Larry Jordan Blog

Is There Something In The Wind?

Posted by on March 28, 2013

UPDATE: Philip Hodgetts was the first to point out that Apple updated FCP X to version 10.0.8 this morning. The release notes indicate that it is mostly a bug fix release, with new support for Sony’s XAVC codec. The update is free and available via the Mac App Store.

There is an article in this morning’s Los Angeles Times. It was about Apple, which isn’t unusual. However, it was about Final Cut Pro X, which IS unusual.

Is there something in the wind?

The article, entitled “Apple aims to win over video editors,” takes a look back at the stormy reaction to the birth of Final Cut Pro X where the launch, and the highly-charged negative reactions to it, completely over-shadowed the program itself.

Chris O’Brien, the article’s author, does a solid job of capturing the anguish of FCP editors over the new software. (Though, as a quibble, in the thousands of emails I’ve gotten on this subject, I’ve never had one person complain about the new, lower price.) I won’t rehash the article here, it is well-written and deserves to be read on its own.

The question I want to reflect on is “Why this article now?” Is this simply a reporter covering an industry leader, or, did Apple plant a seed?

As someone who has had many interactions with Apple executives over the years, I’ve learned that Apple does not do anything spontaneously. They are strategic, with time-scales often measured in years. This strategic focus doesn’t make them perfect, but it does prevent them from being impulsive.

Why now?

The answer, I think, lies in the calendar. Tennyson may have written: “In the spring, a young man’s fancy lightly turns to thoughts of love.” But in the media industry, spring means the NAB Show – that massive industry event that heralds the release of new versions of just about everything related to media. Every company on the planet is trying to think up ways to get their voice heard and their products considered.

Our entire industry is focused on the NAB Show, which starts in a little more than a week in Las Vegas. Apple hasn’t exhibited at NAB for more than five years, but it’s presence is palpable across the trade show floor. It’s the 800-pound gorilla that few talk about, but can’t live without.

Many companies like to think they play the role of disruptor in the industry. But no one causes chaos quite like Apple.

Consider that while the Times article is crammed with a solid look back at the history of the program, the news hook is the posting of three new customer stories showcasing high-end customers successfully using Final Cut Pro X. The rest of the article rehashes past events.

No new products. No new hardware. Just Apple’s announcement about posting customer success stories.

NOTE It is interesting to me that, while the article references Richard Townhill, who was the face of Final Cut Pro X at the launch, no Apple executives were actually quoted in the article.

What Could This Mean?

Unlike when FCP X was announced, I am not privy to any inside Apple information, so these are just informed guesses.

Does this presage a return to an “updated” version of Final Cut Pro 7? Absolutely not. That program is dead and gone.

Does this indicate that Apple is getting ready to release an entirely new version of Final Cut Pro X – such as FCP 11? No. Apple has bet the ranch on continuing to evolve this edition of FCP X for the next several years.

Apple could release a new update to FCP X in the days leading up to NAB. This would dominate the news when every other company in our industry is scrambling to be heard. But I don’t think this is likely. It would make more sense to appear to be doing something, but to wait until after NAB to actually do it.

I expect the next update to Final Cut Pro X to contain major new features, but be built on the same foundation as the current FCP X. I also think it is likely that a new, supporting application will be released at the same time. Logic is the application that comes first to mind, as audio is still a major hole in FCP X.

I think the purpose of this article is to acknowledge that Apple is aware of the damage it caused at the launch, to point out the things that it is doing to repair the damage, and to clearly state that Apple feels Final Cut Pro X is ready for professional use, as illustrated by the customers that are using it today.

The LA Times article ends by quoting Harry Miller, head of the American Cinema Editor’s technology committee: “We are in a precarious business…”

Precarious indeed. Perhaps Apple is trying to reassure us that it better understands that.

As always, I’m interested in your thoughts.



Use this link to trackback from your own site.


Leave a response

  1. Philip Hodgetts Mar 28, 2013 13:43

    Apple released 10.0.8 this morning. Mostly a bug fix release.

  2. Jim Caldwell Mar 28, 2013 15:04


    What are your initial impressions of the changes in 10.0.8 to further address the needs of the professional community?

  3. Will the Thrill Sanchez Mar 28, 2013 15:13
  4. Marcus Moore Mar 28, 2013 15:13

    I was also betting that the just 10.0.8 release would be more feature laden than it is.

    But they did this last year too. 10.0.4 which was released just before NAB last year was a tweak update to the big 10.0.3 release.

    Last year they also did press briefings (as you know) to talk about upcoming features. I think we can now expect something similar as well in the days before NAB proper. I think last year’s briefings were on the Sat/Sun.

  5. remy deveze Mar 28, 2013 15:21

    Apple just released FCPX 10.0.8, few improvements indeed.
    And also released Motion5.0.7, Compressor 4.0.7 and… QTCodecs for ProApps 1.0.2

    So… Will Apple released FCPX 10.1.0 during the NAB ?
    Or just launch a TV Ad ??
    Or both, or else ???

    Remy from Paris France, FCPX huge fan

  6. lasvideo Mar 28, 2013 16:03

    Sorry Apple. Most editors I know dont like your software and dont trust you anymore. To little….to late.

  7. Peter Tours Mar 28, 2013 16:11

    Brings to mind the guy who just jumped from Adobe – a coincidence?

  8. Alvaro Mar 28, 2013 16:47

    With Apple one can only hope and hope and then Apple does the Apple thing: iMovie Pro. I wish you were right Larry and that Apple does the right thing. In my opinion Apple has no interested in Pro apps or Apple is being super, super strategic about them, no pun intended.

    I am still editing in FCP7 and exploring Adobe Premiere/Composer. I can’t switch at the moment, but I know that 7 will not last forever. It will be easy for Apple to win me back, but that is just hope.

  9. Brian Klein Mar 28, 2013 17:10

    I think it would be a mistake for them to release 10.1 and make people pay for it. I’m guessing they want to make up for the bad graces that many have for them, and keep releasing nice free updates to the software. I could very well be wrong, and to be honest I’m not really surprised any more when Apple does something totally off the wall. I do think they will be releasing some companion app soon. Or maybe two? There have been rumors of Logic X and Aperature X for some time now, and Logic would certainly fit the bill to help shore up FCPX’s weak audio editing features. Would Aperature serve as a color correction app? Doubt it, but it might be cool.

    Also, I’ve been thinking about this a lot in the last few days… Will they talk about whatever the new Mac Pro will be at some point during/before NAB? There were rumors that the Map Pro would be announced in spring. That usually means they announce it on nearly the last day of spring, but it seems to be an opportune time to do so.

  10. Charlie Mar 28, 2013 18:34

    FCP X is *not* iMovie pro folks, it seriously kicks ass. It’s not perfect, and does take some re-learning, but I’m a full time “professional” award winning “hollywood” editor and I love it. I add the quoted terms, because there’s a serious bias in LA when it comes to editors choice of NLE. If you’re not cutting broadcast or theatrical stuff, then you’re not a “real editor” Not everyone feels that way, but the bias is there. The iMovie Pro BS is one manifestation. FCP X, once mastered, is freaking awesome. Warts and all. If you don’t like it, fine. You’ve got plenty of other options. But don’t diss it because you think it looks funny, or tried it when it came out (when it really was barely useable) or just plain can’t be bothered to learn how to use it.

  11. Caesar Darias Mar 28, 2013 23:10

    I’ve grown to generally like FCP X.

    However, there are many frustrating aspects such as the inability to round-trip with Motion. Why is this most useful feature still missing?

    And when I’m working on a long project that’s, let’s say, over an hour, and I’m done with my rough cut, the magnetic timeline makes it a pain in the ass to go back and work.

    I wish they would let you deactivate it so it’s easier to create and leave gaps. It can be very frustrating to delete a clip on your Timeline and have everything move on it’s own.

    I don’t want anything in my Project Timeline to move unless I physically do something to make it move.

    Finally, I’d like to be able to name clips on ingest like on FCP 7. Am I just ignorant on this? I’ve searched for this answer.

  12. Christopher Wright Mar 29, 2013 02:07

    Too little, too quirky, too late…..

  13. Leo Hans Mar 29, 2013 07:20

    You can deactivate the magnetic timeline. You can use the tilde key for that and you can use Position Tool too.
    You can even delete clips leaving gaps.

  14. Marcus Moore Mar 29, 2013 07:42

    “I wish they would let you deactivate it so it’s easier to create and leave gaps. It can be very frustrating to delete a clip on your Timeline and have everything move on it’s own.”

    Position Tool.

    And yes, please, to the return of Motion round-tripping (and broadcast monitor output!)

  15. jeff Mar 29, 2013 08:21

    I like fcpx though it took a minute to get used to, but I will say that they still need to fix a lot of text editing bugs and wish they would bring back the simple in/out points as opposed to the range selector it just makes it more cumbersome to be precise

  16. Jason Mar 29, 2013 08:37

    I second everything Caesar Darias wrote (a couple of posts above). In FCP7, I lived in round trip world. That’s gone. I also strongly hate, with a passion, the magnetic timeline. And I’m not a person who uses the word “hate” a lot. Premiere was the easiest switch from FCP7 for me. By the way, round tripping within the Adobe Apps is there and very easy.


  17. Larry Mar 29, 2013 10:35


    You don’t need to use the Range tool to set In/Out points in the Timeline. With the Skimmer turned off (S), type I, or O, in the Timeline to set an In or Out at the position of the playhead.


  18. Caesar Darias Mar 29, 2013 13:18

    Thank you to Leo Hans and Marcus Moore.

    I’ve watched many lessons on YouTube. I’ve also purchased tutorials for FCP X. Obviously, I missed that part of the lesson.

  19. Tangier Clarke Mar 29, 2013 14:02

    Charlie I agree with you so much. I’ve loved FCP X after one week of use and saw huge gains in productivity for me once i let to of the FCP 7 way of doing things. The database underpinnings are stellar. Believe me, I know the quirks and there are changes to be made. At my job we tested it for a year and we are FCP X all the way. Avid and Premiere ( the latest versions) seem so ancient and slow to me now when I use them; more of a hinderance. Though they have features i wouldn’t mind.

    Despite the things that still need fixing, FCP X is like Motion for me when it first came out; I could spend more time playing and being creative rather than wait for After Effects constant need to render every change. I too miss round-tripping, but it’s not a deal breaker. Especially when I backup and media manage a project the elements that were round tripped become more of a pain actually.

    In any case for me there are far more pluses than minuses and I intend to stick with it. I’d love a new sound app too from Apple. In some ways I’m glad they didn’t evolve FCP 7. I’m glad they’re rethinking things anew and would prefer it done well than cram old ways into something new. I’m toying with Smoke just to learn about but FCPX and FCP 7 are my go to apps. To each their own! It’s all about the story.

  20. Brien Lee Mar 29, 2013 16:51

    As an industrial / corporate producer (for more than 40 years) I was there for Pinnacle / Premiere, Matrox / Speed Razor, and finally, as computers got fast enough and GPUs capable enough, Sony Vegas. I standardized on Vegas and taught it to my staff.

    I moved from Sony Vegas (which I loved) to FCP7 in 2003 and stuck with it until FCPX was released. I needed a good DVD tool and Apple’s DVD Studio Pro fit the bill. With it came FXP7. SO I used this as an excuse to go all-Apple. I never really got used to the slowness of FCP7, compared to Vegas, and (as many of you know) if you eventually mastered FCP7 you had a real marketable skill. I didn’t. But that wasn’t the goal.

    I downsized my company during the last decade and had to do more and more work myself, which was often exhilarating, and also often frustrating. I wanted to go back to Vegas but just couldn’t give up the Mac. Then FCPX was released.

    iMovie in its newer form was pretty silly, compared to the former iMovie and even Premiere and Premiere Elements. But it was fast. FCPX was tough to get my hands around, but got easier and more logical with each release (and practice, of course.)

    Now, while I still hire editors on occasion, I feel totally comfortable and satisfied with the new ecosystem of FCPX. It’s fast, intuitive, does things in a single step that FCP7 took multiple steps to do (add a still frame to the end of a clip?) and it’s growing every day. The plugins are coming to market quickly, and I must add, affordably.

    I realize as a midwestern (now east coast) “industrial” producer that my opinions are not based on the workflows and demands of Hollywood. But in a great many markets, this is becoming a freelance world. I think FCP is built for those freelancers, but has matured to the point that some Hollywood types might now give it serious consideration. Industrial types are foolish if they don’t.

    Now, here’s hoping there’s a nice two-way coming between FCPX and Apple’s or third parties’ audio tools.

  21. nickeditor Mar 29, 2013 19:45

    “Apple feels Final Cut Pro X is ready for professional use”… For all professional users? The same users that used Final Cut Pro 7? Cinema, comercial and TV editors?

    Apple made two errors:
    · not update Mac Pro
    · launch a version of Final Cut unipersonal, not thought for teamwork

    Two years later I still waiting the option Send to Logic :(

    “I wanna tell you my secret now…. I see ” Premiere everywhere :D

  22. Leo Hans Mar 29, 2013 21:26


    I have to tell you, I am an editor cutting TV commercials for living and I can’t find a reason not to use FCPX but the myth around it.

  23. Butch Mar 30, 2013 00:52

    Unless it’s networked “Final Cut Studio X” and maybe includes an application to author DVDs/BluRay media the damage is done. You already have some idea that digital distribution for independent features is quite murky for many indie filmmakers as far as what kinds of returns they may or may not receive. Large studios are not killing off mastering to physical media any time soon if at all.

    I get no sense that Apple has any interest in developing a full pipeline suite that does a fraction of what FCS did and many, many editors aren’t willing to accept anything less. Now Apple is going to go Microsoft on us and try to market their way to success with ultimately a good to decent product. The timing of all of this is to build up hype for the release of the Mac Pro I suspect. Like many other people I think Apple has lost it’s way in Pro app development, even though the blueprint ahead was clear as day from FCS. I’m not counting on a barn buster announcement, at least not an announcement that anyone other than Apple will believe is a barn buster.

    Adobe has pretty much filled the gaping hole that was left by FCS, not nearly as well, but significantly better than FCPX alone and in time it may surpass the level of functionality editors and other creative professionals enjoyed with FCS. Adobe is more interested in listening to prospective customers then convincing them that a “new way” is better which is not new and not better.

    I leave the door slightly ajar for the possibility of Apple shocking me, but I don’t expect it.

  24. Craig Seeman Mar 30, 2013 14:14

    A “networked” Final Cut Studio X is something many of us want and I’d hope Apple is heading in that direction. That would be both a better integrated multiuser workflow as well as round trip functions. I have a strong hunch this will all happen. The big question is when… and also how. I suspect round tripping may not happen in Logic X happens and it may involve and update to Motion as well.

    I’m not sure about the importance of DVD or Blu-Ray authoring in the indie film market. I don’t see the chain stores that carry DVD and Blu-ray carrying indie films. Distribution for indie films is much better served by files. It’s not murky at all, just very complex as each service may have different specifications.

    Granted some festivals may want Blu-ray or even DVD delivery but they’re probably not looking for complex authoring. FCPX and Compressor support Blu-ray and DVD burning. I really don’t see that much call for complex authoring other than in the higher end feature film (not indie film) facilities.

    I think there’s a lot of misconceptions about Apple and the MacPro. When Apple moved to Thunderbolt in 2011 they probably intended it for their entire ecosystem. This would allow any peripheral to move between any Mac. Keep in mind the strategic decisions to move to Thunderbolt happened long before 2011. So 2010 was the last significant MacPro update. Thunderbolt must be on the motherboard and, to date, so must the GPU. Remember, Thunderbolt is used for display as well. To date, there is no motherboard that supports Xeon (or even 6 core i7) and Thunderbolt. The next MacPro will likely be a technological breakthrough in that regard. Please don’t underestimate that importance or the challenge in developing that technology.

    Some might ask then why not release something in the interim with Sandy Bridge or now Ivy Bridge Xeons. The problem for Apple would be that, given the longevity of the typical MacPro, any such MacPro may well be in service for 3 to 6 years or more. That would certainly slow the move to Thunderbolt for the third party developers. It would be part of the market most likely to be high end peripherals with no interest in Thunderbolt for years. In effect, lower ROI for the developers. In addition, such developers would have to consider continuing to make PCIe cards. That’s just not good for third party hardware developers.

    So given the small MacPro market which also may be the most motivated for high end peripherals, Apple decided to live with “pent up demand” as a business strategy. It means when the new MacPro is finally released, companies like Promise (Pegasus RAIDs) and AJA (IO XT) and their users will be able to invest thousands knowing that their peripherals will work whether you need to move from MacBookPro to iMac to MacPro.

    So I believe that an interim MacPro would have really hurt Thunderbolt developers. A new MacPro can’t (couldn’t) happen until Intel and/or Apple could develop a Xeon processor based motherboard that included Thunderbolt as well as the GPU integration to use Thunderbolt in such motherboard design.

  25. Marcus Moore Mar 30, 2013 14:18

    @Butch. Not better for you. Better for me though. So are you right and I’m wrong?

    I’m thrilled that apple is offering editor a choice in the methodology of editing. No one platform is going to be for everyone, nor should it be.

    Smoke proposes a single app for editing and post. Adobe has tightly integrated but separate apps or each task. Which is better? That’s very personal to workflow of each user.

    Apple isn’t interested in changing how every editor works, but offering an option for editors to work a different way. You can disagree and choose a different tool, but please don’t claim that the way I’ve been working and making money professionally for over a year (faster and more profitably, mind you) is wrong or unprofessional.

  26. george manzanilla Mar 30, 2013 18:36

    i love fcpx. great tool for cutting. not excellent for keyframing, color, or sound… but for straight cuts… there really isn’t anything better.

  27. nickeditor Mar 30, 2013 18:58

    @Leo Hans

    What kind of commercials? Shot reverse shot? Do it yourself?

    I would like the people use Final Cut X would say if they works alone or with an assistant, if they works with a colorist, a sound mixer, a VFX compositor, etc and how.


  28. Chris Sanderson Mar 30, 2013 19:53

    Also QT Pro Codecs are updated – something’s in the wind.

    A new MacPro can’t be too soon IMO.

    Apart from bug fixes and Sound, FCP X biggest problem fo me is lack of fast hardware but the app is now quite usable and faster workflow than FCP 7 and PP.

  29. Leo Hans Mar 30, 2013 23:09


    You can take a look to my work here:

    And here:

  30. nickeditor Mar 31, 2013 09:02

    That does not answer my questions… but I get an idea :D

    More details about work with a colorist, a sound mixer, a VFX compositor, etc?


  31. Leo Hans Mar 31, 2013 11:27

    If I can’t get what’s your point?

    FCPX can export full-res media, XML compatible with Da Vinci and OMF through a plugin.
    You have even a free FCPX to AE exporter.

    Perhaps you are not up to date about what changed since FCPX launch.

  32. nickeditor Mar 31, 2013 12:47

    Nop, that’s the reason why I am making those questions

    That XML is also compatible with another applications (Nuke, etc)?

    But after two years, isn’t it sufficient time to simplify and include it in Final Cut X?

  33. Larry Mar 31, 2013 13:08


    We need to move this conversation outside of this blog.

    It is up to each application developer to decide what XML version to support. XML is like the letters of the alphabet – they can be combined into a variety of different languages. For example, Blackmagic Design supports FCP X XML in DaVinci Resolve. Nuke decided in 2011 to release their XML import script into the public domain and leave it up to individual developers. As they stated in their blog: “… it was impossible for us to improve the script [such that] it suits all needs.” Many other developers supports the FCP 7 version of XML. In which case, the Xto7 utility can convert FCP X XML into FCP 7 format.

    No one is saying that FCP X is supported by all applications everywhere. If Nuke is critical to your editing, then FCP X is not for you.


  34. Leo Hans Mar 31, 2013 13:30
  35. Larry Mar 31, 2013 13:40

    Thanks, Leo.

    I did a quick Google search for this utility when I was writing to Nick, but couldn’t find any reference to it. In general, Apple provides developers with the ability to support FCP X XML — but the decision on whether to implement this is up to each developer; or, in this case, independent programmers.


  36. Caesar Darias Mar 31, 2013 14:02

    Regarding the Blu-ray discussion: I also want more BR capability in X.

    I used DVD Studio Pro all the time. It was great. Before that I used iDVD. It also worked great. You could drag virtually anything into iDVD- regardless of camera used- and it would compress it perfectly.

    I’ve burned a Blu-ray project using FCP X. It worked. However, it was painfully slow. It took more than six hours to get my first disc. Granted, the TRT was over an hour (1:18) of 1080p video that was “optimized” on ingest.

    As far as I know, you can only use BR directly from X. You can’t use Compressor then burn to BR.

    And as I’ve stated before, other than attaching an HD antenna to your 50-plus inch TV, Blu-ray will get you the highest quality TV picture to play back your content on your large TV.

    BR is what people want. I saw a Blu-ray player at Best Buy this month for about $80.

    When it comes to FCP, Apple needs to stop taking one step back every time it takes one step forward.

    Dear Apple: Add, update, enhance and revise. Don’t subtract.

  37. nickeditor Mar 31, 2013 14:20

    Thank you both

    For long time I’m not aware of Final Cut X updates with detail

    Sorry if I disrespected someone, I did not mean


  38. Larry Mar 31, 2013 14:50


    Thanks – no apology necessary. FCP X is changing rapidly. I study it on a daily basis and am always learning something new.

    No harm in asking questions – the key is to remember that no software stands still.


  39. Steve Marshall Mar 31, 2013 19:46

    I am unable to try FCPX to determine if it is great or not… Not until I know that it can export audio to OMF or AAF, and that every piece of audio will end up on specific tracks without. Further more I need to be reassured that I can just start editing without having to enter meta date – it may be the future but for me it will slow me down – I get a brief from a producer/director and make time code references or clip number notes on my script, and then I need to get to work. Finally I don’t want clients to have easy access to seeing my list of other projects/clients when they sitting next to me.

  40. Larry Mar 31, 2013 19:51


    All reasonable requests. Here are the answers:
    1. X2Pro, from Marquis Software, handles moving audio files from FCP X to ProTools and back. Check out their website for all the details.
    2. Correct. Metadata can be added at any time, it is not required to be added prior to an edit starting. In fact, you can easily edit without adding any metadata.
    3. You can easily view source timecode using the Event Browser.
    4. You can easily move projects (edits) and media (Events) into or out of FCP X so clients only see their work. You can do this manually or with a utility like Event Manager X.


    P.S. Apple is still offering a 30-day free trial of the application, so you can experiment risk-free.

  41. Clayton Apr 01, 2013 01:01

    If Apple’s original FCPX miss-step was due to a lack of resources to spread around, we would have understood. However we know that even as of today, their market cap is around 416 Billion. Making them the second most valuable company. No other company now selling NLE software is even in the same universe. So all Apple need do is simply “decide” and re-commit and their off to the races. They could package FCPX with a new qualifying Mac for $49.95 and for twice as long as it would take to cripple the competition.

    Heck they could buy Adobe outright, keep it branded Adobe, keep selling for both Mac and PC but offer the Mac version of Premiere Pro for $99 with the purchase of a new a Mac and just watch what happens.

    When your debt free and have that much money, you have choices, you just have to decide. We’ll see.

  42. Marcus Moore Apr 05, 2013 20:43

    @Clayton Money isn’t always the solution to coding applications. “Too many cooks in the kitchen” applies here too.

    With 10.0.8 being mainly a maintenance update, I’m particularly intrigued about what they might announce over the next few days.

    I’m sure Larry will have a ring-side seat and will give us a full report.

  43. Craig Apr 08, 2013 10:47

    Apparently nothing in the wind.

    From what I understand the press briefing happened and it may be that nothing was reported out of what one might find on Apple’s “In Action” page.

  44. Butch Apr 11, 2013 21:20

    @Craig I’m not going to hammer on the DVD/BR versus streaming point much, but at this point it’s getting as hard to have your work noticed licensing your stuff to “indie” streaming companies as it is getting noticed on Youtube. For a lot of projects you may your audience better than the streaming company you’re paying to know your audience.

    As for the updated, networked FCS X…I’m not really confident that it’s in the offing. Apple could have pre-announced the development of FCS in the “X” variety at any point to begin to stem the gushing flows of users to Premiere, Avid, smoke etc. but they haven’t done that. They could have made FCS3 permanently available with OS fixes until FCSX was ready to ship, if that was in the cards, but they haven’t done that. It really doesn’t take industry professional advice to analyze the fact that the company had 2 million users with the previous iteration of a product and now with the “better” version there’s probably less than a hundred thousand users after two years and probably less than a quarter of those users actually use FCPX as their primary editing solution…it’s not rocket science to figure out what’s wrong.

    @Marcus Moore It’s not about me or you being right or wrong it’s about numbers at this point. As I just pointed out with one product release Apple cut their own market share probably by 90%. It’s fine that some people are enjoying working with FCPX, but for that to happen 90% of the rest of the FCS/FCP users got jammed.

    Apple had been jamming Adobe for years, so now Adobe is pretty clear about what the customers want and are doing a pretty good job of emulating what was successful about Apple’s FCS strategy. The thing is it’s great to interchange with third party apps, but it’s pretty much a certainty that there will be a point where companies head down forked paths and the apps to work well or don’t work well together at all and it’s the editor/”post-production specialist” that’s left holding the ball. It’s nice to have full application capability in all discipline areas that are required to finish projects whether it’s alternate options for one or multiple people that generally work in another app.

    Ultimately, after two years of rejection of FCP X by many FCS customers it should be clear to Apple that they are on the wrong path and it doesn’t seem like it is. For the people that like FCPX, great carry on for everybody else enjoy the Adobe post-production suite as it keeps getting better.

  45. Larry Apr 11, 2013 22:47


    These are all good comments. I would make only one change. Last week, I learned from Apple that they have sold more seats of FCP X than they have of FCP 7.

    I asked if I could quote that and they said “Yes.”


  46. Craig Apr 12, 2013 07:30

    In addition to Larry’s comments about FCPX vs FCP7 sales I’d note (at least in the US app store):

    FCPX is the number 2 top Grossing app behind only Mountain Lion and ahead of Pages.

    It is the number 12 top Paid app just ahead of Pixelmator.

    While it’s hard to discern the rankings relative to “hard” numbers, clearly FCPX is selling well.

    @Butch you can certainly make DVD and Blu-ray copies of your work FCPX and Compressor support that. They don’t support many authoring features beyond menus. There’s absolutely nothing preventing you from DVD/Blu-ray distribution. The metrics of sales and rentals do bear out that online VOD is surpassing disc though.

  47. Butch Apr 13, 2013 10:30

    The numbers are fascinating. Of course it makes me wonder whether to a certain extent whether it matters IF it’s mostly “Non-Traditional” editors or people that aren’t necessarily influencing the flow/direction of mainstream entertainment, or if it’s mostly people that use it as more of a “pet project” than a tool. The anecdotal evidence I personally know of seems to be leaning in that direction up to this point so it’s not completely shocking to me. I wouldn’t use app store rankings to craft an argument that Pages is equally or more prevalent that MS Word or Google Docs, so why try do it for an NLE?

    I say all of this not to express that it isn’t a competent editing tool for the individual user, but Apple has created a lot of dysfunction in their pro apps solutions and raised doubt in a lot of gate keeper types that had not doubted their commitment or competence in pro applications development for well over a decade. Apple is keenly aware that mind share advantages with the gate keepers is the only thing staving off being shut out of significant chunks of media space, so if they’re leaning on Apps Store rankings to determine their future direction they’re in worse shape than I thought.

    It seems like it’s just a matter of time before Avid collapses and I suspect Adobe will be there to pick up the pieces…if Google than snaps up Adobe Apple will find itself in a pickle, possibly in a number of areas before too long. All anyone should have to say is THE RETURN OF FLASH at that point to know what I’m thinking.

  48. Tijs van den Donk Apr 23, 2013 15:39

    Imagine Microsoft Word X comes out tomorrow and they simply say:”oh, we’re sorry, you can’t open all you docs you’ve been writing the last years”. It would cause an uprise! But we editors are a user-group to small to cause any uprise. Apple simply said: “F… Y..! We gonna do it our way”. So what’s my guarantee for the future?

    You simply should not use FCP X to punish them for their arrogance. I’m a Mac user since 1985 and always have been big a fan, but the last few years Apple showed clearly their focus: the consumer market. I moved to Premiere and it has its quirks. However I’m convinced that Adobe is on top of it and I don’t doubt their dedication to professionals!

    So Apple: F… Y.. , no FCP X for me.