Well if you had Final Cut Pro 3 you had to pay $400 to get Final Cut Pro 4. That was the special upgrade price. If the difference between 10.1 and 10.0.9 is similar, then the cost is probably justified. It's not like Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 users got CS6 for free. It's just that Apple's version numbers are weird, that's all. They want to keep calling it FCPX. They love the X.
I would be more upset with paying for FCPX 10.0 which was definitely not ready for prime time.
I wasn't using FCP or Apple, at the FCP 3 to 4 time so I can't say how I'd see the situation.
But the way I see now is that I bought FCPX and what they sold me still doesn't work in it's entirety, they have added other stuff that I never bought for sure and they never charged me, but their description of what I bought, when I bought it, and what I have still aren't the same thing.
I'm ok with time being taken to get it all together, and understand that different people have their own priorities, but I'd have preferred they made everything as advertised straight off work fully before adding new features. And I definitely think that a company doesn't have the right to charge again for a product before, or even at the moment, it reaches the initially advertised state.
I'm ok with the time being taken as long no additional costs come in, but when it comes to Apple there are so few hardware configurations that I don't think they really have an excuse for releasing software that doesn't operate fully as advertised from a .0 release.
Even if that is only on the latest hardware running the latest OS version.
I can't think of any product other than software where any customer would accept the manufacturer giving them a product that doesn't yet work as described, then charging them again once it does.
I don't consider it a cop out, since the demand was more options at the cost of ease-of-use. And Motion is really easy to learn and use. I find the option of rolling my own effects way better than using whatever some vendor wants to offer me. Jumping back and forth between apps is not difficult, takes very little time, and gives you WAY more options than you ever had. Sounds like folks want things handed to them custom made on a silver platter.
Let's face it, Apple's direction is to deliver pro apps that are easier to use. If that isn't your cup of tea, there's always PPro. I don't think anyone cares what you use any more, as long as your results make the customer happy.
As for the "advertised state" or working as advertised, what does FCPX not do that Apple claims it will?
And I and others have said this before. At NAB 2013 Apple did say in their presentations that they would only charge for an update when it was warranted and appropriate. That is what they said, so yes, I am willing to pay for an update according to what Apple told me and others first hand they'd do; when is is warranted and appropriate.
Animation, the ability to animate effect, title etc parameters is a joke and is in much the same, almost non existent state as on initial release.
I really do get that FCPX is a great NLE, it is. I also see the work being put into it, but I just don't understand how I am reading comments relating to anyone being happy to pay for an update. I'd understand that people will pay for an update but not without care.
I think it's terrible that we've let the world get into a state that it's common for software to be sold for hard earned cash in a half baked state.
FCPX isn't the fully baked product with plenty of room for feature additions that it should be. It's a half baked pie. I wouldn't give a baker payment for a half baked pie and then pay him again when he finished it off because it smelled good when he first gave me it.
I'd buy his fully baked pie and then pay again if he added a new ingredient to enhance the flavour.
I just don't think Apple (or any other company) has the right to charge any more money for FCPX (or their software) until every feature that appeared in the initial release is complete and functional. And further than that, as many people waited until after the initial release to first pay their hard earned cash any additional features introduced at any point before the first payed update must also reach the same state if necessary.
And just to be clear, that isn't that they have the right to charge again for the release that does so, but that the previous release before any additional charge must get there.
I have good reason for my thinking. If an individual pays for a version of an app they will then at least know in good confidence that they will get to the fully working state of that app without needing to pay again.
Only then on a paid update will they have the true decision as whether to stick with their fully working version or pay for the new features in the new version.
If it is the paid update version that gets to the working initial version then its not a real consumers decision, it's "will I not pay and continue using my incomplete version I already paid for, or will I pay the ransom for the rest of what I have?"
I just see my thinking as a reasonable compromise to allow the big companies the bit of leeway they seem to need. The consumer should be buying a completely finished product and I don;t think it's too much to ask.
ejis1979 wrote: I don't know if you guys remember this. About few months ago, Adobe Premiere Pro had released new updates with lots of features and bug fixed on the same day event of NAB Show 2013 in Las Vegas and that time, they didn't charged more to their users for that update.
So, why FCPX will have to charge their users for 10.1 update? Why they can't just like give the next update to all FCPX users for free and we'll be all happy,Right?
Anyway, like what I posted a comment before, if the new features will worth $300 or half price for the next update, I'll still buy it. But I'm still hoping that FCPX developers will give us this next update (10.1) for FREE! Unless, if next Final Cut Pro will become a version 11 or 12 and that's even more SURPRISING! ...lol
I'm not sure what you're referring to. Adobe's NAB Premier Pro feature upgrades were only a preview. Nothing was released at NAB.
All the functionality they previewed there was ultimately released with the CreativeCloud version of Premier a month or so ago. While there was no "upgrade" price, the only way to get those features was to subscribe to Creative Cloud- so it definitely didn't come free.
Redifer wrote: I find this answer to be kind of a cop out. I don't want to be jumping back and forth between apps.
I completely agree with you here. In this specific instance [BadTV] really useful controls were stripped out. Bringing Motion into the conversation is completely irrelevant. The type of person who's going to use a standard plugin is not necessarily going to be a motion-graphics person. Saying that if you want the control of the old effect you essentially have to build it isn't tenable.
But I don't think this is a concerted effort on Apple's part. Some plugins have seen their capabilities expanded and improved [Drop Shadow].
Redifer wrote: I also don't get it when people say FCPX is sooooo much faster. Faster at what? What kind of projects are you doing? I use both FCPX and FCP7 and I'm still much faster at FCP7. I like not having to render in FCPX but as far as building the project itself I don't find it any faster, but instead slower.
In my own personal experience, FCPX is much, MUCH faster for ingesting, organizing, and finding footage. The deep Metadata organization system is a SUPREME step up from Bins and sub-clips. No question. I hate having to do anything in 7 now for that alone.
On the editing side, I find once I've set up a sequence with clip connection placed appropriately, that mucking around with an edit is infinitely faster. Getting in and making edits to complex timelines in 7 was a process of draging out selections for large chunks of audio video [or using "select to end", then manually deselecting all the crossover elements I didn't want to move, then making my timing changes, then doing the same thing to move everything back. I was a pain. Now, because all elements are connected, all you have to worry about is making your timing changes to the primary storyline- all the connected material follows along.
Now, as you say, the way this works is the trackless timeline and elements will make moves to get out of the way for these changes to happen without conflicts. And what suffers here is the visual organization of the timeline- unquestionably. I'm really... REALLY hoping that this is addressed in this next major version with ROLES being used to organize the timeline hierarchy- so you'll no longer have SFX migrating up into your VO, etc. The compromise should be the flexibility of the Magnetic timeline, without the lack of organization we currently have.
I guess it's all personal preference and what you're used to. If you haven't used FCP7 for a while it's going to seem unfamiliar enough to be unpleasant. I'm used to both since I'm using both all the time. I don't find the organization in FCP7 to be an issue, in fact I prefer the folder setup and the ability to nest folders and color-code them. I also like the ability to animate much better in FCP7 as I can control keyframes on any aspect that has a keyframe. I know I know, many people want to reply with the mantra of "DO IT IN MOTION". I don't want to do it in Motion. Why do I need two apps to do what I could do in 1 app before? That's not to say FCP7 is perfect. Not by a long shot. FCPX's code is much more optimized and that makes a huge difference.
I keep forgetting to unsubscribe from each thread I post in. My e-mail really blows up sometimes. Is there a forum preference that lets me automatically not be subscribed to a thread I post in? I'll have to check.
EDIT: Yes, yes there is. Fixed!
It's not familiarity. I've been a Final Cut Editor since 2002, and I have legacy jobs that keep me in the app fairly regularly. So my experience comes from day to day comparison. My productivity is way up in the last year- personal experience as you say....
FCPX's key-framing definitely needs work, but 7's was never great either. The ability to only smooth some keyframe elements was always very frustrating, and often drove me to Motion for more control. Hopefully FCPX will get it right in another version.
I think the whole reason a lot of us would be excited to pay for an upgrade is because we feel that a paid upgrade would be a major upgrade of the software. I don't think we're gonna have to pay just because it's a 10.1 update, but because it is a significant update that will bring more power to the program.
Thinking about it I really don't understand the question.
It implies as some posters confirmed that the customer is entitled to a free update until he/she is satisfied with the product. Come on. There is a 30 day trial period. Don't like it don't buy it.
If you did and as it happened until now all updates including feature additions are free for 2 years for $300 I think you have a good deal. How many things have you bought in the last 2 years that get free updates?
If the software helps me making money of course I pay for updates. If it doesn't I don't.
I'm sure if Apple would pay you for using FCPx there would be people now who argue about should we increase our fee for using the next update as Apple makes us iron out the bugs...
The fact that we know an update is coming is more that you can usually expect from Apple. If Schiller hadn't made that casual comment during the MacPro keynote, we'd really be biting our nails after 10.0.9 (the 3rd maintenance release in a row) was released.
But they did give us an announcement, and a timetable of sorts, should the version be tied to the release of the MacPro- which we know is coming "Fall".
Oh yes I had the same feeling with you at first for its magnetic timeline. I hate all my clip orders being changed after I moved something in the timeline. But ultimately I see the problem from myself other than the software. You might probably wanna watch some tutorials for FCPX to figure out how it really works. Yes it was tricky to do the adjustment but this is how it saves time for you when you handle it.
I most certainly would pay for an upgrade. I think it would be another strategic mistake if they charged at this point.
Us here, even those somewhat critical, may not be a far sampling of those who already purchased it. While those who haven't purchased it yet may jump right in.... after the trial, assuming the improvements and new features are anything like we anticipate. Us veterans who already see the value will also part with our loose change for another big jump.
So where would the lose be? I can't help but think there's a substantial number of people who did buy it. Played with it for a bit and decided it wasn't ready yet. That group, waiting to see if it'll ever meet their needs, finally see a version come to fruition that finally hits stride, only to be hit with another $300. I think that would leave a sour taste. I don't think Apple can afford another round of bad PR on the web.
I'm sure we here can reason out why people shouldn't react that way.... but they will. It'll be bad PR for a good product. It would especially important if Apple hopes the upgraded FCPX moves a few MacPros.
Of course if not know when be the the paid re-purchase (after all there is no "upgrade")? Probably another year away as they finally hook in many more people into the FCPX ecosystem and some MacPro sales along with it.
We here might think logically but when it comes to sales and marketing there's a large group thinking emotionally and they have big impact on perception. When there's MacPro sales at stake. Apple can't risk a paid upgrade at this point.