Pro video was Apple’s to lose and they are
There seem to be two kinds of Final Cut Pro users these days — those with huge investments in legacy workflows and those who appreciate the features + performance improvements Apple baked into the new version. Those in the former group are dropping Apple’s pro video app and the big beneficiary so far seems to be Avid.
Does Apple still care about pro users? The company’s Mac Pro, Cupertino’s only tower computer with the memory and expansion slots pros need, hasn’t been updated in about 18 months.
Granted, it seems clear that a Mac Pro update is awaiting fresh silicon from Intel. Then again, Apple might just drop their last tower — they’re not saying one way or another.
This confusion combined with the ongoing problems created by Final Cut Pro X, which removed a number of key features that pro users rely on, has led to uncertainty among users. For people with six, seven, eight or more figures invested a workflow uncertainty isn’t a reason to buy more Apple software and hardware.
“The perception here is that Apple is more concerned with selling iPads and iPhones than they are with the people who have stuck with them since the ’90s, the professional editors and VFX people,” Jude Mull, who works at a post-production facility in Hollywood that processes and digitizes some of your favorite TV shows, told Ars Technica.
Granted, some people really like Final Cut Pro X’s faster workflow and vastly improved performance, but many pro users are feeling under appreciated. A number of them have moved to Avid, which led the pro video market before Final Cut changed the world.
So, I put it to you, dear Final Cut user, has Apple completely blown it or can the company reclaim leadership in pro video?
Related Posts:
January 16th, 2012
Apple hasn’t shown much interest in pro video advancements recently. But the new version of Final Cut eventually will be upgraded to provide all the functions pros need, I believe.
I also realize that the shortcuts in pulling in and editing video found in the older versions will eventually be offered in the newer version. Meanwhile, faster, more powerful chips and cheaper, bigger storage mean the new version can be made to work quite well by editing full-frame video after storing “the whole thing.” This is slower, still, but workable.
January 16th, 2012
Before software can gain any traction, computer hardware needs major changes since Apple Computer became Apple Inc.
Using 2 MacPros with 2 Apple 30″ displays without incident to this day, I bought a iMac several years ago requiring 2 mother board replacements, 3 screen replacements, 2 transformer replacements and it needed a 4th screen replacement just after AppleCare ran out. Apple Store offered $250 off a new iMac, since mine had reached “end of life”.
Unfortunately, Apple’s interest in Pro computing has reached end of life. I can’t blame them since the iPod & iPhone has boosted stock prices and profits.
What Apple was is not what Apple is or will be to the Pro community. The disposable iCommunity seems to be Apple’s future. RIP Steve.
January 16th, 2012
I’ve never used Final Cut, but I used Avid for years. I’ll tell ya, I never liked it. I moved from Avid to Adobe Master Suite (because I do more than just video) and I’m very, very happy with it. Not sure why anyone would return to Avid.
January 17th, 2012
As Apple completes the revised product the pro users can decide. Is their beef really about making a buck, or is it about looking cool while doing it? Personally, any gain Avid makes will be short lived. Apple is moving to an entirely new way of computing so time will tell.
January 17th, 2012
Apple have made so many game changing products and services for customers of all walks over the years, yet they have a history of screwing over it’s developers, resellers and it’s loyal Mac user base at the same time.
The Marx Brothers rollout of FCPX was nothing short of astounding. It reeked of a company that either didn’t really understand the content creation markets requirements, or arrogantly chose to flip the switch and skate to wherever with little disregard to the huge investment many pro users have made over the years (most likely the latter).
It doesn’t really matter whether or not FCPX’s missing features make it in over time. At this point who cares? Why wait around for features to be added ‘overtime’ when they should’ve been there on the first place? Despite the high margins Apple gleamed from pro users over the years, it’s clear now the pro and enterprise markets are surplus to requirement. As a business owner in the pro market, the unpredictability of Apples nature with regard to business support means I’m one owner that’ll be reassessing any further investment in Apples products down the track.
January 17th, 2012
It’s clear that Final Cut Pro had an aging code base that didn’t allow Apple to make the kind of improvements they believe are possible and the market demands.
So they made a huge investment here to rebuild it from the ground up. This is a real commitment to Pro video. People that are not developers clearly don’t understand what’s happened here. You can say they should have built all of it in the same time period, but that just shows you don’t understand this kind of software. Often throwing more people at a project like this actually slows it way down.
Completely rebuilding a major program like FCP is a risky, expensive, supremely difficult task.
I suspect that Apple was so impressed and pleased with the parts they did get right that they didn’t fully appreciate how much pros depend on the parts not done yet.
Apple clearly blew the rollout of FCPX. Their future success will depend on what they do with the opportunities the new platform gives them and how fast they do it.
But the idea that Apple doesn’t value the pro video market is just ignorant.
January 18th, 2012
fustian: “But the idea that Apple doesn’t value the pro video market is just ignorant.”
No it isn’t. You speak like a developer rather than someone who invests in media creation. High Quality video production is an expensive business. More expensive and more risky than software development.
Feature films, Oscar winning documentaries, television programs and music videos were all edited perfectly with final cut pro in the past. No professional, anywhere would even consider editing any of these projects in FCX.
Apple is not company for media creators to invest in anymore. They are a media distribution outlet. They are the new Virgin Megastore, or Blockbuster Video. They build content delivery devices (iPad, MacBook Air, iPhone) and make their money selling apps, music & films from their own store.
Apple do not care about Professional users, because they are in the business of making money – not video content.
In addition, it’s not about missing features, it’s about workflow. There is no meaningful way to organise content into bins, or tracks in the timeline. Organised = speed, and Time = Money. It is not uncommon on a commercial to have 10+ tracks, and on a Music Video, up to 50 or more. In this way it has all the functionality of iMovie on professional jobs.
FCX is for Stills Photographers who want to do a bit of video shooting on their 5D. They can organise their media like in Aperture, do basic colour correction and throw in a music track… everything a wedding photographer needs. Not so great for that $60 Million feature film, or half million dollar Doco.
To be honest, I’m surprised people are still asking this question. Apple saw the writing on the wall with the looming release of LightWorks now that it is owned by EditShare. A free, open source editing platform that has been around for 20+ years with all the functionality of FCP, and Avid.
Lets all just stop pretending that FCX is even a little bit professional. As much as we loved FCP7, it’s over. Either start a career in wedding videos, or move on.
January 18th, 2012
As far as use in the pro sphere is concerned, I think it’ll be a while, but I don’t think Apple have necessarily “blown it.” I think it’s very possible a new generation will go to it first and do amazing things on YouTube and Vimeo, and will eventually be feted by the big broadcasters. At that point, they’ll baulk at the old Avid/ FCP7 way of organising media and editing, producers will realise that FCPX costs next to nothing and buy their 20 volume license. Any editor in the building who’s been an FCPx snob up ’til then (who almost certainly won’t have spent any time with it and will find it utterly baffling) will look like total dinosaurs who take three times as long to do the same as their new whipper-snapper colleagues, and with lesser results.
If that happens, it’ll take Avid, Adobe, Sony, etc. an age to figure out how to ape FCPx without starting from scratch like Apple did, and Apple, for a while, will be the only game in town.
Extreme hypothesising, maybe, but there IS an alternative to the ‘Apple’s blown it for pro user’ scenario.
January 19th, 2012
You won’t get a real editing job with your hypothesis right now or in the next year with Final Cut Pro X experience. If you were even right than the industry would of adopted the ‘iMovie’ workflow 4 years ago in 2008.
It’s pretty clear that any serious editing in the future will be done on a PC instead of a Mac.
Apple software is fractured now given there is no Apple Color, no dvd Studio Pro, no Sound Track Pro. It’s obvious that Apple has stopped all development on those solutions, whereas the competition haven’t stop making viable solutions.