Conan O'Brien Mocks Final Cut Pro X

This was funny. And on target.

I think Apple should have included legacy support. At least for a incremental version or two.

Eventually all will upgrade, but $$ makes stuff a big deal.


And i do believe Apple will release support patches. So all will be calmed.

But LOL at Apple for not thinking of that, or at least making users aware before hand in a obvious way.

The backlash is acceptable but anyone who thought the software would be pro-ready from the very beginning, is not a pro after all.

You have got to be kidding... I think everyone thought it was going to pro ready from the beginning. The name of the software is final cut PRO!!! It is used mainly by professionals. Sure they are a few out there who have it and use it on occasion. However, this is not an iPad or iPod. This is something that people make their living off of.

The professionals Im sure were well aware that everything was not going to implemented on version 1. Totally get that. If you were expecting this perfect product, they are not a pro. However, we expect and we demand that the even in the first version of "pro" software, there are some pro features.

Look around, there is no one single pro feature in FCP X. Im defining pro features by features that lets us work in real environments. Sound, score, color. This isnt just about the big film guys, its about everyone who needs features to let them finish there product.

Apple has pissed on all the features that made FCP 7 great and great to work with in an environment with more than one person. I know so few editors that work in a complete bubble.

I can see why there is a backlash among industry experts and other pro users of the software.

Isn't this the same thing Apple did with OS 9 -> OS X.

I wasn't using those operating systems then but listening to a lot of people, I've come to know that this is a very good analogy to the present state transition of FCP software.

The whole thing is absolutely new as Apple believed that they couldn't implement all the upcoming new features in the previous release.
Features will come obviously but they are going to take time.

But Apple believes that they needed a fresh start for this software to head for a good future.
The backlash is acceptable but anyone who thought the software would be pro-ready from the very beginning, is not a pro after all.
There's obviously a learning curve to new software and as I see it people knew about it. So by the time, you wait to learn the software and adjust to it, Apple is going to push some strong updates to make this worthy for the future.

I can see people being pissed about it. But I think, consumers have lost patience; they always want a perfect product for perfect price. Sad but true.

All true but it doesn't explain why Apple had to discontinue FCP 7 and Server right away. Why not keep selling and supporting them until this new software becomes more mature

I don't use Final Cut Pro

Then please, don't comment on it.

I laughed. And that is all that matters. Good day to you.

Apple stopped selling OS 9 when they released OS X.

As for FCP 7, they haven't stopped supporting it yet. There's no need to sell FCP 7 as FCP X is already out.

That's not 100% true - they shipped 9.X with the first versions of OS X so you could run the Classic environment (I think that was System 9.2).

I can see why there is a backlash among industry experts and other pro users of the software.

Isn't this the same thing Apple did with OS 9 -> OS X.

I wasn't using those operating systems then but listening to a lot of people, I've come to know that this is a very good analogy to the present state transition of FCP software.

The whole thing is absolutely new as Apple believed that they couldn't implement all the upcoming new features in the previous release.
Features will come obviously but they are going to take time.

But Apple believes that they needed a fresh start for this software to head for a good future.
The backlash is acceptable but anyone who thought the software would be pro-ready from the very beginning, is not a pro after all.
There's obviously a learning curve to new software and as I see it people knew about it. So by the time, you wait to learn the software and adjust to it, Apple is going to push some strong updates to make this worthy for the future.

I can see people being pissed about it. But I think, consumers have lost patience; they always want a perfect product for perfect price. Sad but true.

I read through all of the postings here and while some good comments were made, there were too many comments made by people who clearly do not understand the impact this software has on the film/tv industry. Or rather...lack of impact. I have been using FCP since 2001, but since becoming a working professional in the film/tv industry, I have only been using Avid. I still use Final Cut for web based side projects...but not for professional use and FCPX won't make it easier...

For starters, Apple's Final Cut Pro has NEVER been a standard tool in the film/tv industry. It has been an OPTION, but the standard has and always will be Avid. Final Cut Pro has mostly been used for reality television, independent films, student films, industrials, and any other project on a shoe string budget. There are some tv shows and even films that have been cut on Final Cut Pro, but that might make up 1% of the productions that are made every year. That might be an exaggeration because I don't know for sure, but what I am saying is that Apple does a fantastic job with marketing a film that has been edited on FCP and there is such a large consumer base with Apple from the very beginner to the professional that everyone thinks that FCP is the only software used. When in actuality Avid is still the most used software used to date and is still the chosen tool for the editors in the film and tv industry. American Cinema Editors has also made it very clear that they are behind Avid and not Apple when it comes to their choice of editing software.

There were posts by people saying that the features that were taken out aren't a problem and that editors have to adapt and not be scared or something along those lines. There were posts about how this is great for the iMovie user because it offers so much more than iMovie. And that is the big issue with this release. It is completely geared toward the CONSUMER. People who are behind this release and say it is better than FCP7 have no clear understanding of a professional workflow when it comes to editing and communicating with vendors (and I'm not sure if the people who designed this software truly understand what the film editor needs).

For Apple to call this a PRO application is a direct slap in the face to everyone who truly is a professional. I don't care that updates will be made or third party software will be coming. There are basic features that SHOULD have been in this release to be able to call this a PRO application. The big features missing are:

Creating EDLs and OMFs: If you are asking yourself...well who cares? What is that anyway? Why did they need to keep that? Then you aren't a professional and really need to start understanding more. EDLs and OMFs are the only way to communicate with other vendors. In the film industry, the workflows NEED these basic features. EDLs are used to be sent to color correction facilities and DI facilities so they can rebuild the edit on their end and start manipulating the film. EDLs are also generated to hand over to the Sound houses so they can rebuild the sequences to start doing their sound magic. OMFs are used to essentially consolidate the audio into a ProTools file to be sent to the sound guys with the EDLs to help in rebuilding the sequence.

This is a very basic explanation, but by eliminating these features from FCPX, it has rendered the program USELESS in the professional world. 100% USELESS.

No multicam support: This is just plain idiotic. I am not a fan of reality television and while I know editors on those programs work their tail off and I have great respect for them, I have very little respect for the idea of reality tv. However, as stated earlier, FCP is primarily used in the reality tv world and FCPX just rendered itself USELESS for that world. Reality TV is, at the very least, shot with two cameras (sometimes as many as 4-6) and now Apple has taken multicam right out of the equation. I have worked on numerous well known film and tv shows and all were shot with two or three cameras. Multicam is the way of the world. Some shoots will do single camera, but more often than not, two cameras will be used. To remove this feature with the release of a PRO software was a huge mistake. Again, it doesn't matter that an update will eventually come. The fact of the matter is that Apple is selling this material as a PRO level software to compete with Avid and it can't even do the basic functions of what a professional needs to work.

What is also sad is that I don't even think Final Cut Pro 7 handled EDLs, OMFs, or Multicam very well in the first place. So now they have come out with a "brand new way of editing" and will most likely make things worse than they already were.

Lack of Log and Capture: Ok, this was just ridiculous. Sure, tapeless workflow is the wave of the future, but why would something like log and capture be taken out? Tapeless workflow is not fully implemented in the feature/tv world yet. Sure, the film might be shot tapeless, but the film I just worked on that shot on the Alexa had SR backups made on set. And we had to grab footage from those SR tapes because the Alexa had digital hits and artifacting that didn't transfer over to the tape. So the tape was clean and good to go.

I also work on a tv show (cut on Avid) that does everything in house. When we get our dailies (which is a multicam 3 camera shoot) we load in our tapes at the cutting room and start editing. Then when we are ready to turnover to the facility for color correction, we online the sequences ourselves. We do this because the budget for the show can't afford to use a telecine facility to do the digitizing and syncing.

Apple has now made that type of workflow impossible with FCPX and is essentially forcing a production to spend more money because Apple didn't want to implement a simple feature of log and capturing. Now in order to work with FCPX...you must shoot tapeless otherwise you could run into some very expensive costs to transfer your media to FCP format.


These are just a few of the features I felt were completely necessary to have in the release of a PROFESSIONAL software. Apple has failed their professional users. Maybe with updates they will be smart enough to implement some of what is missing, but I'm not sure how many editors will be quick to jump back on board. Not to mention learning a whole new system. Why fix something that isn't broken? Avid won't be changing their interface any time soon. All they are are tools anyway. Just because you can make a couple edits here and there doesn't make you a film or video editor. Can you tell a story without losing your audience? Can you keep your audience engaged? Can you help make sure the audience doesn't get ahead of the story? Those are just some of the things that makes an editor...not the software.

I'm a huge fan of Apple, but they are definitely losing sight of where they started and are in fact catering more toward the consumer. Obviously there is nothing wrong with that. They are still a company that wants to turn a profit. But please don't say something is geared toward the professional when in reality...this software is anything but that.

Funny sketch.

Some editors I suspect are complaining just because they don't want to change...

Can we let the whole ridiculous "Fear Of Change" straw man argument die?

It's not fear of change, it's the inability to open old sessions and MISSING FEATURES THAT ARE CRUCIAL FOR MANY USERS.

I'm not sure if that's a hard thing for some people who are clueless about video editing to grasp or if the apologists are just ignoring that fact.

Wow, that makes ABSOLUTELY no sense! Huh?? They're two entirely different beasts. If FCX blew your socks off, you shouldn't need the discontinued FCS. But you liked something so much you went out and bought something else?

Or maybe you're just completely oblivious to sarcasm.

In an ideal world all video would be digital...

I assume you mean in an ideal world all video would be tapeless. High end video has been digial for a good twenty years or more. FCX struggles with tape whether it's digital or not. And even being tapeless would only help a little bit, the missing features go way beyond that.

He must have been pretty desperate for jokes that day lol