Poco

Crappy change
Here's a perfect example:  the Show Desktop function.  In XP its in my Quick Launch toolbar, in Win 7 it's at the extreme right side of the taskbar, with no indication whatsoever of what the little gray button actually does in Win 7.

<Windows Key><D> is your friend!   <g>

Poco

 
BTW are you aware of the discipline that they have discarded?  It's one that was in great part what made MS sucessfull.  It's called the Windows Interface Guidelines.  It's the book that we lived by when we designed desktop client software.  It ensured that users would experience short learning curves when encountering new MS software because it ensured that the software would look and act just like all the other MS software that those users already knew how to use.
 
By breaking with this concept, MS has ensured that users are loathe to upgrade their software because they know they will spend a great deal of time re-learning how to do things they already knew how to do with the old software.  Do you know that I just used Ctrl-B to bold that last line of text?  Guess how I knew that that would work.  CAN YOU GUESS?????
  

+1000

Saves me the bother of writing it. Thanks, Poco. I know it's off topic, but the disrespect shown to the WIG standards in recent offerings from MS and other S/W vendors really gets me. Not to mention the accessibility issues, screen readers, etc, for visually or movement challenged folks, that no longer work as well as it should.

I don't, however, think this argument is appropriately directed at Cakewalk and the SONAR X1 UI, which at least still has menus and discoverable keyboard shortcuts, and although they've changed, there's still a lot of user-configurable options here. They don't deserve the same level of contempt that MSoft does, far from it.

Poco


Crappy change
Here's a perfect example:  the Show Desktop function.  In XP its in my Quick Launch toolbar, in Win 7 it's at the extreme right side of the taskbar, with no indication whatsoever of what the little gray button actually does in Win 7.  Guess what these two, differently presented, differently located controls do differently.  Can you guess?  ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.  They both SHOW THE DESKTOP.  Can you guess how much value was added to Win 7 as a result of this change?  Can you?  Can you guess how irritated I was to have to dig around for a simple control that I use all the time?  It's a stupid change by a stupid design decision, by guys who don't know or have discarded one their company's core disciplines.
 
Now multiply this hack-off factor by about a thousand stupid pointless little changes, and you will arrive at my present state of annoyment with Microsoft. 
 
BTW are you aware of the discipline that they have discarded?  It's one that was in great part what made MS sucessfull.  It's called the Windows Interface Guidelines.  It's the book that we lived by when we designed desktop client software.  It ensured that users would experience short learning curves when encountering new MS software because it ensured that the software would look and act just like all the other MS software that those users already knew how to use.
 
By breaking with this concept, MS has ensured that users are loathe to upgrade their software because they know they will spend a great deal of time re-learning how to do things they already knew how to do with the old software.  Do you know that I just used Ctrl-B to bold that last line of text?  Guess how I knew that that would work.  CAN YOU GUESS?????
 
I think this is one of the major gripes with X1.  It makes music.  That's what it does.  That's what 8.5.3 does too.  Why should I spend tremdous amounts of time re-learning how to make music with SONAR?  Are the changes you have made so good that they are worth that frustration?  I am real good and real fast at making music with 8.5.3 (BTW, I used Ctrl I to italicise that text.  Can you guess how I knew that would work?) .  How long will it take me to get to that point with X1?  Will it have been worth the effort?  I sure hope so, because I hate doing things twice, and I have already spent years perfecting my usage of the 8.5 paradigm.
 
Put some o' that in yer pipe...
 
Poco
 
P.S.  I own it, but I am not using it until it's fixed.  It's bad enough to have to re-learn something, but it's downright insulting to have to try to do that when the something you are trying to re-learn is broken.
 
-P

Yeah Show Desktop is a little annoying being on the far right, for maybe a couple hours or days until you get used to it. It didn't really irritate me all that much and I figured out where it was by just learning about the Taskbar right off the bat. Not to mention you can just use Windows+D.

But the Taskbar is such an absurdly and massively vast improvement over XP and even Vista that it's all worth it no? It's just so much better in so many ways. Also the address bar with its breadcrumb style navigation is so much better than previous versions. The notification area, etc...

Not to mention that it sleeps and hibernates far better, the networking (especially wireless) is faster to connect and resume and is more stable. It holds up far longer after installing and removing software over time and the OS doesn't seem to degrade as quickly in general. Search is faster. And IMO it actually performs better (not to mention overall more stable) especially with modern PC's and software designed for it.

So okay it perhaps takes some people longer to maybe get used to some things because of inconsistencies etc. But for me as a user it doesn't mean squat - as my personal experience is far better with it than without it. Yeah I have to learn a few new things, but that's no different than in any new thing I get that's a bit different. It happens with all kinds of technology.

I generally find that the things that give up the greatest rewards in my life are often those that require a little effort on my part. They sometimes require me to break old habits and embrace a new way. Yes sometimes it's all for naught, but more often progress is just that...it's progress.

Of course we don't have to agree on this. Nobody has to like Win7. As long as they keep making it and I can use it I'll be happy. I finally ridded my last machine of XP and I couldn't be happier about it (and my stress level has gone down proportionally). And I for one look forward to Windows 8 (or whatever it may be).

Kroneborge

Not to mention that it sleeps and hibernates far better, the networking (especially wireless) is faster to connect and resume and is more stable. It holds up far longer after installing and removing software over time and the OS doesn't seem to degrade as quickly in general. Search is faster. And IMO it actually performs better (not to mention overall more stable) especially with modern PC's and software designed for it.

All this stuff is great, and I don't think anyone has a problem with any of it.    These are real improvements. 

It's the changes to the work flow (and new restrictions that come with it) that rile people up.  

For example, if MS had just introduced the ribbon, but allowed people to totaly customize it up to and including make it work just like MS 2003, then the upgrade would have been great, and little to no whining.

But when devevlopers change the workflow all around, and then  MAKE you use it without the option to do a classic version then people get pissed, especially if (in many people's minds) the new way is less efficeient/effective.

And even if the new way is better, a lot of people don't want to learn it.   Just give us the actual improvements (like you noted) and then let us decide how we want to work.

Thanks,

Yes of course having all the options of classic UI implementations would be nice for those that want them (no argument from me), but it comes with a cost. It slows development and testing  time, has big potential for hindering the developers on some level and can increase the number of potential bugs etc. And then there's the question of where you draw the line. Should Windows have all the GUI elements and workflow available that Win3.11 offered for example?

To add to tyacko's post...............

You can please some of the people some of the time, you can please most of the people most of the time, but you'll never please all of the people all of the time.................

so why bother trying?

Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]



Yeah Show Desktop is a little annoying...
...the OS doesn't seem to degrade as quickly in general. Search is faster.

Yeah I have to learn a few new things, but that's no different than in any new thing I get that's a bit different. It happens with all kinds of technology.

They sometimes require me to break old habits and embrace a new way. Yes sometimes it's all for naught, but more often progress is just that...it's progress.

>>> Yeah I have to learn a few new things
 
Brandon,  you are totally missing my point.  I don't mind learning new things.  What I hate is learning how to the same old things a different way, and in particular a different way that lends no additional intrinsic value to the operation.
 
>>>They sometimes require me to break old habits and embrace a new way. Yes sometimes it's all for naught, but more often progress is just that...it's progress.
 
I don't consider my knowledge of how to perfrom a task a habit.  I consider it expertise.  Why should I discard it?  Is the new way a better way or does it just sell software to people with a thirty second attention span?
 
>>>progress is just that...it's progress.
 
That's what the developers say when they mow down a thousand acres of pristine forest and build tract housing, too.  Sometimes "progress" sucks to the maximum.
 
>>>Yeah Show Desktop is a little annoying...
 
Know what else I don't like?  When someone takes the one example I provide and then bases pretty much the rest of their argument on it, as though other examples don't exist.  Show Desktop is only one of dozens of things that have changed, and only changed for change sake, not to improve funcionality.  This discussion does not end with the Windows OS, by the way.  It applies to ALL software.
 
>>>...the OS doesn't seem to degrade as quickly in general. Search is faster.
 
Operating Systems don't degrade.  Period.  How much faster is search?
 
What would it take for you to say that a piece of software changed for the negative?  I have encountered others who seem to embrace pointless change, and I just don't get it.  Would you like it if the following key combinations were remapped:
 
Ctrl-C, Ctrl-X, Ctrl-Z, Ctrl-V, Ctrl-I, Ctrl-B, Ctrl-U, Ctrl-S, Ctrl-F
 
I mean, hey they are just key combinations.  Why not change them all?  That would be new.
 
How 'bout we put the strings on the guitar in reverse order?  That would be new.
 
When it comes to the Windows OS in particular there is a pattern that is clear:  each new iteration has a larger footprint, requires more system resources, has more junk in it that is not central to the primary function of an operating system, and contains numerous pointless changes, and new bugs.  It's undeniable.  It's one of the reasons that operating systems like Ubuntu become popular.  I think it can be attributed to eliteism.  Oooohhh look what I can do.  I know something you don't.  That's so old.  I have the coolest new phone, etc. 
 
Back when I was writing C++ apps, there was this concept called optimization.  It's when you went through your code to see how fast, light, and elegant you could make it.  I sure hope Cakewalk programmers still think that way.  By contrast, most MS apps and OS's are just dog slow bloatware.  Don't even get me started on web apps.  They are an abomination and 5,000 steps backward in terms of speed and functionality.  "But they're so easy to deploy..."  Blech.
 
I guess I was lucky to have a more or less stable UI in SONAR as long as I did.  I just hope that the next major release is not entirely new too.

Poco

Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]



Yeah Show Desktop is a little annoying...
...the OS doesn't seem to degrade as quickly in general. Search is faster.

Yeah I have to learn a few new things, but that's no different than in any new thing I get that's a bit different. It happens with all kinds of technology.

They sometimes require me to break old habits and embrace a new way. Yes sometimes it's all for naught, but more often progress is just that...it's progress.

>>> Yeah I have to learn a few new things
 
Brandon,  you are totally missing my point.  I don't mind lerning new things.  What I hate is learning how to the same old things a different way, and in particular a different way that lends no additional intrinsic value to the operation.

I would respectfully submit that I did not miss the point - I simply don't agree with you. There is a difference. 

>>>They sometimes require me to break old habits and embrace a new way. Yes sometimes it's all for naught, but more often progress is just that...it's progress.
 
I don't consider my knowledge of how to perfrom a task a habit.  I consider it expertise.  Why should I discard it?  Is the new way a better way or does it just sell software to people with a thirty second attention span?

But things have to change for the betterment of the overall interface and workflow, simply because they don't fit in the new and arguably better paradigm. Things don't generally change just to change. For instance show desktop is different because the taskbar as a whole behaves in a totally different and IMO vastly superior way.

 
>>>progress is just that...it's progress.
 
That's what the developers say when they mow down a thousand acres of pristine forest and build tract housing, too.  Sometimes "progress" sucks to the maximum.

So you like XP better than Windows 7 and don't find it to be progress? Hey you have a right to your opinion even if it seems completely unfathomable to me. Let's not forget that I use Windows OS's all day every day on multiple machines and my experience goes way back to DOS and Atari's etc so I think my opinion on this is just as valid as anyone else's.

 
>>>Yeah Show Desktop is a little annoying...
 
Know what else I don't like?  When someone takes the one example I provide and then bases pretty much the rest of their argument on it, as though other examples don't exist.  Show Desktop is only one of dozens of things that have changed, and only changed for change sake, not to improve funcionality.  This discussion does not end with the Windows OS, by the way.  It applies to ALL software.

So why provide just one example? Should I base my argument on examples that you didn't give? C'mon now. And while we're at it, I thought the one example you did give just happened to be the only thing I myself found off-putting at first in Win7. So I figured it was all you had.

>>>...the OS doesn't seem to degrade as quickly in general. Search is faster.
 
Operating Systems don't degrade.  Period.  How much faster is search?

Oh c'mon sure they do. A fresh XP installation always, and notoriously, worked better than one that has had drivers and software installed and removed over months or years. I've seen it on countless machines over years and years and discussed this with loads of people over the years. I'll claim conventional wisdom on this one. If you haven't experienced this then I consider you an anomaly in this regard (and lucky too).

And the search is faster in that you can type anything in the search area and it comes up instantly regardless of what it is - files, programs, etc. Never worked that way in XP for me.

 
What would it take for you to say that a piece of software changed for the negative?  I have encountered others who seem to embrace pointless change, and I just don't get it.  Would you like it if the following key combinations were remapped:
 
Ctrl-C, Ctrl-X, Ctrl-Z, Ctrl-V, Ctrl-I, Ctrl-B, Ctrl-U, Ctrl-S, Ctrl-F
 
I mean, hey they are just key combinations.  Why not change them all?  That would be new.
 
How 'bout we put the strings on the guitar in reverse order?  That would be new.

I don't think I ever contended that all change - just for the sake of change - was good. In fact I'm sure I didn't. But I don't think developers go around changing things willy-nilly just to be new. And I don't see this in Win7 at all. Not one bit. And this example you've offered, that I incidentally agree with, is actually hypothetical and has never happened. So yes that would be awful - if it happened. But it hasn't. I would suggest that it is somewhat fruitless for us to debate these hypotheticals that are likely to never happen. When they do I'll get in line with you complaining about it (unless of course the new way is demonstrably better).

 
When it comes to the Windows OS in particular there is a pattern that is clear:  each new iteration has a larger footprint, requires more system resources, has more junk in it that is not central to the primary function of an operating system, and contains numerous pointless changes, and new bugs.  It's undeniable.  It's one of the reasons that operating systems like Ubuntu become popular.  I think it can be attributed to eliteism.  Oooohhh look what I can do.  I know something you don't.  That's so old.  I have the coolest new phone, etc.

Win7 is leaner than Vista. It runs less services, takes a smaller footprint in some regards, etc. So yes there is a pattern, but there are exceptions. Also - so what? We have more resources to burn (faster CPU's, more storage space, etc) so why not utilize it? One person's pointless change is another person's improvement. Anyway, it sounds a little to me like this is more of a philosophical issue you have, rather than a purely operational one with Win7 specifically.

 
Back when I was writing C++ apps, there was this concept called optimization.  It's when you went through your code to see how fast, light, and elegant you could make it.  I sure hope Cakewalk programmers still think that way.  By contrast, most MS apps and OS's are just dog slow bloatware.  Don't even get me started on web apps.  They are an abomination and 5,000 steps backward in terms of speed and functionality.  "But they're so easy to deploy..."  Blech.

Yeah I would agree that optimization is important in pretty much anything. I think that concept is still alive and well. But of course with vast resources, laziness can inevitably certainly creep in. Necessity is the mother of invention and all that. So I agree with you to a point, but what should we do?

But here's the thing: my computer(s), and what I run on them, and my overall experience as a user is more capable and faster today than it was in the past. So the net result is positive even if there are some backward steps along the way. This is evident in that computers and high-tech devices are used by everyone and not just geeks who are willing to fiddle with dip switches to get a parallel port to work (note: I'm one of those geeks). The experience is faster and more accessible than ever. Progress.

 
I guess I was lucky to have a more or less stable UI in SONAR as long as I did.  I just hope that the next major release is not entirely new too.

Like I said. We don't have to agree, but I'm happy to debate the points as it's something I personally find interesting and have an opinion about.

Kroneborge

I don't think I ever contended that all change - just for the sake of change - was good. In fact I'm sure I didn't. But I don't think developers go around changing things willy nilly just to be new
[/quote/

I'm sure that's true.  But from a user experience, it sure feels the opposite.  The creation of the ribbon in office 2007 is a prime example.

In Sonar no longer being able to use right click to create an envelope in X1 is another example, or being able to change the size/shape of skylight.

I'm sure you guys had great reasons for doing so creating the new look (for example, if I had bad eye sight I would love it).  But not having the customizations options to change it back is what creates the problems.  More process related would be not being able to add envelopes with a right click etc. 

Well some progress has to happen in chunks and of course what constitutes progress, or lack thereof, is both subjective and debatable.

Implementing enhancements and allowing further customizations and flexibility to Skylight will very likely happen over time. But everything has to start somewhere. This is Skylight 1.0 if you will. But it has a clear goal and a plan for enhanced workflow and user-experience, not simply "change for change sake" - and many users are seeing this progress and it has been well received by the marketplace. As with anything, it can stand improvements that will please and hopefully benefit an even wider swath of users.

Envelopes were moved to the Edit Filter in order to reflect the new paradigm of filtering what's editable in order to make things cleaner and more deliberate. We have plans for X2 to make this markedly better and further complete the long-term vision for the Skylight interface.

...wicked

Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]
Implementing enhancements and allowing further customizations and flexibility to Skylight will very likely happen over time. But everything has to start somewhere. This is Skylight 1.0 if you will.

I agree with this immensely with a big "BUT", and that is I seriously hope we can hold you to it. Cake has a history of introducing things and abandoning them (ACT, Beatscape, the Matrix...)


I personally, and I can feel a collective trepidation, are hesitant but curious about Skylight and the whole new X1 thing. I think we'll go along gleefully as long as it's something Cake continues to refine and develop. If we get left swinging in the wind next version whilst new plugs and unrelated techs are introduced it's going to be a big disappointment.

We certainly understand this concern with things being introduced and not being given enough love after the fact. And it's a valid criticism to at least some degree. I can tell you that internally there is great desire and active plans to address this. X1b is a start with fixes to some long standing issues and fixes to VVocal and AudioSnap, etc.  But I realize it goes deeper than that and ACT and the Matrix View are valid examples.

I can tell you there is strong desire amongst everyone currently involved iwth SONAR's development to circle back and continue to enhance past feature-sets while delivering targeted and fully-baked new additions.

I realize words mean little without action. I'm simply telling you what the vibe is inside the company - and hoping that X1b is at least a token example of what I'm talking about.

We certainly understand this concern with things being introduced and not being given enough love after the fact. And it's a valid criticism to at least some degree. I can tell you that internally there is great desire and active plans to address this. X1b is a start with fixes to some long standing issues and fixes to VVocal and AudioSnap, etc. But I realize it goes deeper than that and ACT and the Matrix View are valid examples. I can tell you there is strong desire amongst everyone currently involved iwth SONAR's development to circle back and continue to enhance past feature-sets while delivering targeted and fully-baked new additions. I realize words mean little without action. I'm simply telling you what the vibe is inside the company - and hoping that X1b is at least a token example of what I'm talking about.

This is what I expect from CW Brandon. I don't think things have changed that much. I have always held that CW does do its best in responding to its user base. Now I see a new era for CW with the introduction of X1. I see things as being better for both new users and long timer users. It will need time to get everything right but it is happening from all I see here. 

But I still want to know where my tabs are on the non ribbon CB????

Someone else might find this funny - I had no idea the Show Desktop Icon was now on the lower right of the Win 7 screen.

But here's another thing - now that I know - I don't care. It's such small potatoes to the overall feel and function of Win 7 that I've ignored it for almost a year.

The same can be said for me and X1. There's a Control Bar now. I don't care - I'll learn to use the control bar - or not - as I'm finding it basically unneeded for most tasks. The envelopes are in a new place now. I don't care - I learned to use them where they are now and like them better now that I've learned.

Someone mentioned that 8.53 was much more intuitive than X1 in certain regards, but that seems to confuse some very real human traits. It might SEEM more intuitive because a user was used to the GUI but intuitive on its face? Not to me - at all - no way.

X1 intuitive? Are you kidding? No way - for me. But now that I've learned a lot of its ways it seems intuitive but I'm not fooled. Both have and always will need lots of focused learning and in this case some unlearning.

Another advantage that the Bakers have, and something that I think is hard for the user base to truly grasp, is the advantage of a long term strategy. The Bakers probably know where they're going for X2, X3 and maybe even a brief outline of X4. With that long term look at the forest, they may have a hard time seeing the trees that bug (I know) us on a daily basis.

If, and it's now a pretty big if, they can make good on Brandon's last statement of intent, then the X series of DAW will be amazing. If they get lost in the woods and refuse to finish all the projects they've started within Sonar over the years then the X series will just be another also ran.

The future looks bright. Can the Bakers execute? We'll see, and X1b will show us all the stuff the Bakers are made of.

I didn't read the entire thread, but I HATE that ribbon thing.
It sucks.

I have to clarify!

I LIKE the ribbon in X1.

It's the ribbon in MS products that I hate....

Sorry for the confusion. I misread the title.

Oh come on, without these threads what would we talk about. 

There aren't that many problems (or at least not ones that hopefully won't be solved by X1b)

Poco


One thing I must say (being a Tascam owner), it sure is cool that someone(s) who actually work for the company whose product we have purchased frequents these boards and is willing to engage the users.  Thanks to Brandon, Noel, and all the others.  It instills a great deal of confidence in the user base, and as I am sure they have noticed, they get kudos for that from a lot of users.  Please don't let the few rude responses (some unbelievably) deter you guys from coming here.
 
And to your point, Brandon, it is a philosophical thing with me.  I can be a real pain in the butt to work for, but at least the naming conventions in our shop are consistant, we actually model our databases, and we have production control (MS TFS).
 
Poco
 
P.S.  I have XP on my HP TC4400 and Win 7 on my Elitebook (work machines - my DAW is a home-built with XP Pro).  I will like 7 as much as I like XP when the functions are second nature to me as they are in XP.  It's the curve I dislike the most.

Many thanks Poco. I and the others certainly appreciate that.

And keep up the good work in your shop. The world needs it - good optimization, consistency and all that.

stratman70


Better yet-How do I feel about the 2,500th post of the same old complaint. Pretty bored with it really. I kind of got the point after we hit 1,000. Now it's dressed in a MS ribbon. Clever-sure made the thread different than the other 2,500 or so.
NOT.
 
But irt sure has done a lot of good, hasn't it?
NO

 
+1