I think that the controller manufacturers expect Cakewalk to build the control surface dll - it seems that that is how other DAW manufacturers work (they do the donkey work, rather than the controller manufacturer).

KPerry
I think that the controller manufacturers expect Cakewalk to build the control surface dll - it seems that that is how other DAW manufacturers work (they do the donkey work, rather than the controller manufacturer).

I think we'd be open to it. Standard rates would apply 

I think if nothing else, this control surface support and implementation saga is a hugely limiting factor if Cakewalk ever wish to be on par with competing products.

I work in the education sector using Pro Tools, Logic and Ableton Live.  They all support, and make it incredibly easy to setup and use, control surfaces and high end professional consoles.  The implementation and support is incredible.
Cakewalk Sonar? Unfortunately not.  Limited support and many excuses.

I sincerely hope Cakewalk decide to turn this issue around, instead of chasing trends, such as touch.

I can say nothing about big consoles, but I was a bit surprised by the number of users really interested in getting simple surfaces (without motor-faders and display) work perfect with SONAR. I have developed a plug-in which allows that. And till now I know only single person who use it - myself... I am working to support MCP, but I guess that is not going to change the situation.
 
CS API is still the same over time, X series have ProChannel which old code can not control without modifications, but that is the only change. So all units with MCP support should work with Mackie plug-in as soon they have implemented it correctly.
 
Asking a company which sell software for 50-500$ for special support of all possible devices in price range of 5-20k$ is unfair. For example, no one is claiming that Microsoft should develop own drivers for all devices by itself and for free.
 

chilldanny

I sincerely hope Cakewalk decide to turn this issue around, instead of chasing trends, such as touch.

 
Touch isn't a trend. It's in spacecraft, cars, planes, homes, phones, watches, laptops, tablets, POS systems, and your desktop computer. Doctors even use touch screens in the operating room. Once haptics mature you'll see entire industries switch over and the future of dedicated hardware controllers will become more and more niche.
 
Even the Slate Raven MTX is touch - http://www.slateproaudio.com/products/raven-mtx/

That's all well and good Seth, but surely it makes more sense to do all you can to support current and established technologies, such as hardware control surfaces like the infamous V700, before moving on to more innovative technologies such as touch?  Regardless of who manufactures the product, surely it falls to Cakewalk to ensure trouble free and full feature compatibility?  I'm so glad I didn't invest in the V700 series products, certainly dodged a rather expensive bullet there.
 
Don't get me wrong Seth, I can see why Cakewalk would want to be the first to develop and implement touch control in a DAW context and become the market innovator.  But does it really help the end user when all they want to do NOW is plug in a control surface that works without issue in a competing DAW but then encounter several issues when trying to use it with Sonar?
 
Time of course will tell, and it'll be interesting to see the outcome of Cakewalk's gamble.

chilldanny
Regardless of who manufactures the product, surely it falls to Cakewalk to ensure trouble free and full feature compatibility?

 
Is it Toyota's job to make sure every single brand of 205/55R16 tire works with their 2014 Corolla, if their rim meets the UTQGS standards? Is it Honda's job to make sure every OBDII scanner works correctly with their vehicle if they already adhere to the OBDII spec? Is it Microsoft's responsibility for the latest AMD or Nvidia card to have properly written drivers? No, all of those cases fall on the 3rd party to ensure compatibility. Willy already stated above why we can't create stuff for every surface on the market. 
 
Re: VS-700. We have employees who use the VS-700 on Win 8.1 and SONAR X3 everyday. There's also a few users in the VS-700 forum that use it with X3 as well. The legends of it being completely unusable are greatly exaggerated.
 
The VS-700 is a Roland product and we are no longer a part of Roland. The control surface plug-ins are also open source now so they should be able to be readily adapted to any changes in newer versions of SONAR. It's up to Roland if they will continue driver support into Win9 and beyond.

Ok Seth, I fully accept and understand your point(s).

I'm excited to see what the future brings for Sonar, and hopeful that the links Cakewalk now have with Tascam (via Gibson) will indeed push Sonar to the next level in audio creation and production.
 
Here's to the future..

it looks like the hardware guys expect the software guys to make it work, and vice versa

Having been in the 'Hardware' business, there's always seems been a reluctance among Mfr's to do custom drivers, especially for a broad market product. They seem to want to mooch off of the (use with) product developers for these. IMO, DAWs are specialized to a point. HW Mfr's should treat control surfaces more like a vertical market  - you are the one who want's to sell onto some DAW - so you do the work to make sure *your* HW product looks good!