[kenjackson]

If this is Apple's thinking, I think they're in serious trouble. It sounds to me they're taking how they build the iPhone and iPad and applying it to FCP, and it doesn't work.

There are two types of people: People who pay for video editing software and those that don't. I actually paid for Adobe Elements a few years back. It was painful, but I needed it for a specific reason. But I seriously doubt I will ever pay again (unless it's $2.99 or something). Most people will be fine with iMovie or Windows Live Movie Maker. It does 99% of what you need and braindead simple.

My wife (and her friends) regularly record GBs of video each week. The problem is that nothing in FCPX fixes their core issues -- most revolve around video management, and not actual editing.

There are amateur video editors out there, but I don't think its a growing market. It's not small, but I think Apple is making a poor bet if they think the millions of ppl creating video with their phones and cameras is going to buy this product.

[rdouble]

there are amateur video editors out there, but I don't think its a growing market. It's not small, but I think Apple is making a poor bet if they think the millions of ppl creating video with their phones and cameras is going to buy this product.

This is quite possibly the most wrong comment I've ever read on hacker news. every kid on earth with a skateboard or snowboard or BMX bike will be buying this software as soon as they can afford it.

[kenjackson]

Funny you say that because my neighbor has a half-pipe (apparently, that's how it's spelled) in his backyard and I've never heard his son talk about editing video with FCP. And he actually does have a fair bit of video, as he uses a helmet cam.

But again, for him its usually management (I actually recommended something I saw called Project Odessa to him -- not sure if he's using it though). He does super simple titling, and on occassion a soundtrack. But he doesn't need something like FCPX. And if he did use it, he wouldn't buy it. Give him a copy, and I'm sure he'd use it (if he had a Mac), but free does everything he needs.

This isn't to say that some won't buy it (clearly the singular of anecdote isn't data), but I think its like non-free and non-pro music mixing software. Sure there is a market for it, but its just not huge.

[thaumaturgy]

I have to agree with you, even though it feels wrong to do it. I can provide enough anecdotes to start to blur the line between "data point" and "evidence": I was big into the climbing scene for a few years, as an instructor and manager of a Bay Area rock gym. There are few sports that are as self-promotional as climbing, especially in the pro circuit.

The thing is, every climber wanted to have cool videos of themselves, with great soundtracks and innovative photography and cut scenes and everything else ... but nobody -- really, seriously, almost nobody -- ever did it. Instead, they'd get to the crags and start having a good time and the camera bag wouldn't get unpacked, or the videographer would start climbing too, or, even if they did shoot for day, they never got around to any of the post-processing afterward.

I've also been to skate parks and motocross events and BMX and ... I think I could count on one hand the number of serious video recording I've seen at all of those combined.

[zarify]

Funny you say that because my neighbor has a half-pipe (apparently, that's how it's spelled) in his backyard and I've never heard his son talk about editing video with FCP. And he actually does have a fair bit of video, as he uses a helmet cam.

On the other hand, I live in a surfing town and a lot of the kids recently have been moving towards OSX and FCP for their movies (the ones that are doing it seriously anyway). Haven't seen a lot of stuff that the skaters do, since most of the skater kids I interact with at work are more into photography rather than film making.

[rdouble]

It's a half-PIPE, gramps.

[kenjackson]

Thanks. The way the kids talk nowadays, you can't really tell what they're saying. :-)

[rdouble]

No problem. I don't see how you can think amateur video editing is not a growing market. Vimeo/Youtube seem to contain a lot of evidence to the contrary...

[kenjackson]

That last sentence of mine wasn't clear. There are tons of people who will edit video and put it on YouTube. That I don't doubt. And most will use free or nearly free software to do so (in a huge number of cases, no SW at all, beyond editing on the actual capture device itself).

$300 is a lot of money to spend on any piece of SW, much less something as niche as video editing. Especially if you were to ask people what feature they want -- all of them are available in free programs.

[InclinedPlane]

I don't necessarily think that explosive growth of video editing (a sure thing, in my view) is identical to explosive growth of sales of a particular video editing suite, more so if that software develops a bad reputation (as FCPX seems to be acquiring quite rapidly).

[jsz0]

Apple can afford to take a risk with FCP because it's absolutely nonessential to their business. If they're wrong then so what? FCPX becomes iMovie 2014 instead. Not even a blip on Apple's financial radar. I do think it's a growing market because video is everywhere these days and most of it (think corporate, political, educational, YouTube, demos for products, video reviews, etc, etc) does not require very high end features. Ease of use, performance, and fast production is what really matters. That's what Apple's betting on. Even if the vast majority of people are using iMovie or whatever the 10-15% who might go buy FCPX is likely still a much larger video than high end professional video editing.

[InclinedPlane]

If they're wrong they they tarnish the FCP brand.

More than that, they tarnish the Apple brand.

That brand is one of the most valuable in the industry today. Apple can execute well but a lot of their success comes from their brand.

[rimantas]

  > Apple can execute well but a lot of their success comes
  > from their brand.

It's the other way around. The big part of the brand was created very recently. Starting with iPod and then exploding with iPhone and iPad. It's only the four years since the first iPhone appeared. Do yourself a favor, find that 1997 WWDC Jobs' talk and watch it. He knew what he was doing 14 years ago.

[InclinedPlane]

It goes both ways. Apple builds their brand via successful execution and then they extract value from their brand in the form of higher profit margins, faster selling curves, etc.

I think you may be proving my point for me though. Apple has always relied heavily on their brand, but while Jobs was away their brand took some major hits, even while they had many sound examples of solid execution. It wasn't until Jobs returned and began reinvigorating Apple (with iMac, OSX, MacBooks, iPod, iTunes, etc.) that the damage began to be repaired and the modern Apple brand began to take hold. Even so, it's taken a long time for that brand to translate into the degree of customer loyalty and trust that exists today. Apple could quite easily tarnish their brand with a few key missteps (such as foisting low-quality software on the top tier professionals in a high visibility industry) and thus reduce their profits by far more than what they would gain in sales on a shoddy product.

[wazoox]

But FCP is essential to the business of many professionals. And FCP, as a carbon, 32 bits only app, was in a dire need for a cocoa upgrade for years. Unsurprisingly, the professional crowd is not very happy.

[ugh]

In the end it doesn’t really matter, though. Final Cut’s success or failure is inconsequential to Apple’s success or failure. That might not have been true in 1999 (when Final Cut Pro was first released) but it certainly is today.

Apple’s video software people may be in serious trouble, the rest of Apple is not.