Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 28th Jun 2011 22:28 UTC
Multimedia, AV "Apple have been processing refunds for Final Cut Pro X as complaints flood in from grumpy pros - and it seems they are taking a lenient approach. Although the iTunes/App Store terms and conditions state that 'all sales are final' [ed. note: isn't this illegal?], when an application does not meet the expectations of a user, like in the case of a 59p iPhone game, Apple have been known to refund the purchase. Now it seems they are doing so with Final Cut Pro X to the tune of $299."
Thread beginning with comment 478985
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
FCP X is good, but it hasn't smart managers
by Eugenia on Tue 28th Jun 2011 23:22 UTC
Member since:

FCP X is actually a *good*, modern editor if you think of it from the point of view of a stand-alone, modern videographer. It does everything you would need it to do at that price range, again, for an editor who has just started his foray into professional or prosumer video editing, and has modern hardware/cameras.

But where FCP X really sucks and fails, is in the way it supports its previous professional users. Its inability to import/export OMF/EDL/XML/FCP-projects, multicamera support, good DV/HDV tape and RED support etc, are all Hollywood-class or older-prosumer-(weddings)class professionals. These features are indeed a must-have for these kinds of pros, and they are RIGHT to shout at Apple for the lack of these features. Apple's managers should have looked at history (e.g. Lotus 1-2-3 to Excel), to see how important backwards compatibility and interoperability feature support is to OLDER users. It actually surprised me that Apple would do such an easy mistake, in terms of a pro product evolution/market.

But as I said, if you're a new videographer, stand-alone person in the post production of things (e.g. a dSLR user who shoots official music videos, or shooting short movies -- like myself), then FCPX is good enough for what it does. I don't need multi-camera support, I don't need older compatibility or interoperability with others. I can do everything on my own, and FCPX offers most of the features I need.

But yeah, if you're in a STUDIO, sharing projects with others, e.g. colorists or 3D people, then FCPX is a toy.

Edited 2011-06-28 23:24 UTC

Reply Score: 9

Delgarde Member since:

That seems to be the complaint, yeah - not that it's a bad piece of software, but that they've dropped a lot of the features that justified calling it Final Cut *Pro*. And funny enough, they've upset a lot of the professionals who actually used those features...

Reply Parent Score: 2

arpan Member since:

I guess they should have just named it Final Cut Express X and everyone would have been happy.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Neolander Member since:

It actually surprised me that Apple would do such an easy mistake, in terms of a pro product evolution/market.

What if it wasn't a mistake, but simply a not-so-subtle way of saying "Frankly, we don't care about you anymore" to the pro Mac community ?

I mean, what are professional products worth once you are at the center of the mainstream market ? They require more work, and they generate less benefits as a whole, although more benefits per head...

It may simply be the case that this category of Mac users have had their use, and now Apple doesn't need them anymore. So they get deprecated, so to speak.

Reply Parent Score: 1