![]() ![]() The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously. ![]() Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These reviews were served first when searching for Final Cut Pro X on July 19. Something Apple clearly wants to achieve. At the same time not naming the product Final Cut Pro would show to the professional consumer that there now is a product beyond iMovie that is not as hard to use as Final Cut Pro was. That way it would have been clear to the professional market that they should switch to another brand, without letting them buy Final Cut Pro X and be double disappointed. ![]() In stead, Apple could have simply named the product iMovie Pro as many have suggested on their product reviews on the Apple Mac App Store. But it is not smart to let your previous target audience believe you still make a great product for them. Clearly, for whatever reason Apple is not after the professional market and that is of course totally fine. ![]() Unfortunately Final Cut Pro X has little or nothing to do with the previous Final Cut Pro 7. A consumer expects all of these to be photoshop. And note, consumers can only rate after they purchased the USD 299 product:įor any Apple product these are not normal ratings, far from it! So the question is could it be that the name positions the product wrong? I think partly it is. Products considered to be used in the home environment, not by professionals…Īs a result of all of this the product is rated really bad on the Apple Mac App Store. iMovie is Apple’s entry video editing product that is part of iLife. At that time a dialog is presented to import iMovie projects. Professional editors get even more the feeling that this is not a Pro product when they launch Final Cut Pro X for the first time. To name a few: importing of video projects from version 7 to X does not work (hey? why do you call it still Final Cut Pro if it cannot handle Final Cut Pro files?), multicam editing (hey? isn’t this a Pro feature?) and many more. They build Final Cut Pro X from the ground up as a new product, leaving many features desired by the Final Cut Pro 7 audience out. To sum it up with two words, the expectation was nothing less than total awesomeness.Īpple however decided to do things differently. Here is a test for all readers… by just looking at the name and without possibly any prior knowledge of Final Cut Pro… what would you expect of Final Cut Pro X as a successor of Final Cut Pro 7 ?Ĭould it be: everything from version 7 and much much much more… including some super new innovations in video editing (why otherwise use the X in the name)? This expectation building was happening inside the community. It has been around since 1999 and is used by many filmmakers.Ī couple of weeks ago Apple launched the long-awaited successor of Final Cut Pro 7, called Final Cut Pro X. The core product inside this suite is Final Cut Pro, a video editing product. Since 2005 Apple has sold a professional video and audio production suite for OS X named Final Cut Studio. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |