Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Jun 2011 15:04 UTC
Apple Well, this just got interesting. There's been a bit of a backlash over Apple's Final Cut X Pro, which is considered a step down from previous versions by many professional videographers, as they claim it lacks countless features - leading to the nickname 'iMovie Pro'. Former Shake product designer and former Apple employee Ron Brinkmann has now weighed in on the situation. His advice to professionals? Don't rely on companies like Apple.
Thread beginning with comment 479086
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by molnarcs on Wed 29th Jun 2011 15:39 UTC
Member since:

Before any of our regulars start babbling about "apple-haters" - this is a very well written article. Not a hint of vitriol, just the facts. Also, it's kinda interesting to me. Apple does some things very very well. Presenting Ideas is one of them.

Seeing how demoability (is that a real word?) determines the direction of development reminded me of my own ideas about a business I'm trying to set up. I'm fairly certain that my ideas are sound and novel, but I'm stuck at presenting those ideas to would be customers. How to do it in the most concise and simple way possible, without losing too many details? This is where Google made a huge blunder with Wave.

Wave was and still is a brilliant idea. But when it reached customers, it was so convoluted and unusual - it took me hours to decipher how things work, and I consider myself a geek. Slowness aside, I still think that all the main concepts behind wave would revolutionize (I know, big word) online communication (email, collaboration, chat, etc.) but it was presented in a such a way that confused even the most devout google fans. You had to work to figure things out. In other words, it was unpresentable. Or as some people say, it was ahead of its time.

Now most who know me around here know that I'm not exactly an Apple fan. Yet reading about how their mind works (marketing, selling ideas in general) always fascinates me. One can learn a lot from how Apple operates.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Thoughtful
by whartung on Wed 29th Jun 2011 16:03 in reply to "Thoughtful"
whartung Member since:

I don't consider this a criticism of Apple. It's just the way they do business.

Specialty customers with distinct needs, but low, low volume simply do not scale to an organization the size of Apple. They're better served by vertical service organizations that can dedicate the time, and charge the rates that kind of service demands. Apple simply isn't in that business.

That said, with the advances in hardware and devices, and the prices continuing to race to the bottom, mid-range and very affordable hardware is offering "pro-sumer" features.

Now I don't know squat about FCP one way or the other. The best way that Apple can facilitate this kind of market would be to create a tool bench that's enabled by some kind of plugin or extension mechanism. Something that works well out of the box, but if the "pros" want a feature, then ideally the market can respond through creating a plugin or providing services to integrate FCP in to the pro workflow. And those plugins and services can readily be handled by a vertical channel outside of Apple.

Providing this kind of software is important for Apple as it enables their products and promotes a world view. But that doesn't mean they have to cater to the true specialists. It would just be nice if they can enable those that do want to.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Thoughtful
by JAlexoid on Wed 29th Jun 2011 21:18 in reply to "RE: Thoughtful"
JAlexoid Member since:

If anything, Apple should spin off their pro tools as a subsidiary company.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Thoughtful
by Lennie on Wed 29th Jun 2011 16:28 in reply to "Thoughtful"
Lennie Member since:

I had already posted this link in the comments on this thread, so it is a bit redundant. But I think you are very interrested in how Apple works, so here the link again:

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Thoughtful
by molnarcs on Wed 29th Jun 2011 16:44 in reply to "RE: Thoughtful"
molnarcs Member since:

Thanks - it's one of my favourites ;) I still don't agree with their decision to ditch pro users. I think Thom has a point there, and more importantly, it's a solvable problem. Consumers can have the simple UI + functions, pro users can enable their vaunted features via a plugin (available for them in the App Store). To software would have to architected to support a plugin framework and a flexible UI, but that's an engineering problem Apple programmers can solve with a minimum effort. Even if 10.000 customers is a miniscule market for Apple, the revenue they generate would more than just cover Apple's investment. That way, everyone would be happy.

Reply Parent Score: 3