--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Job ter Burg (L2B)" <Job_L2@...> wrote:
>Why not let stuff like CC for companies like Baselight, rather than spending Avid >R&D money on inventing the wheel? Let Avid spend their time on opening up AVX so >Baselight (and others) can use it to build on the MC base? Everyone would win, and >the resulting product could be a killer.
Agreed ... entirely.
I don't know why Avid did not see the utility of this approach long ago. Concentrate on your core competencies and refine the platform -- and open the application to best-of-breed providers who will build out the ecosystem and infrastructure at no additional R&D cost. And, who will add immeasurable value to the product.
To a very large extent, Avid long-ago adopted this approach with their effects module. There are obviously many others, but BCC and Avid FX are typically "bundled" with the core app and they are both produced by 3rd party company Boris.
And during this time, little or no progress has been made with Avid's own home-brewed effects -- some of which have limitations that are laughable in the year 2012. Unfortunately, the big limiting factors are Avid's seeming unwillingness to upgrade the effects -- and a fundamental effects architecture is more antiquated and obsolete than the CC tools.
How much happier would we all be if we could have the choice of fully-integrated apps like Resolve or Baselight running in MC/Symphony. I realize it's obviously not that simple -- and that there are many issues to consider when you hand the reins of your product to another company. But does Avid really have the time, money and expertise to compete on a feature-basis with those programs -- and then to keep-up with them going forward?
The same goes for effects. I'd gladly pay for a fully-integrated, node-based, professionally-authored effects package that released me from Avid's dated effects palette and architecture. And, I guess we are getting a bit closer to that with Eyeon Fusion -- but that may be more specialized than many "generalist" editors require.
I'm sure it's not easy to manage Avid's finite assets. And it can't be easy to compete in a highly-dynamic market with companies that have very deep resources -- selling products that are dramatically dropping in price (with associated reduced profit margins). I'm sure it's nothing to celebrate -- and I empathize.
However, and with no offense intended, crippling MC and Symphony does no one any good -- not Avid -- and not us. Open I/O was finally an overdue step in the right direction -- and the market has rewarded Avid. Maybe it's time to replicate the same approach to other aspects of the program that need the infusion of professional-caliber tools that cannot be cost-effectively produced in-house. One thing is certain, 11-year upgrade cycles for CC and Effects tools is simply not acceptable to professional users.
No comments:
Post a Comment