Since Apple launched Final Cut Pro X last Tuesday, I’ve had more than 3,500 emails that range from “I’m enjoying FCP X and creating useful projects,” to “FCP X will destroy my ability to make a living.” (And, ah, far worse, I’m sad to say.)
When I first saw Final Cut X, I was excited by its potential, but warned Apple that this release would be intensely polarizing to the editing community. It does not give me pleasure to see that I was right.
Worse, Apple has alienated the very people who can make a very visible statement as to the inadequacy of the program. No clearer example can be found than the public ridicule of FCP X on the Conan O’Brien show.
Or, as David Pogue wrote in his New York Times blog: “…let me be clear on this point — I think Apple blew it.”
With the possible exception of the launch of MobileMe, I can’t think of an Apple product launch which has spun more wildly out of control than this one. Apple did not just blow this launch, they went out of their way to alienate their key customer base.
Which is a shame, because FCP X has such great potential — but now, Apple has to concentrate on damage control, rather than getting people excited about the new program.
After the launch, Apple compounded their problems with three extremely poorly timed moves:
1. Canceling Final Cut Studio (3) and pulling all existing product from the market. This is devastating to shops that can’t use Final Cut Pro X. The two applications can co-exist on the same system — killing FCP 7 will not boost sales of FCP X to those shops that can’t run it. All it does is set up a black market for FCP 7.
2. Not providing – then publicly stating (thru David Pogue’s New York Times blog) that they do not plan to provide – a conversion utility from FCP 7 to FCP X. Not only does this render a HUGE number of past projects inaccessible, it sets up the obvious conclusion that if Apple is willing to discontinue support for legacy applications with no warning, what’s to prevent them from doing so again in the future? Every time you watch a movie that is more than 6 months old, you are dealing with legacy assets. Not providing a conversion utility is completely inexcusable.
3. Leaving the support for interchange formats – XML, EDL, OMF and others – to third-parties; or not supporting them at all. Yes, the video and film industry needs to move into the current century. However, Hollywood is very reluctant to change what works. Meeting deadlines is far more important than adopting new technology. Apple’s walled garden approach is totally at odds with the nature of post-production, where the editing system is the hub around which a wide variety of other applications revolve. On any editing project I routinely run 5-10 other programs simultaneously — only three of which are from Apple. I am constantly moving data between programs. This, combined with a lack of support for network-based storage, highlight grave development decisions in determining what features to include in the program.
NOTE: Apple told Pogue that they are working on providing the specs for their XML API. This is essential for any third-party developer to access conversion “hooks” in the program. David didn’t report that they mentioned when this would be available, however.
When I was talking with Apple prior to the launch, they told me that they extensively researched the market to determine what needed to be in the new program. In retrospect, I wonder what people they were talking with.
As I was working with the program, developing my FCP X training series, I often felt that the program was developed for two different audiences. Some features, effects for instance, are clearly geared for the iMovie crowd, while others, like trimming or 4K support, are geared for pros. The program sometimes felt like it wasn’t sure what it wanted to be when it grew up.
In FCP X, Apple got some things amazingly right. But they also got key features amazingly wrong. And if they don’t change course, this software, which has significant potential, is going to spin further and further out of control. At which point, its feature set is irrelevant, its reputation will be set. We’ll be looking at another Mac Cube.
Apple does not normally ever comment on future products – though they did this year, prior to WWDC, because they needed to reset expectations. Because of the visibility of this product into an audience that can cause extensive PR damage to Apple, I suggest that Apple break its usual vow of silence and do three things:
1. Immediately return Final Cut Studio (3) to the market. If it is not compatible with Lion (and I don’t know whether it is or not) label it so. But put it back on store shelves so consumers have the ability to work with the existing version until FCP X is ready for prime time.
2. Fund the development of a conversion utility – either at Apple or thru a 3rd-party – and announce the development with a tentative release date.
3. Publicly announce a road-map for FCP X that just covers the next 3-4 months. Apple needs to be in damage control mode and the best way to defuse the situation is to communicate. Answering the question: “What features will Apple add to FCP X, and when?” will go a long way to calming people down.
I have written in my earlier blog (read it here) that FCP X has a lot of potential, and, for some, it meets their needs very nicely. I still believe that.
I was also pleased to provide training on FCP X so that new and existing users can get up to speed on it quickly.
I don’t mind helping a product develop into its full potential. I enjoy providing feedback and helping people to learn new software. I don’t even mind that FCP X is missing some features; this is to be expected in any new software.
But I mind a great deal being forced to adopt a product because other options are removed, forced to lose access to my legacy projects, and forced to work in the dark concerning when critically needed features will be forthcoming.
This launch has been compared to Coca-Cola launching New Coke – resulting in a humiliating loss of market share.
With Final Cut Pro X, however, the situation is worse — with New Coke, only our ability to sip soda was affected. With Final Cut Pro X, we are talking losing livelihoods.
Let me know what you think,
Larry
253 Responses to Apple's Challenges
← Older Comments Newer Comments →-
Andrew Herd says:
June 30, 2011 at 4:26 pm
-
Why FCPX getting lobotomized means job security for editors. Yes, I’m serious. « notes from the edit bay says:
July 1, 2011 at 2:09 pm
-
Ben Ellingson says:
July 2, 2011 at 2:48 pm
-
bobby says:
July 3, 2011 at 9:44 am
-
Paul Nixon says:
July 3, 2011 at 12:01 pm
-
Jeff says:
July 3, 2011 at 11:00 pm
-
King D says:
July 5, 2011 at 10:42 am
-
Larry says:
July 5, 2011 at 10:59 am
-
King D says:
July 6, 2011 at 10:38 am
-
Curtis Clements says:
July 6, 2011 at 1:22 pm
-
Steve Douglas says:
July 6, 2011 at 1:41 pm
← Older Comments Newer Comments →FCPX has huge potential and it may have a great future ahead of it, but right now, it isn’t the tool to replace FCP7. Apple could rescue their skin here if they put FCS back on sale and published a roadmap for FCPX – and we could certainly live with that while FCPX got up to speed.
But if FCS remains unavailable and no roadmap emerges for FCPX, we have no way of planning our future if we stay with Apple products. Running blind isn’t an option. I guess it is this issue which is causing so much heat and light in the industry and what baffles me is that Apple don’t appear to have realised how much fear, uncertainty and doubt they have caused.
If FCPX had been released and FCS had remained available, then I would be looking at FCPX in a completely different light, especially if Apple told me that an import path was going to become available so that we could transition projects from FCS to FCPX. In fact, I would be a relatively happy bunny, thinking that there was this super fast replacement for FCS coming along nicely while we marked time with FCS until the day when FCPX matured.
I don’t think this is too much to ask, is it?
[…] ended up here, you already know most of the issues. If you need a refresher, check here, here, here, here, and here, and read a simple list of what it simply does not do anymore here. Or you can […]
Exactly! Thanks for the post.
Who asked for Final Cut Pro to be downgraded to Imovie status? Apple has abandoned the niche market that allowed it to survive and grow. The Final Cut pro workflow is industry standard. For apple not to take any of these concerns seriously is outrageous. It’s as if we don’t exist or don’t matter.
Hi Larry,
Apple should allow at least two years overlap for 7 and X to inversely proportionally co-exist, and thereby adjust to fit the market.
They should have launched X as a “paraclete” version; thereby allowing a natural transition. for editors to gradually come to terms with the new software, and then change platform, as and when they were ready.
Admitting that they were wrong, and asking the forgiveness of the Old School FCP7 Editing Community at large, Apple should then seek to reinstate FCP7, and provide the best support possible for at least another year, in order to quell the clamour of the disillusioned diehard FPC7 school.
Although Apple’s pride might be hurt in the process, the PR results would be awesome.
In doing so, people’s faith in Apple, would be greatly restored, and people will respect them far more, than their current “bloody-minded” approach of a Corporate Giant, that churns out great quality machines, software etc, but appears oblivious to the concerns and needs of the very customers, that it’s manufacturing for.
This change of approach would then allow time for the necessary extra software development to be added, and also allow the test of time to prove FCP X one way or the other.
How about it, Apple?
Proverbs 25:12 As a ring of gold, and an ornament of fine gold, so is a wise reprover upon a hearing ear.
I have yet to download Final Cut X. I myself am an independent video editor and I have used Final Cut 7 for a long time. I firmly believe that this is a great example of OS X when it was a Dot 0 release. It was a rough release but they quickly got .1 then .2 and so on. Now we all know and love (I assume) OS X now. I think people need to wait it out and see what happens.
After reading Larry’s superb “Moving Forward” blog (http://www.larryjordan.biz/goodies/blog.html) it occurred to me that, for those of us who are considering switching to, say, Avid or Premiere Pro, one of the most lamentable aspects of doing so is the significant loss of Larry Jordan as a mentor and/or quintessential source of editing doctrine. I’ve been a “Jordanian” for many years and, to me, Larry is synonymous, with Final Cut itself – no Larry, no final cut. To switch (which is what I may very well do) is tantamount to accepting Larry Jordan as collateral damage in the wake of Apple’s myopic abandonment. There is no “Larry Jordan” calibre support to be found in either Avid or Premiere. THIS is what makes switching most difficult for me.
King D:
WOW! I do not deserve such high praise and I am humbled by it.
Thank you very much.
Larry
Yeah ya DO deserve it, Larry. You’d be surprised how many of us feel that way.
Although I am NOT pushing Premiere Pro – how could I be, I’ve never used it. . . but there is an interesting comparative post over at CreativeCow by Helmut Kobler that might prove worthwhile for those of us caught in the middle.
“Article Focus:
If you’re a Final Cut editor contemplating making a change in the wake of Apple’s FCPX roll-out, you’re not alone. Here’s one long-time Final Cut user who tried out Adobe Premiere CS5.5 on a paying gig. He found a lot to like, and not much to miss.”
Take a look if you’re interested: http://library.creativecow.net/kobler_helmut/FCP-vs-Premiere-Pro/1
There seems to be two ways to interpret Apple’s latest step-either a deliberate well planned shift in market focus or an inept launch with a huge backlash of unanticipated proportions. The latter seems to be the consensus of the pro community but I submit the former explanation fits the facts. No multicam, backward project compatibility, XML, EDL, OMF etc cannot be attributed to incompetence on one of the largest technology companies on the globe. Yes even the biggest and best get it wrong- and they may have- but it was a deliberate choice. Jan Ozer pointed out this week with a user base of iMovie ten times the user base of FCP plus all the import features of iMovie in FCPX and it is clear who they are targeting and who they are throwing under the bus. Its all about $$$ and who stands in the wake of this goal is irrelevant regardless of who gets ruined on the process as well as those who have contributed to the development of FCP in the user community.. Apparently Adobe and Avid with their half price offers for FCP users to convert to their suites have banked on this conclusion as well. I would love to be wrong and see Apple make an about face but I’m not holding my breath and am making plans this fall if not sooner to make a switch out of FCP.
Bottom line is that the only thing Final Cut editors wanted was that FC7 be upgraded to 64 bit, enabling access to all ram and cores. There were other feature requests like a scrolling timeline but the one I mentioned would have thrilled everyone without complaints. I realize that an entire code would need to be re written but that was what everyone wished for. No one, and I mean no one, asked for an entirely new GUI and no one asked for another entirely new application, one that was devoid of many of the features that were requested and developed in FCP over the last 11 years.
Adobe bends over backwards to assist ‘influencers’, people of renown either for their achievements, articles and tutorials or even those who are masters of promotion, yet Apple goes the opposite direction by not allowing 3rd party companies access to betas under NDAs, nor press people who must prepare new tutorials and articles. Dealing with Apple is like pulling teeth.
You can softsoap it any way you want but the bottom line is that Apple clearly doesn’t care about those who have made Final Cut and Apple/Macs the tremendous success they have been up to now.