[Veltliner]

It's out - at a MUCH lower price. Color grading is included in the software, no extra "Color" application.

Apple releases Final Cut Pro X to the Mac App Store for $299.99 - latimes.com

[mduell]

And more 1 star reviews than any other rating. It's not ready. Apple is charging $300 for a beta. Actually it's not even feature complete. $300 for an alpha.

[Veltliner]

So far there are only three reviews at the app store. Two of them are 1 star.

The complaints are that it is incompatible with previous versions of FCP. So what? This is a completely rewritten application. It's possible to have FCP 7 and earlier on one's system AND FCP X.

So you can finish the old projects with the old version, and then go to the next.

Another guy comlains that the interface got simpler, and it FEELS to him he has less control.

I can't take this serious.

What I take serious is full support of multi-core, more than 4Gb ram use and 64-bit.

I don't care if some people feel less pro because FCP's look approached the one of iMovie.

A comment about missing audio markers - this I'd take seriously. But maybe they get done differently and this guy couldn't find the new way a few hours into the new application.

One guy says it's buggy - because he had a crash (no details given).

Do you have any other 1-star reviews?

arstechnica also talks about "mixed reactions" in the headline in its article - without ever relating to these "mixed reactions" :

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...-app-store.ars

So I guess we should wait for the serious reviews before we say that FCP X is "not ready", alpha, or beta.

Many people critisize FCP X because its focus is on digital content delivery. Apple does this regularly: doing away with older technology before it's really obsolete, and therefore pushing forward.

It's not been said how little support there is for Blu-Ray, but it's not been said you can't get the movie to Blu-Ray at all. And we know Apple's stance on Blu-Ray anyway.

So, summing it up, I'm waiting for a first professional review who really tests the software and doesn't measure it to old habits of long time users. Then we can see if it is FCP X, or just iMovie Pro (as one reviewer hinted)

[Veltliner]

Here are some excerpts from the LA Times article (not a review):

Originally Posted by Los Angeles Times

(...) ...the ability to fully utilize all CPU and GPU resources in any given machine.

That power comes along with a major change in the user interface, though. Borrowing ideas from the latest versions of iMovie, FCPX now sports a new "Magnetic Timeline." Clips can be easily inserted and rearranged as needed, without worrying about audio sync and other issues. Clips can also be linked with alternate views and takes, audio, and other effects to create a Compound Clip. These grouped clips can also be re-arranged at will without concern for sync or other issues. Supplementing the Magnetic Timeline is a context-sensitive Precision Editor for making fine-grained cuts and trims.

This "always in sync" seems quite revolutionary.

So the missing audio markers one 1 star reviewer mentioned may have to do with this very different functioning of the new software.

[Veltliner]

Here are the problematic points in regards to features.

We'll see what the next revisions will bring. It could be, because of the total rewrite, that the features reported missing below will be added at a later time.

Originally Posted by Los Angeles Times

(...)The new color editing and grading tools, including what Jordan calls "power windows," may replace Color for most users. But, while the built-in audio editing, processing, and effects are top notch, Final Cut Pro X just isn't capable of multi-track audio recording. Also, Jordan said, "the inability to apply effects, volume, and pan settings to a track is a huge omission."

[Art Vandelay]

Here are a few reviews for you.

Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World – Larry’s Blog
What are the Answers to the Unanswered Questions about Final Cut Pro X? | The present and future of post production business and technology

[Veltliner]

Here's an interesting article:

Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World – Larry’s Blog

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay 

Here are a few reviews for you.

Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World – Larry’s Blog
What are the Answers to the Unanswered Questions about Final Cut Pro X? | The present and future of post production business and technology

Didn't see your post until I posted. Larry's article is great.

Love that second link you posted.

[chabig]

I wouldn't take the iTunes reviews seriously. After all, the software was just released and people are "reviewing" it the same day. It's a new, high end, feature rich, product with a learning curve. It can't be "reviewed" in a day.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by mduell 

And more 1 star reviews than any other rating. It's not ready. Apple is charging $300 for a beta. Actually it's not even feature complete. $300 for an alpha.

Wrong.

You can't continue working on existing projects with it, so it's currently not an option at all for the big iron production houses, BUT:

This release is two things:

1.) a full, much more potent successor to Final Cut Express at a fair price, and

2.) a look-see-and-give-us-all-your-feedback version for production houses - at three hundred dollars, excellent value for someone looking for ways to improve workflow and help Apple build the necessary environment.

From what I hear, Apple are VERY actively soliciting feedback from the high-end user community.

In two years, it'll be great.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by mduell 

And more 1 star reviews than any other rating. It's not ready. Apple is charging $300 for a beta. Actually it's not even feature complete. $300 for an alpha.

Apple is not marketing it as a replacement for Final Cut 7 -- yet. If you read any reviews from video professionals and they have gotten the message. I somehow feel the decision not to be able to import Final Cut 7 projects is rather deliberate so as to protect people from `continuing' Final Cut 7 projects with Final Cut X.

[Eug]

Hmmm... It might be good for me, since I don't like iMovie much and wanted something stronger (for the video from my Canon EOS 7D), but not something as expensive and as complex as FC7.

However, some of the reviews and Spheric's summary are making FCX sound for pros a little too much like the iMovie '08 fiasco was for consumer video editing. BTW, at that point Apple offered iMovie '06 for free download for '08 users, which is analogous to having FC7 and FCX being installable on the same machine.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

However, some of the reviews and Spheric's summary are making FCX sound for pros a little too much like the iMovie '08 fiasco was for consumer video editing.

In other words, anybody with half a brain can see why it's revolutionary, and why the approach is absolutely the way to go, but it won't be ready for another year or two.

I concur - as far as high-end pro work is concerned.

iMovie 11 rocks, and Final Cut will for the high-end community, two years from now.

Until then, it's a vastly better Final Cut Express replacement for that target group.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

iMovie 11 rocks

Yeah, it only took 3 years to become a decent program. iMovie '08 was a total mess.

Final Cut will for the high-end community, two years from now.

Which is why it's understandable some in the high-end might be disappointed.

Until then, it's a vastly better Final Cut Express replacement for that target group.

I'm just a bit surprised I am in the main target group.

Maybe they'll release a Final Cut X Pro in 2 years?

[Spheric Harlot]

I think there's rather disparate "pro" segments. There's the big production houses that don't upgrade until *well* after something's been released, on something like five-year schedules and well-six-figure sums.
And then there's the five-man outfits that are small and nimble and have flexible requirements. That's a market that's gonna be pretty happy with this release, I think.

(actually, iMovie 09 was a pretty damn good program.)

[Eug]

And then there are the geeks like me who have no pro aspirations at all and just dabble... I'm guessing most of us will like it, although I have yet to get it.

I was never happy with Final Cut Express since (IMO) it retained the non-intuitiveness of Final Cut Pro, but just dumbed down its feature set. That and the fact there was no native support for the EOS 7D's files.

[Eug]

I just paid a visit over at Creative Cow, and not surprisingly, nearly everyone is having a... cow... over the Final Cut Pro X release. They suggest that in its current form it's for people like me, SLR hobbyists and the like, but it is unusable in most higher end pro workflows. The biggest beef is that it does not import FCP7 projects, which has caused them to question their loyalty to Final Cut, because they sometimes need to go back and revise their projects even years later.

However, the best summary was this one:

I explained Final Cut X to my wife as...

Approaching a 10 year anniversary with both my wife, and Final Cut Pro, she asked why I was so uncharacteristically out of sorts today.

I explained that in our 10 years, Ive spent nearly as many waking hours with FCP as with her, and thus there were a lot of commonalities. We've grown as a team, gotten very comfortable at executing various complex tasks, and had a lot of success, both personal and professional, with our system that has evolved. She's become more capable with age, and while there are always things one wants to change and grow in a partner, we were very happy.

"The NAB Supermeet", I explained, "was like she took a vacation at a health spa, and ichatted me videos of her looking hotter and more fit than ever, complete with sexy innuendo about all the new "tricks" she's been reading about...

FCPX then, was like she returned home to announce she was a lesbian. She had new tricks, but they weren't really for me, and if I wanted in, I'd have to do things VERY differently...

She also wouldn't hang out or work with any of our old friends like Aja and Matrox and Multiclip...good people. People we'd spent a lot of great time with...made a lot of money with. Now? She has younger friends, new and fresh and wet behind the ears. Sure, they don't know much, but she doesn't seem to care. This is now who she is, and no future plans or explanations would be given. I now knew what Ross on Friends had gone through."

My amazing wife of 10 years had a good laugh, and made me some chocolate chip cookies.

I fired up FCP 7, smiled, and got back to work.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

(actually, iMovie 09 was a pretty damn good program.)

I dunno, iMovie '11 is the first version of iMovie since the rewrite that I've been able to use without attempting to make it work for a while, giving up, and going back to iMovie HD. And I have fairly simple needs.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

I dunno, iMovie '11 is the first version of iMovie since the rewrite that I've been able to use without attempting to make it work for a while, giving up, and going back to iMovie HD. And I have fairly simple needs.

I had lots of fun with iMovie 09.

[Eug]

I didn't like iMovie '09 either, but it was an improvement.

Now I just need to decide when to drop $299.99 on FCPX just for the little dabbling I have no time for anyway these days.

P.S. I have 8 GB RAM in my iMac. I'm thinking this will be fine. Whaddya think? How much of a scratch will I likely need? I have 60 GB on my Time Machine drive as a scratch but I'm thinking that even just for dabbling I'd probably several hundred GB for an FCPX scratch (assuming it works that way).

BTW, how many computers can I install this on? I can't see the licence agreement because my work computer (Windows) doesn't have iTunes installed.

[mduell]

The apologists are out in force today.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

This release is two things:
1.) a full, much more potent successor to Final Cut Express at a fair price, and

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Apple is not marketing it as a replacement for Final Cut 7 -- yet.

Well that's funny, they typoed the name as Final Cut Pro X.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Well that's funny, they typoed the name as Final Cut Pro X.

The apologists are out in force today.

As are the people who can't take a hint (absolutely NO way to import Final Cut Pro 7 projects? Hello? How much clearer do you need it spelled out???) and feel the need to piss at Apple for doing the right thing by getting it out there.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

As are the people who can't take a hint (absolutely NO way to import Final Cut Pro 7 projects? Hello? How much clearer do you need it spelled out???) and feel the need to piss at Apple for doing the right thing by getting it out there.

I think they have every right to be concerned.

Apple has now effectively emphatically stated to the higher end NLE crowd that all their older projects are now orphaned. There is no sequel to FCP7. This is a complete restart, all prior work be damned.

[Spheric Harlot]

Absolutely.

FCP7, however, will continue to work as effectively and smoothly with all existing projects until, at some point in the future (as with virtually all formats at some point), you will need an ancient computer running a long-obsolete version of the operating system to view them.

Very comprehensive, non-apologetic "First Look" by Steve Martin:
Final Cut Pro X - A first Look

Is he an apologist for cutting the slack on a version 1.0?

[Brien]

So is it versioned 1.0 or 10.0? I've seen both in reviews.

And Apple is very legacy-unfriendly, so I would expect production house to hold onto older machines anyway.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

I had lots of fun with iMovie 09.

I tried to like it, but kept running into brick walls.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Brien 

So is it versioned 1.0 or 10.0? I've seen both in reviews.

And Apple is very legacy-unfriendly, so I would expect production house to hold onto older machines anyway.

Heh, sometimes too long. I know a guy at a print shop where some of the machines were still running OS 9 in 2004. It was for a good reason though, since it was custom software, but to end users like me it still seemed odd.

[Big Mac]

This new FCP seems to show a lot of promise but is also half-baked, feature incomplete. And the problem with Apple is that Apple's never up front about its specific plans to improve feature setts and capabilities of their products. You can assume certain things will probably be enhanced if they're really incomplete (I think back to no DVD support in Mac OS X 10.0), but there's never any assurance that your assumptions are correct.

At least Apple knew enough to allow FCP 7 to remain active on a system with FCP X installed on it. It kind of seems like the way iMovie got radically changed and was very feature incomplete, and as consolation Apple allowed new iMovie owners to download the previous version of iMovie for free for a while.

[Eug]

From Daring Fireball: The Final Cut Pro X Backlash

--

This ground-up rewrite may well have been the right thing to do. Apple seems convinced that this is a better fundamental concept for video editing — and, really, storytelling in general. But it may prove risky not to offer a transition period. Hell, even with iMovie, when they made the switch from old-style editing to the new one (and lost a bunch of features in the initial release of the new iMovie), Apple kept iMovie HD 6 available as a free download for two years. If iMovie users were worth appeasing with a transition period, surely professional Final Cut Pro users are too. If Final Cut Pro X can’t even open Final Cut Pro 7 projects, how quickly can editors be expected to switch?

--

Walter Biscardi, Creative Cow:

All in all the worst product launch I’ve ever seen from Apple or pretty much any software manufacturer. Instead of a nice suite of applications that worked well together (FCP, Color, Motion, SoundTrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro) you now have one big app that really doesn’t do all that much well. It completely ignores the 11 years of existence by giving you zero options to open older projects. We called it iMovie Pro when it was debuted back in April and quite honestly, that’s what it is.

--

Philip Hodgetts, concluding his excellent Final Cut Pro X FAQ: [Ed: Already quoted earlier]

From the answers above you should be able to see that at version 1 Final Cut Pro X won’t support some professional workflows, but for other professional workflows it will be more than capable. Using Final Cut Pro X to cut together a story, I’m struck by how fast it is to achieve a result, as if everything was designed to get a result a quickly as possible.


It's really interesting reading through the comments in Philip Hodgetts article. He seems to have a VERY apologetic approach to everything. He doesn't seem very objective at all. Then again, Biscardi from Creative Cow almost sounds like he's having a temper tantrum.

[OreoCookie]

@Eug
I have the impression that the difference between the two is that one recognizes the usefulness of the new UI concept, thinking `if it had features x, y and z that I depend on, it'd be awesome' while the other doesn't. Sort of like OS X when it launched.

[lpkmckenna]

I'm not a video editor, so this issue isn't personal for me. But I just want to post something I've seen elsewhere.

Basically, Apple replaced QuickTime 7 with QuickTime X, but QTX had far fewer features, but Apple said the missing features will show up later. We are still waiting.

Will it be the same for FCP X?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

I'm not a video editor, so this issue isn't personal for me. But I just want to post something I've seen elsewhere.

Basically, Apple replaced QuickTime 7 with QuickTime X, but QTX had far fewer features, but Apple said the missing features will show up later. We are still waiting.

Will it be the same for FCP X?

I was thinking the same thing... except that are certain features which may never come in FCP7. Also, Apple is still actively updating Quicktime 7. The 7.7 beta just came out last week for example. Will Apple do the same with FCP7?

Oh and I still use Quicktime 7, because Quicktime X is still essentially unusable... and Quicktime X is now over 2 years old.

BTW, I personally have no use for FCP7 either actually.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

@Eug
I have the impression that the difference between the two is that one recognizes the usefulness of the new UI concept, thinking `if it had features x, y and z that I depend on, it'd be awesome' while the other doesn't. Sort of like OS X when it launched.

Well, OS 9 was a total piece of crap. Everyone knew this. People had left the Mac platform in droves specifically because OS 9 was a total piece of crap.

OTOH, 10.0 was essentially an alpha, and 10.1 was the beta. Despite the fact that I bought a 10.1 machine, I didn't start advising people to go Mac until about 10.3ish.

However, that was a different situation. I don't think we can equate FCP7 to OS 9. I told everyone to stay away from OS 9 like the plague, because OS 9 was a total piece of crap. I then told people to stay away from OS X until it became mature enough, which really wasn't until 10.3 or 10.4... but even during that time Apple went out of its way to provide backwards compatibility to OS 9 applications, because as bad as OS 9 was, people still had to run them. In contrast, FCP7 is a mature and stable platform, and although not perfect, it is widely respected.

Based on the comments out there I do expect a lot of people to switch to stuff like Avid or whatever. However, this is NOT because FCP7 is crap. It's because there is absolutely no upgrade path.

Another analogy: Last year a whole lot of people were getting very, very nervous about Aperture. Aperture was a nice idea, and was actively updated. Then Aperture 2 came out. It was getting more mature, and Adobe was also ramping up the updates to Lightroom. Lightroom started getting way better really quickly, but Aperture seemed to be stuck in neutral. The guys who had converted to Aperture started getting very restless. Adobe Lightroom was crossplatform and was getting real updates, while Aperture had stalled. When Apple released Aperture 3.0 (with full backwards compatibility) there was a collective sigh of relief. OTOH, with FCP7, Apple has basically told everyone that they're orphaned and that they should just deal with it. If they had done that with Aperture 3, a big chunk of those people (including myself) would be Lightroom users now.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

I'm not a video editor, so this issue isn't personal for me. But I just want to post something I've seen elsewhere.

Basically, Apple replaced QuickTime 7 with QuickTime X, but QTX had far fewer features, but Apple said the missing features will show up later. We are still waiting.

Will it be the same for FCP X?

They replaced it on August 29th, 2009. If you've been following Lion a bit, you'll know that the answer is a resounding "hell yeah".

Like I say, in two years...

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

They replaced it on August 29th, 2009. If you've been following Lion a bit, you'll know that the answer is a resounding "hell yeah".

Apple - OS X Lion - Over 250 new features. Read about all of them.

You might not be aware of this, but QuickTime Player 7 can do quite a lot more than that.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Well, OS 9 was a total piece of crap. Everyone knew this. People had left the Mac platform in droves specifically because OS 9 was a total piece of crap.

OTOH, 10.0 was essentially an alpha, and 10.1 was the beta. Despite the fact that I bought a 10.1 machine, I didn't start advising people to go Mac until about 10.3ish.

I think you're overextending my analogy: all I wanted to say is that the early adopters of OS X (like myself, I started using OS X as the only OS when it was released as 10.0) could see the promises of OS X and how much better it could become if it matured. And it did. Then there were others, perhaps those that relied on certain pieces of software for their businesses (Photoshop, Quark XPress, Office) couldn't switch, because those essential pieces were missing. Yet others didn't like the change altogether, because they prefer the truly spatial Finder or the great Platinum theme (think thalo.net).

So in this spirit, I think some reviewers judge Final Cut X by its promising new ideas whereas others judge it by whether it is ready to replace Final Cut 7 (it's not).

Originally Posted by Eug 

However, this is NOT because FCP7 is crap. It's because there is absolutely no upgrade path.

The lack of a project importer could be on purpose: perhaps Apple doesn't want people migrating work projects, but instead, professionals should just play with it a little.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Another analogy: Last year a whole lot of people were getting very, very nervous about Aperture. Aperture was a nice idea, and was actively updated. Then Aperture 2 came out. It was getting more mature, and Adobe was also ramping up the updates to Lightroom. Lightroom started getting way better really quickly, but Aperture seemed to be stuck in neutral. ...

Actually, I hope Aperture gets the Final Cut X treatment so that it makes uses of all the cores and gpu power that is at its disposal.

[kenna]

Interesting debate, thinking of getting this and a video camera for Christmas... so it'll be interesting what comes of this release and whether people cotton on to what exactly Final Cut Pro X really is... like everyone else says, maybe FCP 7 will change to FCP 8... and this will be the Lightroom of video editing for Apple... I don't see myself as an expert on this like the rest here, but I'm not a complete noob either.

I found this release quite exciting as I was looking at FCP 7 and wishing... but realistically, it's way out of my price range, I'd rather get a MacBook Air. This however, is realistic and it's about how much I'd expect to pay for a Video Editing software package... either way, looking forward to detailed reviews in a few weeks or more.

*edit* does seem like this will be the future FCP 7, at this price, I think it's a bargain...

[Veltliner]

Of course, experienced video editors protest. They have to change their habits, forget many of the processes they learned, and have to learn something new.

The orphaned FCP 7 projects say: this is the past, the future looks different.

People always hated that.

When you go through the article Spheric has posted: Final Cut Pro X - A first Look

...you can't fail to see what a great step this software is - even if it's not completed in all its features. But, be honest: how many will need multi-cam editing? It will come in the near future, and until then those people can use FCP-7

It's also perfectly logical not to put all the features in right away, but to figure out how to incorporate them.

If you look at the audio quality, it's so vastly superior to FCP 7... (of course, many capabilities are still missing for the professional editors).

It's an excitingly risky move for Apple to cut the old stuff loose and put something new into place.

Just like they did with switching to Intel.

I don't care what "Creative Cow" moohs. I would have been disappointed if this were another step upgrade from FCP 7. This is quite revolutionary, and all those protests just fit in. In two years all of those complaining will be using FCP X - or be out of business.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

Of course, experienced video editors protest. They have to change their habits, forget many of the processes they learned, and have to learn something new.

And throw out some of their existing hardware.

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

In two years all of those complaining will be using FCP X - or be out of business.

Or will just be using the competition's products (which often have the added benefit of being cross-platform).

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

And throw out some of their existing hardware.

By the time that's due, Final Cut will be ready.

[Stogieman]

Wow, even Conan is making fun of Final Cut Pro X.

Conan O'Brien editors publicly slam Final Cut Pro X | MacNN

[Kensington]

I myself downloaded the software yesterday in the wee hours of the morning and got in about 10-12 hours of video editing time yesterday afternoon. I'm coming from Final Cut 7, so I can understand what some of the initial reactions were all about, but after using the software for a few hours I found it to be really impressive.

The speed at which you can get through an edit is astonishing. The way the new software works is the real upgrade here. Effects and transitions can be viewed prior to applying them, they can be layered on and viewed in real-time, there is auto color balancing (which saves hours upon hours of monotonous work), and you DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR IT TO RENDER!!! I could go on and on about the features that make getting the job done faster, but I would rather get back to using that software instead of trying to explain why peoples first reaction was wrong, but before I go I'll leave you with this...

The problem with the general response to the new Final Cut is that people were too quick to jump on the "Apple screwed up" bandwaggon without actually attempting to learn how to use the new software first. This is the first time in the last decade the software has actually worked different, it changed, change scares people, those people commented first and voiced their fear.

My advice is to get over it and try the new software with a new project...you'll be very pleased with how it all functions then.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Apple - OS X Lion - Over 250 new features. Read about all of them.

You might not be aware of this, but QuickTime Player 7 can do quite a lot more than that.

You know, that's just ****ing sad.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by Eug 

And throw out some of their existing hardware.

Which has to be replaced in regular intervals anyway.

Originally Posted by Eug 

Or will just be using the competition's products (which often have the added benefit of being cross-platform).

So, instead of learning the radically changed Apple software they learn a completely new software.

[mduell]

Apple just withdrew (note they don't market or sell FCP7 anymore) from the professional video editing space with a sticky note saying "we'll be back in a few years and you're going to like it." As Jeffery Harrell blogged:
It’s not “I don’t like it,” or “I don’t prefer it” or even “I choose not to make the change because it’s too burdensome for too little benefit.” It’s “Because of the choices you guys made, we literally can’t use your product any more.”

Hopefully they'll live up to their sticky note.

It sounds like a fine product to call Final Cut X, but it certainly isn't worth the Pro moniker.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

Which has to be replaced in regular intervals anyway.

Except you can't with FCPX, because it's not supported.

So, instead of learning the radically changed Apple software they learn a completely new software.

Or standardize on one cross-platform software package. I was reading some comments from shops that had a mixture of FCP7 Mac and Avid Windows, but now they're switching to 100% Avid on both the Macs and Windows.

[Eden Aurora]

the biggest complaint is that it's not backward compatible.
finish your old projects in version 7 and then move into the future.

what's the problem?

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by Eden Aurora 

the biggest complaint is that it's not backward compatible.
finish your old projects in version 7 and then move into the future.

what's the problem?

Many people don't like change.

It's a transition period.

An Interregnum of Video Editing on the Mac. I guess it will take about a year until we see a version 2 with many of the missing features incorporated.

PS: That FCP is sold as an APP at the APP store probably insulted many an editor. After a while they will get used to the fact that there are new distribution channels, and that being sold at the App store doesn't mean it's just a tiny app like an iPhone app.

[Veltliner]

Another interesting article:

Professional Video Editors Weigh In on Final Cut Pro X - NYTimes.com

It shows that most complaints are unfounded and are uttered because those editors didn't know the new software.

[Eug]

Huh? That article confirms that most of the complaints are valid. His answers to the questions are basically that it's coming later in the future from Apple or that some third party needs to handle it as a plugin even though it's basic functionality.

PS. It's funny reading that article because he makes a point of saying he's not an Apple apologist.

The more I read about this, esp. articles like above, at best Apple should have released this as a public alpha, cuz that's what it is. Or else they could have been up front about it and just said stuff like "Multi-cam support is coming. Look for it by the end of the year." or something like that.

Our suspicions seem to be correct: This is iMovie '08 all over again, and it only took three years to make that much simpler consumer oriented program actually decent.

[voodoo]

FCP X is iMovie "advanced" (I hesitate to say pro)

It's made for prosumers, it's priced for prosumers, it's pleasing to prosumers and it's targeted at prosumers. It's a prosumer app.

I can understand why professionals who depend on FCP are not happy with this version (or revision) of FCP7->X

YouTube - Conan O'Brien on FCPX

Apple is a prosumer/consumer company now. Recognize it.