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 479136
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
apoclypse
Member since:
2007-02-17

"Seriously, this is version ONE.O people. ONE.O. ONE.O this is not version 5.0 of this completely from the ground up rewritten version of Final Cut.


Except that Apple's marketing it as being the version "X" of an existing "pro" software, not version One of an all new "pro" software.
It's called "Final Cut Pro X", like before the previous versions were called "Final Cut Pro 7" and "Final Cut Pro 6".

Same product name, only the version suffix changed. And this suffix is always increasing, like MacOS X was dubbed MacOS "10" by Apple to both keep the link with older (outdated, in fact) MacOS version, so offering a great upgrade path, but with an all new code redesign.

There is no way to get from this that :
- it's a new product, not an upgrade.
- it won't be able to load projects done with a previous version because, hey, it's an all new product so there is no projects made with a previous version yet :-)
- the Pro required features won't be the main focus anymore.

May Apple have choosed to use a new name (Final iMovie Cut anyone?) for this software, you'll have a very valid point. But it's not the case.

Imagine one second that next Microsoft Office version, even heavily redesigned, will lack the ability to load documents made by the previous versionn, not a very old version, no, simply the previous one.
What will you say then?
Seriously?

Sounds like your opinion is tainted here.
"

On that note Apple should have been more clear on some of these points. I don't agree with your statement about the X. I mean going from version 7 to version ten is a damn big leap don't you think? So you have to think that the X is just a way for Apple to denote a huge change in the software. The same happened with Quicktime. Quicktime X and quiktime 7 aren't using the same codebase. Anyone who has been following Apple over the years would know this. So did all of those these professionals, who btw were cheering their asses off when Apple demoed FCPX at NAB, but now choose to complain about what is essentially a completely different platform and software.

It really does remind me quite a bit of the same complaints people had about OSX. How did that turn out? I think they are complaining (like all pro users do) that Apple didn't give them more of the same with shiny features tacked on. That's exactly what the OS9 crowd complained about. Where Apple did fail is completely dropping support for FCP7, though imo, if you are a professional who uses FCP then you should already have the software. Apple isn't going to your Mac and removing the software.

Either way I think Apple will add the features as time goes on. I don't think they care about tape so they will probably leave that to third parties.

Edited 2011-06-29 19:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Sabon Member since:
2005-07-06

apoclypse - I agree 100% with you.

Reply Parent Score: 1

phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

I don't agree with your statement about the X. I mean going from version 7 to version ten is a damn big leap don't you think? So you have to think that the X is just a way for Apple to denote a huge change in the software. The same happened with Quicktime. Quicktime X and quiktime 7 aren't using the same codebase.


I didn't remember QuickTime X dropping backward compatibility or not supporting earlier versions features of QuickTime. Do you?

New codebase is neither a selling feature neither an valid excuse.

Anyone who has been following Apple over the years would know this.


They also know that MacOS X provides backward compatibility with previous MacOS version, that QuickTime X provides backward compatibility with previous version. Even if they were new codebase.

So, how one could know by himself that FCP X wont be backward compatible or wont support at least the set of Pro features that does previous version of FCP?

By reading on the box?
Nope, nothing there.
By reading the press release?
Nope, nothing there.

So did all of those these professionals, who btw were cheering their asses off when Apple demoed FCPX at NAB,


FCP X "preview" was demoed at NAB. It was not released in store yet then. It is now.
And nothing inform buyers about the broken backward compatibility or the features set which don't cover Pro ones. It was not said during NAB either.

You can twist it as much as you want, the facts are that they present it as the *new* Final Cut Pro version without saying it's not backward compatible.

but now choose to complain about what is essentially a completely different platform and software.


Then give it a completly different name, for god sake!

Where Apple did fail is completely dropping support for FCP7, though imo, if you are a professional who uses FCP then you should already have the software. Apple isn't going to your Mac and removing the software.


Now. But could you bet that Mac App Store won't ever do that when upgrading a product?
What would happened if the Mac App Store upgrade process had remove FCP 7 to replace with FCP X?
Oh, sure, Apple will have fixed it a few days or weeks, but until that, no access to existing FCP projects!?
That's money loss.

I'm sorry, but maybe that a risk consumers could accept, but pros really can't. There is enough stuff that could jeopardize your business, you don't need some software provider to screw your workstation.

And Apple just send the signal this risk is increasing with their FCP product.
The least pros can do is sending back the signal that they won't accept it.

Reply Parent Score: 3