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 →-
Jeff Self says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:25 am
-
Timothy Sorel says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:26 am
-
AlRobi says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:29 am
-
Larry says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:35 am
-
Tom Munnecke says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:32 am
-
Shaun M says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:43 am
-
Don Crosswhite says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:45 am
-
Don B says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:54 am
-
Russ says:
June 27, 2011 at 11:59 am
-
Roger Shinn says:
June 27, 2011 at 12:00 pm
-
Jeff Franklin says:
June 27, 2011 at 12:07 pm
← Older Comments Newer Comments →I’m not a video pro by any means. I shoot videos of my kids and stuff. I started on iMovie back in 2003, switched to Final Cut Express and eventually moved up to Final Cut Studio. I never upgraded to 7 as I was still using a PowerMac G5. I just got an i7 iMac with 16GB’s of memory. Was looking forward to installing FCPX. Now I’m undecided if I want it. Like others, I want to hear from Apple about a roadmap. FCPX is probably exactly what I need but I want to use what the industry uses.
If I somehow wind up making the swith to Premiere Pro (only if Adobe has a killer deal), then Apple will lose me on another product as well. I’ve been sticking it out with Aperture instead of Lightroom, but maybe it would be time to go Adobe completely.
As an educator at a major university, FCPX is very troubling. Apple needs to listen to the many of us that will need to change our curriculums to Premiere or Avid if they do not take steps to fix this.
Hi Larry, because you go threw all the possibilities in FCP X for now, is this X app work with DVD Studio Pro. I will follow you direction, before move or update wait if everything working so you get no surprise.
The only thing we need for FCP Pro a 64 bit engine and the new codec and this is it, but Apple target it is Kiddy mass product remember what the real genious of Apple Mr Wosniak , you look fantastic for now but in few years from now you will be look as a Window division
Exporting from FCP X can create a QuickTime file which you can compress in Compressor and import into DVD Studio Pro to author a DVD. So, yes, this workflow is exactly the same in FCP X as it is in FCP 7.
Larry
Given that Apple has insisted that they “have done market research” and that they are pulling the plug on FCP 7, the only conclusion I can draw is that they are pulling out of the pro market.
End of discussion.
No sense in making it a long, drawn out ordeal, just make it a short and sweet good bye. too much money to be made in iPhones and iPads, too little margins in Desk Pros and Pro Application Suites…
Larry,
Thanks for being such a guiding light in these troubling times! I have been waiting for the perfect time to upgrade my editing suite. I had it all planned out for this year. I was going to wait for the new Final Cut, OS X Lion, and then a new Mac Pro (still waiting on that part). It was going to be my company’s flagship editing system probably for the next 3-5 years at least.
Now that Apple has a nightmare scenario on their hands, I’m not so sure. I will say this, your ideas for their damage control is absolutely right on. If they start putting out this fire quickly by communicating to us that they are going to put important stuff like being able to use previous projects and multicam editing back in, they might not lose all their customers. Us editors have project deadlines, we don’t have time to sit around and wait for apple to fix their software to make it useable. They better get on it!
Problems bring change and change brings progress. Give the change time and you will see the progress. Birth pains will give way to life after all!
Don
I suggest that all pro users refer to Apple’s latest video release as either iMovie Pro or FCP-ex. No pro should even consider furthering Apple’s deception by using the official name, which evokes a former, great desktop video application that no longer exists.
Thanks Larry – I have followed you for a long while and I find your comments well moderated.
But I think we need to put some things in perspective here. To do this, let me say that I have had a lifetime’s experience in producing material for television as a writer, cameraman and video editor. I grew up through the revolution from cinematography to videography and must say that cinematographers never easily made the transition to ‘videography’. The ‘old’ pro’s still decry ‘modern’ camera-people who don’t use lights, who make the camera part of the action (as opposed to recording the action as it happens in front of the camera) and who think that any camera apart from an Arrifllex is…well..something you might flush down a toilet.
To add to the above, let me say that over 30 years, I have only had 4 Apple computers – the old ‘brick’ which revolutionised WYSIWYG, then an Apple 8100 Nubus (and paid an absolute fortune for Media 100 – I was the first in my town with one), then a G5 (and FCP 5), and most latterly in the last two weeks, an IMac 21.5″ Quad. I only bought the last Apple because the G5 had a heart attack and we thought we might have to take it out the back and shoot it. The G5 went onto life support and I got the new Apple – but my Apple Doctor ‘operated’ and within a week or so, the old Apple was up and running around the ‘ward’ – I brought it home and now have the new and old computers in a stand off, trying to seek ascendancy – a bit like the ‘old dog and the new dog’ trying to win or regain my favour.
The point is this: like cameras and edit suites, I’ve done the whole gamut — from UMatic, Betacam, Betacam SP, DigiBeta….and production houses boasting the ‘latest’ technologies ranging from 2″ quad, through B and C format 1″ – and a range of edit suites which would cost me $100’s per hour to hire. Along the way I made money, when there was a lot of money in the system to pay for ‘wizards’ to make video.
Then along came FCP – and Adobe and so on. And cameras like the Sony Z1p (and my favourite) the Canon XHA1. Brilliant! We could all do what we paid thousands for – in our own desktop – and with cheaper cameras (that do everything than the Betacams did – in high heels and backwards!) From an editing point of view – heck – I didn’t need to shower to go out! Many of my productions (again from which I have made serious money) were done in the early hours in my pyjamas!!
But this revolution has accelerated. We are facing the new ‘revolution’ in videomaking. Apart from ‘serious’ film-making, this revolution is taking the ‘paid’ editor out of the equation! Pro camera-people and video editors are going the way of traditional journalists! ‘Citizen’ journalists and film-makers with an IPhone or IPad – or those using the multitude of stills cameras masquerading as video cameras (!!) are taking over! Are they making cr@#p content! Yes, probably – but they are getting their stories across. And guess what? Today, the ‘story’ is more important than the technique! (On reflection, hasn’t it always been thus? — These days I don’t say I am a writer or a cameraman or a ‘producer’ — I say I am a ‘story-teller’!!
Apple has worked this out. You can’t tell me that a company as smart as Apple hasn’t had the best research the world can provide. THEY understand that the future of video is in providing a platform for the ‘proletariat’! IMovie was their first foray into this space — now they can bring FCP functionality to those who have been born and bred on that system and who represent the ‘new wave’ of videomakers. Is there more return for them in making the best video editing platform for those who will use it for the next 20 years? You bet! It makes plain good business sense.
Sadly, those editors and producers who have taken the current FCP to an art form (and I’ve got to say I am often breathless about the way many editors have been able to use FCP) will simply need to adjust – not only in the way they edit, but most importantly, in their thinking. For those in the higher stratosphere of editing, does that mean they may need to migrate away from FCP? Probably, unless Apple does provide a migration path (as you have wisely noted Larry). But I’m sure Apple sees the way forward in those who will use the new FCP in ways the ‘traditionalists’ have not yet envisaged. We are all, of course, the ‘sum’ of our experience unless of course we can embrace the future. As a 60 year old with a lifetime’s experience in communication, I put myself firmly in the ‘future’ category, and I hope you young whipper-snappers do too.
At the bottom end of the day, we must all realise that unless we are working for main-stream movie or advertising agencies with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, we need to embace this change.
Underlying all this is that we must also understand that we are communicators, and like it or lump it, our output in the future will be made for the Web – with all its attendant (current) weaknesses. The latest FCP will be great for that. Does it still inherent weaknesses? Listen to Larry – he’s right — and I’m sure Apple will address many of those.
But will the new FCP be suitable for the ‘traditionalists’? Probably no.
Apple is properly seeking to capture new markets – and good on them! If my son can use a lot of the tools I’ve grown up with in FCP (at an affordable cost) to tell a story, easier and cheaper than he could in the past, then Apple with its new FCP has got it right.
For me – well, I’m still using FCP 5.1.4. (I’ve never felt the need to upgrade – and the stuff I produce, increasingly (although not exclusively) for the web, continues to make me money. I uploaded FCP to my new 21.5″ Apple with no problems (although If I do have a gripe, I see the Lion is the LAST time Apple will support ‘Rosetta’-like back-compatibility!!)
So I’ll continue to make a good buck using FCP on my new computer — until Apple gets the latest FCP right. For those bitching about the new FCP, why not do the same?? Get the latest Apple box, and work it into the ground using your current version of FCP!
And don’t sweat the small things.
Looks like Apple thought they could boost their sales by combining their FCP market and their i-movie users with the new “I-Movie Pro”. What a pain in the. . .neck!
Larry, I like your summation: “This launch has been compared to Coca-Cola launching New Coke – resulting in a humiliating loss of market share.” Personally, I hope some flows to Adobe and to Grass Valley…ahh, competition.
Apple’s FCP jumped from nowhere to stellar ratings when it came out, and we’ve counted on them to keep up the good work. However, just like in other big competitions, if Apple’s not going to play up to their potential, then they don’t deserve their spot on the charts!
I think it was in the Reduser.net forum that someone suggested that FCP X could be seen as a development platform for more sophisticated and “pro” features. This was said after someone found code in the app not only for XML support but also for Python scripting. This combined with what I understand to be an improved plug-in structure could allow 3rd parties to build really useful “extensions” (dirty word for old Mac users) to FCP X that might elevate it’s standing among the pros. If this is Apple’s strategy then it could explain why the app seems to be aimed at prosumers. They built some strong underpinnings and then only developed the user features to a certain point leaving it to third parties to fill the gaps. For example it seems AJA could make good use of the extension features to build a deck control plug-in for Kona cards. One that hopefully would work better than the FCP 7 Kona driver as it would not have to go through FCP Log & Capture tool – which of course doesn’t exist.
However, I also realize that getting all the features you need piecemeal from various vendors is not an optimum solution and would most likely raise the cost of FCP X to a point higher than FCP 7. Particularly if people charge as much as Automatic Duck.
We’ll just have to wait and see. Apple needs to get that SDK out pronto.