Dom,

I think getting a 15" would be a safer bet, specially due to the better graphics card. The processor of the 13" is good enough, however, I'm not sure about the graphics card, and FCPX is a heavy user of the graphics card...

Hayden, Adobe has excellent pricing on education software, check them out. Also, Premiere is very similar to FCP in terms of operation, including a possibility to change your keyboard shortcuts to FCP ones. There are some differences, of course, but not that many, and not that important in my opinion.

My take on FCP X is that it looks like their software engineers said "we need more time", and the management said "we need a new version now! What can we have? We'll deal with the rest later."
I have not downloaded the app, so I can't comment, but that was my impression from what you guys wrote.

However, it might be that they really for some reason decided to make some not so wise decisions in development. Perhaps they wanted to ride on the FCP brand, but this release and lack of support for FCP7 seems to actually be a huge blow for the FCP brand in the professional market.

Also, so far the lesson seems to be: don't get bought by Apple if you want your product to go on. :)

"X" is a new program charting untested waters. It is not "7" in anyway except that it's an editing program with Apple integration. It is missing support for many pro features that FCP also didn't have at the beginning many years ago. As with FCP, third party or updated Apple programming will fill the gaps as time moves on.

I will not use this program for major client work until I feel I have a reasonable understanding of the program, transitions and titling especially. I already have reconstructed several small projects as tests and I have to say that the program is very impressive and the help menu is informative when I get confused. Much of my work is either disc bound, web bound or files bound for transfer at outside dub facilities so I feel that FCPX is mature enough for much of my work. The client who needs tape delivery and I have the decks, well FCP7 is still there and working well.

One point that I've seen referenced several times is the inability to capture footage from tape. According to the review on Ken Stone's website, this is FALSE. It is simply found under the "import" option now, where you will select "import from camera".

Alot of great info here, though. I think I'll stay on the fence for now and continue using FCP 6 until I see how this all plays out!

Brian

I was working in the centre of Cambridge this morning so after I'd finished I nipped into the Apple store in the hope of trying out FCPX for a little while (basically to get a bit of a feel as what all the fuss is about for myself...).

Unfortunately, they have not got FCPX loaded on any of the demo MBPs etc. in store just yet. Not sure if this is just a local delay with Apple here in Cambridge or mostly UK wide - but I bet you can try it at Apple's main London store.

Looks like I'll be keeping hold of my money a little longer!

Brian,

Actually it is true and false. Youi can capture DV or HDV tape formats via firewire. However, you cannot currently capture/or/digital cut via HD-SDI through Matrox or Aja or even legacy componenet analog.

See. most post facilities/TV stations etc., big and small, commercial and corporate, even one man bands,,invested a lot of money in capture cards,,,and FCP X clearly didn't address the fact that a lot of workflows are based on SDI capture.

A facility with multiple edit suites are usually connected with a central control room that has tape machines, digital routers, etc. Again, a massive investment in dollars. FCP X, at this stage would not fit into a facility style workflow at all,, as I see it.

Cheers
Edit: I left out DVCPro HD and DVCAM tape formats via firewire.

I am getting angry at apple for this release.

At our company, we have invested a lot of money into the finalcut workflow.

If I look at my shopping list of urgently needed features (ability to save Versions - Save As..., OMF, Mutliclip, Monitoring, SDI and on and on) I am very skeptic if they will be able to implement all this within a reasonable timeframe to earn the pro back...

Without all the necessary Pro elements, this cannot even be called iMovie Pro.

Who the hell gave the developers input for what is needed and what not?
CNN iReport? YouTube? really???? wtf...

Sergio

Already checked the graphics card requirements and the 13 has one that is recommended, so i don't see that as a problem.
Obviously the 15 would be better, but it costs a lot more, and i like the smaller size. I also have a 23" Apple Cinema Display for a good view. I'd rather spend the saved cash on a 256 SSD card and a thunderbolt drive when they arrive.
If i decide i need a more powerful set up down the line, i'll get an imac as they are superb machines right now. My Mac Pro is going on Ebay this week.

Oliver

You still have FCP7 i take it?

Why not just use that till X is ready for your work?

I agree it's a little odd for Apple to put out an APP that is not ready yet, but nobody is forcing you to use it. I shall wait until it's up and running. There's no hurry. Or is FCP7 not good enough for you anymore?

My big beef is how they are trying to change the terminology of editing. It is really confusing if you have been editing a long time. There is a venaculer of editing terms that has existed for many decades.

Case in point a sequence is now called a project? (Which defaults to surround sound matrix vs. stereo or single channels)
A timeline is a storyline? Okay.
A bin is called a smart collection/ (Vs. a stupid collection?)
A project is an Event? (Like my cousin's daughter graduation?)
Effect based clips in timeline ,,,umm storyline are called "Video Animations"??

Mark in and Mark outs are called selections?

A simple DVE/transform move/zoom on a still is called "Ken Burns". So, now my post supervisor/producers are going to say,, you need to add a Ken Burns to that timeline...I mean storyline..sequence...I mean project...in yesterdays event edit session??

Those stills need to be imported into a smart collection. Genius.

The more I play with this..the more I realize that I cannot even think like a seasoned editor...I have to think like my Uncle Jim editing his grandsons birthday party.

Also, we're comparing FCP X to Avid AMA. And so far it looks like I cannot edit XDCAM EX, Red, MXF, and a host of other codecs natively. If it see the qiucktime file it transcodes it to ProRes,,,which is fine but even with background rendering is nowhere near as fast as Premiere or Avid AMA native editing/ingest. Those programs direct link to the file and yo see it instantly in a bin. Which BTW, the term "bin" actually refers to "film bins" which are like laundry bins with hangers for your "film clips". I just cannot call a "bin" a "smart collections". I just cannot do it. it is my hang up I know,,but...I just can't.


I've seen enough...for professionals...Apple threw the baby out with the bath water. This is for iMovie for Video Prosumers.

Brian,

Actually it is true and false. Youi can capture DV or HDV tape formats via firewire. However, you cannot currently capture/or/digital cut via HD-SDI through Matrox or Aja or even legacy componenet analog.

See. most post facilities/TV stations etc., big and small, commercial and corporate, even one man bands,,invested a lot of money in capture cards,,,and FCP X clearly didn't address the fact that a lot of workflows are based on SDI capture.

A facility with multiple edit suites are usually connected with a central control room that has tape machines, digital routers, etc. Again, a massive investment in dollars. FCP X, at this stage would not fit into a facility style workflow at all,, as I see it.

Cheers
Edit: I left out DVCPro HD and DVCAM tape formats via firewire.

I'm sure Apple's solution for this is to replace all that clunky old stuff with shiny new Thunderbolt components. Your 6 month old Mac Pros don't have Thunderbolt? Too bad, cause we're not supporting add-in cards.

I agree it's a little odd for Apple to put out an APP that is not ready yet, but nobody is forcing you to use it. I shall wait until it's up and running. There's no hurry. Or is FCP7 not good enough for you anymore?

To be blunt, no it isn't.

FCP 7 was a stopgap measure. No 64 bit, lousy media management tools, limited BD support, etc. And that came after two years of little progress from the FCP camp. FCP X addresses a lot of this, but no one expected that they would be trading other features for these improvements. Given the pace this software is developed, it may be a long time before Apple realizes that multicam is more important than iReport.

As it stands right now, I think Apple has given us a very clean way to slowly transition to this new FCP. I'm happily running FCP 7 and FCP X on the same machine. One foot in the old world, and one foot in the new. I have the opportunity to learn a new workflow, while still being able to depend on old ones. When I take a big, long term perspective, that's a pretty good place to be in.

As for new features we"ll just have to wait and see.

That does seem to be the case, and I recall a similar situation many moons ago when Apple released both the public beta of OSX, and even the first release of 10.

Those applications we had to pay for too. They were VERY limited in ability, were buggy, and had extremely limited software/hardware support. BUT, you could run OS9 on a separate partition, and even if you didn't partition, you could reboot to OS9.

Like FCPX, OSX had the EXACT same arguements made about it. "What has Apple done?" "All this hype, and we get THIS POS?" "I'm going to Windows!"

But there were also people that were looking at the infant product, thinking, "given some time, some adoption by 3rd party developers, and some constructive feedback beyond...'this sucks...why didn't you just keep developing on OS9?' this is going to be GREAT!"

I was in the latter camp at the time. I have yet to get FCPX, and I'm going to give it a little more time before I dive in. Even when I do, I'll continue to use FCP 7 on paying gigs.

Bottom line, for professionals, there's nothing wrong with Final Cut Pro 7. Yeah, you can't get it through Apple directly anymore, but there are plenty of places that still have old stock they'll sell you.

Apple didn't abandon anyone. You didn't "Upgrade" Final Cut 7. It's still there, unaltered, undamaged, and completely servicable. You've got Multicam. You've got EDL, OMF, and XML import/export. You've got external display and 3rd party card support.

Apple had a choice; Discontinue support for FCS 3 and focus everything on FCPX, or divide their efforts between 7 and 10, consequently slowing the development they've promised.

It may not be the choice YOU want, but it's the choice they made.

I think the only thing that Apple may have dropped the ball on here is in their marketing of this product. Their support pages for it clearly stated what it would and wouldn't do, but the hype lead a lot of folks to believe that all those shiny new features came with all the bells and whistles they were used to.

I don't know if I'd call it "iMovie Pro." On the current surface, maybe. But you could have called OSX 10.0 "Etch-A-Sketch Pro" too, for all the initial functionality it had, (I didn't find OSX remotely usable until 10.1. Until 10.1, I couldn't get any networking to function on my system! and it was still not great then.)

From what folks who've actually got in there and played with it have described, FCPX CURRENTLY is very responsive and fast. Once you wrap your head around the new editing style, it's VERY useful, intuitive, and logical. Background rendering is great, and the new metadata-based media management is a HUGE step in the right direction. What it DOES do, it seems to do very well. What it DOESN'T do can be corrected in a big way considering the architecture they've built it on.

In general, I think Final Cut X is a huge step in the right direction. To some folks, it looks like a step backwards, but I think time, development, and attention will correct that.

For the folks that need all those features it's missing NOW, stick with Studio 3 a while longer.

I've been chewing on this a bit, and here's what I think is happening:

When Apple came out with FCP in 1999, they were a company that serviced professionals. Graphic design, video, etc. And the professional video market was THE video market. There were amateur video hobbyists, but they weren't where the money was.

Now everything is different. Starting with the iPod in 2001, Apple became a company that serviced consumers - and now that focus dominates. Also in that time an entire new class of video producers evolved - people who make semi-polished videos on YouTube, avid hobbyist who make videos for fun. These people now certainly outnumber video professionals by a large margin, and they are people who are already in Apple's consumer base. They are people who are not going to spend the money or take the time to learn AVID or FCP Suite. This is a whole class of user who did not exist in 1999, and who has never had a product that fell between iMovie and FCP.

I think that FCPX is designed for exactly that person. They are not doing broadcast, they are doing YouTube. They don't need to send audio to a sound mix, the don't need to grade in Color, they don't need to drive a production monitor, they don't even need to burn DVDs -- and they never will need any of it. They outnumber video professionals and they are growing MUCH faster.

I think it's a fabulous business move for Apple to focus on them. It makes sense.

I don't believe that they will ever come back to service the the professional video market, and I don't think that they've said or done a single thing to make anyone think they will. What I hear from people here is that they think that Apple should, so of course they will. I haven't heard anything like that from Apple.

Well said Barry. I think you pretty much hit the nail directly on the head. I imagine in big media production markets like you guys in L.A. , New York, and Chicago that switched from Avid to FCP and invested in collaborative relationships, infratructures, and workflows must be hugely disappointed. It is as if Apple just bowed to Adobe and Avid and said it is all yours,,we don't want the pro market anymore.

Which is sad becuse I think Apple FCP as a whole did a lot for the pro market by forcing down prices and pushed Avid and Adobe to innovate more.

Fortunately for us out here at NASA/JSC we stuck with mostly Avid. And really didn't have much choice. The amount of NASA archival footage in a wide array of formats going back to the 60's is mind boggling.

I like Apple..I edit with Avid on a MAC Pro here at work and a MAC Book Pro at home. Now I'm worried that Apple won't develop and innovate products for media professionals,,which means we go back to PC's exclusively again for Adobe and Avid ....again? Microsoft? NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

Cheeers.

There are plenty of professionals producing for YouTube and other online video outlets (and getting paid a fair amount). Yes, there are cat videos, but to equate all YouTube producers with Uncle Bob is simply incorrect. I see FCP X as providing a new rapid edit environment, which should suit my sport productions quite well - especially the ESPN.com "we need it hours after the finals wrap" schedules.

And, I don't have any problem with not importing the old projects. I would never move a job from an old editor to a new version before it's completed.

I don't believe that they will ever come back to service the the professional video market, and I don't think that they've said or done a single thing to make anyone think they will. What I hear from people here is that they think that Apple should, so of course they will. I haven't heard anything like that from Apple.

You won't because Apple doesn't talk about these things. You can look at Apple's business model. They're all about ecosystem and even the tiny (compared to iPad/iPhone) market feeds an important strategic niche in the system.

I've heard from people who have talked with Apple directly. While they can't say details due to NDAs they have said Apple/FCPX has said they intend to support the Pro Video Post part of the ecosystem.

There are plenty of "professionals" producing for YouTube and other online video outlets (and getting paid a fair amount). Yes, there are cat videos, but to equate all YouTube producers with Uncle Bob is simply incorrect.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to make that assertion. When I say "professional" product, I mean one that will fit in to a professional post house for doing broadcast stuff.

Certainly there are tons of people making money who need no more features than what FCPX delivers. And that is exactly my point. You are their new main market, and I don't think they have any regrets about that.

Craig - in terms of whispers that they will be evolving the product to meet professional needs... they failed so horribly with this release on that, I don't think anyone will be waiting around. Certainly no one who needs to buy equipment today or train new people today are going to use FCPX hoping that they fix it, and they aren't going to use FCP7 (which they likely can't even buy) betting that one day Apple will change course and fix FCPX and then they'll make that jump.

It would be a hard sell even if Apple WAS saying that they'd upgrade it, but they're not.

Professionals who have spent significant money buying monitors, decks, plug-ins, etc, who have now seen that investment shown a dead end road are not going to sink another dime in to Final Cut.

And me... starting a new project today and given the choice of FCP7 which has no upgrade path, or Premiere which certainly does... which does a sensible person pick?

And, I don't have any problem with not importing the old projects. I would never move a job from an old editor to a new version before it's completed.

My first problem is that I'm never finished with all the jobs I'm working on at one time. There will always be open & ongoing projects on my plate. Yeah I can have FCP 7 & FCP X installed at the same time, but I think that just proves that FCP X isn't ready yet, at best it is a Beta release that only is 60% done.

What is going to happen when FCP X2 & FCP X3 come out? Will I still need to have FCP 7 on my computer for the rest of time? It happens all the time when I get a call for a completed project, that someone wants the graphics to be changed, but everything else the same. Or maybe they just want a few tweaks to a project from 4 years ago.

In 2015 & even today, I don't want to switch the NLE I'm using, just because I'm working on an older project.

To me it is like Apple coming out with a new iPod / iPhone / iTunes that doesn't play mp3s. What to listen to your old music? Time to start from scratch.

Barry, there's no reason to wait for FCPX develop if waiting is a hinderance. It will happen. That's not the same as it will happen fast enough.

I think we'll see major improvements within 6 months. Apple has said major updates should happen once or twice a year rather than 18 months or longer (as was the case with disc and ship).

If you're building a facility you can not do it with FCPX today. If you're expanding a facility you can't buy new seats of FCS anymore.

There's lots of very good reasons that a business can't wait.

None of that precludes that FCPX will eventually be an advanced professional product used by high end professionals working in a collaborative environment. BTW Thunderbolt is very much part of it. Just because others can use it doesn't mean Apple wasn't thinking of how their products can use it. I can speculate there but I wont.

Given the lows cost of movement between NLEs, someone moving back to Premiere or Avid today may well move back to FCPX when it's more capable. It happened the first time when FCP progressed. As to whether people/facilities will be emotionally inclined to do that, that's up to Apple's marketing and whether FCPX workflow is "killer" vs just competitive.

There's no reason to base today's business decision on a future promise. That doesn't mean the promise won't come to pass though. The indicators, to me, are that it will. People will reevaluate when those days come to pass.

Hi Guys
Been interesting following this thread and taking in peoples opinions.
I have a quick question about the new version of compressor for those who have downloaded it - I know technically not fcpx, but as it was formerly part of the fcp suite i think it is relevant

The question is basically is it quicker, any differences in quality of the exports, any differences good or bad

thanks

marc

[removed because it was surplus to requirements]

So its been a while since I've added any information to this thread but I have been reading it.

Here is what I have to add to the thread for those people who are thinking about buying it or those who have but haven't really played with it much.

Having worked in a education environment (school), a professional environment (work) and on side projects for weddings and such in the past couple of years I feel I have adequate experience in editing to give real feedback.

First, I have to say that if you work in a typical production environment that is not a one-man-band, you're not going to be able to much of anything with this software. Your projects and footage need to be stored on the same system that you're working on (as far as I've been able to tell so far) meaning that you will not be able to work from servers and remote drives over your fibre network. Also, you can't version, or import or export a variety of formats that have already been covered in this thread.

Although, this software is no where near ready to be used in a production environment, I can see how the one-man-bands, like wedding videographers, short film makers, youtube producers, etc. are going to enjoy using this software. I have been cutting together some footage to test and learn X and I have found it to be buggy for somethings (ex, I can't rename folders, and I've had a few problems with keywords), and as mentioned it doesn't do much. But what it does do... it does well. Editing is fast, rendering in the background is great and the magnetic timeline does have its benefits once you get used to it (however, it can be extremely annoying in the first couple hours of getting used to the system when you want to put a clip in one location and the timeline won't let you)

So yes, this software is not amazing, and it needs a lot of work, but it is functional and can be useful to you if you are a one man band kind of a producer. I'm keeping 7, thats not even a question. However, I'm going to keep trying to get used to this because once its stable and they add features that we all miss, I want to be ahead of the game on actually knowing how to use it.

Hi Guys
Been interesting following this thread and taking in peoples opinions.
I have a quick question about the new version of compressor for those who have downloaded it - I know technically not fcpx, but as it was formerly part of the fcp suite i think it is relevant

The question is basically is it quicker, any differences in quality of the exports, any differences good or bad

thanks

marc

I haven't had the opportunity to actually use it, however, I can tell you that it is much easier to use the new version as a qmaster node than the previous version. After I get to the point of exporting a project through fcpx through the new compressor I'll post a review of what I think of it.

My first problem is that I'm never finished with all the jobs I'm working on at one time [...] What is going to happen when FCP X2 & FCP X3 come out? Will I still need to have FCP 7 on my computer for the rest of time? It happens all the time when I get a call for a completed project, that someone wants the graphics to be changed, but everything else the same. Or maybe they just want a few tweaks to a project from 4 years ago.[...] I don't want to switch the NLE I'm using, just because I'm working on an older project [...]

This is the scenario that has me very concerned. I would have thought that Apple would have thought this through, but sometimes "insanely great" means a total break from the past. I had hoped for many years that a good XML inport and export architecture would resolve these issues, the ideal way to back up a project would be to collect the media and an XML document represents the project and then anytime in the future you could rework the project.

The optimist in me thinks (wishes, hopes) that Final Cut Pro projects will be importable eventually via an XML mechanism. But that probably requires some software magic to accommodate the radically different interface semantics between the two applications in terms of how the timeline is structured.

Oliver

You still have FCP7 i take it?

Why not just use that till X is ready for your work?

I agree it's a little odd for Apple to put out an APP that is not ready yet, but nobody is forcing you to use it. I shall wait until it's up and running. There's no hurry. Or is FCP7 not good enough for you anymore?

I am using FCP7 and will do so in the near future. but it hasn't been good enough for a while. Most things we do today are HD and with a few effects or anything that needs rendering, speed has become an issue. I cannot work the way I like, the system is slowing me down. (running current 8-core MacPro) So I was looking forward to FCP finally becoming 64 bit, I expected a similar performance increase as Adobe demonstrated when they switched to 64 bit. And the speed of FCP X is WOW! its what I wished for in speed and it lets me hope that someday they might fix it.

i just got back from the London Supermeet. Interesting. Larry Jordan was there as well as a few representatives from 3rd party developers. From Larry's comments and (informed) answers to questions, all the necessary "hooks" to fix issues like OMF, XML and such are present in the software but Apple leaves it open to third party developers to come up with answers and solutions. Same with i/o card support.

What still worries me is the apparent shift in priorities to (again) CNN iReport and similar consumer tricks.
What I heard from a representative of a 3rd party developer was a rumor that Lion will not support FCP7.

Some people need to set up an edit station, but FCS is not available any more and FCP X is unusable in a productive environment.

I installed it on one non-production machine, I will play with it and learn, get comfortable with the new approach observe the issues, problems and wait for updates.

If Lion doesn't support FCP7 that's going to force the issue pretty quickly and eliminate the option of running FCP 7 and FCPX concurrently until they sort it out.

Who wants to be left running an out of date editing system (which FCP7 was when it came out) on an out of date operating system, all in hopes that Apple will change its strategy and support pros.

You still have FCP7 i take it?

Why not just use that till X is ready for your work?

I agree it's a little odd for Apple to put out an APP that is not ready yet, but nobody is forcing you to use it. I shall wait until it's up and running. There's no hurry. Or is FCP7 not good enough for you anymore?

FCP7 is not good enough for me anymore. When you service a core group of loyal clients, you frequently dip into past projects for elements (titles, cutaways etc) and as Zach says, you often return (sometimes years later) to make a minor change at the client's request.

X isn't ready for action. But starting new projects in FCP7 doesn't make a lot of sense when you know the program is in its death throws.

Even if/when X allows me to use my Blackmagic Card, XF files, production monitor, plugins, I can see there are some features of X that look irksome: the inability to quickly export discrete portions of a sequence (which I do all the time) and the media management interface being the prime two.

Looks like it's time to give Adobe a go.

From Larry's comments and (informed) answers to questions, all the necessary "hooks" to fix issues like OMF, XML and such are present in the software but Apple leaves it open to third party developers to come up with answers and solutions. Same with i/o card support.


In such case it was very clever for them not to allow the third parties access to code API before the launch.

I guess the $299 price is just bait and switch then or the marketing team is in damage control mode.

/sarcasm mode off

The Inevitable video (but sums up what I've been hearing effectively enough):

YouTube - ‪Hitler hates FCP X‬‏ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVV9wEQZmGE&feature=fvst)

Worth reading this article which addresses some of the 'perceived' major shortcomings of the program, and makes the case that everything is still possible:

Professional Video Editors Weigh In on Final Cut Pro X - NYTimes.com (http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/professional-video-editors-weigh-in-on-final-cut-pro-x/)

To sum up everything, it is time to buy some stock in Adobe and Avid!

If you haven't already done so, listen to Biscardi's and Harrington's podcast over at the cow - the link is listed several pages prior. After listening to them for just 30 minutes, you will understand that Apple had every intention of making FCPX a watered down, consumer-ish NLE.

To sum up everything, it is time to buy some stock in Adobe and Avid!


No, Apple stock is still the way to go. They'll make more money this year off of iPhone 5 (if it's released in September) than they've made on FCP since 1999. Apple just needs to look at Sony and realize they can make tons and tons of money in the consumer market, yet still make 100%, no-compromise professional products.

So I'm guessing it was just a dream that Apple did a huge press release this mornIng and said, "Just kidding everyone! Here's the real FCPX!"

And Conan's take on it: YouTube - ‪Conan O'Brien Slams Final Cut Pro X‬‏ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRzLP0FJ82I)

Conan's YouTube video is HILARIOUS!

i just got back from the London Supermeet. Interesting. Larry Jordan was there as well as a few representatives from 3rd party developers. From Larry's comments and (informed) answers to questions, all the necessary "hooks" to fix issues like OMF, XML and such are present in the software but Apple leaves it open to third party developers to come up with answers and solutions. Same with i/o card support.My wife & I were also at the Supermeet yesterday evening & came away pretty reassured that our needs at least will be met by FCP X.

Oliver, were you the Swiss guy who won two raffle prizes but was then forced to give one back & insulted by the American compere because in his eyes you didn't show sufficient gratitude & enthusiasm for the prize by whooping & hollering like a lunatic?

i just got back from the London Supermeet. Interesting. Larry Jordan was there as well as a few representatives from 3rd party developers. From Larry's comments and (informed) answers to questions, all the necessary "hooks" to fix issues like OMF, XML and such are present in the software but Apple leaves it open to third party developers to come up with answers and solutions. Same with i/o card support.

So "hey, it's only $299" after which we let you pay serious bucks to add back all the functionality that was taken away." I wouldn't really appreciate that. I need to play around with this software a little bit more, but I have a gut feeling that Apple won't fix most of the complaints. Consumers > professionals.

Having lived and died through the cessation of Avid Liquid after Avid bought out Pinnacle and decided it was too good of an editing program to continue it as competitor to their own money maker, I suggest you forget that Final Cut Pro ever existed, and start learning a new program today and hope it doesn't die, too. Three years from now your mind should be filled with a viable, living, breathing workflow that gets better with new updates to the program and to the OS. Your mind won't still be picking through the dead bones of Final Cut Studio operating on the an Apple equivalent of Windows XP.

Even Larry Jordan is backtracking now (and aiming at Apple):
Apple’s Challenges – Larry’s Blog (http://www.larryjordan.biz/app_bin/wordpress/archives/1514)

I've never witnessed such a publicity onslaught/mess as the launch of Final Cut Pro X. By now, I'am pretty sure that Steve Jobs himself is not happy with this. The only thing that can rescue Apple now is communication, in which they are really, really bad.

Silently fixing stuff won't work this time. People are angry, feel betrayed... and rightly so. All Apple 'evangelists' have spoken in fierce words that Apple blew this up, big time. Not good.I also noticed that my Google Reader and Twitter exploded after the Final Cut Pro X release. I've never seen the editing community so divided about something. Final Cut Pro X is disruptive in that regard; which is good. But it should've been a beta release or should have carried a new name. They also should not have ever, ever stopped Final Cut Pro support on the same day.

So:
1) Apple cares and communicates that clearly to us
2) Apple cares but doesn't communicate
3) Apple doesn't care

If they opt for 2/3 they will lose many customers. They will get back many more (Apple store magic, new price, prosumer appeal) but they will upset a large, loyal customer base that helped build the Apple brand. Also: after Shake, and now Final Cut Pro... what message does that send to aperture and Logic users? A very uncertain message. Time for damage control.

I still insist that everyone is wrong when they say Apple blew it, and just silly when they say Apple needs to make changes quickly to update FCPX. They knew what they were doing and they did it on purpose.

The writing on the wall says it clearly: FCPX is a program designed for the advanced non-broadcast user. Apple has unceremoniously ditched Shake, now Color, Soundtrack and Final Cut Studio. They are no longer in the market of providing to broadcast professionals.

And in terms of their business model, I think it makes great sense. I'm buying Apple stock. And Adobe Premiere.

As an outside onlooker, I have to say I agree with Barry. I am not a Final Cut user, nor am I a Premieire Pro User. I was a premiere pro user until Adobe the continuous updatig expense and the clunkiness of the user interface drove me to Vegas 7, which I have used since then. I consider myself one of those advanced prosumers, and interestingly, when I started hearing about FCP X, and its little improvements, I couldn't help think that we already have most of what is called "new" FCP X in Vegas.

Point is I think it is clear that there is no real money in maintaining a heavy duty pro editing systems for a few editing houses out there, and those that need that kind of support are probably going to have to pay dearly for plug ins and adaptations.

The Inevitable video (but sums up what I've been hearing effectively enough):

YouTube - ‪Hitler hates FCP X‬‏ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVV9wEQZmGE&feature=fvst)

That was pretty good.

As an outside onlooker, I have to say I agree with Barry. I am not a Final Cut user, nor am I a Premieire Pro User. I was a premiere pro user until Adobe the continuous updatig expense and the clunkiness of the user interface drove me to Vegas 7, which I have used since then. I consider myself one of those advanced prosumers, and interestingly, when I started hearing about FCP X, and its little improvements, I couldn't help think that we already have most of what is called "new" FCP X in Vegas.

Point is I think it is clear that there is no real money in maintaining a heavy duty pro editing systems for a few editing houses out there, and those that need that kind of support are probably going to have to pay dearly for plug ins and adaptations.

Uh-oh. You said the V-word. You're in for it now, Bub.

That was pretty good.

I agree - I've watched a few of these and it's amazing how a few subtitles can be so good (only if you don't speak German mind you!). This one gets is just right - it all comes down to the text content, the pacing, the level of invective, even the punctuation etc - many miss the mark woefully but this is almost believable!

There's legitimate criticism and overreaction, but I bet no one here knew the backlash was a conspiracy!

Final Cut Pro X ‘backlash’ coming from competitors scared to death over Apple’s $299 price tag? – MacDailyNews - Welcome Home (http://macdailynews.com/2011/06/24/final-cut-pro-x-backlash-coming-from-competitors-scared-to-death-over-apples-299-price-tag/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wordpress%2FxhfA+%28MacDailyNews%29)

Needless to say, this guy has no clue.

No new information, but a well-written piece with some interesting thoughts:

lonelysandwich - Final Cut Pro: The New Class (http://lonelysandwich.com/post/7033868135/fcp-the-new-class)

There's legitimate criticism and overreaction, but I bet no one here knew the backlash was a conspiracy!

Final Cut Pro X ‘backlash’ coming from competitors scared to death over Apple’s $299 price tag? – MacDailyNews - Welcome Home (http://macdailynews.com/2011/06/24/final-cut-pro-x-backlash-coming-from-competitors-scared-to-death-over-apples-299-price-tag/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wordpress%2FxhfA+%28MacDailyNews%29)

Needless to say, this guy has no clue.

oh come on... the authors credits say:
(He also has over 16 years of professional linear and non-linear editing experience. – MDN Ed., June 25, 11:15am EDT)

16 years of professional... rrrrright... I agree with the no clue bit.

Answers to your Final Cut Pro X questions.
Apple - Final Cut Pro X - Answers to common questions. (http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/)

Great review of Premiere from Hemut Kobler, who has written books on FCP. And who seems to agree with my previous assertion that Apple is just leaving pro applications altogether - even before FCPX came out.

A Final Cutter Tries Out Premiere Pro : Apple FCPX - Final Cut Pro X (http://library.creativecow.net/kobler_helmut/FCP-vs-Premiere-Pro/1)