maybe "o" is for offset? wouldn't be the first time

Anderton
Remember, development of functionality occurs in parallel. Another way to look at it is to release the simple things on the monthly schedule while a more complex function bakes in the background for a future release. Regardless, Cakewalk can't win either way: if they release something simple, then people complain there wasn't anything substantial in the release. If they miss a release, people will complain about that. People who like to complain can always find something to complain about.

I know, and you see that with development snapshots and the like in open source code. However it does take additional time, testing and QA to do an actual rollup for consumer release. It also means if you are changing something big and fundamental, like say the plugin host engine, that you have to have multiple code branches for awhile.
 
I don't at all mind how Cakewalk is doing things, just saying I wouldn't mind seeing it changed.

Snehankur

Anderton
People who like to complain can always find something to complain about.

Big Yes

I'd like to complain about people who complain about the complainers....wait, now I'm doing it....never mind.

I really think the "O" release should be "Orgasmic", for the simple reason of all the "tension and release" previously discussed in this thread.  Either way, I predict we'll all be using "O" by Thursday, March 31st or before.

This may be crazy talk, but I predict that the April update will be available in April.
 
As to the "O" update, the Oracle has spoken and said there is no "O" update. Apparently Oracle owns the rights to the letter "O."

While we wait , here is a song about O :-)

http://youtu.be/rpvtKnqu7-4

ebibault51
Yes, you're right. I think that this subscription program is really a new, innovative service. And this program encourages me to test new features, new techniques... and finally makes me work more on music... Isn't it the best compliment that we can give to Cakewalk?
 
That's fine... but [I must admit that when I first read the announcement of this subscription model, I was ANGRY] :-)

After all the clarifications for like for ever by nearly everyone why do some people still insist on calling it a subscription model?
 
It's a friggin' membership model, with option to pay monthly. If you buy up front (full price) or pay 12 months you get the same rights of usage as the previous yearly update model.
 
And please, let's not get into the "what if I only pay for 3.756539074 months one at a time spaced out over 11.765478365 years" scenarios. They've been hashed and rehashed like a thousand times too.
 
Just like there is no spoon, there is no subscription model.

Huh. I was sure I saw a spoon there.

Probably because subscription is what we've always called things like this at work. We have a fair bit of software that works like this where you pay $X to get the software, and with that comes a perpetual license but then for $Y/year you get to have updates to the latest version. Vendors often call it a "maintenance subscription".
 
So that's just the term I'm used to. To me subscription implies a periodic payment (normally yearly for software). The terms of the subscription are what differs. Like with Symantec GSS it is a subscription like Sonar has, if we cancel we don't get updates but keep the license, with Mathworks Matlab it is a subscription that must be renewed to have a license.

Sycraft
Probably because subscription is what we've always called things like this at work. We have a fair bit of software that works like this where you pay $X to get the software, and with that comes a perpetual license but then for $Y/year you get to have updates to the latest version. Vendors often call it a "maintenance subscription".
 
So that's just the term I'm used to. To me subscription implies a periodic payment (normally yearly for software). The terms of the subscription are what differs. Like with Symantec GSS it is a subscription like Sonar has, if we cancel we don't get updates but keep the license, with Mathworks Matlab it is a subscription that must be renewed to have a license.

Well the answer is this isn't Symantec. CW as the developer has named it a membership. Its the term preferred by CW and we users have adopted it as well. One big reason is some people don't like the idea of a subscription where one loses the right to use the software if one is not current with a payment. Plus because we have a very strong forum the idea of membership is a better description of the nature of what goes on here. We work together to help one another with any issue a member encounters. 
 
The semantics aside we have a community that is alive and well it fellows that someone purchasing Sonar automatically becomes a member even if they never come here. There is no requirement to purchase Sonar to be apart of the forum but I believe if one is interested in DAWs and went to the trouble of logging in they too are members. Members of the forum.
 
I rather be looked upon as a member rather then a subscriber. It implies a closer association to other like minded people. We share what we know with each other to a degree that is rather fantastic. Give us a problem to solve and watch the fur fly as we seek an answer.  
 
When we think of this in the above way I think it helps to fundamentally change our relationship with one another in a very positive way. We no longer need be off on our own by ourselves trying to get answers. We can call upon the collective knowledge and wisdom of the members. 
 
In a virtual world of a forum it helps to humanize it by calling it a membership. It can be anything we want it to be. Thus I support what CW has started and asks us to refer to it with the term of membership.