Thoughts on new FCP X Sneak Peek

[Ron Evans]

Thomas , I started editing with the Fast Video Machine then with NLE moved with Ulead and Premiere eventually getting the Canopus DV Raptor which solved all sorts of problems with DV editing for me. When Edius appeared I switched and have stayed with Edius as it is very fast and also does not need a really powerful machine for most tasks. I still kept Premiere up to date until CS3, have always had Sound Forge and Vegas from Vegas audio ( before video version).

Because people use more than one program one has to be careful with drawing too many conclusions from manufacturers quoting number of licenses they have sold and then relating to stake in the industry. Just because someone has a license doesn't mean they use the program or use it exclusively. My version of CS3 is a perfect example I have it but no longer use it regularly.

On the topic of MAC's running Windows programs I think Randy answered. The MAC users I know run Windows programs that do things they cannot do with any MAC program. None to my knowledge loaded Windows to play games. They certainly didn't buy a MAC to run Windows programs they just do not want two computers and prefer the MAC for most of what they wish to do. MAC's do have an advantage in being able to run MAC and Windows programs and there are a lot more programs available for the Windows environment.

Ron Evans

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

Because people use more than one program one has to be careful with drawing too many conclusions from manufacturers quoting number of licenses they have sold and then relating to stake in the industry. Just because someone has a license doesn't mean they use the program or use it exclusively. My version of CS3 is a perfect example I have it but no longer use it regularly.
Ron Evans

Hi Ron,

I agree about the licenses.

Unless I am completely mistaken, the number Apple threw out of 2mil licensed users includes all version of FCP, not just FCP 7. If Avid and Adobe did that, their numbers would be fairly large as well and Avid might be close.

[Allan Barnwell]

I love how this thread has taken the new Final Cut and used it as a lens on the changing face of the industry.

For me, seeing the new Final Cut was further confirmation of the march of the pro video industry down the same path that desktop publishing took in the 80’s and 90’s. We even have the same core players, Apple and Adobe, leading the parade.

Once the computer became the central technology for the publishing industry, it started with high-end service bureaus who invested in the expensive equipment and software. Then the cost continued to drop to the point that color printers were given away for free with the purchase of your computer and everyone could afford to publish from their desktop. And the software from Apple and Adobe continued to drop in price as the hardware and software tools of the trade continued to be commoditized.

It seems to me the exact game is playing out today in the pro video world, but instead of HP and Epson making printers, we have Sony and Panasonic making the cameras.

The march is inevitable, and the innovative companies are the ones that speed it along with every new “disruptive” technological advancement (i.e. RED, Blackmagic, Apple, etc.).

I don’t consider this march inherently good or bad, just unavoidable.

More people will edit video because it will be easy and accessible to do so. Some will do it really well, most will be “good enough”. Because that is the primary goal of the products today: to enable the user to create a result that is “good enough” without having to make a real investment of time or talent.

Good enough to meet the deadline.
Good enough to satisfy the boss.
Good enough to make the sale.
Good enough for reality television.

But with hard work, talent, and some inspiration, some will take these same tools and create something truly excellent – and that is why all the folks doing it “good enough” will ask the question: “what did he use to make that?”

Allan Barnwell
Omega Broadcast Group - Professional Video Sales, Rental & Services

[Chris Barcellos]

I am quite excited to see FCP X out, and at that price point. I believe it will help the market stay reasonably priced for those of us who treat this more as an avocation than a business.

A lot of what is on board with X, is what has been onboard my NLE of choice, Vegas, for several years. I had watched FCP .editors doing log and tranfers and other tasks that seemed somewhat archaic and restrictive to me, when I just dragged and dropped most forms of video on my Vegas time line. I had actually gone with Premiere through Pro 2 before changing over to Vegas.

I probably wouldn't change over to FCP X, unless I perceived a need to have an industry standard program in my arsenal now for future business reasons. I have invested in Cineform as my "ProRes", and have a pretty good workflow going. However, the price point offered makes that a more practical option consideration, and I could see it happening in the right circumstance. I am currently running a Core Duo Quad system right out of Dell at 32 bits, with Vista. For almost 3 years it has been a clean machine. .I am also running Linux on it, and messing with Linux editing systems too, to keep current with that area.

Is a Mac in my future ? Seems like more of a potential today, than it did 2 weeks ago, and I think that is exactly what Apple is hoping for.

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

On the topic of MAC's running Windows programs I think Randy answered. The MAC users I know run Windows programs that do things they cannot do with any MAC program. None to my knowledge loaded Windows to play games. They certainly didn't buy a MAC to run Windows programs they just do not want two computers and prefer the MAC for most of what they wish to do. MAC's do have an advantage in being able to run MAC and Windows programs and there are a lot more programs available for the Windows environment.

For most WIndows applications the way to do this is to use VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop to run a Windows virtual machine on their Mac desktop. It is a major pain to exit OS X totally thus abandoning all your running Mac applications & boot Windows. Beefy applications like an NLE will not run in a VM however.

[Randy Johnson]

I dont mean to sound negative here but everyone keeps talking about the price point $299 is it that good? I mean it was $999 before but that was FCP, Motion, Sound booth, compressor and DVDSP 4. Now if Apple comes through with the semi confirmed rumor that there will be a some kind of suite it very well could be FCP 299 Motion 299 and sound booth 299 hopefully some sort of DVD authoring app 299 that puts us back up over $1000.

[Ron Evans]

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

For most WIndows applications the way to do this is to use VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop to run a Windows virtual machine on their Mac desktop. It is a major pain to exit OS X totally thus abandoning all your running Mac applications & boot Windows. Beefy applications like an NLE will not run in a VM however.

Yes the people I know really only do this because they do not want two PC's. Personally I would just buy two machines. I have 4 PC's I have made on my network two of them working with the same set of monitors , keyboard and mouse etc. If one needs a MAC or PC for business reasons just go for it. The point I was trying to make was that if someone just has a MAC they are not now limited to just MAC software.

Ron Evans

[Randy Johnson]

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

For most WIndows applications the way to do this is to use VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop to run a Windows virtual machine on their Mac desktop. It is a major pain to exit OS X totally thus abandoning all your running Mac applications & boot Windows. Beefy applications like an NLE will not run in a VM however.

All VMware fusion is really good for is running programs like office to really run Windows multi-media software ie Edius, Encore, Premiere Bootcamp is the only way to go.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Randy Johnson

it very well could be FCP 299 Motion 299 and sound booth 299 hopefully some sort of DVD authoring app 299 that puts us back up over $1000.

You don't know that though. Nobody does at this point. The full suite of apps could be a lot less for that matter.

You really do get what you pay for -- if the whole package is $1000 then it's usually worth every penny. If it's priced the same as before then you still come out ahead since the capabilities and feature sets are so much better now. This is a business expense, and you should be making your money back from it fairly quickly. To answer your question though, yes it is $300 for FCP alone. They could have priced it at $600 and it would still be a great deal as far as I'm concerned.

[Steve Kalle]

Because there was no upgrade price given, I have an eerie feeling that an FCP upgrade is no more; thus, there will only be full purchases at $299. I think this can also explain why its price is so low.

[Chris Hurd]

I have the same feeling... and I have an unopened FCS2 box still in the shrink-wrap which is most likely a doorstop now!

[Kirk Candlish]

Adobe started talking about a subscription model for their products about 5 years ago. This month they introduced that as an option. Their preference is to have that be the only option.

Apple has moved to downloads for apps via the App store. That means no retailers other then themselves, no packaging costs and no upgrades.

I worked at a major software company for several years. The greatest expense in releasing new apps and updating existing apps was documentation, packaging and distribution. Actual development costs were minimal by comparison.

[Mike Petty]

Reading these postings has really been refreshing...fairly levelheaded responses to what was "announced" (more on that in a bit) and the reactions from various segments of the industry.

I have kind of a unique perspective on the whole issue of Apple's marketing that has been running through these threads. In my first career (of 25+ years) I was in national brand marketing. As a matter of fact, one of the brands I used to run (as head of marketing) used the same ad agency, Chiat/Day, as Apple. The same guys who did "1984" and some other great stuff were peripherally involved with creating my advertising. I used to spend literally millions on TV production & post production so I have a little experience in that arena.

I enjoyed the production part of things so much (and hated a lot of the other stuff) I packed the marketing career in and began a second career by starting a micro-production company. Write/Produce/Direct/Shoot/Edit/Graphics/Distribution...we do everything. I am having a ball and making a pretty good living.

So when I saw what Apple was doing with the Super Meet at NAB and the outcry from certain segments of the editing community I kind of had to smile.

I think the event at NAB told us two things.

One. What we saw and heard from Apple was neither an announcement nor a sneak preview. What it was, was nothing more than a giant focus group...and that focus group had one clear objective - to do a disaster check. Make sure we really haven't lost our way or gone off the rails. That's it. Tell the group the minimum amount of info to make it valid and see what the response was. Let's float the pricing out and see what the response is.

Hell no we're not going to have Q&A, we know what the group will ask and we don't need to stir this research pot.

Back in the day in Chicago we used to call this "State Streeting"...got an idea/product concept/ad that you want to do a disaster check on? Go downstairs and go out on State Street and ask people what they think.
Simple. Unscientific. But it worked. Apple did a State Street test at NAB. What better place? Doesn't matter that FCPX may still go through a bunch of changes before release. Doesn't matter that we did not reveal a ton of info on other features. We'll find out what we need to know.

The proof that this was market research? Anybody ever see Phil Schiller at anything having to do with FCP? Don't let Steve kid you...they do a lot of research.

The other thing we learned is that the heavy user segment (I hate the word pro's because it has no meaning anymore) is really nervous. They see their feifdoms eroding and Apple is accelerating the process. (And since we are on the subject of "focus groups" the ones who did the most bitching about what FCP X is or is not are the one's who, to quote Steve, would say they want faster horses!)

Their sense of entitlement because they are the PROS is almost sad. How dare Apple not ask us what we think? How dare they not address all of the technical stuff that is important to us? How dare they reduce the price and democratize our little club.

I think Apple is saying to this group, "If you don't like what were doing...that's cool. We know you are important but we are not going to roll over for you and if you don't like it, mazel tov. Go use Adobe/Avid/Whatever. No problem."

We can get some brand name feature film editors to use FCP X so we have cred...and we'll sell a zillion bucks worth of software and computers to the middle market - that huge group of wedding/corporate/training/government/you name it groups (like most of us.)

It's all about product, marketing, revenue and the stock price. Apple has always known that and always will. Sorry for the rant. This has been percolating for a week. BTW...It will be a pain for my little shop to reinvest, transition and learn new software and new editing techniques. But that is life in the big city. Deal with it. I will now standby for FanBoy brickbats...though I like to think of myself as being simply and reasonably brand loyal - all things being equal.

[Kirk Candlish]

I don't think we saw a focus group at all. I think we saw a sneak peek that was intended to stave off defection of the existing client base. A peek at a product they've neglected as long as they possibly could.

Apple has only so many R&D resources and they've all been used for a couple of years changing the company to aconsumer products company. It was a smart move. They've made a fortune at it.

Ignoring their existing creative client base made good sense. Now they'd like us all to stick around while they hurry to catch up in this market and offer a direct to client proprietary product which will also sell hardware.

[Ron Evans]

I think you both are saying the same thing. They don't have the product yet. Open to suggestions on pricing and delivery and keep everyone hanging around before they desert to the competition that already has just about everything that was shown.

Ron Evans