Apple pulls out of NAB

Has anyone considered that maybe it really IS just costing too much money? I saw this $6million dollar figure come up a few places. That's a lot of money to be spending.

Has anyone considered this: Is NAB themselves getting greedy with the pricing of their showfloor? I understand that union labor, lighting, sets, employees, etc. are expensive, but what is NAB charging them?

And if it's not the cost of the floorspace, why doesn't Apple and Avid just simplify their booths? Are the flashy lights and big sets going to change the opinions of the hardcore users? If I were them, I would have a very scaled down booth and put a huge sign up that says "We just saved 4 Million on this booth so we can make your products better". I don't think anyone in the broadcast world would give a rats a$$. Who really cares? It's freakin Apple! And Avid! Everyone knows what their quality is like - a Booth is not going to be a representation of that. I'm just a believer that there would be a much cheaper way to get in their while still making an impact. All this talk of them not being there completely makes me want to run straight to the Adobe and Sony booths and purchase their products, cause where else am I going to see first hand all of the products we are using / want to use?
 
It would be a big mistake if Apple would leave the Pro video/photo market. The reputation of Macs being great for visual arts is well known around the globe- this is a prestigious brand recognition and if they were to lose this "brand", PC's would indeed be considered the machines of choice by opinion makers and professionals. Joe Consumer listens to them.

Its good for Apple to be "cool" to consumers, with mainstream items like the ipod, iphone, Macbook, Imac, etc. However, its their Pro Market that gives them the prestige.

Car analogy time: Mercedes makes luxurious cars with prestige worldwide, reliable, powerful and a great bang for the buck- a 300 or 200 model usually lasts for 10 to more years. But they also have the Class A Mercedes (The Macbook, or Imac), and the Ipod (The Smart series joint developed with Swatch).
 
Kit Hannah said:
Has anyone considered that maybe it really IS just costing too much money? I saw this $6million dollar figure come up a few places. That's a lot of money to be spending.

Has anyone considered this: Is NAB themselves getting greedy with the pricing of their showfloor? I understand that union labor, lighting, sets, employees, etc. are expensive, but what is NAB charging them?
Click to expand...

I think you hit the nail on the head there, Kit.
 
SPZ said:
It would be a big mistake if Apple would leave the Pro video/photo market. The reputation of Macs being great for visual arts is well known around the globe- this is a prestigious brand recognition
Click to expand...
Agreed. That's why I have been slowly moving towards a CS3-based workflow (on Mac). I have enjoyed using Final Cut Pro for the last five years. But about the only news I've heard from Apple is them calling me three times in the last year asking what kind of computers I wanted to buy from them and when. Each time I told them ways they could improve their software. So far they have not responded. I feel like they don't really care about professional users anymore. They only care about moving expensive hardware and improving their stock prices. I mean, how about making Color support 4K and letting us burn Blu Ray disc's with DVD Studio Pro? RED camera support is nice, but it's not enough to keep me buying expensive upgrades and using Final Cut Suite exclusively anymore. So what's a guy supposed to do? Hello Adobe. Bye bye Apple.

I will still continue to buy Apple hardware. I like their OS too much. But, if they really cared about professional users, they would modernize all the apps in their suite. Immediately.
 
Funny how Avid pulls out of NAB and it's Chicken Little - "the sky is falling". Poor Avid. Now, Apple follows suit and it's a 'good idea' and cost-effective.

Fair-weathered (and fickle) Final Cut fans. Almost as loyal as Apple's R&D.
 
these trade shows are really becoming obsolete and are more of a PITA than a good investment for participating companies.
Apple just joined a club that has long time members with white beards ;-)
I can see more and more of these giant convention halls being empty most of the year and the cities that were believing the hype of some convention lobbyists now pay the bills!
I for one am glad I dont have to work on these trade shows anymore and no VIP treatment would get me into such a noisy and crowded place. The Frankfurt MusikMesse is the worst of them :-)
 
Not to beat a dead horse but I will anyway. What's most troubling about this (and other pro-FCP discussion) is the prevailing notion that "Apple can do no wrong". It's some weird cheerleader thing where fervent loyalty to a software product clouds most common sense. I could care less whether Apple is at NAB. Personally, I think they'd jump at the chance to capitalize on Avid's not-being-there and really push their pro apps. I didn't realize Apple was so cash poor that a booth was going to be a red flag on the balance sheet. Sell some more iPods / iPhones.

Avid's biggest supporters / users are also their biggest critics. Sometimes we're listened to, sometimes not. Regardless, this is a much more healthy attitude to take towards a product than rah-rah consumerism. It's as feeble as trying to convince someone your favorite band is better than theirs. What's the ultimate benefit from trying to prove to someone that Final Cut is better than anything else? I don't see any coupons going out or bonus points for posting on boards.

If it makes you feel better about your purchase, then fine. Have at it. I just don't understand the equal parts defensive stance and one-upmanship that goes on with the old Avid / FCP debate. It's software. I like both apps. I also believe they both can be better. When I'm cutting, I'm not worried about who's at NAB or what their stock's doing. Apple's a big corporation. It's not in our (the consumer's) best interest to get all gung-ho and supportive about every decision they make or product they release.
 
"FCPro is kicking Avid's keister on a daily basis.
At the last NAB, Avid's booth had almost no clients in it, whereas Apples was overflowing/standing room only.
Avid announced that they weren't going to NAB at all this year.
What does that tell you?"

It tells me that Avid is still industry standard for all Post Production houses worldwide while FCP is for the indie cutter who is a highly evolved editor or a no-nonsense moron who thinks he's awesome b/c he knows how to batch capture and 3-point edit.

Sorry but Avid is leaps and bounds ahead and better than FCP.

I consider myself an editor, one who's extremely passionate about what I do, and to have some dolt buy FCS2 to "get into the business" not knowing anything really pisses me off, which is what half the people who own FCP are doing.

I use both applications, and both applications have their benefits and pitfalls. However, to say to a dedicated Apple Fanboy that Avid is industry standard might as well be punching their mother in the face. What I hate is that people who are dedicated FCP users say that it is "industry standard" is simply put, asinine. And to say that FCP holds "70% of the market" means absolutely nothing w/out a source other than "http://www.apple.com/someappleurlsupportingtheirnumbers".
 
Last edited:
AllAroundFilmLV said:
"FCPro is kicking Avid's keister on a daily basis.
At the last NAB, Avid's booth had almost no clients in it, whereas Apples was overflowing/standing room only.
Avid announced that they weren't going to NAB at all this year.
What does that tell you?"

It tells me that Avid is still industry standard for all Post Production houses worldwide while FCP is for the indie cutter who is a highly evolved editor or a no-nonsense moron who thinks he's awesome b/c he knows how to batch capture and 3-point edit.

Sorry but Avid is leaps and bounds ahead and better than FCP.

I consider myself an editor, one who's extremely passionate about it as well, and to have some dolt buy FCS2 to "get into the business" not knowing anything really pisses me off.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a personal issue.

I have been editing on Avid since 1991. Cut all kinds of shows, from national ads, to corporate/industrial films, to music videos. I've freelanced for Nat Geo and Discovery.

When it came time to get my own system, I first got an Avid Xpress with Mojo, then upgraded the software to the Media Composer.

Avid "suite of integrated tools" is laughable. Sonic DVD for DVD authoring? I don't think so.

The fact of the matter is that Final Cut can do 90% of what Avid does, and some things Avid CAN'T do.

The ONE THING I'll give Avid over Final Cut is its media management. Can't be beat.

But when I can buy a Final Cut uncompressed edit system with storage for less than 1/3rd the price of a comparable Avid, thats a business no-brainer.

In the end its not the paint brush, its the painter.

If you are a good editor, then it shouldn't matter WHAT you cut on. Either you can tell the story or you can't.
 
Oh yeah, I agree with you 100 percent.

One other thing I forgot to mention while I was reading your post was:

When it comes down to it, they're all just tools; different roads for the same destination.

And I'm not trying to bash FCP in any way, I love it. But I have also had a lot of experience with FCP users vs Avid users, and FCP users tend to be...

You also have to be able to call yourself an editor, not an FCP/Avid/Premiere cutter, so be able to know all the major programs is best IMO
 
I consider myself an editor, one who's extremely passionate about what I do, and to have some dolt buy FCS2 to "get into the business" not knowing anything really pisses me off, which is what half the people who own FCP are doing.
Click to expand...

Amen, though I'm in sound so substitute whatever DAW for FCS

mcgeedigital said:
Sounds like a personal issue.

I have been editing on Avid since 1991. Cut all kinds of shows, from national ads, to corporate/industrial films, to music videos. I've freelanced for Nat Geo and Discovery.

When it came time to get my own system, I first got an Avid Xpress with Mojo, then upgraded the software to the Media Composer.

Avid "suite of integrated tools" is laughable. Sonic DVD for DVD authoring? I don't think so.

The fact of the matter is that Final Cut can do 90% of what Avid does, and some things Avid CAN'T do.

The ONE THING I'll give Avid over Final Cut is its media management. Can't be beat.

But when I can buy a Final Cut uncompressed edit system with storage for less than 1/3rd the price of a comparable Avid, thats a business no-brainer.

In the end its not the paint brush, its the painter.

If you are a good editor, then it shouldn't matter WHAT you cut on. Either you can tell the story or you can't.
Click to expand...

All of the above is pretty much true. Avid plays better with other applications than FCP but there are ways around that. But you know nothing you have said really contradicts what MR. LV said. The 18 year old who got FCP last week and is running around trying to sell himself as an editor probably pisses you off also. FCS is a great bargain but its a suite and Avid doesn't really offer a suite. But then pro's on large projects rarely need a suite. I mean you don't hear many feature editors working on non indi no budget films doing there own motion graphics , color correction and DVD authoring. Part of the confusion is that there isn't A industry, there are a bunch of them. The film "Industry" doesn't have that much to do with the Indi film "industry" Neither have much to do with event videographer or ENG. Then there is Broadcast narrative, reality TV and advertising. They all have different needs. Some need to do it all, or a lot, in one place. Others need to be able to work with lots of different systems and people. Avid supports "team" work flows better than FCP but does not have a suite, and it costs a bunch. FCP is very powerful IF you can stay inside the suite and especially if you can stay on a single workstation. But it starts to get complicated if you need to work with a bunch of other applications.
So I think it's safe to say they are both industry standards, it just depends which industry you talking about. Big films, FCP barely has a toe in the door. Event videography has probably had a large move toward FCP. Indi films, FCP has a LOT to offer. The balance probably depends on budget but FCP certainly has a big presence. Advertising could move toward FCP, maybe it has? but it makes sense. ENG probably not, because of the need to work with lots of folks on a tight time line.
I have FCP. I don't do much editing and I don't consider myself a picture editor, but I do a bit and the suite makes it a no brainer.
 
Good point, well said. I agree with what you say.

Now, back to the topic.

Apple couldn't care less if they were at NAB, they have MacWorld
 
I am a huge Avid fan. I have cut professionally on Avid and FCP. I personally prefer Avid, but I will say that the best thing that ever happened to Avid was FCP.

The competition has forced Avid, kicking and screaming, to be more competitive. Avid did not release Apres DV until 2004. They were way late to the software only DV market. Also pressure from Apple made them give way their color correction from MC and Symphony away in the Xpress software.

Now Avid has launched the we are listening campaign. Doing exhaustive user polling and research and claiming to have new resolve for their customers.

SO every time your Avid software gets better, faster, and cheaper hug and thank your friendly FCP editor.

This is not to call Avid a bad company, but the industry changed on Avid and they are a big ship to start turning. Can you imagine if you had a business were you were selling a 30,000 dollar xpress system as your low end producet and then suddenly all your competition stated selling software only NLEs for 1,300.
 
I have a FCS/Aja IO setup and Express Pro/Mojo for my personal use, and use an Avid Adrenaline at work. Both have their upsides and downsides. Personally, I like basic editing features better on the Avid. FC can certainly do the job but they could look to Adobe to see how the programs within FCS ought to interact with each other.
Apple has never really delivered on the round tripping issues within the suite. Adobe is much slicker at it.

But they are just tools in your hands. There shouldn't be "Avid editors" or "FC editors. You're an editor.

Here in Los Angeles, it's actually a problem finding good professional editors since the market is flooded with FCP newbies who have cut some kind of no budget indie feature and now represent themselves as full fledged pros.

On NAB, I have seen posts by FC fanboys saying Avid's booth was "empty" at NAB. Well, I have been to the last 6 NAB shows and have always had trouble squeezing through the crowds in the Avid booth. Apple always has a cool booth with a big theater area running very cool looking demos. But it has always bothered me that the booth is staffed with teenagers in the same black t-shirt getups. Avid's booth has a stage area where real working editors talk about post on big name features and television. There is always a crowd. And the guest editors usually wear their own clothes, not generic black t-shirts (or even purple). Which fits into my view of editors as creative individualists vs. corporate branded wonks.

Regarding the much discussed "imminent death of NAB", Apple is a relative newcomer to the show. They won't be missed that much. In the recent years I have gone, there wasn't anything in Apple's booth that I couldn't have learned on the web. Same with Avid for that matter. The NAB is for shopping broadcast hardware mainly. Transmitters, cameras, lighting, weather forcast/graphic services for news, microphones, satellite news trucks, prompters, seminars for station management, switchers for remote trucks or master control, and on and on. It helps to get your hands on the hardware and be able to compare before purchasing. Where else are you going to be able to fly a Steadicam, see a Supertechno crane, watch a live virtual set demo, compare HMI's, walk through production trucks or pickup nice toys on a "NAB show discount".

Computer software? A lot of makers let you download demos, who needs to be in Vegas for that?

The Avid's and Apple's are only a small part of NAB and if it all went away NAB would still be chugging away.
 
Last edited:
It was all about the money for Avid.

NAB has become way too costly and attempted to raise their price again (booth lease ended). Most large vendors like Avid can't just get a "smaller" booth because NAB sells the space in a way that attempts to maximize profits - if you downsize you loose your space and go to the back of the ine in your attempt to get another space. Your put out in the nobody hall next to bnc connectors :)

There really are better ways to speak to you customer without the loud distraction of a tradeshow hall. There are better ways to spend millions of dollars. It's my belief that Apple was only there to try to stand toe to toe with Avid. They did it by offering free training in their booth to attract crowds and keep them there. But there's 0 dollars in doing that (if it's costing you Millions).

Tradeshows for these types of companies will be LARGE events hosted in various cities at hotel banquet rooms with suites to talk to your key clients without the distraction of your competition playing loud music next to your million dollar booth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top