Apple's Challenges

Posted on June 26, 2011 by Larry

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 →

Shaun M says:

June 27, 2011 at 11:43 am

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!
Don Crosswhite says:

June 27, 2011 at 11:45 am

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
Don B says:

June 27, 2011 at 11:54 am

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.
Russ says:

June 27, 2011 at 11:59 am

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.
Roger Shinn says:

June 27, 2011 at 12:00 pm

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!
Jeff Franklin says:

June 27, 2011 at 12:07 pm

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.
Utah Editor says:

June 27, 2011 at 12:21 pm

Larry,

The most disheartening thing for more is trusting the beat of the Apple drum that things would “just work”. Apple berated Microsoft for this very same thing. I know, I know, Final Cut X does “work”, but it doesn’t fulfill user needs. For me, that is the same thing.

Had Microsoft released such a limited and “not ready for professional use” program, the guys at Apple would have responded with derision. “What do you mean it’s not ready for professional use?”, they would have said.

Apple seems to respond much more quickly to issues with the iPhone (bumper cases for example). They need to do the right thing here and bundle Final Cut 7 with Final Cut X until it is ready. It’s the only way to make fully “usable” software available until the new software is ready.

Also, I need DVD Studio Pro. So do all of my friends in my business. Every single one of my professional friends uses DVD Studio Pro. Every single one. Because their clients want DVD’s.

Let’s look to the future constantly, but understand we live in the present.
Bill Pryor says:

June 27, 2011 at 12:22 pm

I will most likely move to Premier Pro and I would like to see you do training on it as well as After Effects. Thanks.
Brian says:

June 27, 2011 at 12:51 pm

Wow… very eye-opening article that I’m glad I read. I am a professional editor who recently was thrust back into the freelance and small business owner world after 4-5 years of FT work, and I am about a week away from sinking some serious money into a new edit station. I was ABOUT to go hog-wild for the new FCPX, but to say I’m having serious doubts is an understatement.

I cut my teeth on Avid products, and was a regular devout user of both MC and Xpress Pro (which I had on my workstation at home), and when I started my FT gig (with a pro sports team that may have just won a 35lb trophy named Stanley), we had one top-of-the-line Avid MC workstation and two Matrox machines running Adobe Premiere, which I avoided like the plague whenever possible, but occaissionally would need to work with (mostly since those machines were also our After Effects workstations, which I also used very frequently).
About three years ago the decision was made to go to an all-FCS workflow for video editing, as Avid did not support Prores422, which all of our “highlight” clips were encoded as on a nightly basis by our tape ops on EVS systems, and my beloved Avid was sold off. I had roughly three weeks to learn FCS and edit our opening night video. But, after getting thrown into the fire, I came to love and even prefer Final Cut. Within a year I considered myself more capable in FCS than I had been after 8 years of working in Avid.

When I found myself suddenly underemployed and needing to drag my dormant video business into the HD world suddenly, I found myself looking for low-cost options to make do until the cash flow started coming in, and ended up souping up my newer PC laptop and giving the newest version of Pinnacle a look (hoping that, under Avid’s ownership, it had become more powerful than it was in the past). A few weeks later, I heard about a new product, Avid Studio, which was a step up for the higher-end consumer editor, and felt, again, this may be the way to go and purchased the $99 upgrade. What a collossal waste. I had hoped for “Avid Lite” and instead got an abomination of a “edit” software that behaved and operated both slowly and unlike any other system I’ve worked on. Things that should have taken me two hours took two days.

So, here I am today about to make a huge purchase (for my small business budget effectively starting over from scratch), and I was trying my best to maximize how much machine can I get for my money, knowing I’d need both Adobe’s creative suite and either FCP or Avid… and of course the PC option was continually cheaper… but I still found myself drawn like a moth to a more-reliable flame to Apple (I also have yet to find a suitable PC equivalent to DVD Studio Pro). The initial words I had read about FCPX thrilled me, as I saw the possibility of getting an Apple workstation at a price point that meant I’d have more to spend on the machine. But now… ugh…. no DVD Studio Pro, a watered down editing system with a name I once respected, and a sour feeling in the pit of my stomach that buying an Mac might very well be buying one of the last generations of a dying breed.

From the feedback I’ve seen, FCPX looks much more like Apple’s answer to Avid Studio than a useable tool for the professional editing community.

And to “True Professional” I have to add… I’m one of those professional editors who has had to learn how to edit across multiple platforms and systems, and I still am seriously dissapointed in FCPX and see it as a serious blow to actual true professionals out there. Maybe Apple pulls off a miraculous about-face and gets very public about the issues and finds a way to service this community again, but I feel like their efforts to cater to the masses is a not-so-subtle middle finger to the rest of us.
DavidH says:

June 27, 2011 at 12:54 pm

Here is the Double Whammy that is one of many reasons to despise what Apple has done.

Adobe and Apple were pioneers in DESKTOP EDITING applications that took us into realms as video editing solutions that were getting very close to what proprietary hardware based editing systems were doing.

The promise that Apple helped fulfill and gave much support to was a much cheaper alternative than Avid that enabled editors “professional features”, some of them actually ahead of Avid capabilities.

However, the requirement to enter the newly formed club was an Apple computer with Apple software. Okay, well, expensive machine but Apple seemed committed to also giving us the best hardware and operating system.

I bought an 8 core MacPro BECAUSE it ran the software, Final Cut Studio, that I had selected as the best investment for my fairly modest needs. But with the input and output formats to make it possible to upscale production by enlisting other video professioals in color grading and audio sweetening.

What I see is that the Apple Mac Pro line is probably also being phased out by Apple as they see more money in the core Power to the People apps.

Then I look at Adobe, seriously for the first time and I am impressed.

Then I see how many other great, well-known production products are a part of their suite.

I see their video editing product even taking care to also import Final Cut Pro 7 projects and files when Apple will not.

I see Adobe with the ability to natively play .mov, mxf, various HD formats immediately on the timeline.

I see the ability to import all the necessary formats in Premiere Pro.

I see Adobe offering a Windows and a Mac version of the same software.

And, very importantly, I see REAL EDITORS EMPLOYED BY ADOBE who very apparently understand all the needs of professional editors. They give me the feeling that they are engaged with the professional community of editors and care about how to curtail their product to working editors.

They seem much more directly engaged with the professional editing community and more focused on talking to it and responding to it.

Adobe seems to WANT the professional community.

Right now they only support 4 multicam windows, but, hey, now that they have more FCP 7 editors come sniffing around seriously kicking their tires I bet Adobe comes up with what professional editors want long before Apple.

I think Steve Jobs does not really respect the financials from such a niche. His product, his actions speak all we need to hear from Apple.

Right now I feel better than I did last week as I get to really look at Adobe. I feel another Windows machine in my future.

But for now I will introduce my MacPro to the Creative options at Adobe.