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 →-
Nivardo Cavalcante says:
June 26, 2011 at 12:07 pm
-
Mr. Worried says:
June 26, 2011 at 12:20 pm
-
Alex says:
June 26, 2011 at 2:14 pm
-
Josh says:
June 26, 2011 at 2:36 pm
-
Larry says:
June 26, 2011 at 3:17 pm
-
John Vasey says:
June 26, 2011 at 3:06 pm
-
Alex Chan says:
June 26, 2011 at 3:54 pm
-
ChrisHarlan says:
June 26, 2011 at 3:56 pm
-
Ryan says:
June 26, 2011 at 4:02 pm
-
Ethan Aylett says:
June 26, 2011 at 4:31 pm
-
Lucas Saldanha Werneck says:
June 26, 2011 at 5:01 pm
← Older Comments Newer Comments →Dear Larry,
I think the London Supermeet you had yesterday allowed the real vision of the big problem that Apple has left the professional editors. We hope you become our voice together with Apple so she can see how wrong it was to force the professional market to accept the FCP X.
Thanks!
I’d like to refer back to this reply I made on your “1,700 jaws dropping” post:
——-
Mr. Worried Apr 17, 2011 04:11
My background is in narrative TV and film. Like many, I’m very excited and very worried about the new final cut.
In general:
-I’m excited that apple has decided to rethink what the non-linear editing experience can be. I couldn’t even conceive of what revolutions were possible in the timeline alone until I saw the videos of the presentation.
-I’m worried that with this version Apple has chosen a market segment — the do-everything-in-one-box user base. Will there still be OMFs, XMLs, timecode displays, etc? Will we be able to edit multicam, collaborate with editors on another computer, and NOT keep audio in synch if we prefer to use it out of context or swap lines? In other words, will the prestigious FCP users, such as the Coens and the editors of the Social Network, still be using it in a year, or is this goodbye?
Specific excitement:
-Magnetic timeline (excited x 1000)
-Visual browsing
-All the new clip-organizing stuff
-The new visual in-timeline trimming
-The audio stuff
-The new keyframing
-Compound clips
Specific worries:
-No viewer (worried x 1000)
-No mentions in the presentation of these essential features: match framing; OMF or XML export; multicam; assistant editor stuff like modifying timecode etc..
-The overemphasis on “audio staying in synch” — there are lots of reasons to not want audio always in synch. Also, if a clip has say 4 mic channels associated with it, can you selectively turn on and off some of those channels without bending over backwards? Because it looks like it’s all totally married in the timeline.
Basically, I’m just dying to know if Apple intends for this update to maintain FCP’s current place in the industry — if editors like me will be able to keep using Final Cut in film and TV — or if Avid will finally reassert their dominance in that market, while Final Cut becomes exclusively the tool of film students, wedding and corporate video makers, and others who don’t need to interact with assistant editors, sound houses, colorists, and machine rooms and are content to click “color match” and export.
The answer to this final question is not evident from anything we’ve seen so far.
—-
To comments like this, people around the community were saying things along the lines of “why would you assume a pro feature isn’t there because they didn’t mention it?” and “give apple the benefit of the doubt”
I think we’ve all learned now — NEVER assume a feature is in unless they specifically mention it. NEVER give a secretive company the benefit of the doubt.
I’m brushing up on my Avid MC skills now…
Thank you Larry,
This is exactly what the Pros have been saying and what they WANT from Apple. But even thought Apple should, they will not follow your advice.
And this is what your previous post (Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World ) should have been about. Especially since you’ve had access to the software long before we did. Like David Pogue, you played in Apple’s hand and you became the recipient for the grief that was really geared toward Apple. I am truly sorry about that. But we needed to be heard. And we all could have avoided that if what you wrote today had been written last week.
Never the less, thank you for making our voice heard, and writting today’s entry. It is right on point. May Apple hear you (I have really really low expectations about that)
Great article Larry, as always. If you care to read my take on the FCPX situation, here it is: t.co/SOj2gk5
Josh:
Excellent piece. I recommend others read it as well.
Larry
Hi, Larry…
I plan to attend the LAFCPUG meeting this coming Tuesday and you have already covered the same strategy that I was going to suggest: keep support for FCP 7, a plan for a conversion utility, and most importantly: releasing a PUBLIC ROADMAP that ballparks what features they will add back in and when. I would lobby for an 18 MONTH ROADMAP….what features will they add back in by October let’s say, then April of next year, September, etc. We can guess that because of the new architecture, some features may take longer than others to integrate.
In this case, for Apple to regain our trust and confidence, they need to reverse their mindset of secrecy…and go public with a timeline. In fact, the features we are lobbying for now are not new, they are essential and there is no need to keep them and their plans for adding them veiled in secrecy.
Once we have a public roadmap, every single user can calculate their own equasion…do I hang in there and wait and for how long? Or do I jump ship? Having that public timeline would be a huge help to us all.
The other issue that I will bring up here and at the LAFCPUG meeting on Tuesday…is more of a question of communication. How can we best lobby to have Apple respond to these issues? You and Michael have had some personal contact with some of the Apple FCP team, but individually as users we do not have that kind of relationship. Is there some kind of strategy that you and Michael can pursue with your relationships? Along with some kind of plan that we as users can also pursue on a parallel basis? Perhaps by Tuesday’s meeting there may be more concrete details as to what LAFCPUG can do as an organization and what we users can do as individuals.
Thanks for sending this latest update. It’s just what we need. A plan. Now how to communicate it and elicit a response from Apple.
Thanks again for your support…John Vasey
Very rational and clear piece, Larry; if Apple heed your advice, we might be ok.
Personally, I like FCP X, but I’m hardly a “pro” user. I suspect I’m the sort of person Apple was targeting with this release: someone who was intimidated by FCP, but felt constrained by iMovie. I hope I’m wrong, because if they can add the features professionals are clamouring for without making the interface more complicated, then they might have the best of both worlds. But I’m not confident; the new pricing structure certainly suggests that they’re heading that way.
My other concern is that maybe Apple doesn’t understand just *how* important these features are. I think most people get that they’re important, but not *how* important. For example, I know multicam support is key for pro editors, having tried to cobble together a film with three cameras in iMovie, but I don’t think I really appreciate *how* key it is — and I won’t until I do something that really relies upon it. Similarly, I worry that Apple is making decisions based upon what they perceive to be important features, rather than what turn out to be in the real world.
I would love to be proven wrong on both counts, because several of my best friends rely on FCP for their livelihoods. But until (if?) Apple provides a response, I won’t hold my breath.
Thank you.
I recall seeing an email from Randy Ubillos on a few different forums, stating that there wasn’t enough information in the FCP 7 project files to convert them to FCP X projects. Though since that project file links to the media, and have specific cuts and locations on the timeline, I’m wondering where he’s getting that from. There is no real reason why it wouldn’t work.
I’m hoping to see something from Apple in the next few days, at the very least, a rough development timeline through the end of the year. I’ve been using FCP for the last 3 1/2 years, and I’d hate to see it be tossed aside for higher profits from lower-end consumers.
Thank you! You just summed up my feelings perfectly. Hopefully Apple listens and acts.
Hi Larry,
I don’t think you remembered me, Steve introduced us at Supermeet before we entered the in the corwd.
I just want to congratulate you to say exactly what I’m feeling.
I don’t know if you have any path, but Apple most know that this is not an iPhone Antenagate problem, this is professional software and equipment.
Don’t forget the past:
1- pullout from NAB
2- Shake
3- XServe RAID
4- LiveType
5- XServe
6- Final Cut Pro 7
7- SoundTrack Pro
8- Color
9- Cinema Tools
10- DVD Studio Pro
11- Final Cut Server
Pulling this out and (with the exception of XServer RAID) showing alternatives, migration paths and solutions.
This shows that we cannot trust apple pro software anymore. Unfortunately.
I really like Apple but to pissed me off like this for what I make for a living it shows something is VERY Wrong.