∞ Adobe's video tools boast 45% growth on the Mac, thanks to Final Cut X

Adobe will announce on Thursday that demand for its Production Premium CS5.5 video tools has exploded this year, and they have Apple to thank.

Demand for Adobe’s video creation tools has grown 22 percent year-over-year, but the big news is on the Mac side. The company said that it’s seen 45 percent growth on the Mac.

Adobe says the growth on the Mac is fueled by the large number of Final Cut Pro X users switching to Premiere Pro.

After releasing Final Cut Pro X, Apple faced a backlash from users. Adobe stepped in and welcomed users to its platform. Adobe created video tutorials and published documents to help Final Cut users switch to Adobe products.



  • Nakusthin

    apple can be very smart…and very stupid too

    • http://twitter.com/Moeskido Moeskido

      We’ll see.

    • http://twitter.com/Moeskido Moeskido

      We’ll see.

  • His Shadow

    So people who immediately upgraded to a completely revamped product found they had been a little hasty.

    • http://www.acid-product.co.uk Ian Davies

      Yeah, this.

      I found it hugely amusing (and more than a little depressing) wading through the froth-spattered comments on countless websites from assorted morons and goobers who were shocked – SHOCKED! – to find that immediately switching their production environments to a radical, untested 1.0 product didn’t somehow result in herds of rainbow-shitting unicorns!

      That, and the avalanche of wannabe video pros and flat-out liars bitching about how a product they hadn’t even used was going to ruin their jobs, start sleeping with their wives and bring about the collapse of western civilisation.

  • Kevin

    So basically, Apple just shifted the most ornery, knee-jerk, ego-maniac professionals who still edit with tape over to Adobe to support. Apple’s left with those who will continue to evaluate software with a level head, upgrade to FCP X when it suits them, and a whole bunch of new digital video editors (where the market is going anyway).

    This might just work out for the better.

    • John

      Generally speaking, professional editors don’t get to dictate whether they “edit with tape” or not.  If delivery is required on tape, you have to deliver on tape.  If your source material is on tape, you must load from tape.  That’s not being knee-jerk.  If you don’t have clients that want to see your cuts on a television, or if you don’t need to interface with professional sound mixers, color-graders, and VFX artists, then I’m sure FCPX is fine for you.  But calling editors ornery and ego-maniacal because FCPX is not up to snuff for this kind of work is misguided.  

    • John

      Generally speaking, professional editors don’t get to dictate whether they “edit with tape” or not.  If delivery is required on tape, you have to deliver on tape.  If your source material is on tape, you must load from tape.  That’s not being knee-jerk.  If you don’t have clients that want to see your cuts on a television, or if you don’t need to interface with professional sound mixers, color-graders, and VFX artists, then I’m sure FCPX is fine for you.  But calling editors ornery and ego-maniacal because FCPX is not up to snuff for this kind of work is misguided.  

    • Orcena550

      It’s always nice to hear from some one who knows absolutely nothing about a professional workflow interject their comments on the FCP debacle.  Kevin, FCP X is flawed at it’s very core.  Without a complete overhaul, it will never be anything more than an upgraded version of iMovie.  Professional editors are digital video editors, and we have been for a very long time.  We understand the tools we need to accomplish the job effectively and efficiently.  Despite all of it’s flaws, FCP7 users agree that it was the single best tool in the world for this.  FCP X is a prosumer product and nothing more.  FCP7 users now are faced with the decision of whether to hang on to a dead platform or move to inferior products such as Avid or Premiere.

      This will work out for the better for Apple, who can now tap into the lucrative YouTube market.  This will work out for Adobe and Avid who will eventually swallow up the professional market.  It does not bode well for industry professionals who have built their workflows around FCP7.  I just hope Adobe and Avid can look long and hard at what made FCP7 superior and begin to integrate those philosophies into their existing platforms.

      • http://www.acid-product.co.uk Ian Davies

        It’s always nice to hear from someone who rubbishes another person’s point of view by operating from a vague position of expertise for which they provide absolutely zero evidence.

        Here are some actual experts who disagree with your appraisal: http://www.crumplepop.com/blog/?p=369

        Here’s another: http://fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/512-evan-schectmann-talks-sense-about-fcpxs-history-features-and-future

        You can disagree with Apple’s decision to break from the past in the way it has, but statements like calling FCPX “flawed”, and “a prosumer product and nothing more” just makes you look silly.

        Tape is a legacy medium. Solid state Pro HD cameras are already here. If you’re laying the foundation of NLE for the next 10 years, why would you bother spending engineering resources supporting something that is going to disappear in less than 5? Avid and Adobe are both going to have to adapt to this situation in the coming years, and when they do, Apple will already be several years ahead of them.

      • http://www.acid-product.co.uk Ian Davies

        It’s always nice to hear from someone who rubbishes another person’s point of view by operating from a vague, implied position of expertise for which they provide absolutely zero evidence. There are some actual experts who disagree with your appraisal. Google “crumplepop bet everything” to read the views of a company whose ability to make a living is tied directly to the “pro-worthiness” of FCPX. Search YouTube for “tekserveproav” and take a look at their top-viewed video “Final Cut Pro X: A Look From Past to Present to Future” for a rational look at what FCPX is all about. You can disagree with Apple’s decision to break from the past in the way it has, but statements like calling FCPX “flawed”, and “a prosumer product and nothing more” just makes you look silly. Tape is a legacy medium. Solid state Pro HD cameras have been here for 5+ years and are now mainstream. If you’re laying the foundation of NLE for the next 10+ years, why would you bother spending engineering resources supporting something that is going to disappear in less than 5? Avid and Adobe are both going to have to adapt to this situation in the coming years, and when they do, Apple will already be several years ahead of them.

        [Reposted without direct links, since the moderators appear to be asleep at the moment...]

  • Jresse

    You see Apple does have a good relationship with Adobe, here a bone now let’s see how long they can hold on to it.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/3M7U73TMW54LPZ5C25ZXU6BTTY Adam Chew

    I have to admit I don’t do video editing and have not tried FCP X, many are saying it is the prosumer version of FCP and felt insulted by it being a pro product.

    I remembered that there are people saying similar stuff about the Macbook Air and three years later it is the must have laptop.

    I am not saying FCP X will be like the Macbook Air and if editors think Apple is doing them a disservice by introducing FCP X well they can try other similar products from Apple’s competitors.

    But one thing I can say in three years times FCP X with third party apps will make it s must have for video editing but for those who can’t wait adios dudes.

  • Purplepickle

    Real editors use Avid.

    • http://www.acid-product.co.uk Ian Davies

      Douché

    • Michael Brassert

      Real editors edit video tape, film, media whatever.  It doesn’t matter what they use.   I stopped using Avid as a tool in 1995 because Media 100 was better.  I stopped using Media 100 in 2001 because FCP was better.  I stopped using FCP in 2011 because PP was better. 

      I always thought David Lean did a great job without anything but a moviola and film.

  • Desmond

    Hey not everyone bought CS5.5 Production Premium with the SWITCH code to use Premiere Pro :) I bought a few copies for After Effects and Photoshop.

  • http://www.acid-product.co.uk Ian Davies

    How long does it take to get a comment with links in moderated around here?

  • Anonymous

    This article tells me nothing. 45% means how many users? If they had only sold 20 copies to Mac users last year, and sold 29 copies this year, that would be a 45% growth. So % is meaningless in this case. If we were talking about % of Mac users who switched, that would be meaningful. Just PR BS from Adobe.

  • Steven

    Why do guys have to boil everything down to which team you’re on? I’d go with the company that has the most to gain from you being successful in your professional business. Adobe doesn’t sell computers or gadgets, neither does Avid. Apple is the richest corporation in the history of the world – do you think they give a hoot about video editors? Their profit margin on FCPX is what?  

  • Christian Jadot

    Uhm… every now and then I still get 3/4th video tape from a client from products done years ago. So legacy mediums are still relevant, and will be for a long time. Granted tapes will play a lot smaller role, but it will take 10-15 years if not more to completely rule them out, and by that time FCPX will be out dated. Heck I had to go out and get a DVD player for a client, because he still wanted his product on VHS!!!

    I do feel FCPX is very limiting in other aspects. There are too many presets, with out enough user options. It may make it “easier”, but it takes away the power of the user.

    God I hate magnetic timeline.

  • Michael Brassert

    I have been editing on NLE’s for twenty years and FCPX does not work the way I think.  I don’t see ever using it.  Some people will.