24
Jun 11

Final Cut Pro X: the natives get restless

Well, well. This is something you don’t see every day: an open revolt by some of Apple’s most loyal customers.

It’s not that Final Cut Pro X is a bad product. Quite the opposite. It’s actually a tremendously cool and bold product. (I’ve been playing with it for two days now.) The problem is, for those who make a living with Final Cut Pro, it’s disturbingly incomplete.

To best appreciate the depth of frustration out there, you need to understand FCP’s history. Released by Apple in 1999, FCP had to do battle with the far more popular editing software from Avid and Adobe. Over the years, it grew more and more sophisticated, ultimately turning into Final Cut Studio — a full suite of high-end apps for video, sound, titling/effects, DVD authoring, color correction and compression.

Starting with nothing, FCP became the darling of Hollywood and the first choice among pro editors and video hobbyists. An amazing success.

But FCP was seriously due for an upgrade. So when Apple let loose that an all-new 64-bit version of FCP was coming, there was joy across the land.

It was a joy that came to an abrupt halt this week when Final Cut Pro X was released.

FCPX is indeed 64-bit, but it arrived missing features that many pros simply cannot live without. And Apple knows that.

For example, FCPX doesn’t support multiple cameras — which are a standard setup in many productions. It can’t open projects from previous FCP versions. It doesn’t support XML. (See what a big deal Apple made about XML in its own announcement two years ago.)

Apple said it was killing off a bunch of Final Cut Studio apps — Soundtrack Pro, Color and DVD Studio Pro — because their functions were now built into FCPX. However, FCPX offers up only streamlined versions of these apps.

Unfortunately, the list goes on. Creative Cow provides a thorough picture of what’s missing here.

The criticism that FCPX is really “iMovie Pro” is not far from the mark. For people like me, a high-end consumer app is a fabulous thing. For professional editors, broadcast news organizations and production companies, it’s a sad and disorienting thing.

This whole affair seems very out of character for Apple. Why would they create a product that is so forward-looking and revolutionary (it is), but do it in a manner that will provoke such a predictable backlash?

Some point out the obvious, that this is a “typical” Apple launch. The 1.0 version has a limited feature set, but provides a solid foundation for more advanced versions to come. That’s how it worked with iPod, iPhone and iPad.

Unfortunately, that argument has a big, gaping flaw. Apple did not introduce any of the i-things to a large existing customer base that relied on those products to earn a living. The FCPX intro is so illogical, I have to suspect there’s a deeper truth hiding in there.

As we know, Apple does not have infinite software resources. Mac OS X Lion and iOS5 have clearly been the main focus. With an update to FCP being way overdue, chances are that Apple simply set a goal for this product that became too difficult to reach.

Apple did not make a mistake in creating FCPX. They made a mistake presenting it as a high-end pro solution.

Imagine if they had unveiled FCPX as the new Final Cut Express instead. Buyers of that product would have been absolutely delighted by the many leaps forward in power and simplicity, and the missing features would have been insignificant to them. A new Final Cut Express would also have given pro editors a tantalizing preview of a new FCPX to come.

I only get disappointed by Apple when they create a problem that didn’t need to be created. By choosing the route they did, they created the impression that they’re oblivious to the needs of the editing pro — which we know is not true.

Apple’s response has been to say that the missing features will be added back in with updates coming soon. I’m sure they will. And you know what — that’s a perfectly acceptable solution. There’s little reason why the pros can’t continue to use the current Final Cut Studio until there’s a product that meets their needs.

And that’s my whole point. The only problem here is the manner in which Apple introduced FCPX. Great a product as it is, it’s just not a replacement for Final Cut Studio. Yet.

If there is no crisis, I’m puzzled why Apple would choose to create one.

Tags: , ,

This entry was posted on Friday, June 24th, 2011 at 11:25 am and is filed under apple, apple news, observatory, strategy, technology. You can follow any comments to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.

  • Carlos

    No multi-cam support is a deal breaker, but the horrendous iMovie UI is far more difficult for me to swallow.

    Dear Apple. FCP X sucks donkey balls. Fire Ubillos.

  • neilw

    This backlash was clearly foreshadowed back when Final Cut Pro X was previewed back in… well, a few months ago (NAB maybe?) So Apple can’t claim that they are surprised by this reaction.

    For reasons known only to Apple (for the moment at least) they chose to apply their consumer strategy to their professional customers. That is, drag them forward to new generations of product regardless of suitability. I can only attribute this particular incident to hubris on Apple’s part (see also: in-app subscription fiasco).

    Somehow, Apple is so secure in its market position that it is willing to piss off its customers now and clean up the mess later, even though it’s usually not necessary. It’s the characteristic of the modern Apple that I find least appealing.

  • ken segall

    @neilw:
    Yes, it was at NAB early in April. And you’re right, Apple was certainly aware of some reactions that FCP was being dumbed down to iMovie. And they publicly stated that the reason they were giving the preview was to get some early feedback. So go figure.

    I do think there is value in bringing in the parts of consumer apps that will serve the pros well. Ordinarily, I’d say I trust Apple to do such things judiciously. Looks like they went a bit overboard on this one.

  • Hobbes

    As an outsider that looks in, usually with an Oliver-Twist look on his face, I’m betting on fragmentation. Or as Apple has shown time and time again, avoiding any type of fragmentation.

    An application that may seem limited in its first iteration will eventually encompass the missing features and leap forward. They do this time and time again.

    As you mentioned, Apple unlimited vision and strategy, but has a limited resource in terms of coding and development. Once you have an app that behaves exactly the same in all available platforms iPad, MBC, MBA, iPhone, iPod–even AppleTV– it will be easier, cheaper and faster to move forward.

    Apple is betting on this development strategy to service their loyal fans: users with multiple iDevices will feel free to move from one screen to the next rather than hating their iPad because it can do less than their MBPs.

    Lion’s UI tweaks show that Apple is betting on the same experience across all of its products. And they’re getting there. Fast.

    Keep the faith.

  • Riz

    “Keep the faith.” Really? Has anyone in the pro world has been keeping “the faith” for Macs? Apple has long ago decided to become a consumer company. They even dropped the word ‘Computer’ from their name just in case you didn’t get it!

    There are orders of magnitude more people who edit videos for weddings, YouTube and for corporate soldiers. FCP X is designed for them. It will help you look great when you kiss the bride and that ‘ice’ colour grading preset will create the perfect look when your mother-in-law comes into view :-)

    If the VERY small percentage of the people who rely on FCP are not satisfied, they can go to Avid or Adobe. In fact Apple’s rep has said exactly that during this week’s FCP users group meeting in London.

    Losing them will make no difference to Apple’s bottom line. They will buy iPhone & iPads anyway, so they are not lost as clients. Lose one, win ten is what Apple is aiming at, and as a CEO who can blame Jobs for doing that?

  • Riz

    Further to what I said above, have a look at the below news article and see who are at the top of the list of ’10 Doomed Industries’.

    Do you think a clever businessman as Jobs would aim his products and development resources for an industry in terminal decline?

  • Riz

  • Pingback: Final Cut Pro X Fail « Technobliss

  • Plist

    Innovate and cannibalize your existing product line or die. If they didn’t move beyond FCP7 someone else would have. And FCP would be dead.

    This ability of Apple to kill it’s most popular products for something more forward looking is it’s hallmark, and it’s why they are what they are.

    Good point by the author though. Could have eased it in a little better. Still, next year FCPX will have this functionality, and until then everyone will keep using 7. So all of this noise is just temporary and predictable whining.

  • http://erichocean.com Erich Ocean

    “There’s little reason why the pros can’t continue to use the current Final Cut Studio until there’s a product that meets their needs.”

    This is simply not true. Final Cut Studio is no longer available for purchase. If Apple was still selling it, you might have a point. But they aren’t.

    Need a second edit bay running Final Cut Pro 7? — Too bad.

  • ken segall

    @Erich:
    Good point. I was actually thinking more of the current FCP7 users who have been clamoring for an updated FCP. (I imagine those greatly outnumber the number of people adding new seats.) But you’re right — by killing FCS3 outright, Apple is making it even more difficult for those who need a pro solution this minute.

  • James

    > There’s little reason why the pros can’t continue
    > to use the current Final Cut Studio

    That version is now a discontinued product. Not for sale. No updates. No future.

    Many pros will be reluctant to keep using a discontinued application in the hope that someday FCPX will maybe suit their needs.

  • Mister Snitch

    The author should be working in Apple Product Marketing. He’s good.

    Also, Riz makes a good point.

  • Gordon

    James & Ken: People who currently own FCP7 still own FCP7, and can still use it, whether or not they also own FCPX. That’s why pros can CONTINUE to use it. How illiterate do you have to be argue with that sentence?

  • Pingback: Final Cut WHAT? | Gulf Broadcast

  • SteveMcN

    Great article, and the best comment I’ve seen on the FCPX fiasco, agree with you totally. I wondered to myself whether iMovie was intended all along as a development test for new “Pro” software, so this article here was most interesting:

    http://www.dvcreators.net/what-does-the-guy-who-led-the-original-final-cut-pro-revolution-think-of-the-final-cut-pro-x-release/

    I suspect it’s a case of one department at Apple driving another: MacBook Pro designers must have known that removing FireWire was a mistake, that it would not be seen as a Pro machine, but there was another driving force that needed to show what else they were capable of and not wait for an Intel logic board with integrated FireWire. Hence the outcry at that minor debacle.

    My suspicion here is that Apple wanted a test run of a heavyweight release on the App Store before the Lion launch? After all, everyone suspected FCPX needed Lion to run and assumed it would be released after Lion…

    Someone had to weigh the pros and cons of releasing purely prosumer ready software under the pro banner. And that’s where cynicism regarding Apple’s real intentions can easily creep in.

    Gordon, all over the web I keep seeing the occasional comment pointing out we can still use the old software so why complain. This is from an assumption that everyone who uses FCP uses it in isolation, much as you might use iMovie, or Aperture. No, much use of FCP places it in a workflow that interconnects with other people, other departments, all of which is impossible with this new release; intensive use of FCP would benefit from 64-bit, background rendering etc… features editors have been patiently waiting for (for 2 years) but are now tauntingly kept at a distance. And now expansion of FCP 7 suites is prevented by taking it off the market.

    All Apple had to do was show a roadmap, perhaps release this software as a Beta, show a way forward, and leave FCP Studio on the market. By not showing a way forward it is now encouraging an entire industry to jump ship, not smart PR, and now FCP has its Doonesbury moment with the Conan skit…

  • MikeP

    Great article from David Pogue. He has spoken to some of Apple’s Product Managers regarding the missing features and done a Q&A session.

    http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/professional-video-editors-weigh-in-on-final-cut-pro-x/

    However, one must realise, with new price point, FCPX is open to a whole range of new buyers. FC Express was ha big leap from iMovie for most people. Whereas, and I haven’t used it, FCPX seems like an easier progression. What consumer , or pro-sumer, can complain about getting 90 – 95% of a professional video application for $300. So those people will fund the upgrades that will come over the next year or so.

    As for the professionals, FCP7 is no less powerful than it was last week. I’m sure it’s got another year or two left in it. People should just wait for the dust to settle.

  • Steven McGarrigle

    “James & Ken: People who currently own FCP7 still own FCP7, and can still use it, whether or not they also own FCPX. That’s why pros can CONTINUE to use it. How illiterate do you have to be argue with that sentence?”

    With the greatest respect i think it is you who is missing the point as your quote missed the key issue which is: “No updates. No future”.
    Sure you can continue using FCP7… for now! Ultimately though, you are a dinosaur, doomed to extinction. Change is inevitable as the FCP7 skill set will ultimately become redundant.
    This isn’t just a few hundred freelancers, this is thousands of production and post production houses across the world.
    All of these companies hands have been forced into inevitable change, having to consider investing in new software, hardware and training and do you stick with a company that is moving more and more towards consumer electronics hoping that FCPX will become the program that it used to be or do you jump ship and become an Avid devotee?

  • ken segall

    @Gordon:
    Yes, people who own FCP7 can continue to use it. (We’re pretty literate.) James’ point was that people who do NOT own FCP7 can no longer even get it — including large editing facilities who might want to add another edit bay.

  • pr9000

    You can still find FCP 7 seats for sale. My Apple Specialist (www.appogee.com) has them in stock. I’m sure this is true for most resellers.

    If you think you need another seat, go buy it now.

  • Bill

    I’ve been working with moving pictures for many decades since I got my start cutting 8mm (none of that fancy consumer “super-8″ crap!) with a razorblade and tape.

    The video industry is one of the most untechnical of “high tech” professions.

    Realize these people are tradesmen, not creatives, and not engineers. So, even though people don’t use tape anymore, they think that the bitrate of a video feed determines its quality. It is beyond their comprehension that one codec might be more efficient than another, and thus might provide better quality at a lower bitrate.

    I’ve been trying to get these so called “professionals” to understand this for several years now and it is a losing proposition.

    Every. Single. Version. of Final Cut Pro that had any improvements has resulted in a lot of screaming and complaining from that quarter. They also complained when iMovie was remade.

    These are people who were taught a skill. They know the sequence of buttons to push to get what they want– and that’s it. When you change the sequence you invalidate their “education” and thus you lower their value (for their union jobs.)

    And that is why they are screaming.

    Nobody who is an editor– an actual creative person– is unhappy with a product that radically improves the *EDITING* experience.

    I’m tired of media representing these complainers as if they were experts.

    But then, what do you expect. The media generally is ignorant about everything.

    But Bashing Apple– that’s always good for more page views, isn’t it?

  • Bill

    If anyone doubts my perspective, just notice how often the attack against FCP is based on fallacies like argument from authority. This is why they constantly call it “prosumer” while calling themselves “professional”.

    You see this constantly in any area where there are know-it-alls who can’t defend their position.

    They can just decide arbitrarily that “pro” is everything they like, and anything they don’t is “consumer” and therefore worthless.

    These are the guys who spend $10k on Leica gear in order to take snapshots.

    Actually creative people– you know the ones who have as much talent as they do training– appreciate when their tools are upgraded!

  • James

    > People who currently own FCP7 still own FCP7, and
    > can still use it, whether or not they also own FCPX.

    The old version was already in need of an update, but now we know it’ll just grow older and older with no updates. It has no future.

    Professionals will not bet their careers on discontinued software while their competitors switch to other apps that are more current and that continue to be updated.

    Certainly they’ll keep the old version around to finish their current projects or to work on archived projects, but for their new projects they’ll need to think seriously about switching.

  • Riz

    Gordon, it is shocking that you call someone like Ken illiterate. Besides being very rude, you show how illiterate you, yourself are. It is obvious to me that you are commenting on something that you have no idea about.

    I am a film producer. I hire facilities that use FCP7 every day. A friend has 60 rooms, all equipped with FCP7. He needs to add new rooms as his business is growing. How can he add new rooms now as FCP is removed from the market? Even if he scavenges left-over copies from Internet dealers, in time he has to switch to FCPX. Do you think it makes business sense to run FCP7 and FCPX together in a facility? Especially when the latter cannot open the former’s projects? Can you not see what a mess it will be to run two incompatible versions alongside?

    Or maybe I should use the language you used: How illiterate can you be not to see that? :-)

  • http://www.trinacrio.cl Carlos

    I swicht from avid to final cut pro in 2000, with final cut 1, and my company works with final cut studio 1 and 2, and I dont belive that , final cut studio 3 is out of store????????? sh######it, I don’t understand why apple take off final cut studio, is a big mistake, Final cut x is a beta version Ok, but why I can not buy final cut sutdio 3???? more than 10 years of solid state software to the trash.
    We work with protools and OMF, opsss, fcx don’t support omf??? XML??? AAF??? EDL???? is a nightmare, looks like a “Windows experience”.

    Please Mr. Apple , reconsider put Final Cut Studio in store again, millions of littles companys and editors appreciates that.

  • Kap

    > Imagine if they had unveiled FCPX
    > as the new Final Cut Express instead

    At the new low FCPX price point there’s no reason to believe Express will continue to exist.

    This is all about Apple making the best use of it’s resources (i.e. the iMovie code base) and casting a much wider net for FCPX.

  • http://nicksweeney.com nick s

    In response to Steven McGarrigle:

    “Ultimately though, you are a dinosaur, doomed to extinction.”

    All serious users of “pro-grade” software are dinosaurs. That’s not an insult: they need to be conservative about upgrades and new features because the software they use puts food on their table.

    I’m trying to think of a genuine “pro app” that has successfully pushed through a significant update in terms of architecture, interface or features, and retained its user base. Photoshop perhaps fits to some degree, though it’s borderline pro/prosumer, and it’s showing its age.

    Instead, the pattern with pro apps seems to be that they get stuck because they have to cater to their long-standing users in terms of feature retention and backwards-compatibility. It’s a vicious cycle: I vaguely remember Alfred Brooks writing something about the perils of core rewrites for that kind of code.

    What happens most often is that an upstart comes along — as Ken said, like FCP against Avid and Premiere ten years ago — and users jump ship en masse, even if it means abandoning features and practices that they demanded year-on-year from the old software. But it took FCP till version 3.0, and “The Rules of Attraction”, to do that.

    (Nobody jumps ship to v. 1.0, and FCP X is best seen as a 1.0, but the people who jump at 2.0 get a leap on those who wait, even if some of them sink to the bottom of the ocean while the ship sails on.)

    This isn’t to excuse Apple. But it’s a recognition that pro apps have a very distinctive development cycle with issues that nobody, including Apple, has been able to solve — and which might be unsolvable by definition, because pro users will demand the features that earn their keep until the advantages offered elsewhere outweigh the costs of abandoning them.

    If other software makers want to challenge FCP’s position among pro-level editors, now’s the time to do it, as long as they’re aware that it’ll take a few iterations to make the case to that user base.

  • http://hammonwry.com Kev Hamm

    Who, honestly, considers his/herself an Editor and can’t sit down at Avid, Premier, or hell, even Sony Vegas, and actually cut something together? I’ve been on Final Cut Pro since version 3, and while I prefer it and I can find my way around the UI with my eyes closed, I’m not married to it, nor do I feel terribly lost when asked to help on a project that’s being edited in other NLEs. My skills as an Editor ARE NOT tied to any one program, they are tied to my creativity and my brain, neither of which were discontinued by, or supplanted by, Apple. If you think you’re an Editor and you can’t function in any NLE out there, you’ve got another think coming, and probably a banana as you’re about to find out your simian roots are showing.

    As for people wanting to add new seats to a company that needs editing bays, read the old license. You can install and use FCS3 on as many computers as you like, but they can’t be using it at the same time, and this drawback is enforced if they are on the same net. I bet if you asked nicely, Apple would let you install versions of FCS3 onto seats, so long as they had licenses of the current FCPX purchased as well. And since there is a Commercial Licensing store for FCPX that businesses can contact, there is a great place for you to ask. Can’t hurt, and the more people who clamor for it, the more likely it’ll be allowed.

  • Pingback: Final Cut Pro X に対する風当たり « maclalala2

  • steveH

    “That version is now a discontinued product. Not for sale.”

    B&H, Adorama, Frys, etc. still show it as in stock.

    There’s more to life than the Apple Store, you know.

  • Scott Waugh

    Great article, and you make a great point about all of these design issues were deliberate decisions on Apple’s part. Prior to programming FCP X, the designers had to flesh out the requirements for the application – define them (what has to be in there and what doesn’t) and plan them – like import projects from iMovie for example (that was important for whatever reason). These types of decisions aren’t made lightly. Did they have to leave all this stuff out? No, they could have made sure what was left out was put in there (would have taken more time and more money) – they just chose not to.

    I’ve been thinking the same about Final Cut Express (which they end of life’d the same day as FCS) and FCP X is supposed to replace it.

    Something else that is interesting is that Final Cut Express’s price point has been $300 (except for its last release which was $200).

    This thing is Final Cut Express 5, someone just forgot to tell Apple Marketing.

    BTW, here is an article calling this more than a year ago – interesting read:

    http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/05/18/apple_scaling_final_cut_studio_apps_to_fit_prosumers.html

    Apple denied that article at the time, but it calls what we’re seeing totally. Thanks again for a great perspective.

  • ken segall

    @Scott Waugh:
    Holy cow. That’s a great find, and thanks for sharing it. It’s spooky how perfectly it describes what was to come a year later.

  • http://www.arbourmedia.com Peter Wiley

    I thought this was clever and nicely done.

    http://vimeo.com/25645130

  • Pingback: Final Cut Pro X – The Adventures of Systems Boy!

  • Synth

    Remember the transition from OS 9 to OS X?

    OS 9 had lots of cool features, habits and options built up over a decade but it was a dead horse.

    OS X was the future but no one in their right mind was running it on a regular basis for a couple years, and if you did, you could still open up OS 9 in a separate window or even boot up OS 9 on a new machine. And OS X eventually gave us the iPhone, iPad, iOS, and the iOS app store.

    Apple forgot those transition options this time. They need to put them in place (i.e. at least keep selling FCP 7 for another year) or they need to fix the missing features very, very quickly. Or both.

    Or let pros use FCPX as a beta for six months while they fix at least a few things.

    I think we’ll see an open letter from Steve Jobs about this very soon. Along with some back-pedaling.

  • Bill

    Most of these “missing features” aren’t actually missing. They are just done differently.

    I’ve not seen a negative review yet from someone who bothered to take 10 minutes and learn about how the new product works.

  • Craig

    There is no excuse for Apple to not have the resources needed for software development. They refuse to expand internally, and they are sitting on more money than God.

    Apple spreads themselves too thin in every area of their business these days, and the results are products that are lack luster, buggy, or crippled.

    This is Aperture all over again. Does anyone remember how badly that app sucked? Still not up to par IMO.

  • Bill

    Yes, to Apple haters and adobe fans (as if they weren’t the same group here) everything Apple does sucks.

    Adobe’s products are great… if you like buying them again each year with a different version number but nothing really improved.

  • Pedro

    why i cant (and others) keep using fcp7:

    i cant use fcp any more, because of fear create new projects that i wont be able edit in the future, since fcp7 probably wont work in (future lions , or what ever cat come next), most projects as we all know they tend come back over and over, so if i cant open them in fcpx then is time to…. move on.

    for current projects, yes we will keep using fcp7 and i will start migrating them to a system with a future (weird i thought avid was the one who would die first).

    i was a pc user till i met fcp, since then i moved to mac, since most of my friends and family watch me on the mac they switched so more than 15 regular joes (no editors, friends and family) switched i think fcp indirectly created customers for other apple products.

    in the business part of things we were waiting for the new fcp for 5 new seats, today we sent the PO for 5 avid composers. and yes they are on pc’s.

  • Riz

    Apple officially responds to Final Cut Pro X complaints with new FAQ website, next ‘major release’ coming with fixes

    “Final Cut Pro X is a breakthrough in nonlinear video editing. The application has impressed many pro editors, and it has also generated a lot of discussion in the pro video community. We know people have questions about the new features in Final Cut Pro X and how it compares with previous versions of Final Cut Pro. Here are the answers to the most common questions we’ve heard.”

    http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/

    It looks like Apple is admitting that they released a half-cooked product and promising fixes, on certain occasions, within weeks. There’s a heated debate about this news at 9to5mac.com

    http://9to5mac.com/2011/06/29/apple-officially-responds-to-final-cut-pro-x-complaints-with-new-faq-website/

  • Riz

    I recently read nice article from Ron Brinkmann, former head developer of Shake before Apple bought it. It is a good perspective on the way Apple look at the post production market.

    http://digitalcomposting.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/x-vs-pro/

  • Riz

    Once again, hats off to Apple. They made a mistake, they admitted it and now issuing refunds to people who don’t want to wait or don’t like the new product. I am not surprised soon we will hear the reversal of the Final Cut Studio’s cancellation.

    “Apple Starts Issuing Refunds For People Who Hate Final Cut Pro X”

    http://www.businessinsider.com/final-cut-pro-x-refund-2011-6#ixzz1QflyZ18z

  • Rich

    “There are orders of magnitude more people who edit videos for weddings, YouTube and for corporate soldiers. FCP X is designed for them.”

    Really? Where are the chapter stops in FCPX? Where’s multicam? Where is the abiltity to import from tape? To export a subclip? You arrogant ass, you have no idea how things work in the real world. This product is so dumbed-down, it’s completely useless.

    “If the VERY small percentage of the people who rely on FCP are not satisfied, they can go to Avid or Adobe. In fact Apple’s rep has said exactly that during this week’s FCP users group meeting in London.”

    VERY small percentage? Over half the reviews are one-star. Apple went from a product that had a 98% satisfaction rating to one that sucks your mother’s ass. This thing isn’t Final Cut. It’s an abomination, and Apple will regret it.

  • Rich

    “I’ve not seen a negative review yet from someone who bothered to take 10 minutes and learn about how the new product works.”

    Then you haven’t been paying attention:

    http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/final-cut-pro-x-whats-missing-for-some-pros

  • Rich

    “Actually creative people– you know the ones who have as much talent as they do training– appreciate when their tools are upgraded!”

    If FCPX were an upgrade instead of a downgrade, we wouldn’t be complaining. Actual users of the product—you know, the ones that utilize it to make a living—would appreciate if ignorant apologists like yourself would STFU.

  • Riz

    “You arrogant ass, you have no idea how things work in the real world.”

    What a civilized way to communicate. Especially after I wrote that I am in fact a film producer and involved with post-production.

  • http://www.facebook.com/reyreyrodriguez Rey “Rey”Rodriguez

    Apple has stated that they will fix all of FCP X’s problems and add more features than the previous had. They say that with the future upgrade, and that all will be better (price decrease, all of FCP Studio will be incorporated except for Compressor and Motion, it will take up less space on your hard drive, run faster, ect.). If you bought it and didn’t like it, you can return it with a full refund, if you read the reviews and it doesn’t sound like it’s for you then don’t buy it. For the people that like it great! For the ones like myself that currently need missing features, relax, pretend it was never released and wait for the better version to come out. Your FCP Studio is still great, you can continue working on all of your “Professional” jobs as you always have, and forget that Apple released FCP X. Don’t make things so complicated. Apple stays on top for a reason! I have no doubt that within the next year or so we’ll all be praising FCP X. ~Rey “Rey” Rodriguez