Rumor that Apple will sell Final Cut & Pro Apps [Archive]

Dan Carew

02-08-2008, 08:05 PM

Frank Capria writes in a post on the new ProVideo Coalition site (http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/fcapria/story/apple_avid_and_nab/):

Word on the street is that Apple has been shopping ProApps around since late last summer, and a deal was close last fall. Now such rumors have reached a fevered pitch, with ProApps apparently sold with all but the final announcement to be made. Potential buyers include Thompson, which has been on an acquisition spree of late, and would love to add an industrial strength NLE to its newsroom offerings. No one will speak on the record for attribution. Until then anything can happen, but sources say morale in the ProApps group is low. Key members of the team have been moved to consumer-focused products like iMovie. Others have begun preparing for life after Apple.

Has anyone else heard this? It'd explain why they're not at NAB. It's mind boggling to me. I wrote about it on my blog:

http://indie2zero.com/2008/02/09/final-cut-to-be-sold-by-apple-whoa/

Punchline of which is:
I was about to switch my small post-production studio from Premiere/Cineform to Final Cut--with plans to spend US$30K on Apple hardware & software this year. If this rumor is true, there's a good chance I won't make these purchases--as key developers leaving and bad morale at FC, caused by a sale, will set Final Cut back years. I was (gladly) on a slippery slope of converting from PCs to Macs, but this would be a serious fly in the ointment, on the slope...

----------------------
Dan Carew
Hong Kong
dan.carew@kandariver.com
http://indie2zero.com
http://www.kandariver.com

Matthew Rogers

02-08-2008, 08:08 PM

Apple would be a fool and I would be very mad if they did!

Matthew

Joel Kaye

02-08-2008, 09:34 PM

Considering so many people predicted the demise of AVID when they decided to skip NAB this is pretty interesting. I've heard rumors that Pro Apps were on the chopping block but nothing that indicated they were close to a deal.

Thom Steinhoff

02-08-2008, 10:29 PM

Ugh--say it ain't so. Maybe Jim should take over...

Jeff Kilgroe

02-08-2008, 10:29 PM

I can't imagine that Apple would be shopping its pro apps. To me, it makes little sense. I don't see where Apple is going to abandon their own tools that are used to produce so much of their own iTunes content. ie: Compressor.

Or maybe I'm not looking at it the right way? Maybe they are looking for someone to pick up the pro apps division and run with it as a separate entity, yet it will still be marketed and sold under the Apple label? Could be an opportunity to expand and move the software to multiple platforms too. That could be a double-edged sword for them though...

I Bloom

02-08-2008, 10:48 PM

I won't buy an IPhone if they sell Final Cut. Whose with me!!?!!!!

Corrado Silveri

02-08-2008, 10:56 PM

me.

Can't imagine the scenario.
:detective2:

Dan Carew

02-08-2008, 11:01 PM

I have a mashup dirge playing in my head: The theme song from The "It's a Final Cut World" video at NAB '07 (http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/action/?movie=nab) X REM's "It's the End of The World As We Know It". Tentatively titled, naturally, "It's The End of The Final Cut World As We Know It".
Truly hope it remains a dirge without a funeral to sing it at...:rip_1:

I Bloom

02-08-2008, 11:02 PM

me.

Can't imagine the scenario.
:detective2:

Actually truly scary. I agree. But you know what, Final Cut in someone elses hands might be more competitive. And Premiere might be the Final Cut Pro of the next decade. The only constant is change.

IBloom

Dan Carew

02-08-2008, 11:11 PM

ibloom wrote
But you know what, Final Cut in someone elses hands might be more competitive. And Premiere might be the Final Cut Pro of the next decade. The only constant is change.
ibloom,
Taking a long-term view, I agree with you. However, in the short term, this could be a real pain in the *ss for those of us getting our new Reds and trying to set up stable workflows for processing and editing Red footage...

I Bloom

02-08-2008, 11:20 PM

ibloom wrote
ibloom,
Taking a long-term view, I agree with you. However, in the short term, this could be a real pain in the *ss for those of us getting our new Reds and trying to set up stable workflows for processing and editing Red footage...

Why, what is ownership going to change?

Dan Carew

02-08-2008, 11:43 PM

Why, what is ownership going to change?

If the acquisition was done well, perhaps not much. But the original source of the rumor (http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/fcapria/story/apple_avid_and_nab/) reports:

sources say morale in the ProApps group is low. Key members of the team have been moved to consumer-focused products like iMovie. Others have begun preparing for life after Apple.
If this is true, I think it's bad for us--in the short term, at least. Fewer experienced developers means fewer Final Cut (and appropriate Quicktime) updates and bug fixes, less continuity and stability. In my corporate career I've lived through a few acquisitions, where the most talented people leave--despite the best-laid plans of the MBAs in suits. Developer and staff morale is a key factor of Red's success, and it's certainly important for Final Cut's too, IMHO.

Gunleik Groven

02-09-2008, 12:50 AM

The proof is in the pudding...

The Bad
No Phenomenon yet
Shake is crippled by every Hardware/Software update. (You can only render on 4 cores on the newest Macs, and 10-bit support for output is sort of wanishing)
When QT/System is upgraded, ProApps are temporarily crippled
No new XRAID since (???)
XSAN and Leopard is a no-no
FinalCut Server? Anyone

The good:
Redcode support
More and more big houses, film-studios and broadcasters (in Norway at least) jump ship from AVID/whatever
Color. It's a nice app.
There's not really much but video where you need the high-end Macs.

The speculation:
Jim, Jarred and Graeme seems overly excited about this years NAB.
AND are highly Apple dependant.

My partner is looking into jumping ship to Avid or setting up a Smoke suite.
And Nuke seems like a tempting beast.

Last NAB seemed so promising for everything Apple/ProApp.
But focus is evidently AppleTV/iPhone/iPod/iTunes/Thin Air

And I guess the business of laptops/consumer gadgets is a better one than towers, Pro Workflow Solutions and Pro Applications.
If it's broke: Replace it, as compared to load shouts for support.

So maybe an other owner could take better care of the customer base?
Apple's developing nice hardware for the pro segment, but is someone else actually caring for the software such a bad idea?

Gunleik

Simon Blackledge

02-09-2008, 02:21 AM

Major 3D apps used to change hand quite alot and didn't change that much :-/

Chris Kenny

02-09-2008, 02:32 AM

This rumor strikes me as extremely unlikely.

The notion that a company of Apple's size can only effectively sell products to one market at a time is silly. Frankly, I think the idea that the Pro Apps are neglected is largely the result of unrealistic expectations. To hit a few key points:

- FCS got a major update less than a year ago. Logic got a major update just six months ago. Upgrade cycles are typically 2-3 years or even longer for professional apps. Nobody could reasonably expect another major update for FCS at this year's NAB.

- As far as bugs with system updates... Adobe Creative Suite also has those kinds of problems. Anyone think Adobe's planning to get rid of it?

- When talking about a Shake replacement, the only date Apple gave was "2008". It's only February, folks.

Jay A. Kelley

02-09-2008, 02:41 AM

I can't say much here. All I can tell you is what I know... Not why:

Apple as considered selling it's proapps division for the last 5 years.

Jobs has always fought against it, but weakens every time.

The ipod and iphone have changed his stance now as apple moves more towards the consumer direction.

Standing line at Apple: "If the price is right" Good news for you Apple types is that there are a lot of requirements to the sale that make it hard to pull off. But....

It's simply a matter of time.

What? You think I stayed away from windows cause I love Gates? No... It's cause I have relatives in the right places.

Apple has no loyality to anyone other than itself. The proapps division is very expensive and makes no money.

Jay

Sanjin Jukic

02-09-2008, 02:43 AM

I think that somebody who write the rumor like this wants only to increase its website traffic.

It's just a pure rumor.

"Apple is reportedly expanding its Cupertino campus by taking possession of buildings abandoned by HP,
and in some cases is knocking down the old structures to construct new ones.
SetteB.IT reports that Apple is hiring new staff every week to fill the new areas of the campus,
since Steve Jobs does not wish to move the headquarters outside of Cupertino.
HP’s old buildings have painted-over signs, with addresses still written in HP’s typical company font;
some signs have been finished, bearing the unmistakable grey logo."

Apple just expands, renovates Cupertino campus. (http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/01/12/apple.expands.cupertino/)

http://images.macnn.com/macnn/news/0801/12-cupertino-in1.jpg

Rick Darge

02-09-2008, 04:25 AM

I think its time for me to build a Hackintosh..

Brent J. Craig

02-09-2008, 05:09 AM

Just throwing it out there, but I wonder if there are any small, upstart-like cinema companies with tons of money that could benefit from buying FCP?

Emmanuel Cambier

02-09-2008, 06:02 AM

Just throwing it out there, but I wonder if there are any small, upstart-like cinema companies with tons of money that could benefit from buying FCP?

Red Digital Cinema

Tico Llaurador

02-09-2008, 06:26 AM

There have been plenty of talk in the past about Apple spinning off its entire Pro division into a company proper to direct 100% of its attention to service that industry sector in particular (just like it did with FileMaker). If I recall correctly, the last time I heard that was when they completed the purchase of the last remaining commercial property in Cupertino, a couple of years ago. Never heard of it again.

Bottom line is, I wouldn't be surprised if they did spin it off into a company of its own. As opposed to selling its pro apps to another. That wouldn't make a lot of sense to me.

Jay A. Kelley

02-09-2008, 07:14 AM

I am not guessing here.. I said what I said with 100% confidence.

What's the big deal? I mean look at the price point vs R&D the buying of other technologies, and that the proapps are what cause 90% of macs hardware headaches.

OF COURSE they think of selling it. But the real question is, when it comes down to it, WILL THEY?

The only buyer who could really get a hold of it would be Microsoft, and Jobs would sooner pound his own nuts flat with a wooden mallet.

From a consumer side, selling FCP would be the best thing that has ever happened.

Just think:

Can use other wrappers, not just brain dead QT
The platform would open up to make it faster for 3rd parties.
PC and Mac compatible.

Adobe would be the best to sell it too, but it would cost them Premiere so that will not happen.

Can't really think of a good buyer, the boldest move would be AVID but they would have to restructure their business model.

Oh well... Whatever

Jay

Videoteque73

02-09-2008, 07:45 AM

It doesn't seem to me that Apple loves it's ProApps division too much, they seem rather slow and unpowered respect what I think it should be.

Should someone else buy them, products prices would increase and not by little... :cold: :cold: but maybe they would be more competitive and quick in the developement cycles. Someone has writen that pro apps has a 2 or 3 years cycle, it seems like an eternity for me. 3 years ago there wasn' a Red and neither HDV??

Color is a clear example. They bought it, they put it inside Final Cut Studio. Full stop. At least they could have changed the interface to a more Apple one... :sarcasm:

M.Halsell

02-09-2008, 08:55 AM

But to Apple's credit, they have cobbled together a solid set of applications within the suite. Particularly at that price point. Probably no other vendor provides the same product of equal value. This hidden cost of the software is the purchase of the hardware to use it on.

It does seem Apple internal process is to 'lift' entire development teams for use on hotter or more pressing projects. If FCS is sold on the auction block it probably can be easily polished up nicely by an excited new owner and probably ported to the other "OS" that we all know and love. Apple does have to answer to it's shareholders at the end of the day. Thankfully, RED does not at this time. Thank GOD!

Although, I do feel Apple's committment to Quicktime is important. It is still a very robust delivery system, despite it's imperfections.

But I am very excited that RED is show aggressive support on the software side. They have given us for free 'a baby Scratch' that is still 1.x. It shows alot of forward thinking. RED seems very interested in providing a complete 'turnkey solution' across the board.

We are really taking for granted the leaps and bounds RED has made despite the humble beginnings.

Jeff Kilgroe

02-09-2008, 09:39 AM

Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt.

mikeburton

02-09-2008, 10:47 AM

Dj Joofa

02-09-2008, 11:35 AM

From a consumer side, selling FCP would be the best thing that has ever happened.

Just think:

Can use other wrappers, not just brain dead QT

Jay

FCP is not tied to Quicktime when reading a file. The internal organization of a Quicktime movie in memory when read-in is in a "moov" format, as it is called. However, any file format wrappers (non-Quicktime) can be loaded into FCP if you have the right QT component for it. QT Component is an open source SDK and anybody can write a new non-Quicktime wrapper, and not just new wrapper, but any new codec to that wrapper also anytime, that FCP shall be able to load.

BTW QT is not brain-dead. In addition to the QT architecture, the QT file format is quite advanced -- MPEG-4 committee took a subset of it and appropriated for the MPEG-4 container standardization.

Mark L. Pederson

02-09-2008, 02:45 PM

I think its time for me to build a Hackintosh..
Use Skull Trail.

David Birdy

02-09-2008, 02:47 PM

I heard the same rumor a month ago...but have NO confirmation.

Mark L. Pederson

02-09-2008, 07:36 PM

What about Phenomenon? If Apple is selling off their ProApps Phenomenon (the new compositing application to take the place of SHAKE) would be gone as well. We all know that Apple bought, then discontinued SHAKE to start working on an entirely new Professional Compositing APP (Phenomenon). Interesting to see how this all plays out.
Ahhhh .... we all "know"?
Please tell me how you got ANY information about a project called "phenomenon" other than retarded mac fan rumor sites?

I will say this one more time ... there is no "Phenomenon".

Please show me your ... Apple "Asteroid".

Get over it and buy a NUKE license.

Bruce Allen

02-09-2008, 07:58 PM

Ahhhh .... we all "know"?
Please tell me how you got ANY information about a project called "phenomenon" other than retarded mac fan rumor sites?

I will say this one more time ... there is no "Phenomenon".

Please show me your ... Apple "Asteroid".

Get over it and buy a NUKE license.

Someone on the Apple Shake listserve forwarded an LONG email from "Louis Cetorelli - Manager, Shake Support".

It contained the following quote:

"Apple will no longer be selling maintenance for Shake and no further software updates are planned as we begin work on the NEXT GENERATION OF SHAKE COMPOSITING SOFTWARE. While we're excited about the innovations we can bring in the future, we understand you have a business to run today that requires Shake."

http://www.fxshare.com/shake/list_servers/shake_list/archive/9604.html

EMPHASIS MINE.

So, at the time of Shake 4.1, they were beginning work on it. Whether it has been cancelled or not is not known. But they did see fit to keep employing Ron Brinkmann for a couple years until he quite to go to The Foundry to work on Nuke.

Maybe the successor to Shake wasn't called Phenomenon? Either way, they seemed to be working on *some successor*... Offhollywood, you're a fellow in the know - care to shed any light?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Dylan Reeve

02-09-2008, 11:48 PM

For what it's worth, if it did go to Thomson (/GrassValley/Canopus) I think it could be a good thing. Their existing leading NLE (Edius) currently has better 'weird format' support than any other NLE around. It will capture Varicam at 50Hz framerates over Firewire with audio (nothing else can do that). It supports all flavours of HDV. The new XDCAM EX format. It's got great format support. It's just not a great editor. They've certainly got some good coders in house.

If it does change hands, I really like the new owners to take a good long look at some of the more fundamental functions. Media management, I/O, etc...

Mark L. Pederson

02-10-2008, 12:46 AM

So, at the time of Shake 4.1, they were beginning work on it. Whether it has been cancelled or not is not known. But they did see fit to keep employing Ron Brinkmann for a couple years until he quite to go to The Foundry to work on Nuke.

Maybe the successor to Shake wasn't called Phenomenon? Either way, they seemed to be working on *some successor*... Offhollywood, you're a fellow in the know - care to shed any light?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
Bruce -

I believe the future of compositing on the Mac platform is NUKE.

I believe Apple is putting all of their compositing resources into MOTION.

I believe Ron Brinkmann left for a reason.

Mark Allen

02-10-2008, 02:23 AM

One thing about rumors like this is it's very often true that certain things are being discussed and considered. But at ANY corporation, a ton of ideas are discussed all - the - time. They have to do that - they have to evaluate all their options and strategize. But, they weigh many factors and the majority of the time, things don't change that drastically - and usually when they do - it's really sudden with no time for a rumor.

I think they feed their consumer iLife products with technology from their pro-apps.

Note something about Logic. It took FOREVER to get a Logic upgrade to 8. So long that people started to think Apple had abandoned Logic. Lots of rumors about them just using Soundtrack pro in the future. Then... Logic 8 comes out and it's just an incredible update. It really took a lot of user input into consideration and so many details were changed for the better.... so... you know... you never know.

I think it's always good to stay aware of what's going on in the media world - but even if something drastic happened, you'd find another solution - these are just the tools. That said - I don't think FCP is going anywhere - it's earned way too much saturation - no one would throw that away.

Mark L. Pederson

02-10-2008, 02:37 AM

David Dennis

02-11-2008, 02:02 PM

Final Cut Pro, Logic and Aperture are selling a heck of a lot of 8-core Mac Pros, and not the cheapest models, either.

I think if you lose the pro apps, you lose a lot of that profit, and I don't think Steve would be keen on that. After all, he just released an extremely competitive upgrade of the Mac Pro, and I'd be really shocked if he didn't want to control the software we use on it.

And there is synergy between the pro apps and their lesser cousins. Not so much with Final Cut Pro, but GarageBand uses the same file format as Logic and is probably very similar internally. As another example, shortly after Aperture came out, iMovie developed heads up displays that were in a similar format to Aperture's.

Finally, I think the best way to launch the successor company would be for it to buy up Apple's space at NAB and do the announcement there where there would be enormous buzz and interest in their future plans.

Come to think of it, do we know who bought up Apple's booth at pretty much the last minute? I think they said they sold the space, just not who bought it.

I think it's far more likely, however, that they didn't buy the space simply because Avid didn't. They were following Avid's lead with no new version of Final Cut Studio to announce. I'm sure they will be back when there is something new.

Besides, it was just leaving more attention to you guys at Red, right? For all I know, you bought their space to showcase Scarlet :-).

D

Seán_T

02-11-2008, 04:32 PM

Bruce -

I believe the future of compositing on the Mac platform is NUKE.

I believe Apple is putting all of their compositing resources into MOTION.

I believe Ron Brinkmann left for a reason.

I'd say your bang on on every point. And speaking to a few shake artist they say pretty much the same thing, their all learning Nuke.

I was always quite disappointed with the progress apple made on shake when they bought it, they gave it quicktime support and better audio and a few other incremental improvements and that was it. Oh and they dropped the windows version.
But it could have been worse, they bought silicon grail to kill off a competitor (RAYZ/chalice). Much like autodesk did with the great 5D Cyborg.

Gunleik Groven

02-11-2008, 04:48 PM

Hans von Sonntag

02-11-2008, 04:56 PM

I'd say your bang on on every point. And speaking to a few shake artist they say pretty much the same thing, their all learning Nuke.
.

The Foundry is a great company and it's even better that they took care of Nuke. Shake without The Foundry Furnace has just a third of its potential. I stopped investing into Furnace 3 for Shake since Apple discontinued developing Shake as a host.

I'll wait until The Foundry shows a new version of Nuke that will take advantage of the GPU. It is pure speculation but NAB 2008 might be interesting in this regard. Furnace needs a new host for OS X.

Hans

Seán_T

02-11-2008, 05:34 PM

Actually Apples current active crippling of Shake as it is, gives me some hope they're preparing the road for "shake 5"/phenomenon.

Why else would they restrict renders in leopard to 4 cores and destroy the high bitrate outputs from shake (it's not really gone yet, just quickly sneaking towards the exit)

I really have come to like Shakes approach to what it does...

Gunleik
(Who don't mind Nuke. Would just like not to learn another package...)

Regardless of what happens your going to have to learn a new package. Well you could use shake for a long time to come and be fine, but to stay current you'll have to learn something new.

I doubt apple is actively crippling shake, its just called "being unsupported"

Gavin Greenwalt

02-12-2008, 12:14 AM

Kholi Hicks

02-12-2008, 12:25 AM

I think its time for me to build a Hackintosh..

Do it right and it's the best money you'll ever spend on a computer.

Quad Core Core 2 Architecture pushing 3.6Ghz Daily

4Gigs of DDR2-1000 @ 1200

4Tbs of Seagate space and counting

Smashing a Mac Pro in all quadrants including GPU... for half the price.

Leopard tomorrow.

On Topic -- Even if it happens I doubt FCP will go away. Speculation and Worry makes brains hurt! :D

Stephen Webb

02-12-2008, 12:37 AM

Would anybody notice if Apple releases a new compositor?

Nuke is so good and it's being run by such great people I can't find a reason to care if Apple is working on something or not. I can't imagine Apple doing better. I can't see a reason for Apple to develop, test and push a competitor when that same time could be put into motion and other prosumer apps.

Hmm...

Nuke costs (minimum) £2250.

Shake costs £330.

Yeah, I'd notice if Apple released a new compositor. And I'd imagine that the reason to test and push a competitor to another product is 1) They already make a competitor to that other product and 2) They want to continue serving their Pro community (you know, the one's who buy all their Pro Apps?)

Gavin Greenwalt

02-12-2008, 12:43 AM

But unlike Shake Apple would have to actually spend money on it.

Shake is like free money for Apple. $400 abandonware is atually somewhat steep.

All they have to do is print the CD and put it in a Box. It already was profitable. I'm sure it's already payed itself off.

I just can't see the bleeding edge compositor market looking all that friendly right now when you're minting cash and selling a "good enough" tool to the mass market.

Stephen Webb

02-12-2008, 02:05 AM

I'd say that's bad logic.

Apple paid a lot of money for Shake and all they've really done with it is sell it cheaper. One or two features have turned up in Final Cut Studio, but that's hardly what they bought it for.

Your argument seems to be that, because another company has a product that is very good, Apple will just not bother to compete. In which case, why would they with any of their other products?

M Most

02-12-2008, 07:28 AM

I'd say that's bad logic.
Your argument seems to be that, because another company has a product that is very good, Apple will just not bother to compete. In which case, why would they with any of their other products?

History shows that in general, Apple will usually compete by buying the company with the very good product and dropping the price by about 50% on the first release and 75% thereafter, on the notion that this will sell more computers and corner the market. This strategy has proven to be somewhat successful for them, although many of us are not particularly sure that it has benfitted the industry in the long run (take away competition and you take away choice, innovation, and collaborative development). Out of all current Apple "pro" products, only a select few were developed at Apple. Final Cut, Color, Cinema Tools, DVD Studio, Logic, and Shake were all acquired by corporate acquisitions - as was Filemaker. And some others, like Motion, were basically outgrowths of some of those acquisitions and the programming teams they inherited.

Mark L. Pederson

02-12-2008, 08:14 AM

Apple paid a lot of money for Shake and all they've really done with it is sell it cheaper.

Ahhhhhh .... totally disagree. I have used Shake for a LONG time.

But, one thing we can all agree on, it is OFFICIALLY "EOL". It's development days are GONE.

Still works GREAT - used on TONS of features EVERY DAY - a true workhorse.

But I try to always bet on the JOCKEY not the HORSE. I like companies and products with GREAT future roadmaps - RED, AJA, ASSIMILATE, NUKE, ADOBE, etc.

Gavin Greenwalt

02-12-2008, 08:23 AM

But I try to always bet on the JOCKEY not the HORSE. I like companies and products with GREAT future roadmaps - RED, AJA, ASSIMILATE, NUKE, ADOBE, etc.

"One of these things is not like the other.... one of these things... doesn't belong....."

But I try to always bet on the JOCKEY not the HORSE. I like companies and products with GREAT future roadmaps - RED, AJA, ASSIMILATE, THE FOUNDRY, ADOBE, etc.

There fixed it for ya. :clown2:

fightordie

02-12-2008, 08:40 AM

some Apple pro apps analysis that was linked from Studio daily:

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/02/12/is-apple-shedding-its-final-cut-pro-apps-at-nab/#more-1554

David Dennis

02-12-2008, 08:44 AM

At this point, I can present ironclad proof doubt that Apple is NOT going to sell its Pro Apps division.

They just introduced Aperture 2 with enormous improvements. A big highlight is integration with iPhoto, iWork and even iPod/iPhone.

You don't tie your products MORE into the Apple way of doing things if you're about to sell the division.

And the rumor doesn't make sense, anyway. Apple doesn't need the money and the Pro Apps sell millions of dollars of Macs every year.

And I think some of you are being less than fair to Apple. Final Cut Pro would not even exist if Apple hadn't taken over the flagging project from Macromedia.

I probably feel this way because I could not afford the higher professional prices you guys pay, being basically a hobbyist, but I love what Apple has done to make the pro apps more accessible to someone like me, who has $1,000 but who could not afford $10,000.

Shake seems to be following the same pattern as Logic. They buy the company, lower the price, make it Mac-only and start working very, very hard on reworking the user interface to make it "Apple". It takes a year or two of complete silence, where guys like you worry their hearts out, and then an almost totally reworked version comes out.

This has happened with the new Logic Pro, which was introduced only a few months ago, and will happen with Shake. You just need a bit more patience.

But I will admit that from the professional point of view, it would be nice to have a road map so you know they are doing this without having to rely on blind faith in Apple and Steve.

On the other hand, consider a company that does have a road map: Microsoft. How often have they managed to actually deliver on what they've promised?

D

Frank Weeks

02-12-2008, 09:19 AM

some Apple pro apps analysis:

Another interesting twist.

Mark L. Pederson

02-12-2008, 09:27 AM

Another interesting twist.

THANK GOD for all these forums and blogs so we can get accurate speculation!

Frank Weeks

02-12-2008, 09:35 AM

I'm just trying to hang on for the ride.

Gavin Greenwalt

02-12-2008, 09:54 AM

I probably feel this way because I could not afford the higher professional prices you guys pay, being basically a hobbyist, but I love what Apple has done to make the pro apps more accessible to someone like me, who has $1,000 but who could not afford $10,000.

Peple keep saying "Thank god for FinalCut because if it went away I couldn't afford to edit." but...

FCP: $1300
Adobe Production Suite: $1700 (which includes Photoshop Extended a $1000 value).
Avid XpressPro: $1500 (Note has no motion or stand alone audio app)
Avid MediaComposer: $4500

Now I will say that having a 3way race has been great for competition but when FCP was first introduced firewire capture of DV was still this new and intrigueing possibility. With the explosion of DV it was inevitable for prices to fall.

It was a lot of forsight on Apple's leadership that recognized that video would become something that your parents did on a computer. So they did a good job of positioning themselves on the wave along with Adobe and Avid... but it's not like they created the concept of desktop editing.

This has happened with the new Logic Pro, which was introduced only a few months ago, and will happen with Shake. You just need a bit more patience.

D

If you're waiting for shake's update you're going to be waiting a VERY VERY VERY LONG time. You do realize they even sell the source code now. There are press releases and everything. It's dead.

Steve Sherrick

02-12-2008, 10:05 AM

It's a wild jungle out there. Lots of moving targets, innovation mingling with pragmatic accountants. Upgrades, platforms, compatibility, oh my. A sea of opportunity, but one with unpredictable waves that can wipe you out at any moment. Anyone up for a swim?

Post is not for the faint of heart. It can be a beautiful thing when all is well, but it can really bury you if you are not prepared. Whether Apple decides to sell Pro Apps or not, I think the most pertinent question is whoever has Final Cut/Pro Apps under their umbrella needs to remember the golden rule in high level post production environments - stability is king. If I turn it on and it works every time, that means more to me than one or two new features. If you can give me both, I will support you until the end of time. Does Apple have that attitude? We know they are innovative in a lot of ways, look at why we have these apps in our home studios. But can they truly support the demands of a professional post environment? Anyone who has had clients breathing down their necks with 5 minutes before a deadline knows what that level of reliability means. If Apple is along for that ride, and wants to provide that level of service, then more power to them to hold onto Pro Apps.

However, if they are not committed to that level of support, and their research and financial projections show the biggest growth will come from consumer apps and hardware, then it makes a lot of sense for them to at least look at the option of selling. Will they? They will make decisions based on maximizing their profits. And that is not a black and white topic. There are many shades of grey, because certain product lines have indirect affects on profitability. So even if they are considering it, I imagine there is heavy debate from all angles.

I have my thoughts on what the ideal NLE company should be, but it's best suited for another time and another thread somewhere down the line.

Steve

Seán_T

02-12-2008, 10:41 AM

And the rumor doesn't make sense, anyway. Apple doesn't need the money and the Pro Apps sell millions of dollars of Macs every year.
----
D

Well if the pro apps division gets sold off its still going to be selling a ton of Macs and apple will get those sales for free with little development costs. Apple would be idiotic not to guarantee the product remains macs only in the deal.

----
I probably feel this way because I could not afford the higher professional prices you guys pay, being basically a hobbyist, but I love what Apple has done to make the pro apps more accessible to someone like me, who has $1,000 but who could not afford $10,000.

D
One of my biggest problems with FCP is that it is the everyman editing application and really suffers for it. The hobbyist, offliner and the pro finishing editor have very different needs. I'd like to see it more "pro" and less "prosumer"

Regardless the products will be around for a long time to come and a new owner would obviously bring in most of the development team in the purchase (if it happens... ya know...its a rumour...)

David Dennis

02-12-2008, 11:49 AM

Sorry about the confusion, guys. When I said "Shake", I meant "Shake's brand new successor which is being created by the Shake team." Since it is being created by the same folks, I think of it as Shake, even if it's not the same product under the same name. I'm sure they are doing this complete rewrite for a very good reason which will probably bring us a much improved application.

No buyer would be willing to guarantee that these applications remain Mac-only. That's why Apple would be nuts to sell them.

In any event, I would say that over the years Apple has treated its customers pretty well, with very strong updates, like the addition of Motion, Color and Soundtrack Pro to the base price.

I doubt that Adobe would have been as aggressive with their pricing without Apple nipping at their heels.

I'm curious, Sean - since i like to learn, and meaning no disrespect, could you tell me how Final Cut has failed the pro market - what would make it pro and less prosumer?

D

Finner

02-12-2008, 11:57 AM

I'm curious, Sean - since i like to learn, and meaning no disrespect, could you tell me how Final Cut has failed the pro market - what would make it pro and less prosumer?

I think what Sean is looking for is far less crashes. FC crashes a lot.

Steve Sherrick

02-12-2008, 01:21 PM

I think what Sean is looking for is far less crashes. FC crashes a lot.

My Final Cut 5.1.4 system rarely crashed, and I'm only a couple of weeks into testing Studio 2 on my system but it seems okay. The problems come with the various configurations, third party integration, and not running a "clean" system. There's a reason why Digidesign and Avid have been so stringent about the components being used with their systems. It allows them to be able to troubleshoot a little easier.

Regardless, as editors/content creators we need support every once and a while and that to me is what separates the quality vendors from the ones who are not as attentive to the specific needs of their customer base. I've always believed in the smaller companies that focus on one thing and do it really well over the large ones, who although they may have good intentions sometimes get over their heads. I'm not accusing Apple of being one of those companies - yet. I think we need to give them a little more time, see what their development path is going to be and see whether they truly want to own the broadcast/film post industry or if they are just trying to stay relevant. You would think with the momentum they've built up over the past few years that they would love to continue it, but good intentions can run into the Great Wall of Economics and unless those intentions have a good bulldozer along side them (a Steve Jobs perhaps?) they may not be able to make it over that wall.

I'll be keeping a watchful eye on this situation but for now I take it for what it is - a rumor.

Steve

Gunleik Groven

02-12-2008, 02:28 PM

I really can't remember last time FCP crashed on a healthy computer.

If you're talking FCS, well that's another story.
Soundtrack.... Motion... Color....

But FCP has been solid on me from 5.1.3
(I always drop the .0 updates, so I have noe experience from FCS2 .0)

Gunleik

Jeff Coatney

02-12-2008, 02:47 PM

Apple just put Blockbuster and Netflix in it's gunsights with the new Apple TV, so I'd say that keeping a developmental edge in media creation would be a key component of their strategy on that front. For me, that indicates keeping FCP and the other Pro Apps on the reservation.

MichaelP

02-12-2008, 03:54 PM

When it comes to distribution, it doesn't really matter what was used to shoot it, cut, it, mix it, etc. As long as there is a market for it, they will sell it. That's why content is king.

Michael

Thomas Mathai

02-13-2008, 02:52 AM

True content is king.

But it wouldn't hurt Apple if it was shot, cut, mixed, and distributed through their software and hardware.

Seán_T

02-13-2008, 11:33 AM

I'm curious, Sean - since i like to learn, and meaning no disrespect, could you tell me how Final Cut has failed the pro market - what would make it pro and less prosumer?
D
Ok I'll bite.
Going over the same ground thats been covered before, off the top of my head I would say improvements could be made in: Toolset, Render Speed, the ability to keep its render files when you reopening a sequence(a problem not every user has), Media Management (Avid MC is still better, I know the 1st assistant editor on a big 6hr mini series that said he would quit if the show went FCP rather then MC).

And of course the biggest problem is QUICKTIME if you could use DPX files natively that would sell a lot more FCP's to highend post houses (yes glue tools helps but its not perfect).

That being said I use FCS for all my personal projects, but I avoid it at the office because I work with clients in the sessions.