My post last week probably should have been titled in a different tense or a theoretical manner, but we're on the internet so acting rationally doesn't always make sense. That said, a week and a day have passed since Apple released Final Cut Pro X, and lo and behold we have some sort of response from them.
This morning Apple posted a FAQ on their site entitled "Answers to your Final Cut Pro X questions". The document is mostly focused on clarifying misinformation that is floating around, but we get something of a timeline in two answers.
In answering the question "Does Final Cut Pro X allow you to assign audio tracks for export?" Apple says to expect a solution to this problem in an update "this summer."
In answer to the question "Can Final Cut Pro X export XML" Apple lets us know that there will be an API for this "in the next few weeks."
That's it. That's the timeline we get from Apple. Still no public refund policy (although Twitter rumors suggest that you can get refunds for FCPX if you ask the right people through App Store support), and more importantly, no ability to purchase Final Cut Studio 3 or Final Cut Pro 7 (the previous version).
In the time since I wrote my post last week I have thought more about the release and the great editor outcry (which, honestly, has gotten really annoying on Twitter and such). It occurred to me that perhaps this is what Apple knew would happen. Apple claims they did a great deal of research in the market and spent years rewriting their flagship video editing product.
And then they released the app, pissing off… whom? Only editors who make a living solely as an editor. The guys who do the highest of the high-end and require all the features that the average editor never needs. Six or seven years ago this would have been really bad news for Apple, because the high-end people are the ones who helped direct the industry, and Apple was still trying to establish their hardware in the video production industry.
But now there are three strong NLE (Non-Linear Editors for those not in the industry) contenders on the Mac - Avid, Adobe, and Apple. Or at least, Apple was there. But Final Cut Pro X is aimed only at tapeless workflows, meaning it just can't work in a Broadcast environment. Even if XML is added, the problems it causes are larger than the solutions it brings.
The thing about the FCPX release is that the writing has been on the wall for awhile. Apple first discontinued the development of Shake, their high-end compositing application. Then they discontinued all their server hardware, which lots of Post houses used for storage of all the video media they were editing.
People will say that this clearly shows Apple doesn't care about the professional market anymore, but I believe that is the wrong takeaway. Apple cares about all markets - but they try hard to only invest time in the markets that need help. Now that Avid and Adobe have very strong Mac options, Apple doesn't need to focus on the high-end markets to lock people into their hardware options.
It seems to me that the past decade, Apple has done whatever it takes to convince people that the Mac platform is the best for creative work of all types. Now that there are compelling NLE options on the Mac that help keep creatives on the platform, Apple doesn't have to spend their energy on developing the market. The market, specifically the high-end market, can move forward without their help.
But there is a developing market that is already and will continue to be huge for Apple - the midrange, prosumer and just beyond market. The new Final Cut Pro X is aimed squarely at that market with its focus on tapeless workflows.
If you've been editing for any length of time it can be frustrating to examine this market, as they still consider editing purely the act of putting pictures into order, without understand all the technical considerations that factor into editing. Apple's FCPX seems to actively encourages people to only think of editing in this manner.
There is a tendency - and I find myself thinking this way often - that because something has always been complicated (such as the technical aspects of video production), the complication is a fundamental aspect of the craft. I have long been frustrated at "video editors" who know nothing of video codecs, compression styles, color sampling, gamma shifts, audio sampling rates and on and on.
How, I ask myself, can these people possibly consider themselves a video editor?
The answer, from Apple's perspective, is that they can if they have the right tool. And that tool is Final Cut Pro X - because the program is designed to be simple enough for a n00b to use it, yet still have enough power under the hood that a more seasoned editor can do the things he needs to do. Final Cut Pro X is not just a rethinking of a NLE, it is a rethinking of what "video editor" means.
This is not comforting for those of us who like to think of ourselves as more "high-end," but just because the old Final Cut Pro has died does not mean we are left without options.
Apple, for their part, ultimately cares about us using their hardware to do our jobs. This means that they do care about professionals, but if they feel the professional market is properly taken care of without them spending their energy developing for it, then they are willing to focus elsewhere. That's also why the Final Cut Pro X debacle may not be as bad to them as we thought it should be.
Friday, September 16, 2011 at 9:43PM