You'd think they'd want to at least have feature parity on launch with their outgoing product, especially since it was so popular.
I think this update will be welcome, but the question will linger: why did it take so long, or more to the point, why wasn't Final Cut Pro X released WHEN all the features were ready?
They totally rewrote this. It's more important to do it well then get every feature in, even if some are important. Apple did say that they would give free updates to bring the feature set up to par, and they are.
I think it was too precipitous of some to leave the platform in anger. I've used it from the beginning. When it first came out, it received excellent reviews, but it was pointed out that it required a number of features, both large and small. Apple added them over the next year for free before the second major revision came out, and as they say, the rest is history.
I feel pretty confident that we'll see the same thing here. Apple's significantly lowered pricing has shaken things up in the industry, according to the people I've been speaking to, and that seems to be part of the annoyance.they would actually rather have the product priced higher, as a professional product. Go figure!
While I understand why they did it, I agree with Chuck, below, who thinks their mistake was in discontinuing the older line too early, even though they allowed sales for a while longer. That complaint should die out as Apple brings all of the features and comparability on line over the next six months or so.
I believe that Adobe's new semi victory over this frustration will be short lived.
Hey, what I said is correct, both from a historical point, and from what they are doing now. You can be moronic about it if it makes you feel big, so go right ahead and amuse us.
Sound like an iSheep. And Apple certainly need these lower prices because it's got nothing on Adobe software. FCPX is a joke and still missing features even now.
Not disputing your Apple related facts but your attitude towards Adobe like it's some amateurish company that was lucky Apple made a wrong step; good timing though for Apple as we wouldn't want Adobe to get ahead in this market, after all Apple is our favorite brand.
Adobe was lucky that Apple made a wrong step. Why else would a block of users migrate to their product? Would this have happened if FCPX had feature parity with FCP7? Nope.
I'm one of Adobe's first customers. My company was an Adobe shop. I've beta tested Hotoshop since version 1.0. I certainly don't think they are amateurs. I've also used all. Of their video editing software from the very beginning.
But facts are facts. Apple captured 50% of the professional video editing market by two years ago. Adobe was a distant second. FCP and then FCS has long been considered to be the best pro editing solution below the very high end and expensive operations.
This upgrade, which was really a total rewrite, was unexpected. People, and especially professionals get nervous when something they use gets a major change, and when some important features are left out. We've learned to be skeptical when companies tell us that features will be added later. Until they are, the feelings are negative.
But these features are being added back, and third party plug-ins are being supported again, along with job portability, something that was needed to move previous work over.
I see that we have several people who have never done any professional anything, making negative comments. That's as usual here. It's too bad, but it doesn't change things.
I think releasing when they did was fine, but the one critical mistake they made was abruptly cutting off sales of FCP 7, signaling "you must move to FCP X!".
In hindsight, they probably should have release FCP X, kept FCP 7, and then continued iterating on FCP X until it was matching most or all features of FCP 7. Then they could pull the plug on FCP 7 without people flipping out.
I think their normal strategy of "move forward, legacy be damned" didn't quite work out on this transition, probably given the maturity and complexity of the software they were trying to replace.
Indeed, what this did was to force professionals to move to something else.
They could no longer buy licenses for the old software; and the new one just didn't cut it. They had no choice but to quit. When you're a pro, you can't stop working for some unknown time until the missing features are added, and what do you do if you need more workstations?
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
12 Comments
Back to Article
piroroadkill - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
You'd think they'd want to at least have feature parity on launch with their outgoing product, especially since it was so popular.I think this update will be welcome, but the question will linger: why did it take so long, or more to the point, why wasn't Final Cut Pro X released WHEN all the features were ready?
melgross - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
They totally rewrote this. It's more important to do it well then get every feature in, even if some are important. Apple did say that they would give free updates to bring the feature set up to par, and they are.I think it was too precipitous of some to leave the platform in anger. I've used it from the beginning. When it first came out, it received excellent reviews, but it was pointed out that it required a number of features, both large and small. Apple added them over the next year for free before the second major revision came out, and as they say, the rest is history.
I feel pretty confident that we'll see the same thing here. Apple's significantly lowered pricing has shaken things up in the industry, according to the people I've been speaking to, and that seems to be part of the annoyance.they would actually rather have the product priced higher, as a professional product. Go figure!
While I understand why they did it, I agree with Chuck, below, who thinks their mistake was in discontinuing the older line too early, even though they allowed sales for a while longer. That complaint should die out as Apple brings all of the features and comparability on line over the next six months or so.
I believe that Adobe's new semi victory over this frustration will be short lived.
ananduser - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Straight from Apple's press release with subtle jabs towards Adobe. Great job melgros.melgross - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Hey, what I said is correct, both from a historical point, and from what they are doing now. You can be moronic about it if it makes you feel big, so go right ahead and amuse us.B3an - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Sound like an iSheep. And Apple certainly need these lower prices because it's got nothing on Adobe software. FCPX is a joke and still missing features even now.ananduser - Wednesday, February 1, 2012 - link
Not disputing your Apple related facts but your attitude towards Adobe like it's some amateurish company that was lucky Apple made a wrong step; good timing though for Apple as we wouldn't want Adobe to get ahead in this market, after all Apple is our favorite brand.jmv909 - Wednesday, February 1, 2012 - link
Adobe was lucky that Apple made a wrong step. Why else would a block of users migrate to their product? Would this have happened if FCPX had feature parity with FCP7? Nope.melgross - Wednesday, February 1, 2012 - link
I'm one of Adobe's first customers. My company was an Adobe shop. I've beta tested Hotoshop since version 1.0. I certainly don't think they are amateurs. I've also used all. Of their video editing software from the very beginning.But facts are facts. Apple captured 50% of the professional video editing market by two years ago. Adobe was a distant second. FCP and then FCS has long been considered to be the best pro editing solution below the very high end and expensive operations.
This upgrade, which was really a total rewrite, was unexpected. People, and especially professionals get nervous when something they use gets a major change, and when some important features are left out. We've learned to be skeptical when companies tell us that features will be added later. Until they are, the feelings are negative.
But these features are being added back, and third party plug-ins are being supported again, along with job portability, something that was needed to move previous work over.
I see that we have several people who have never done any professional anything, making negative comments. That's as usual here. It's too bad, but it doesn't change things.
chucknelson - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
I think releasing when they did was fine, but the one critical mistake they made was abruptly cutting off sales of FCP 7, signaling "you must move to FCP X!".In hindsight, they probably should have release FCP X, kept FCP 7, and then continued iterating on FCP X until it was matching most or all features of FCP 7. Then they could pull the plug on FCP 7 without people flipping out.
I think their normal strategy of "move forward, legacy be damned" didn't quite work out on this transition, probably given the maturity and complexity of the software they were trying to replace.
Paedric - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Indeed, what this did was to force professionals to move to something else.They could no longer buy licenses for the old software; and the new one just didn't cut it.
They had no choice but to quit.
When you're a pro, you can't stop working for some unknown time until the missing features are added, and what do you do if you need more workstations?
Kristian Vättö - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Actually, Apple started selling FCP 7 again after all the complaints.http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/01/apple-puts-leg...
chucknelson - Tuesday, January 31, 2012 - link
Well, yeah, but after the flipping out phase, which made things a little more complicated, at least for PR/"word on the street" purposes.