∞ Why Apple built Final Cut Pro X

Written by

The pro market is too small for Apple to care about it. Instead of trying to get hundreds or even thousands of video professionals to buy new Macs, they can nail the pro-sumer market and sell to hundreds of thousands of hobbyists like me.

This little tidbit comes from Sachin Agarwal, founder and CEO of Posterous, and a long time employee of Apple working on Final Cut Pro.

Why Apple built Final Cut Pro X | Sachin’s Posterous


  • bobbsybobs

    I completely agree with his article but it’s a crying shame. As a pro editor I’ve always championed FCP although we’re using PC Avids based in my work. I like the brave move forward with regards to the interface and the new way of working but the fact that so many pro features have been stripped out (for now at least) really makes me worry.

    I’ve read so many articles recently that states that Apple doesn’t care about the pro market to make me not want to trust them again. People have built companies around FCP and are now facing the prospect of having to rethink their strategy – and that will cost a lot of money. Obviously FCP7 will continue to work for now but sooner or later technology will begin to supercede the unsupported software and then what? Why risk this again? It’s not worth it, so unfortunately I’m backing Avid for the foreseeable future – my livelyhood depends on it.

    I will get myself a copy of FCPX eventually – as I said above, I really like the interface and the brave leaps – and I’m keen to use it but there is no way to use it professionally, not in an environment with Pro Tools, colourists, VFX and other departments chipping in as well. I can see that this is an excellent app for the prosumer and I also understand that there are far more prosumers out there than pros.

    One last thought: One of the reasons that Apple uses for not installing Flash on the iPhone is that they don’t want to be beholden to another company to update their plugin quickly after the update of an OS and risk people not updating or having a bad time because they’ve broken compatibility. Apple have stated that they will leave it to third party companies like Automatic Duck to fill in the blanks with regards to plugins and capability. What happens if they’re slow to update, or don’t update? Crucial features like EDL’s and OMF’s really should be in the app as standard and only extra effects and non-crucial pro capabilities left to others to enhance the app.

    That’s my take anyway. Apologies for going on, this was only meant to be a short post…

    • Anonymous

      If they didn’t care at all they wouldn’t have included plug-in support, wouldn’t have bothered with NAB  etc. 

      And they never claimed they don’t care about pros. Just that they weren’t going to use the pro market as the touchstone for every decision they make. 

      Thing is, they could prove right. Pros have used their consumer ‘toys’ etc many times. Major companies have brought in ipads. Big name music groups talk about using Garageband on the road to record ideas. and so on

      • bobbsybobs

        I have no doubt that Apple will include features in the future that people are asking for but my argument still stands.

        Pros using their ‘toys’ isn’t the same as editing in FCPX then needing to go to a grown up system. You can record ideas in Garageband then record properly in a studio using the same instrument. If you edit in FCPX you want to get those cuts out and into another system then exporting a quicktime isn’t it. You need to be able to get timecode and/or keycode info out, otherwise you needn’t have done it at all.

        I have no doubt that FCPX is awesome for the prosumer market but it’s shaken my confidence in Apple and time will tell if I’m correct about my theory on the third party plugin support.

        Having read your many other posts on this page, I can see that you have no problem at all with FCPX so there’s no point going back and forth with you. I’m just trying to look objectively, I’m not a hater but I’m suspicious that although they may well swallow up the wedding video and corporate market, we won’t be hearing of top TV shows and movies done on Final Cut again for a while yet.

  • http://twitter.com/bd__sd Bernard D

    Maybe it is time for FCP to leave the coop.

  • http://www.theuniversalsteve.com Anonymous

    It’s a good argument, but I don’t completely agree. The number of sales in the Pro market might be small, but being able to point at Pro users is great marketing for the high-end hobbyest market. They’ve been marketing Logic that way ever since they bought Emagic. If an artist you like made a CD (or whatever medium) you like with Logic, that’s some pretty good credibility. If it’s good enough for them it’s gotta be way more than good enough for me, right?

    • TV Editor

      Maybe. But Apple removed a lot of essential pro functions from FCPX. No one is going to edit a film like the Social Network or True Grit on FCPX anytime soon. They couldn’t even if they wanted to: FCPX is missing too many necessary features.

      I know Apple says these functions will be coming back soon, but we’re talking about a LOT of features that need to return. One year from now, I’d be surprised if anyone has edited a high end prestige project on FCPX.

      • http://www.theuniversalsteve.com Anonymous

        I meant to say that I thought Apple screwed up the launch as far as real pros go. I don’t use it myself, but it’s obvious from the screams of editors worldwide that FCPX is missing critical features and should have been called Final Cut Express. However, one year from now, if those features have been added and FCPX is an awesome tool I imagine a lot of pro editors will use it. Maybe some will have switched and have hurt feelings that keep them from ever switching back, but there are always new users.

        • TV Editor

          You could be right. But I’m skeptical that all those features are going to be back a year from now. That’s a lot of features to put back in.

          Also, I think FCPX could MAYBE win back the feature film market. But I think they’ve permanently lost the market for TV editors. On feature films you edit one project then close up shop and move on to the next show. But in TV you use the same edit system year after year – with minor upgrades. Things like backwards compatibility are more important to TV editors. Also if you’re a TV post-production producer who is planning on using the same edit system for the next few years, you know you’re also going to need future tech support. From what I hear, Apple apparently discontinued updates and tech support for FCP7 when FCPX came out. They eventually reinstated support – but only after everyone started going crazy. If I’m a post-production producer who is deciding which edit system I’m going to choose for my new TV show (which will hopefully run for many seasons) it would worry me that Apple would do something like that.

          Also, a lot of the missing features that I’m talking about apply mainly to feature films and broadcast TV. FCPX could wind up being great for professional editors who don’t work in those areas: industrials, webshows, freelance work, etc…

          • Iasky

            If it is in FCP7… It shouldn’t be that hard to port it over in a year. And most of all, why wouldn’t they.

          • Anonymous

            Costs. Some of the features that are missing are likely licensed tech that Apple paid for and baked in. Much as they did Java and Flash for a long time. 

            And just like Java and Flash, Apple may be leaving those features up to the folks that own the tech, who probably already create plug-ins for every other company and have no issue with making one for this new Final Cut. 

            So those that need the feature can buy it and potentially get faster updates directly from the source. And those that don’t need it don’t have to pay the extra costs. Plus the consumers/prosumers have a less expensive program that makes them feel like big boys

          • Anonymous

            Yes but how many TV editors, given what you claim, were still using FCS anyway. Most of the editors I know switched to Premiere Pro or Avid when FCS wasn’t updated for ages. With no real desire to look back. So the state of this new software doesn’t matter to them because they have no plans to ever use it

          • bobbsybobs

            Lots. I know lots of TV and movie editors that use FCP7.

            Premiere Pro? Are you kidding? I’m guessing that you don’t work professionally in this field.

      • Anonymous

        But folks that would edit the next True Grit etc were smart enough to do the research and know that they wouldn’t be using a new software with a new structure etc right away. None of them would have expected it so they aren’t really shocked by Apple using their standard game plan for new software. They would be planning to learn it etc and use it perhaps in six months. 

        As for the ‘too many necessary features’ perhaps, perhaps not. Some of those features aren’t needed by everyone. You’re a tv editor so you need things like export to tape because tv still uses tape in some occasions. My shop doesn’t work those types of projects so we don’t find that feature necessary. Others may have similar situations

  • http://twitter.com/feralchimp feralchimp

    I’m calling BS on this.  FCPX is not about “not caring about Pros.”  It’s about allowing not-Pros or not-yet-Pros to produce work with Pro quality, under Pro deadlines, and thereby expanding the Pro market by a factor of 10, 100, or 1000x.  So the current-Pro market has complaints about the Very First Version to be released along that axis…so what?

    Apple cares a ton about Pro creatives.  Why do you think they acquired Logic, improved the heck out of it, and dropped the price out of the stratosphere?

    • Anonymous

      Sure it is. The Pros are not their target audience anymore. The consumers/prosumers are. FCPX is about creating something for that group that could be enhanced via plug-ins etc for the professionals. it’s a smart game that has been used in various ways with the iphone, the ipad etc. 

  • John David

    A well written piece by someone in the know who is explaining all this without the bombast & hand ringing  of allot of the other noise that has been spewing from the ”intrawebs” these past 2 weeks. 

    I use FCP in my studio for clients, not to the extent that a pro user would use all it’s more advanced features in let’s say using it for broadcast television, but still more than a prosumer would normally use or need. I too was a bit disappointed when I first read about FCPX, but I too realize that Apple will add more functionality into the program as times goes on. No, I don’t think it will be as sophisticated as FCP has been in the past, but I think that it will still do the job for most users & still, when all is said & done, be the tool that many pros continue to use. 

    Here’s a thought; you don’t have to upgrade right away just because something new just came out! Wait & give it time to see how it’s patched & have added features incorporated into it over the next 6-12 months.

    I will wait for it to get there as FCP 7 still does the job for me, so if I wait a year or so until I upgrade, I will still get my work done & then see where FCPX is by that time.