APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X Creative Community Conversations FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Re: FcpX 10.5?

COW Forums : Creative Community Conversations (was FCPX Debates)

VIEW ALL   •   ADD A NEW POST   •   PRINT
Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread


Tim Wilson
Re: FcpX 10.5?
on Apr 21, 2020 at 9:24:33 pm

[Patrick Sheppard] "I think that FCPX will not only continue to be developed well into the future, but also be optimized to fully take advantage of the new MP's horsepower.
"


Maybe, but I think it's a mistake to think of the two as causally related. Or even casually related. LOL FCPX isn't even close to requiring the heaviest horsepower that Apple offers. Apple's whole effort has been to make it lighter and lighter weight, which is why every major visual representation of FCPX has been on a laptop. Even when Apple was crowing the most about support for film workflows, they pictured an ARRI Alexa with FCPX on a Macbook Pro.

Not that FCPX-ers don't like heavy iron, or that the people here don't like both FCPX and heavy iron. But I disagree that the Venn diagram has much of an overlap at all in Apple's eyes. Think of the number of Mac users of Creative Cloud, plus Nuke, plus Media Composer and others in our space, plus science apps, enterprise apps, servers, on and on -- I doubt that FCPX is more than single-digit percentages of Apple's Mac Pro opportunity.

That's why I think that Apple developing FCPX on iOS is the single most critical thing for the vivacity of FCPX's future. What makes the difference is NEW seats of FCPX that would never have been sold any other way.

Certainly no number of new Mac Pros is going to do squat for sales of FCPX. There may not be any person left on the planet who said, "I've been putting off taking FCXP seriously until Apple gets their computing act together. What's that? A new Mac Pro? Woo-hoo! FCPX, here I come!" LOL No. Not a chance.

What's far more likely is that there are a bunch of people like Herb, or our old friend Marco Solorio. Herb bought a new Mac Pro to run Adobe stuff. Not FCPX. Marco sold his HP Z workstations and spent $25,000 on a new Mac Pro to run Blackmagic stuff. Not FCPX.

I guarantee you that Apple isn't losing sleep over the $299 of "lost" FCPX money to either of those dudes....and I don't know about Herb, but I bet that Marco spent the money on FCPX just to see it for himself anyway. The money's the money.

Which is also to make my first point conversely, that I think it's a mistake to think that FCPX accounts for more than single digit percentages of new Mac Pro sales. Plenty folks here running on old Macs, iMacs, laptops and such. The future of FCPX and Mac Pros have nothing to do with each other, because the revenue streams have so little effect on each other.

That's why the key to FCPX's future is NEW sales of NEW seats of FCPX. Apple already knows how many or how few new sales of FCPX that they get with every new computer release. They've had plenty of cycles to suss this out, and I'll wager that their prediction models land within a few units of the target every time. Although honestly, the number is so small that it might fall within the margin of error anyway.

The main thing is, when I think about FCPX on iOS, I think, "Why the heck not?" It seems insane that they're NOT doing it. Not because anybody thinks that an iPad is the best way to do FCPX, but because getting it right would require getting a bunch of other stuff right, which would also benefit people working on Mac Pros. Not least of which is proxy workflows, for sure!

It's definitely not an either-or, though. Yeah, SOMEBODY is going to go all-iPad, all the time, for FCPX, and if they can, why not. But I sure don't think that too many people who CAN use FCPX on an iPad will sell their Mac Pros...and even if they did, Apple won't care. They've already gotten paid for those Mac Pros. LOL

And THIS is why anyone who cares about the future of FCPX needs to have all their fingers and toes crossed that Apple IS planning to bring FCPX to iOS, and hope that it works like magic: this is exactly the kind of thing that will make Apple new money for both new iPads and new seats of FCPX that they might never have gotten any other way.

That's the thing. The ONLY thing funding new development is new revenue, and nobody who has bought FCPX already is making Apple any new money that Apple wouldn't have gotten out of them otherwise.

Heck, they've made more money out of Herb and Marco switching back to a Mac Pro -- just those two guys by themselves -- than they've probably made from everyone else in this forum for new FCPX revenue since you first bought it years ago.

No matter how much you might want to equate FCPX sales with Apple sales for heavy iron because it argues for the relevance of our market in Apple's eyes, they're not even connected a little, which is exactly why THIS part of this market hasn't been a major part of Apple's strategy.

Honestly, even the message that you CAN run FCPX on an iPad would be enough to move the needle, I think. Doesn't matter if anyone actually DOES. The point is to get NEW people buying NEW seats of FCPX.

Surely most people who are suddenly inclined to look at FCPX for the first time will do some research and find that it would be better for them to run it on nearly anything else BUT an iPad, but they'll at least be looking at FCPX when they hadn't before.

And of course another major revenue stream for Apple is services. Having FCPX run on iOS now opens it up more directly to the rest of Apple's ecosystem, maybe an upcharge for extra iCloud storage, who knows. You'll all be able to come up with ideas for this better than I would....

...but the ball to keep your eye on is NEW sales for FCPX. That's what Apple needs in order to fund new features and new releases. Nothing that Apple is doing with new heavy iron (or even MBP or iMac-weighted iron) is moving the needle enough, but iOS might really make a huge differerence.

There's also a lot to be said for hybrid workflows that have iPads on set doing assistant editor/DIT/pre-grading kinds of work, feeding directly into full-scale editing back in the suite. No need to develop a separate logging or grading application when they've already got the feature set they need. Running it on the processor that they need to, and enabling it on the devices they need to, will immediately extend their workflow in ways and locales that nobody can think of matching for a very long time, and they get it more or less for free.

There's nothing bad about doing this, and everything bad about not.


Posts IndexRead Thread 


Current Message Thread:





© 2020 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]