Even Apple Is Ashamed of Final Cut X

Even Apple Is Ashamed of Final Cut X

A little over four years since its release, Apple's Final Cut Pro X hasn't quite comeback to its prominence in the professional video editing industry it once held. To the point that even its creator, Apple, is abandoning the software in its workflow. 

I still remember the day I decided to switch from Windows to Mac a few years ago. Being an avid video editor at the time, I was very excited to open one of it’s signature applications, Final Cut Pro. I heard so many great things about Final Cut… then I started to use the program. Needless to that was the last time I used Final Cut Pro X. After a day of use, I immediately switched back to Adobe Premiere Pro. 

Now apparently Apple itself doesn’t favor using their program, Final Cut Pro X. One of their job postings surfaced showing its requirements for an Assistant Editor position. While there is in-depth editing knowledge and experience required for this position, one specific application doesn’t seem to be involved:

Final Cut, nowhere to be found, essentially a waste of memory space for many video editors alike.

The once heralded video editing program left many disappointed after its release in 2011. While Final Cut Pro X does serve a purpose at the consumer level, it simply does not meet the demands of the video editing professional. That being said, this surfacing isn’t the best look for Apple. 

[via The Verge]

Log in or register to post comments


Michael Comeau's picture

This is overly melodramatic.

The job in question was at Beats by Dre, which was acquired by Apple.

Odds are, Beats by Dre had plenty of highly complex editorial/production processes in place that are not easily switched.

Or, their particular workflow could simply be better-suited for Premier.

That doesn't mean Apple is ashamed of Final Cut Pro X.

Yeah, it sounds like the opinion of someone who was understandably upset when the software launched and hasn't seen or used it even remotely recently.

Nick Pecori's picture

You're exactly right. Just an opinion. I'm sure they made refinements and everything. I was a fan of Premier before using FCPX and still love the freedom to integrate from other Adobe apps.

You should take another look. A LOT of big improvements made in a relatively short amount of time. And they didn't charge for any of them (not that they should).

dred lew's picture

What a tool. “I'm sure they made refinements…” Flat out admitting that you have no clue what you’re talking about. Professional troll.

Some high-school senior with a goatee and his friggen cap on BACKWARDS... LOL!! Nuff said.

Clearly knows ZERO about X, feels terribly threatened by it (as anyone is by things they don't grasp even the slightest), and jumps at every chance to feed his pathetic little confirmation bias. Yeah... what a PRO!! lol We definitely should be listening to HIM and his cheap click-bait malarkey! :-))))

Django G-S's picture

What's with the personal attacks on this dude? Pretty unprofessional...kinda like FCPX. OHHHH!!!! Srsly though.

Mauricio Martinez's picture

I can tell that this is not true at all friend . First of all, final cut did its renew interface years ago so complex that havnt had to make a big upgrade, second the price that is now on virtual store is actually big but not very very expensive and plenty of clients bought it making it a success product, and if you own the software youll notice that evey month they make updates .. But also at your side, i can tell the export and the Dvd menus are quite with a bit limitation of creativity. Cheers just sharing thoughts .

Chelsey Rogers's picture

FCPX is probably the worst editing software out there, it reminds me of Windows Movie Maker, or iMovie... I miss FCP7.

michael andrew's picture

iMovie is great. I use premier now but loved iMovie, short sweet and simple

Chelsey Rogers's picture

Please tell me you're joking...

Please tell me you're joking. I feel like hate for X has become trendy after it's poor launch.

It may not fall under "industry standard" style NLEs but it can handle any media you can throw at it better than all the rest (second maybe to premiere). I hated it at launch too, but Apple has made a lot of changes.

I recently gave it a second try and once I got the hang of the nuances I felt myself having fun while editing. The interface has a flow to it that I had never experience before.

If you're basing your critique on the initial offering I highly recommend you give it a second chance.

Kevin Grace's picture

Try editing 4k multi cam on premiere or FCP7, you will be waiting till armageddon

When I was first getting into video so many people told me that Final Cut was the industry standard and I should switch to Apple for this reason alone. I'm so glad I didn't fall for that.

Brian Rodgers Jr.'s picture

I had a decision to make when I got into video just over two years ago. Final Cut Pro X or Adobe Premiere. After using both, Adobe just made for sense for me, even as a mac user. It just integrates so well with the Adobe Apps we already use as creatives and I felt right at home.

I've always wondered why people used Aperture as well. I tried it over and over again, but ultimately I decided to use Lightroom instead. Aperture is no longer being supported....I wonder what Chase Jarvis uses to process RAW files now?

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to see Logic Pro go away either in favor of Garageband. Apple makes way more profit on consumer products than pro software, so it makes sense from a business standpoint that they would focus on that. Not saying Apples software is not powerful, because it is. I freaking love Garageband. But it does suck to not see them continue to build on pro software that so many people had relied on for a long time

In my opinion, it's really hard not to love the Adobe Creative Cloud, it's almost everything you need as a creative and they keep making it better. Photoshop CC bugs suck though

Charles Coleman's picture

Well considering I've cut over 50 televised ads in FCPX, there's a professional Hollywood trailer editor who uses both premiere and FCPX (and hands down prefers FCPX) fcpxpert.com , and the fact that Adeles most recent award winning album that just came out was mixed in Logic Pro. I'd say Apples pro software is here to stay

Brian Rodgers Jr.'s picture

I'm not saying that it's not great software or anything. And I'm not saying that some great things haven't been made using that software. I've used Logic and really like it. Hell, there's a lot of video professionals that prefer Avid. It really comes down to preference. Personally, I love the apple interfaces. I think from a UI standpoint, they look amazing. The only thing that sucks is that over time, I feel like Apple has been more concerned about the consumer market, and less about professionals who use their software and hardware. But it is what it is.

Nick Papadopoulos's picture

We're glad you like your blue scissors better than the red ones. Software is simply tools one can use to create whatever is in their vision. For a change, try hiring people here at f-stoppers that write articles about methods to make this vision come to life instead of fuelling traffic and misconceptions about software.

Charles Coleman's picture

Doesn't Ted talks only edit their talks with FCPX? It's being used by professionals daily. Don't let other professionals tell you it isn't usable. I've put over 50 hours editing in both monthly FCPX is a much better experience than Premiere

Marius Pettersen's picture

FCPX should be renamed iMovie Pro.

Spy Black's picture

It was. By professional editors.

This is clearly a click-bait article, for both you and The Verge. As Michal Comeau mentioned the job posting wasn't for Apple, it was for Beats by Dre, who most likely already has it's own creative team in place who was already using Premiere and Avid.

Also, the "article" links to it's own older articles from 3-4 years ago so it's examples are surely out of date. FCPX has gone from 10.0.0 to 10.2.2 so plenty of things have changed.

Another thing to take into account is we don't know what workstations the Beats team are using, if they are on Windows, which could be the case because don't forget they were purchased by Apple not long ago, then FCPX is not an option right now.

Like the article I'm speculating because neither you nor I know all of the details. However the article is clearly biased because it outright speaks down on the software; "dumbed down program" really? When the writer of The Verge article (@kwameopam) was called out on Twitter for more information all we heard were crickets.

To just copy and paste someone else's lazy article, who also didn't look into the facts or provide any alternative theories is just that, lazy.

Yours truly,
A FCPX user for 4 years ;)
[Premiere for 6]

I can't believe this isn't an old article. Have you used FCPX recently? Apple has made a million free updates that brought it up to date a long while ago now. What do you want FCPX to do that it currently doesn't do?

For the record, I use Premiere and FCPX for paid work. I do prefer premiere at this point, but honestly FCPX is damn good and has a couple of things above Premiere depending on what you need to do.

Nick Pecori's picture

Fahnon, I have answered similar questions in other comments but at the time I was struggling to integrate Adobe After Effects into FCPX along with other apps Adobe offers. Also, I would also have to work around converting my video file types since FCPX did not support .MTS at the time among other reasons. Premier Pro didn't have any of the issues, so from my perspective it was a "if it isn't broken, why fix it" decision. I'm sure FCPX has improved over the last few years, at least I would hope so.

Understood Nick. I'd hope you'll consider changing the tone of the article because it's clearly (as I guessed) thinking about the program as it was a few years ago. I think a lot of editors tried it, hated it, wrote it off and never thought about it again.

They bungled the launch, no question, but it's been a long while now.

Eric Lefebvre's picture

Don;t know if you remember the system shock people got when Final Cut changed ... here is Ryan Conolly's reaction at the time (2011).


The issue is that you can't make that kind of jump to a program and not expect people to abandon it.

Not being able to open your existing files?!?!? That's not an upgrade!

Here were his thoughts when he switched to Premiere (CS5.5 ... again 2011)


Side Note: Vegas Pro user here. :p

Nick, you say:

"While Final Cut Pro X does serve a purpose at the consumer level, it simply does not meet the demands of the video editing professional."

My question is, what's your definition of a video editing professional?

Nick Pecori's picture

Adam, I'm sure refinements and upgrades have been made since using the software (over 3 years ago). But when I used it, it had an iMovie "feel" to it. I was not able to integrate Adobe After Effects smoothly, Apple's Motion just didn't seem to meet After Effects standards.

Also, FCPX did not support my .MTS (Sony Video) file type at the time and had to use a 3rd party app just to convert my files. Meanwhile, Adobe Premier performed those functionalities without 3rd party apps and the ability to integrate ALL Adobe programs (After Effects, Photoshop, Audition, etc.)

Again, I'm sure FCPX has made improvements, but this is just my honest opinion and decided Premier Pro was a better fit for my workflow. Thanks for reading.

No problem Nick, just felt weird that you stated that FCPX is not for a video editing professional when there are many professionals who do use it, actually a true professional knows how to all of the NLEs IMO. So what you could have said was it doesn't work for you.

To me FCPX does not feel like iMovie, because anytime I've used iMovie it just doesn't work the way I think it should, where FCPX does. Of course this is my experience, not everyones.

When I used to work with .MTS files I would convert them anyways so that we could preview the thumbnails and utilize Quick View in the finder. The conversion itself only takes minutes at most.

In the end they're all tools and there's no problem with knowing as many as you can. The less you know the more money you leave on the table.

Kevin Grace's picture

False Statement

The Truth is many companies including large broadcasting companies are switching to FCPX

Notice Scripps Broadcasting

Here are a couple of good articles on this. Their test at WXYZ in Detroit was so successful they are rolling it out to all their stations in the U.S.

Apparently many news organizations have used a special variant of Avid called NewsCutter, which has been discontinued. Stations' only option is get Avid Media Composer with a NewsCutter add-on pack to add back the lost functionality. That is about $1,800 per seat.

Apple's licensing policy for FCP X says you can use it on up to 10 machines, and it's $299. I don't know if that was a factor in their decision process or not.



More comments