Anderton
 
Bugs are in a queue. The order of the queue depends on multiple factors. The primary one is if large numbers of users are affected and it causes crashes or serious operational problem. Bugs with workarounds, and issues people refer to as "bugs" but are not, are low priority. All the rest fall somewhere in between.

Craig, it is not surprising to hear that Cakewalk has limited resources and needs to prioritise bug fixes. What is surprising is that Cakewalk appears not to read the reports at all. They remain "new" for months (perhaps forever). If there is a triage process (and there must be something like that, else no prioritisation can take place) why don't they record the status as "read, but no action because ..." or "read, but low priority bug that will be fixed when we break something else near it ..." or whatever. I am being slightly facetious here about the wording, but I am not at all facetious about the approach. It is just rude to ask customers to waste time on bug reports otherwise.

I'm with Tripecac on this one. I submitted a problem/bug report back in January and still no real solutions. I'm running Kingston because that is the last version that didn't have the bug.
Mr. Anderton, I hate to see you circling the wagons on a software company that is losing it's commitment to it's customer base by ignoring their issues. Lack of support is a sure sign that maybe this software will not be around for much longer (and I go back to the DOS days of Cakewalk *sniff*).
 
I would Love, Love, Love to start using some of the new stuff in Sonar Platinum. Just can't because of the loss of productivity a workaround would cause.
 
Look at Sony Creative Software. I dropped Vegas a couple of years ago because of this very reason. Took them 2-3 months to respond. By that time the project was finished with another piece of software. I used to love the ease of use of Vegas, but no more.
 
Anyway, my two cents. I hope Cakewalk gets their s**t together. T'would be sad to see it go.

ChristopherM
If there is a triage process (and there must be something like that, else no prioritisation can take place) why don't they record the status as "read, but no action because ..." or "read, but low priority bug that will be fixed when we break something else near it ..." or whatever.

 
Well, any time spent on formulating and giving a response like "no action taken because..." is time not spent fixing bugs. It may seem trivial but let's suppose there are 500 bugs that have been reported, and it takes 5 minutes to formulate and send a response. That's 41 hours not spent fixing bugs. If an updated response is expected later, then that number would increase.
 
I agree that it would reassure customers to get more of a response, but I assume Cakewalk feels their priority should be spending time on the bugs themselves. Perhaps as the company grows, there could be a better balance.
 

It is just rude to ask customers to waste time on bug reports otherwise.

 
Many of the bugs that have been fixed trace back directly to bug reports from users. So, while some bug reports may represent wasted time, others do not. Also I'm not exactly sure what "new" means; I don't know if it necessarily means "unread." We'd need someone from QA to clarify that, or someone who has asked QA and gotten an answer.
 

That's 41 hours not spent fixing bugs.

 
However, it would be 41 hours spent reassuring customers that someone is listening.  It is rude, and risky for companies to ignore their customers' cries for help.
 
This is why I love Amazon.  And, despite the fact that I live in New Zealand, still order most of my CDs, DVDs, and books from them.  Amazon's extra-responsive customer service has earned them TONS of money from me.  They have earned my loyalty, and my money.
 
Not so with Cakewalk.  From my perspective, their support was okay for the few few years, but has only gotten worse and worse over the years.  Maybe that's because I represent a subset they don't care about (captive MIDI-oriented audience).  Or maybe it's just bad luck.  Regardless, although I continue to have hope that Cakewalk will "fix" Sonar some day, they definitely have not earned my loyalty.  I still with Sonar solely out of inertia.  If another Windows-friendly sequencer started getting awesome reviews before Sonar fixed their PRV bugs, I will switch in a heartbeat.
 
I'm sure I'm not the only Sonar user with a "wandering eye".  Perhaps just one of the more vocal ones.  Like a spouse wearing an "I'm with stupid" t-shirt.
 
If Cakewalk doesn't invest more time and money (part of which was MY money) in improving their customer support, then they will not stand a chance once a younger, prettier, friendlier, smarter sequencer steps into the room.

I use Adobe Photoshop.  Super-powerful, but a bit slow to load and a memory hog (compared to Macromedia Fireworks).  Are you using Premier?  Is it similarly slow to load?  Did you try out Audition for MIDI?

Tripecac
I'm sure I'm not the only Sonar user with a "wandering eye". 

Well, that's why I said "You may find that rewiring Reason into SONAR gives you the best of both worlds." To continue your analogy, you might consider having a mistress as well as a spouse  

Tripecac
I use Adobe Photoshop.  Super-powerful, but a bit slow to load and a memory hog (compared to Macromedia Fireworks).  Are you using Premier?  Is it similarly slow to load?  Did you try out Audition for MIDI?

I use pretty much the complete Adobe Suite. Not too bad for memory, just have to read up on the tweaks. Helps to have multiple SSD hard drives...for projects as well for scratch disks. Only ever did midi with Cakewalk products. Never saw a need for any other (except maybe Acid Loops). I don't do a lot of music anymore, unfortunately. Too busy making a buck at multimedia, video & voice over work in the eLearning industry. Audition is funky, to me. Premiere as well, but the learning curve investment is worth it due to the integration of the products. Very cool to see tweaks to files in other programs show up in the one you're working in.