vendor is risk-free over those timescales.

[Walter Soyka] "If enough people migrate away now, it may not matter to the pros if FCPX has tape I/O in a year, because another vendor will have picked up many new users who many not be willing to switch back."

It's not like the next 12 months are a unique "open enrollment" period where users can switch NLEs. Users can switch NLEs at any time. And new users enter the market on a regular basis. If FCP X is fundamentally a solid product for pro editing in 6-12 months, I doubt it will have any trouble gaining pro users.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:56:35 pm

[Chris Kenny] "I won't trust them because they don't care about the pro market"

I think beneath all this there is a growing perception, which should perhaps have been apparent before, that there is not a "natural fit", as we say in business circles, between Apple and the pro-editing (and compositing, and visual effects, and pro-audio, and motion graphics) communities.

That they can still make products that appeal to those groups is something of an anomaly.

This is not a company with a vested interest in satisfying these groups. There is an imbalance of need here and I think many people in the industry are starting to perceive that and to appreciate to what extent it puts their businesses at risk to stay vested in a supplier who has the potential (whether or not it is currently an intention) to walk away from them.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:36:47 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "This is not a company with a vested interest in satisfying these groups. There is an imbalance of need here and I think many people in the industry are starting to perceive that and to appreciate to what extent it puts their businesses at risk to stay vested in a supplier who has the potential (whether or not it is currently an intention) to walk away from them."

I've actually been meaning to write a blog post on this notion (that seems to have crystalized around Brinkmann's "X vs. Pro." blog post) that it's an unalloyed good for a vendor to be afraid of its customers.

It's not.

Yes, it results in new versions of software that can open the old versions' files. That's pretty convenient. But if you filed off the operating system chrome and showed this screen shot and this one to a couple of reasonably savvy computer users with no knowledge specific to the video editing market, and asked them to guess what year each application was released in... well, personally, ignoring the screen resolution clue, I'd guess about 1997 for the first, and within the last year or two for the second.

Being afraid of your customers also causes stagnation.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:16:17 pm

maybe maybe maybe maybe - you could actually turn out to be right chris - the interesting thing about this is that it's a crapshoot. In terms of quantum futures, this thing is just a shimmering mess - there is no way of knowing the outcome here - apple have gone that mad with the software pitch.

I'm still just basically deeply shocked at their cavalier treatment of a community that's livelihood reliant on the software it uses, this is not iTunes.
I mean the sheer number of better ways they could have chosen to handle this beggars the mind and well, engenders real valid concern - not paranoia - concern. There is something of a moral onus on apple to step forward and speak clearly to the issues people are facing here, in education if nothing else - some of the posts from educators I found startling. For a company that touts its credentials in education, their behaviour here is nothing short of disgraceful.


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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:59:25 pm

[Chris Kenny] "Some people have bought into an elaborate narrative of Apple abandoning the pro market, but the actual evidence that supposedly supports this narrative is fairly weak."

one more time: the guy who engineered FCP for six years at apple and was there for the ramp up to FCPX, has just said the following:
from his piece on his blog: http://sachin.posterous.com/why-apple-built-final-cut-pro-x

"Apple doesn't care about the pro space "

"The pro market is too small for Apple to care about it.
"


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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:03:12 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "one more time: the guy who engineered FCP for six years at apple and was there for the ramp up to FCPX, has just said the following:
from his piece on his blog: http://sachin.posterous.com/why-apple-built-final-cut-pro-x

"Apple doesn't care about the pro space "

"The pro market is too small for Apple to care about it.""


The argument he advances is only sufficient to justify a belief that Apple does not care exclusively about the pro market.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:07:30 pm

ah gimme a break.

"Apple doesn't care about the pro space "

"The pro market is too small for Apple to care about it."


They Don't Care About The Market We Comprise. They Are Not Qualified Statements. Expecting To Get Software To Meet Your Needs From A Vendor Who Doesn't Care About Your Market Is A Problematic Position.


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


Return to posts index

John Chay
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:08:04 pm

Compare that to Adobe's stance..."Adobe Premiere Pro, designed by PROs for PROs.




http://www.john-chay.com

Editor/Videographer


Return to posts index

Gary Pollard
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 1:40:50 am

And there's more than one pro market.

For the MANY people cutting for daily or weekly broadcast on single workstations, with one producer or reporter sitting next to one editor, FCP X has few, if any, drawbacks.

What happened to all those people who used to say "Don't buy the first generation of anything" who are now so thoroughly furious that this one doesn't do everything they want in the first week? (Apple's one huge mistake here is signalling lack of support for older versions).

For MANY pro users, as well as a huge mass market, FCP X is a step forward. Let's face it: track based editing is basically a literal porting of the physical process of editing film, mag tape, etc etc, into an electronic environment. I'm in my fifties, and it's familiar to me too. But I would hate to see the new paradigm of FCP X get sunk rather than find its place, wherever that may be. It may even turn out that the magnetic timeline proves itself and AVID and Premiere will end up going to it too. What a ruckus that would cause.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 2:05:30 am

[Gary Pollard] "It may even turn out that the magnetic timeline proves itself and AVID and Premiere will end up going to it too."

Or, it may prove to be an unnecessary solution looking for a problem, that we'll all be laughing about some day. Or are you suggesting the success of the magnetic timeline is a given?


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Gary Pollard
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 2:28:52 am

I really don't understand the depth of antagonism and hostility towards some of those who have the temerity to see some merit in FCP X.

"May" is a word with very clear meaning in the English language.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 2:47:36 am

[Gary Pollard] ""May" is a word with very clear meaning in the English language."

And is often used by those unwilling to commit unless questioned. You're waffling Gary, one minute you're not certain and using "may" and the next you're suggesting that your meaning is clear. That's all pretty confusing...


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Gary Pollard
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 3:08:58 am

I said exactly what I meant.

Of those actually trying out the new working methods, many are liking them and seeing their function. If you don't that's fine. That really doesn't justify the personal nastiness seen here over the past two weeks.

It "may" become a new paradigm.

But then, heck, I've been known to edit programmes for broadcast on Vegas.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:21:16 pm

[Chris Kenny] "Some people have bought into an elaborate narrative of Apple abandoning the pro market, but the actual evidence that supposedly supports this narrative is fairly weak."

Not abandoning the pro market, Chris -- either not understanding it, or not caring it about. Either is bad. Many people feel this way and may switch platforms as a result.

And fairly weak evidence? Really?

Shake, Color, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack Pro, Cinema Tools, Xserve, Final Cut Server?

The sudden EOL of FCP7 -- with no new product that can read its project files, and the stated suggestion that there will be no migration tool?

The fact that Apple didn't bring more third-party developers on board before the FCPX launch?

The lack of proper video monitoring?

The fact that Apple allowed rumors of the vaporware Phenomenon compositing project to persist for years?

The fact that DVDSP never got Blu-ray?

The fact that the Mac Pro line has gone for over a year without an update twice since 2008?

The fact that Apple has basically ended NVIDIA support at exactly the time that Autodesk and DaVinci really began relying on it?

The fact that Apple has essentially sidestepped the VARs that supply many pro's studios?

The fact that Apple removed ExpressCard 34 from the MBP 15" in place of a memory card reader?

Goofy little things like glossy displays instead of matte?

There is no one huge problem (aside from legacy project support, which I think is a far bigger deal for far more post facilities than you're considering), but there are plenty of little ones.


[Chris Kenny] "It's not like the next 12 months are a unique "open enrollment" period where users can switch NLEs."

Actually, it is. Apple has ended forward compatibility with legacy FCP projects. For all FCP7 users, their next NLE -- no matter who the developer is -- will be a migration.

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

John Chay
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 9:40:50 pm

We have a winner.




http://www.john-chay.com

Editor/Videographer


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:49:54 pm

I've grouped your points by explanation, with any specific comments included afterwards.

Attributable to common Apple practices such as aggressively consolidating product lines, deliberately discouraging the use of media formats Apple disfavors, or shipping initial versions of software and devices with 'important' features missing:

Shake, Color, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack Pro, Cinema Tools, Xserve, Final Cut Server?

The fact that DVDSP never got Blu-ray? -- Notice Macs still can't play Blu-ray either. Apple just doesn't like Blu-ray. Or discs in general, these days.

The lack of proper video monitoring?

Attributable to Apple's culture of secrecy:

The fact that Apple didn't bring more third-party developers on board before the FCPX launch?

The fact that Apple allowed rumors of the vaporware Phenomenon compositing project to persist for years?

Attributable to factors beyond Apple's control:

The fact that the Mac Pro line has gone for over a year without an update twice since 2008? -- Apple updates the Mac Pro whenever Intel releases a new generation of suitable processors. The Xeon doesn't get updated as fast as Intel's consumer processors.

Attributable to Apple believing it has a better way:

The fact that Apple removed ExpressCard 34 from the MBP 15" in place of a memory card reader? -- Apple's better way is Thunderbolt. Yes, I'm aware it didn't show up at the same time ExpressCard was removed on the 15". But they left ExpressCard on the 17", clearly understanding there were some people who really needed it.

The fact that Apple has essentially sidestepped the VARs that supply many pro's studios? -- Apple has been pretty obvious about their better way here.

The sudden EOL of FCP7 -- with no new product that can read its project files, and the stated suggestion that there will be no migration tool? -- No migration tool because the timeline approach that Apple thinks is superior makes one difficult. EOL of FCP 7 discussed more below.

Not really accurate:

Goofy little things like glossy displays instead of matte? -- Glossy displays are sharper and have higher contrast. They're not obviously worse for professional work. In fact, they're better if you can control environmental light, which we build suites for in this business. Also, Apple has gone out of its way to continue offering matte displays on the MBP. On towers they don't really need to, because you can use any screen.

The fact that Apple has basically ended NVIDIA support at exactly the time that Autodesk and DaVinci really began relying on it? -- Apple reevaluates this with each generation of machines. Expecting them to put NVIDIA GPUs in every Mac in every generation because of a couple of apps is not really reasonable. Lion actually adds support for additional GPUs, including NVIDIA GPUs. Apple created OpenCL and pushed it as a cross-platform standard to solve this problem long-term.



You may strenuously disagree with Apple about its decisions in some of these cases. That's not what this discussion is about. This discussion is about Apple's motivations. And all of these actions are explainable without resorting to the explanation that Apple doesn't care about the pro market. In fact, they're all explainable by aspects of Apple's corporate culture that are pretty widely understood and that we can see operating in other market segments.

Meanwhile, this is all cherry-picking. There are other things that show Apple does care about the pro market, including the fact that they rewrote FCP at all and many of the features FCP contains, Thunderbolt, some seriously high-end laptops, the continued existence of the Mac Pro, etc.


Finally, let's come back to the issue of Apple no longer selling FCS3: I believe this to be an error on Apple's part. I think they're really excited about the whole App Store thing, and they've always been obsessive over inventory management and small product lines. They probably figured people who really needed copies of FCS3 could still find them aftermarket, and they think through all of the implications this would have for their institutional customers. Their culture of secrecy, remember, probably means the institutional sales reps where totally out of the loop and couldn't point these problems out.

Whether Apple will admit this error and backtrack, it's hard to say. But as an error, one can't really read much in the way of motivation into it.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:06:13 pm

[Chris Kenny] "But as an error, one can't really read much in the way of motivation into it."

and me with a shiny new auto card response, given to me by a half decade apple FCP developer. and well, It's sort of debating kryptonite.


"Apple doesn't care about the pro space "

"The pro market is too small for Apple to care about it."



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


Return to posts index

Gary Pollard
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 1:48:26 am

[Chris Kenny] " they've always been obsessive over inventory management and small product lines."

Not judging by the fact they never get enough new products in the stores in time to meet demand at rollout. I've seen companies with greater demands manage it. (Oh, did someone say "hype" and "marketing ploy"?) ;-)

No disagreement with most of your other points though.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 2:26:17 am

[Chris Kenny] "I've grouped your points by explanation, with any specific comments included afterwards."

Any one of the things I mentioned may be reasonably explained -- but the pattern, taken all together, is alarming to the professionals using these products and may show that Apple is not well-focused on professionals' needs.


[Chris Kenny] "Attributable to common Apple practices such as aggressively consolidating product lines, deliberately discouraging the use of media formats Apple disfavors, or shipping initial versions of software and devices with 'important' features missing"

Common Apple practices are not necessarily common software development practices, and in the cases I listed, certainly don't align with professionals' needs.

Apple has not aggressively consolidated product lines. They have ended every single pro product line they've ever had except FCP, Motion, Compressor, and Logic. Though FCPX may have better sound and color support than FCP7 did, the feature sets of STP and Color have not actually been folded into FCPX.

Why is Apple discouraging the use of a media format it disfavors? That may benefit them, since they distribute content electronically -- but it doesn't benefit me or my clients who want Blu-ray. A developer builds products that its core audience needs. If pros need Blu-ray, and Apple doesn't care to provide a serious solution, are they a serious, professional-focused developer?

Shipping initial versions of software and devices with important features missing is fine -- for real 1.0 products which don't have pre-existing user bases. Apple's previous version of Final Cut Pro had 2 million users who will lose important functionality if they "upgrade" from FCP v7 to FCP v10.

And how can you put important in quotes? Without external video monitoring, FCPX is appropriate for web video only. If you could currently get data out of FCPX, you could make the argument that it'd be a nice offline editor, given its new timeline and audition features, but that's not an argument you can make today.


[Chris Kenny] "Attributable to Apple's culture of secrecy"

I agree that Apple generally maintains a culture of secrecy (the sneak peek being a notable exception) -- but a corporate culture of secrecy is not professional-focused. They should be seeking the input of users to improve their products, and they should do a better job managing our expectations, especially around radical changes in feature sets.


[Chris Kenny] "Attributable to factors beyond Apple's control... Apple updates the Mac Pro whenever Intel releases a new generation of suitable processors"

Intel's Xeon update schedule is beyond Apple's control -- but Apple skipped speed bumps and USB 3.0. Adding some more slots would have been a nice Mac Pro update, too.

[Chris Kenny] "Attributable to Apple believing it has a better way... Thunderbolt, VARs, legacy projects"

Thunderbolt came out, what, two or three years after the 15" dropped ExpressCard? And now that it's been out for months, how many Thunderbolt devices are actually even available? Even when Thunderbolt devices become common, PCIe 4x at 10W won't help with GPU co-processing.

I understand building for the future, but you seem to forget that professionals also actually require solution's to today's problems, not just tomorrow's.

VARs used to integrate and sell the whole package, which Apple has never done until now -- since the FCPX package can't actually include things like external monitoring now anyway.

As for legacy projects -- I don't care how hard it is for Apple to get old timelines into FCPX, this is a critical feature for many, many pros that will hinder the adoption of FCPX. I would be willing to hand-magnetize a timeline -- it can't be worse than eye-matching an online -- and I think there are many others who would feel the same.

I like the idea that the magnetic timeline makes some of the implicit relationships in a standard multitrack timeline explicit, but to not acknowledge the importance of legacy projects is a very cavaliere attitude to take toward your current users.


[Chris Kenny] "Not really accurate... glossy displays and NVIDIA GPUs"

You say that glossy displays have higher contrast -- I'd add that it's artificially high contrast and an artificial saturation boost. The point of a glossy display is to make images pop. Professionals would largely prefer their images to be accurate.

You can certainly profile around this, but since the profile would live on the graphics card and not in a hardware LUT on a wide-gamut display, this will be of limited value.

On NVIDIA, I wasn't talking about Apple selling ATIs in the Mac Pros and removing NVIDIA as a CTO option. I'm far more concerned about their relationship with CUDA. Apple chose not to include NVIDIA's drivers in 10.6.7, and 10.6.8 broke existing and otherwise functional CUDA drivers.

OpenCL isn't there yet (though I think eventually it will be). CUDA is there today, and professional applications are making use of it today. Apple treats it as if it were tainted with Not Invented Here syndrome to the detriment of professional users with CUDA-enabled products.


[Chris Kenny] "This discussion is about Apple's motivations. And all of these actions are explainable without resorting to the explanation that Apple doesn't care about the pro market. In fact, they're all explainable by aspects of Apple's corporate culture that are pretty widely understood and that we can see operating in other market segments."

That's actually exactly my point. Apple may like pro users, but I think that if they were focusing their business on pros, they would change some of these practices which work well in the consumer space and poorly in the professional space.


[Chris Kenny] "There are other things that show Apple does care about the pro market, including the fact that they rewrote FCP at all and many of the features FCP contains, Thunderbolt, some seriously high-end laptops, the continued existence of the Mac Pro, etc."

FCPX and Thunderbolt will both have cross-market appeal, so I don't think you can point to them as totally pro-oriented.

I'm happy to see that there are still high-end laptops and Mac Pros, and I hope that they continue. I wish that the Mac Pro line add some slots to be better positioned against the Z800.

FCPX is absolutely forward-looking, and I don't want to take anything away from the great foundation Apple has built, or the very cool underlying technologies Apple has developed both for media and the operating system as a whole.

That said, some of the FCPX features which I suspect you think are evidence that Apple cares about the pro market, like 64-bit, multi-threading, and native file support, are table stakes in 2011.

If you're building a whole new imaging engine in 2011, why not make it linear floating point? Floating point was far less practical with a 32-bit app's memory constraints, but can be done on a modern machine and OS without really affecting development. Color management has been a staple on the Mac platform for years. Using CoreData to manage your project files gives you a lot of functionality for free without having to develop a massive project file saving and parsing engine.

I salute you for your tenacity, Chris, but I honestly don't understand how you can't see that there's room for reasonable disagreement on some of these points. I don't care if I sway you on your position about Apple's focus or lack thereof on the professional market, but I do hope to show that it's not unreasonable for pros in a niche market to be concerned about a niche product in the hands of an increasingly mass market-focused developer.

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 11:04:41 am

[Walter Soyka] "Any one of the things I mentioned may be reasonably explained -- but the pattern, taken all together, is alarming to the professionals using these products and may show that Apple is not well-focused on professionals' needs."

But you'll notice I didn't have to explain your points with ad-hoc one-off explanations. I agree there are systematic explanations. I just disagree about what they are.

[Walter Soyka] "And how can you put important in quotes? Without external video monitoring, FCPX is appropriate for web video only. If you could currently get data out of FCPX, you could make the argument that it'd be a nice offline editor, given its new timeline and audition features, but that's not an argument you can make today. "

"Important" is in quotes because people treat these features as critical, yet somehow Apple products without them seem to sell just fine.

[Walter Soyka] "Why is Apple discouraging the use of a media format it disfavors? That may benefit them, since they distribute content electronically -- but it doesn't benefit me or my clients who want Blu-ray. A developer builds products that its core audience needs. If pros need Blu-ray, and Apple doesn't care to provide a serious solution, are they a serious, professional-focused developer?"

Where is Avid's Blu-ray authoring tool? You can be serious about the NLE market without caring about disc authoring.

[Walter Soyka] "Intel's Xeon update schedule is beyond Apple's control -- but Apple skipped speed bumps and USB 3.0. Adding some more slots would have been a nice Mac Pro update, too."

Apple skipped USB 3.0 because they're trying to push Thunderbolt. More slots? The current Mac Pro has as many as any Mac has had since the PowerMac 9600 had, and it shipped in 1997. This does nothing to demonstrate a recent de-emphesis on the pro market.

[Walter Soyka] "Even when Thunderbolt devices become common, PCIe 4x at 10W won't help with GPU co-processing."

Err... ExpressCard is PCIe 1x.

[Walter Soyka] "Apple chose not to include NVIDIA's drivers in 10.6.7, and 10.6.8 broke existing and otherwise functional CUDA drivers."

10.6.8 had a bunch of OpenGL changes. Apple makes pre-release software available to developers to test with, and the quick availability of updated CUDA drivers suggests NVIDIA was not caught by surprise upon release. What was Apple supposed to do? Hold the release of an OS update for tens of millions of users for this?

[Walter Soyka] "You say that glossy displays have higher contrast -- I'd add that it's artificially high contrast and an artificial saturation boost. The point of a glossy display is to make images pop. Professionals would largely prefer their images to be accurate.
"


There's nothing 'artificial' about it -- you're just seeing something closer to the native capabilities of the panel, because there's not a piece of diffusion on front of it as with a matte screen.

[Walter Soyka] "That's actually exactly my point. Apple may like pro users, but I think that if they were focusing their business on pros, they would change some of these practices which work well in the consumer space and poorly in the professional space.
"


These things have alleged downsides in the consumer space as well. Pundits are always pointing them out. If you ever take a look at Mac vs. Windows forums, many people even present them as major reasons not to choose Apple products. Apple gets accused of neglecting pros and not consumers not because pros are treated any 'worse', but merely because accusing Apple of neglecting consumers isn't credible because they're such a huge market.

[Walter Soyka] "I salute you for your tenacity, Chris, but I honestly don't understand how you can't see that there's room for reasonable disagreement on some of these points. I don't care if I sway you on your position about Apple's focus or lack thereof on the professional market, but I do hope to show that it's not unreasonable for pros in a niche market to be concerned about a niche product in the hands of an increasingly mass market-focused developer."

My response to this argument is that I agree FCP X is designed with crossover appeal, and is not as strictly a niche product as, say, Avid Media Composer. I just think that if you look at the history of technology products, this is probably a good thing in the long run.

And I'm also not at all convinced that FCP X is targeted at a different market from FCP 7. Apple has always been primarily targeting the larger market of people who get paid to edit video, not just the broadcast and post production markets whose needs we're mostly discussing here. FCP 7 had just been around for long enough that Apple had had a chance to add more niche features.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 12:59:25 pm

This conversation would be so much more fun in a pub. You and I could argue all night long, while Aindreas leads everyone else in song...

I'd be happy to continue to debate you on glossy displays or slots in a Mac Pro, but we run the risk of missing the forest for the trees.


[Chris Kenny] "But you'll notice I didn't have to explain your points with ad-hoc one-off explanations. I agree there are systematic explanations. I just disagree about what they are."

I don't think we actually disagree about the systemic explanation. I agree with nearly all of your explanations of each of the individual decisions that Apple as made. No one is saying that Apple thinks, "You know what would upset professional users? Spending millions of dollars to buy Shake, and then killing it a couple years later. Let's do that."

My main point is Apple's decisions, taken as a whole, can be reasonably interpreted as inconsistent with a professional market orientation.

Apple's stance on the Pro Apps was crystal clear 10 years ago: deliver great applications to professionals who will use them in their businesses in order to sell high-margin, top-of-the-line hardware. Apple saw us as a critical market for their continued success, and developed or bought software to entice us to buy their hardware.

Fast-forward to 2011: Apple Computer, Inc. has become Apple, Inc., and the main drivers of their growth are things like iPods, iPhones, and iPads. Apple's strategy toward professionals has become less consistent over time -- like you say, there are still high-end computers and pro features in FCPX -- and it's very reasonable to suggest that the professional market is now of negligible strategic importance to Apple.

Clearly, you believe Apple is still very pro-focused, and I understand your arguments for saying so -- but do you believe it's unreasonable for anyone to suggest that Apple cares less about pros today than they did 10 years ago?

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

Andrew Richards
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 1:24:35 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Fast-forward to 2011: Apple Computer, Inc. has become Apple, Inc., and the main drivers of their growth are things like iPods, iPhones, and iPads. Apple's strategy toward professionals has become less consistent over time -- like you say, there are still high-end computers and pro features in FCPX -- and it's very reasonable to suggest that the professional market is now of negligible strategic importance to Apple.

Clearly, you believe Apple is still very pro-focused, and I understand your arguments for saying so -- but do you believe it's unreasonable for anyone to suggest that Apple cares less about pros today than they did 10 years ago?"


Apple seems to be trying to straddle the prosumer and pro segments with FCPX. Merging FCExpress and FCPro, so to speak. And they finished the FCE features first, since it hits a wider market. If they really do have a deep API, they can still deliver a product that can be very compelling to even the highest-end pros without having to develop for every niche use case themselves. They've found that delivering a platform to a hungry market and giving third parties a way to address far more facets of that market than Apple would want to itself is highly successful (see iOS).

This doesn't forgive yanking FCS2009 off the market, but then again, would there be nearly as much of a feature vacuum for third parties to race to fill if Apple was still distributing FCS2009? Maybe that's far fetched, and we still need to see that API. So much is still up in the air.

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 1:35:04 pm

[Walter Soyka] "My main point is Apple's decisions, taken as a whole, can be reasonably interpreted as inconsistent with a professional market orientation."

And my point is that Apple is an unusual company in many respects, and commonly does things competitors would never even consider doing in all market segments. You can say this these are inconsistent with the needs of pro customers, but many of Apple's detractors have argued Apple's practices are inconsistent with the needs of customers in general, so this doesn't make a compelling case that Apple treats pro customers unusually poorly. Maybe in this instance Apple's supposedly poor treatment of customers will actually translate into a negative outcome in the marketplace, but historically that's not the way to bet.

[Walter Soyka] "Clearly, you believe Apple is still very pro-focused, and I understand your arguments for saying so -- but do you believe it's unreasonable for anyone to suggest that Apple cares less about pros today than they did 10 years ago?"

I think the model of 'attention' that such a statement implies is not directly applicable to corporations. And, interestingly, mostly isn't applied to other corporations. Nobody freaks out that Sony will neglect its pro cameras because the company is selling too many Playstations.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 2:33:08 pm

[Chris Kenny] "And my point is that Apple is an unusual company in many respects, and commonly does things competitors would never even consider doing in all market segments."

I'm not talking about what competitors think -- I'm talking about what Apple's current and potential professional users think. A significant chunk of professional users are looking at Apple's offerings and wondering how you'd think it's targeted at them.

If your argument is that Apple releases products that they think are good without targeting them at a specific market, then I think it follows logically that Apple is not focused on the professional (or any other) market.


[Chris Kenny] "You can say this these are inconsistent with the needs of pro customers, but many of Apple's detractors have argued Apple's practices are inconsistent with the needs of customers in general, so this doesn't make a compelling case that Apple treats pro customers unusually poorly. "

Consumers and professionals have totally different needs and merit totally different approaches. Secrecy and cool product launches are great with consumers, where hype and "it" factor sell. Not so with professionals who are buying tools to do work and get paid.


[Chris Kenny] "Maybe in this instance Apple's supposedly poor treatment of customers will actually translate into a negative outcome in the marketplace, but historically that's not the way to bet."

Supposedly poor?

There are plenty of professionals for whom FCPX is a good fit. For them, it's a great new start. You have no disagreement from me here.

There are also plenty of professionals and current FCP users that Apple has apparently chosen to exclude from the target market of the new product, because it doesn't currently address their needs. For example, people who preview their work on broadcast monitors or post specialists who rely on interchange in post.

I don't think that FCPX will have a negative outcome in the marketplace. I anticipated this argument from you, and I made a separate post about how FCPX will be a huge seller -- but that the market is much, much broader than it was before, and has possibly shifted, excluding a previous subset of FCP's users.


[Chris Kenny] "I think the model of 'attention' that such a statement implies is not directly applicable to corporations. And, interestingly, mostly isn't applied to other corporations."

Sure it is. Corporations sell things. The things they sell are targeted to appeal to a group of potential customers. That's what "attention" is -- knowing your market and delivering something attractive to it. Apple does this very well in the consumer space.

FCPX knows its market, and is delivering something to it, too. It's just not the same set of potential customers that previous versions of FCP was targeted for (though I agree with you that there is a lot of overlap).


[Chris Kenny] "Nobody freaks out that Sony will neglect its pro cameras because the company is selling too many Playstations."

That's because Sony continues to deliver products that satisfy their pro customers' needs. If Sony stopped production of broadcast cameras, HDCAM SR decks, and cinema projectors tomorrow, people would rightly observe that Sony was more focused on consumer electronics.

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 4:44:49 pm

[Walter Soyka] "If your argument is that Apple releases products that they think are good without targeting them at a specific market, then I think it follows logically that Apple is not focused on the professional (or any other) market."

My argument is more that Apple has very unconventional opinions about what things really matter in various markets, and despite people constantly criticizing Apple for these opinions, or accusing Apple of simply being clueless because they can't understand Apple's (rarely articulated) opinions even are based on Apple's actions, Apple rarely turns out to be wrong.

[Walter Soyka] "Consumers and professionals have totally different needs and merit totally different approaches. Secrecy and cool product launches are great with consumers, where hype and "it" factor sell. Not so with professionals who are buying tools to do work and get paid."

Most of the arguments along these lines with respect to this market have also historically been made against iPhone/iPad/Mac enterprise adoption. But those products are now doing quite well in enterprise markets. Yes, even the Mac, which is growing ~60% a year in the US enterprise market. Apple's "take no prisoners" approach to the market does require flexibility, and it's true that businesses tend to be less flexible. But this approach allows Apple to make more compelling products than its competitors do, so there are competitive advantages for businesses that can be flexible enough to to adopt products from Apple and similarly aggressive vendors, and more and more business are finding ways to accommodate them.

[Walter Soyka] "There are also plenty of professionals and current FCP users that Apple has apparently chosen to exclude from the target market of the new product, because it doesn't currently address their needs. For example, people who preview their work on broadcast monitors or post specialists who rely on interchange in post."

Apple has almost certainly not chosen to exclude those users from their long-term (or even relatively short-term) plans for FCP X. They simply didn't wait on those features for the initial release. People are up in arms because they don't like the signal that supposedly sends, but I suspect Apple shares my opinion that a year from now, nobody will much care about what signals Apple was believed to be sending with the initial release, if the product meets their needs at that time.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Richards
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 8:02:10 pm

[Chris Kenny] "Apple has almost certainly not chosen to exclude those users from their long-term (or even relatively short-term) plans for FCP X. They simply didn't wait on those features for the initial release. People are up in arms because they don't like the signal that supposedly sends, but I suspect Apple shares my opinion that a year from now, nobody will much care about what signals Apple was believed to be sending with the initial release, if the product meets their needs at that time."

To wit: John Gruber back when the iPad was brand new and being widely panned for its missing features and supposedly directionless marketing.

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 8:35:22 pm

[Andrew Richards] "To wit: John Gruber back when the iPad was brand new and being widely panned for its missing features and supposedly directionless marketing."

Wow, that's a great find. It's freakishly applicable to Final Cut Pro X.

Apple has released many new products over the last decade. Only a handful have been the start of a new platform. The rest were iterations. The designers and engineers at Apple aren’t magicians; they’re artisans. They achieve spectacular results one year at a time. Rather than expanding the scope of a new product, hoping to impress, they pare it back, leaving a solid foundation upon which to build. In 2001, you couldn’t look at Mac OS X or the original iPod and foresee what they’d become in 2010. But you can look at Snow Leopard and the iPod nanos of today and see what they once were. Apple got the fundamentals right.


--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 3, 2011 at 1:35:03 pm

The iPhone and iPad are poor analogies for FCPX. They were brand new products, but FCP has a decade's legacy and a large existing user base. FCPX is not just a new product, it's a reboot of the FCP franchise.

An iPhone analogy for FCPX would be a hypothetical iPhone X, with cool technologies and a brand new interface, but which couldn't import your existing contacts (legacy projects), didn't sync with your computer (bidirectional interchange), required all apps to be re-written in order to run (FXPlug 2), and didn't work with your Bluetooth headset (external monitoring).

The iPhone X would almost certainly be very cool and sell very well. The feature changes wouldn't make a whit of difference to new iPhone X users, or to existing iPhone users who didn't care about those features. A lot of people who had bought every iteration of the previous iPhone, though, would be upset that their favorite feature didn't exist anymore.

Chris, there are actually several really important things that you and I agree on:
  • FCP was totally outdated, and couldn't reasonably be updated. A rewrite was appropriate.
  • FCPX is built on very forward-looking technologies and is the future of the FCP franchise.
  • Future releases of FCPX will add back at least some of the "missing" functionality. FCPX will evolve over time. FCPX 10.0 is not set in stone.
  • FCPX will be a commercial success.
  • FCPX is usable by a large subset of professional users today.


The only thing that I'm really asking you to try to understand here is why so many people are upset. Many people are looking at the same facts as you and arriving at a different, but reasonable, conclusion, which is supported by the evidence as they see it.

I understand your position as the FCPX guy, but a little empathy for those for whom FCPX is a puzzling and currently incomplete offering would go a long way for your credibility in the community.

Have a happy Fourth of July.

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 3, 2011 at 1:55:21 pm

[Walter Soyka] "The iPhone and iPad are poor analogies for FCPX. They were brand new products, but FCP has a decade's legacy and a large existing user base. FCPX is not just a new product, it's a reboot of the FCP franchise.

An iPhone analogy for FCPX would be a hypothetical iPhone X, with cool technologies and a brand new interface, but which couldn't import your existing contacts (legacy projects), didn't sync with your computer (bidirectional interchange), required all apps to be re-written in order to run (FXPlug 2), and didn't work with your Bluetooth headset (external monitoring)."


I get this. And I get why it bothers people. What I don't get is why people (not necessarily you) are predicting the product will fail because of it.

Look at it like this: if FCP X were a new product that had just been shipped by an established, credible software vendor that was only now entering the NLE market, would people be predicting failure for it? Would they be insisting it was a 'consumer' app? Or would people look at what it was, look at what features its vendor was promising the release over the coming months and saying "Hmm, this is pretty interesting, and if these guys play their cards right they'll be a major player in a year or two"?

I think you'd be seeing something much closer to the latter. What's happening with FCP X is that people have negative feelings about the fact that Apple ditched backwards compatibility, and went into this whole thing with a certain amount of paranoia about Apple's commitment to the high-end market. As a consequence they're not really seeing the product for what it is and what it's likely to become. Instead, they're looking for reasons to validate their negative feelings toward it.

[Walter Soyka] "Many people are looking at the same facts as you and arriving at a different, but reasonable, conclusion, which is supported by the evidence as they see it."

Many people are claiming (or just implicitly accepting) that the evidence supports the conclusion that FCP X is not intended for the same market as FCP, but is instead intended for 'consumers', and that Apple has abandoned the 'pro' market. I do not believe this is a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence, or even especially coherent. I think the implied definitions of 'pro' and 'consumer' here make no sense, and this is causing a serious misunderstanding of who bought FCP, which leads to a misunderstanding of who FCP X is targeted at and of Apple's motivations for making certain decisions around the initial release.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Richards
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 1:03:57 pm

[Walter Soyka] "That said, some of the FCPX features which I suspect you think are evidence that Apple cares about the pro market, like 64-bit, multi-threading, and native file support, are table stakes in 2011. "

Wel I guess Avid is in trouble... (not really, but they seem to get a pass for not having all these boxes ticked on their spec sheet)

I also see an interesting theme with all the business analysis going on; that no one is at all concerned with the fact that Avid isn't making any money. Could it be that Avid's tight focus on just the tens of hundreds of high-end pros could be just as big a liability as Apple being Apple? For Avid to be profitable, and thus sustainable, they need to make a lot more money off each of their tens of hundreds of users than they do when they have to compete on price with the likes of Apple and Adobe, who can both afford a race to the bottom on NLE pricing since they both make most of their money elsewhere.

Avid will sell a few thousand more copies of MC5.5 the second half of this year than usual, but I don't see that getting them out of the financial hole they are in. Especially when most of the bump will come from sales at 40% of their usual list price from the crossgrade promotion. Just like we need to wait 6, 9, or 12 months too see where things tend to be headed with FCPX in terms of features, we also need to wait that long to see if Avid is heading in a positive direction financially. Maybe Avid is seeing healthy revenue growth in their other products, I wouldn't know. I just know what I see on their recent financial statements, and they're in a bit of a hole in general.

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 3:02:30 am

There's one other strawman argument I want to make sure we stay clear of: I'm not suggesting that FCPX will fail.

I believe that FCPX will be wildly successful in the market, but that the market will look very, very different than it used to.

If you carry a cell phone in your pocket everywhere you go, chances are you are carrying a little video camera in your pocket everywhere you go. That will generate a lot of video that will need editorial.

Literacy used to be limited; now it's expected that everyone can read and write. Likewise, more people will be editing video tomorrow than ever before -- and that trend will only continue. FCPX will help make it happen.

Walter Soyka
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


Return to posts index

james carey
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:10:52 pm

[Walter Soyka] "If enough people migrate away now, it may not matter to the pros if FCPX has tape I/O in a year, because another vendor will have picked up many new users who many not be willing to switch back.
"

and that's exactly what may happen. Both Adobe and Avid recognize this opportunity to increase their market share and are already reacting to it. If Apple loses enough of it share, and I hear it has recently climbed to just over 50%, then it won't matter how good the upgrades eventually may be. By then 3rd party will have deemed support not worth the ROI. The biggest mistake Apple made was its business decision. That is if they really cared about staying in the professional post production marketplace in the first place. A very good case could be made to the opposite.

Jim Carey
Director of Video, Radical Entertainment
linkedin: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/jcarey256
mobygames: http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,17212/


Return to posts index

Buddy Couch
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:07:13 pm

[james carey] "and that's exactly what may happen. Both Adobe and Avid recognize this opportunity to increase their market share and are already reacting to it. If Apple loses enough of it share, and I hear it has recently climbed to just over 50%, then it won't matter how good the upgrades eventually may be. By then 3rd party will have deemed support not worth the ROI. The biggest mistake Apple made was its business decision. That is if they really cared about staying in the professional post production marketplace in the first place. A very good case could be made to the opposite."

The biggest issue I see with people leaving, is that Apple is at a disadvantage hardware wise. They do not have the luxury of a FCP X Windows 7 version. Once people invest in PC hardware to go with Adobe or another, they will definitely not return anytime soon. They might keep existing Mac hardware if its relatively new and buy Adobe Mac version. Lets say it isn't and it was time for an upgrade. You can forget them migrating back anytime soon. Especially when you can buy the latest and greatest hardware at any moment when it comes to PC. Not to mention price is much cheaper for the most part.

Buddy C


Return to posts index

Nelson Torres
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 8:17:49 pm

I have a lump in my throat from watching your trailer. Well done.


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:22:28 pm

Mike I don't accept your initial premise about Apple's "failure" because it is so premature to call it that. And you're conflating two things: the relative merits of the new software, and Apple's business behavior/PR problems regarding the established user base.

Both of those have potential to be resolved in a good manner. Not saying they will, but not saying it's impossible, which is what your premise sounded like to me.

Really, everybody should take a breath and let X develop into something that eventually makes everybody as happy as 7 did. It's okay to be disappointed; I was too. But time moves on. It will get better. Or it won't. Some of us will go ahead with it, others won't.

The one thing that can't help the situation is to throw up our hands and get all "emo" about it. These are business decisions, and we make business decisions in return.


Return to posts index

Ben Holmes
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:07:10 pm

Must. Not. Get. Involved.

Oh, sod it.

The thing is - I agree with everyone here. I agree with Chris about the future. I agree with everyone else about the present. In my head, in know the damage has already been done. I don't honestly believe Apple did not forsee ALL of this. Cancelling 7 was as clear a marker as we could ever hope to get about their views.

It's too late now - unless Apple acts immediately to counter the offers made by Adobe and Avid, that's it. Game over. It will be that swift, and that final. Because if they don't act now (2 days, a week) it means they will never act. It means all of this is actually going according to plan. Genuinely - I still don't believe that, I still read something more into Lion support of 7 than anyone else, apparently. I still think an epic U-turn is possible.

I've bought extra systems and 7 licenses this week. I have a mature and best-in-market solution for tapeless outside broadcast workflow locked in, and a line of clients forming for the Olympics next year - what else can I do. But I will also be looking to AVID to step up and offer the kind of open integration FCP gave me. It's a shame it's not there yet.

And lastly - I'm pissed because I like X. With 7 still available, it would be so much easier to love it.

Edit Out Ltd
----------------------------
FCP Editor/Trainer/System Consultant
EVS/VT Supervisor for live broadcast
RED camera transfer/post
Independent Director/Producer

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/community/communitydetails/?UserStoryId=87...


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:15:44 pm

[Ben Holmes] "I don't honestly believe Apple did not forsee ALL of this. Cancelling 7 was as clear a marker as we could ever hope to get about their views. ... It means all of this is actually going according to plan."
Hi
Yup. :-(
Maybe they reckoned that as there are mature alternatives for their erstwhile customers to immediately switch to the spin-off would be less high-profile.



Return to posts index

Douglas Morse
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 2:18:25 am

Chris, Kudos for keeping your cool. Of course I fall on the other side :-) One thing no one has mentioned (I think) is that Adobe and Avid are not standing still. Both are well on their way to version 6.0 of their respective softwares. I imagine they can, if they want, incorporate many of the desirable features of X while maintaining everything else we need.

Also, Chris, as a representative case, I was waiting for Final Cut X as I just finished shooting a feature at the end of May. I needed the promised DSLR native support, 64 bit rendering and I was liking the dual system sync. All perfect. How perfect?

I bought a new system and purchased $300 of iTunes gift cards (at a 15% discount). Then -- release. no OMF. Killed the deal. No upgrade of DVD Studio Pro made it even worse.

I HAVE switched to Adobe as of today and Adobe is ahead of Final Cut X in the race. They have all of the professional features, tight integration, and native DSLR support. Apple cannot catch up. (But I'd love to be wrong as more is better) But the switch is a lot less painful than I thought it would be. In fact, it's pretty awesome as the Adobe suite is fantastic.

Also, I suspect Avid is better for the higher end production houses...at least we have the choice.


Return to posts index

Peter Corbett
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 4:53:10 am

[Douglas Morse] "I HAVE switched to Adobe as of today and Adobe is ahead of Final Cut X in the race. They have all of the professional features, tight integration, and native DSLR support. Apple cannot catch up. (But I'd love to be wrong as more is better) But the switch is a lot less painful than I thought it would be. In fact, it's pretty awesome as the Adobe suite is fantastic."

I think you will find the Titler in Premiere so far ahead of the FCP7 version, it's not even funny. It was ported from the Inscriber CG guys years ago when it started as a broadcast online title generator.

Plus the import of layered PSD's as "sequences" and the tight integration with Photoshop will save you more time than you ever imagined.

It's not perfect but it works. If you map navigational controls to the left side of the keyboard (for righties), it is very fast.

Here are some speed shortcut remaps for my Mac Pro;

Previous edit point: Command-Q
Next edit point: Command-W
Ripple delete: Command-1
Apply default video transition: Command-A
Apply default video transition: Command-S

It's not difficult. I had to switch two years ago to FCP to fit in with agencies, but I've been back using CS5 for some time now. It's just faster and more powerful.

I do hope the situation improves with Final Cut X but I strongly disagree with Chris' optimism and seeming apologia for Apple. Competition is good for NLE development and that competition just got a whole lot shorter.

Peter Corbett
Powerhouse Productions
http://www.php.com.au


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Risk and failure
on Jul 2, 2011 at 12:37:12 pm

[Peter Corbett] "that competition just got a whole lot shorter."

I find that slightly worrying too. two viable contenders left on the field is not ideal.


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


Return to posts index

Mike Parfit
Is it really a failure?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:43:39 pm

So is it really a failure?

The argument goes on. However, as far as I can see the only serious marketing Apple did was to real pros in its private then public sneak previews, which were clearly designed to create buzz in the professional ranks.

It's hard to imagine that those two events and the words and tone of the press release on the day of release ("the biggest advance in Pro video editing since the original Final Cut Pro") were part of a conspiracy to dump professionals.

I think it's less complex than that. Sure Apple most wants FCPX to appeal to everyone with any kind of camera, but it needs the pros to keep the program's image burnished because consumers love feeling part of the great moviemaking machine. But the FCPX team simply failed to create the universally-useful tool that I suspect Apple -- maybe Steve himself -- had in mind.

In the long term, perhaps it'll be OK, but right now just comparing FCPX to what Apple promised at those events and in the press release, FCPX is a failure. Promise>reality=uh oh. There are certainly recovery routes, but not until that failure is recognized by Apple.

Mike

http://www.thewhalemovie.com


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 10:52:16 pm

[Mike Parfit] "So is it really a failure?"
Hi
Whilst FCP X is unlikely to remain on any academic curriculum for some time, I expect the launch, like Edsel or New Coke, will feature in the syllabus of most Business Schools marketing courses for the next half century or so.
The bigger you are the harder you fall :-(



Return to posts index

Chris Jacek
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 2, 2011 at 4:50:15 am

[Paul Dickin] "I expect the launch, like Edsel or New Coke, will feature in the syllabus of most Business Schools marketing courses for the next half century or so."

Yay! Somebody else making an Edsel reference. It makes me proud to be "Imported From Detroit."

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index

Chris Takimoto
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 4, 2011 at 2:02:22 pm

The launch of FCPX may already fit a business case, but from a differing perspective. I think this launch is an attempt by Apple to navigate a disruptive innovation in the face of an established professional user base that expects sustaining innovations with smooth transitions, not abrupt painful changes.

The rationale for releasing a technologically advanced product with lesser capabilities than what is needed by the core user base is well described by Prof. Clayton Christensen from the Harvard Business School in his treatise on "The Innovators Dilemma." I've detailed this further in the following post: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1177352

I'm not saying that this was the right or wrong move, but I am saying that what strikes many (especially and understandably here) as sheer stupidity on Apple's part may be a bold and calculating gamble (which still may fail!).


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:03:01 pm

[Mike Parfit] "So is it really a failure?"

Yes, it's really a failure.

The non-pros who are clearly Apple's targets don't aspire to remain as permanent "Youtubers" all their lives. That's the mistake Apple has made.

Without the tools to learn and to collaborate and to work and to exchange like professionals do, Youtubers will remain Youtubers.

---------------

BTW Mike, THE WHALE looks like a superb film and the trailer is superb.


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 11:49:40 pm

[Mike Parfit] " the only serious marketing Apple did was to real pros in its private then public sneak previews, "

that meetup press bonanza, which was, lets face it, white hot - in all the press, articles in USA today for gods sake - lets just say this: the function of that exercise on Apples part was to maximise the visibility of FCPX - that we can agree on.

We now know the presentation was incredibly careful in how reductive it was about the true capabilities of the software in the professional environment. Had they told us what we know now, beers would have been hitting the screen during randy's presentation. But that didn't happen. this all feels pretty carefully planned.


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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 2, 2011 at 12:16:35 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "that meetup press bonanza, which was, lets face it, white hot - in all the press, articles in USA today for gods sake - lets just say this: the function of that exercise on Apples part was to maximise the visibility of FCPX - that we can agree on. "

I disagree Aindreas. That event was not about FCP X, but rather about trumping Avid, who had been planning on appearing at that event for months before Apple got them booted.

[Aindreas Gallagher] "We now know the presentation was incredibly careful in how reductive it was about the true capabilities of the software in the professional environment. Had they told us what we know now, beers would have been hitting the screen during randy's presentation."

On that part I completely agree.


[Aindreas Gallagher] " this all feels pretty carefully planned."

Far from it... I suspect the planners were off planning something else. From the decision was made to sneak the peek in Vegas, I'd say this deal was as shabbily planned as just about anything Apple has ever done.


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 2, 2011 at 1:05:19 am

[David Roth Weiss] "I suspect the planners were off planning something else."

I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, we all don't know - the problem was are facing as a creative community is that we have no idea what apple truly entails for this software.

The thing that infuriates me about the broader public perception is that they don't understand the madness of this. It's like transformers - your typewriter gets up and reconfigures itself with clarinet keys! your guitar becomes a chello with two strings! your pencil sprouts wings! the stuff we are doing represents an actual virtualisation of the physical creative craft of editing - the inputs are unchanged, its not a geo-location app to re-imagine at will. Any attempt to alter all of its basic function should not occur within a messianic blackbox of igniting computer/cultural revolutions.

It is not within Apple's remit to completely Rip Up Editing As They See Fit.

..Or at least talk to us for Gods sake, oh I know, skate to the puck, but apple, are you listening sweetie? this is not your puck apple. It does not belong to you.

"Do you not understand?!?" he said shrieking a little - No. Look mate: this is our Puck. You are playing with our Puck.

Apple please for God's sake take some care with it for the simple reason that - This. Puck. Does. Not. Belong. To. You.

and that would be another rant.


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


Return to posts index

Andrew Corneles
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 2, 2011 at 4:53:43 am

I took a week off to actually get some editing done (in fcp)
and it seems like the same fcpx champions are out in full swing... I've gotta say some of the defending that goes on here is just amazing.

In other threads, even calling out people that dare recommend
someone go to a different suite if they need certain workflows,
totally ignoring the fact that PP is less of a paradigm shift
than going to FCPX.

Personally, can't wait until it's 79 bucks like aperture.
I'll give it a shot then.

I really love when they talk about how apple isn't abandoning
pro apps, when it's SO obviously true. like BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.

for YEARS.

We should all just buy fcpx and like it, I suppose. To utter
any criticism of apple will just entice long winded doubleplusgood
applethink.



Return to posts index

Robert Brown
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 2, 2011 at 5:02:37 am

Nice rant and totally agree. And to the apologists: I don't think anyone is saying X doesn't have it's merits. I'm sure it does although I haven't used it and don't know what they are but the fact is; if you make your money as an FCP editor or as owner of an FCP facility then you've got some problems. Maybe some more so than others but software programs are linear sorts of things. FCP has just entered the beginning of the end.

It's as if the entire FCP team was killed in a plane crash but on the same day another company introduced this kind of odd new product with a "magnetic timeline". Who cares about a magnetic timeline? If you know your software you can get it to do what you want.

As a former linear editor my desire for FCP was a decent DVE on par with what AE had more than 10 years ago, EDL export on par with what Avid had 15 years ago, frame accurate import and export to tape, a decent keyframe editor, good chroma keying, and yeah 64 bit, better GPU integration, more formats blah, blah, blah. Instead they said loud and clearly "your needs are not important".

Apple may not need the "pro market", they have more money than God so they probably don't but they managed to change their image practically overnight to where many no longer get that warm fuzzy feeling when we see images of Steve Jobs on another stage introducing another product.

Maybe in the big picture none of this really matters but if you are one of the people with years of experience with FCS and who's livelihood depends on it, it's a pretty big deal. The "merits" of FCX don't change that in the slightest as it's a totally different product from a totally different company.



Return to posts index

Ben Holmes
Re: Is it really a failure?
on Jul 2, 2011 at 5:53:43 am

Complaining about the edit paradigm misses the point. Had the features been there, or more importantly had 7 still been there for now, we would be having an informed discussion about whether or not we liked the new interface. Some would never like it (like yourself) and move on - others (possibly like myself - I still haven't had enough time off to make a decision) would hail it as the future and embrace it. Over time, more and more doubters would come on board as, safe in their FCP7 bubble, they learnt the 'new way to edit'.

Cutting the old software is what caused this mess, cutting 7 without already having every feature in X. You may never like X. A lot more people will never take the time to decide if they do - and my gut feeling is that's a shame.

Edit Out Ltd
----------------------------
FCP Editor/Trainer/System Consultant
EVS/VT Supervisor for live broadcast
RED camera transfer/post
Independent Director/Producer

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/community/communitydetails/?UserStoryId=87...


Return to posts index

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