> Shirley Gutierrez wrote:
> Certainly not, unless Avid gives new users
> a reason to chose them!
I think they've been trying that. That's why the software versions exist and the incredibly good educational deals. That sells Media Composer, but it does nothing to advance Symphony, which is the point of this thread.
Let's take CC as an example. I've used Symphony and I've used MC, so I know the difference. Yet, I have quite successfully delivered shows and features (including to networks) using only the built-in tools of MC or FCP. So for me - and most others - there's very little compelling reason to go to Symphony.
In fact, where CC is the issue, many Avid (and FCP) customers are looking into DaVinci Resolve. Sure, it's not integrated, but it does add another "name" product and a powerful toolset. You can't market a price advantage for Symphony when there's so little difference. If you bring up a new generation of editors on MC, will they want more? Avid already missed an early opportunity to tie in the Artist Color panel. On the other hand, I can use it with Smoke, Storm or Color.
I think it's funny that Avid gets all the flak for its marketing association with "enterprise" users - mainly TV shows and film editors. Yet marketing is aspirational. Apple has been doing that with FCP since Murch switched over and its been quite successful. Why shouldn't it be for Avid? It's been successful for Pro Tools, as well. Of course, what's aspirational about Symphony? Job is one of the few feature film editors I've ever heard of that uses Symphony for creative cutting.
Again, my first point was to merge the products and concentrate on 1 or 2 professional video NLEs and then market the hell out of them.
- Oliver
No comments:
Post a Comment