This guy really doesn't understand what all the noise about FCPX is and what film and broadcast practices are. In that regard, I really do not understand why he wrote that article at all. It's as if I wrote an article on organic chemistry since I once read about it on wikipedia. I wrote about what FCPX vs FCP means to me here: http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=2695610
I don't understand why all these professionals are upset with Apple about FCP X. Do Not Upgrade(R). Stay on FCP 7.
Your linked post seems much more down-to-earth and level-headed than the complaints I keep seeing everywhere. If all these professionals would hold off purchasing the new version (and I suppose they will with all the negative feedback from those who have already purchased), then Apple will feel the repercussions in lack of sales.
I don't understand why all these professionals are upset with Apple about FCP X.
i think it's a combination of two things. First, obvious lack of pro features we need - even the basic ones. Second, Apple/FCP development/release cycles were known to be really slow and lacking in feature compared to competing products. This amplified the lackluster release that is FCPX IMO, since - I presume - lots of FCP guys felt let down by Apple, expectations were high, delivery was below low.
Do Not Upgrade(R). Stay on FCP 7.
On the other hand, people will stay on FCP7, of course. But, if you've read my post you'll remember that productions are budgeted and organized well in advance, and people are buying/will soon buy new pipelines for future products. Apple is not selling FCP7/Studio anymore, so people immediately start looking in other directions - even if they don't jump the ship right now.
