Apple Introduces Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro for the iPad
From Apple Newsroom:
Apple today unveiled Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro for iPad. Video and music creators can now unleash their creativity in new ways that are only possible on iPad. Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro for iPad bring all-new touch interfaces that allow users to enhance their workflows with the immediacy and intuitiveness of Multi-Touch. … Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro for iPad will be available on the App Store as subscriptions starting Tuesday, May 23.
I have no use for either Final Cut Pro or Logic Pro, but I’m curious how those who rely on these apps on the Mac will respond to and adopt the iPad versions. It’s hard to imagine the iPad versions being as capable, but will they be welcome companion apps for current users or stripped-down alternatives for newcomers who don’t need the full power of the Mac versions? Or both?
They’re available only by subscription, either $4.99 per month or $49 per year. Final Cut Pro requires an iPad with an M1 chip or later, whereas Logic Pro works on any iPad with an A12 chip or later.
I would have been all over this at a single purchase, but I don’t want an annual subscription of 49 bucks. Lumafusion has taken care of the video editing side of things on the iPad. I heartily recommend it.
FCPro on iPad? If it’s anything like iMovie on iPad, I don’t think so. Final Cut is accessible high end non linear editing, and I don’t see how it lends itself to a touch interface as an equivalent. Plus an expensive annual subscription? No.
(20 year Final Cut user in both flavors.)
And on further consideration: the question you asked is exactly what iMovie has become — a less capable subset of FCPro’s features whose files can be taken into Final Cut for refinement.
Same here, I would have thought the primary use case would be assembly on the hoof for syncing to your desktop later. Shorter videos on the iPad alone I can see, but why deal with a subscription for that? LumaFusion handles both, the first via a 20$ add on FCPXML export option, the second by being a capable video editor built for that platform. I’m sure there’s nuances of differences between the two which might nudge users one way or the other.
My suspicion is that the iPad is difficult to justify development for when it comes to Pro apps. We’ve seen a spate of highly capable apps recently, Affinity’s suite includes them in their overall price, Capture One has a $5 a month sub, I suspect the uptake is small.
That or…Apple have seen the benefits of bundles in other areas, subscriptions covering a range of services, we may see similar when it comes to their Pro apps.
I’m not so sure. I doubt that Apple would have gone to all the effort of developing iPad versions if they didn’t think there were some compelling use cases out there. I think it’s a bit preliminary to write these off without seeing them in action.
As for pricing…shrug. The annual fee is a sixth the cost of the Mac app. Whether this is overcharging or not is, again, a bit soon to tell. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see the Mac applications moving to a subscription basis, too.
Whether you like or hate app subscriptions, that’s the way the market is moving. It’s not, realistically speaking, all that different from a “one-off” purchase price followed by endless annual upgrade fees.
Early days indeed, but subscriptions have low appeal for me.
Normally I’d agree, but considering how rarely I do video projects – once every 2 or 3 years – being able to “rent” FCP for $5 for a month’s use sounds far better than paying $300 for a permanent license.
Except, of course, for those instances where it isn’t.
It turns out that Avid, DaVinci Resolve and Sibelius, Premier Rush, Luma Fusion, etc. have had iPad Pro versions of their high end editing software for years.
Shame on Tim Cook for not developing a iOS version of Final Cut Pro Sooner.
Now do Aperture
Beyond me why anybody seriously into video editing would want to edit with a fat stylus like a finger.
While I can’t imagine using my finger for precision editing, I say this without trying Apple’s implementation, and Apple has surprised me before. I couldn’t imagine talking with a fat iPhone on my ear until Apple invented one. And, I couldn’t imagine typing a passcode into a tiny watch face until Apple proved me wrong. I still don’t like using a virtual keyboard on an iOS device because of trying to type on glass, but I’m a touch typist. (I’m typing this on an iPad with a Magic (i.e. “real”) keyboard.)
I think the use case is not finger editing, but Pencil editing. With my new iPad Air I decided to pick up a generic Apple Pencil clone (about a third of the cost), and I can testify that it turns the iPad screen into a nifty drawing tablet with very high precision. I recall when Wacom first produced their screen/tablet combos at a cool $3,000 or so, back around the turn of the century, and how the idea seemed amazing but the implementation looked so awkward. A Pencil gives you the same thing, much as an iPhone gives you everything (and then some) in relation to the ELPH style cameras that were once popular, as well as making calls.
I use Apple Pencil to do sketches on my iPad, but I find the pencil skates across the glass surface and so I am impressed with those that seem to do better than I do. I’ve tried editing with the pencil but again for similar reasons, found it unsatisfactory. Maybe I need to tip that has more friction (and sharper point) or a skin to go on the surface of the iPad. I’ll stick to my big screen for my photo and video editing.
This brings back bad memories, and I hadn’t heard the word “Wacom” mentioned in many years. In addition to being way overpriced as compared to iPad, iPad is so very much more versatile. I don’t know if this still is the case, as I haven’t seen or heard about anything Wacom for so long. And way back when you had to plug a Wacom into a Mac in order use it, and the plugged in screen had to be flat on a table; if it hasn’t changed this can be a major inconvenience.
Not being able to draw directly on an unplugged screen just about anywhere like iPad is also a big disadvantage for many people. And Wacoms were not so great about managing color if you are going to print. The batteries tended to drop dead quickly and recharging took some time. And iPads can do so very, very much more, and so much more varied stuff than a one trick Wacom. I don’t know what Wacom is charging now, or if they have an App Store or whatever.
Wacom seems to be resting on the residue of its reputation (much like Logitech); high prices and little support. I desperately needed a tablet when I was producing video content for my day job during the pandemic; I had mostly good memories of a Wacom tablet I had purchased along with a Tensor-lamp iMac. The tablet I received came with a stylus, a thumbnail size packet of legal warnings, and almost nothing else. The software to drive the tablet and set its parameters looks exactly like the software I used 20 years ago on early versions of OS X. Stability is a virtue, but it looks more like a vice here.
Two months later, I reviewed a tablet from an Asian company. It looks identical to the Wacom tablet down to the “pistachio” case color and the dots on the tablet surface. The stylus is slightly more comfortable to use, and it is easily as accurate as the Wacom. Retail price for it is about 20 percent of what Wacom charged for their tablet.
There may be heavy Wacom users out there, and I don’t mean to denigrate the tablet on performance, which is fine, but the company seems to have receded into a cloud of “this is the apex of what we’re doing with this technology” and in my opinion is resting on its IP.
I love my Wacom tablet but only use it for editing photographs.
Rumor has it that Apple will be charging $3,000 for its long rumored mixed reality headset which will debut in the upcoming WWDC on Monday:
Personally speaking, I’m as uninterested in a mixed reality headset as I am in a Wacom.
Yes, that’s my primary use as well. The tablet I had 20 years ago came with both a mouse and a stylus, so I used it as a mousepad. It spoiled me for cordless mice.
Using the stylus to navigate or do ordinary tasks feels frustrating and retrograde.
I wonder if there will be even a sliver of users willing to give that a spin. My last iMac and last MBPro each cost less than that. (The iMac came real close because of higher end specs.)
My very wild guess is that this new product will debut at the most targeted event for developers. At this point, Apple needs developers to create products that will lure consumers and businesses. Without apps for personal and business use, I think any VR/AR headset will be doomed. A lack of VR/AR apps and services might be why Google, Microsoft and Sony haven’t set the world on fire with their headsets.
I hope Apple already managed to lure a big enough group of developers to showcase use cases/apps for the headset in the upcoming event.
An interesting development:
Zuckerberg unveils Meta Quest 3 VR headset days before Apple reveals its own
I think this is especially interesting:
Join the discussion in the TidBITS Discourse forum