Has anyone noticed its in the New style of graphics as per the Start menu?? Very slick.

I like it.
 
But what I also like is the look (feel and color) of the "Add track" popup menu. I mean, if the whole Sonar UI would be in that color tone with same fonts and buttons and icons, it would look great and easy to work with. ;)
 
Was it in Sonar 8.5. when the Start menu was updated and eventually it looked the same as in X1? :)

williamcopper
ok I read the whole thread.   good grief.    a "feature". 
 
Insert (number of) (type of) tracks (following/before) track number (X).  
 
In ONE and ONLY ONE place and ONLY ONE way, and that a clear way for the beginner and a fast way for the expert.
 
This is why Sonar is so widely hated, or despised, or neglected,  in a nutshell.  

You seem like a bright guy. No disrespect but this is why I can't take anything you write/propose seriously. I think it's the MELODRAMATIC way you INSIST that there can only be ONE and ONLY ONE way ( read YOUR WAY) to resolve an ISSUE.
...widely hated, despised, neglected....... You crack me up......

mudgel
Has anyone noticed its in the New style of graphics as per the Start menu?? Very slick.

I like that

 
The style is nice, but it's pretty dark and grey.
 
Does this announce a major overhall of all the dialog boxes ?
Otherwise it would be a bit out of character with the rest of the UI.
 

Anderton

williamcopper
ok I read the whole thread.   good grief.    a "feature". 
 
Insert (number of) (type of) tracks (following/before) track number (X).  
 
In ONE and ONLY ONE place and ONLY ONE way, and that a clear way for the beginner and a fast way for the expert.
 
This is why Sonar is so widely hated, or despised, or neglected,  in a nutshell.  

You have just described what Add Track does, except for the "following/before" option. However, I guarantee that if this function was implemented as you describe, the complaints would be quick to arrive, loud, and numerous...
 
"That sucks!! How come I can't specify the track's output? You want me to insert a track that goes nowhere?"
"Those idiot Cakewalk developers seem to have forgotten that tracks need inputs. C'mon, guys!"
"Wow Bakers, how stupid can you be to let me create 10 tracks AND THEN HAVE TO DRAG THEM INTO A FOLDER?!?"
"I play through amp sims, where do I enable input monitoring?"
"What if I don't use the same MIDI controller all the time?"
"Simple instrument tracks suck!!! Why can't I split the track and put it in a folder LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE DO?!?"
"Look, I get you want to make things simple, but why can't I insert a track that's already record-enabled, monitoring the input, and ready to record? Why does your stupid simple approach make me do MORE clicks AFTER inserting the tracks?"
"This new way of inserting tracks is really, really dumb and is why SONAR is so widely hated, or despised, or neglected...the only improvement is being able to choose following/before, and in the process you're crippled all the rest of the functionality we need a whole lot more. Way to go, Bakers."

 
Craig, how DARE you satirize this forum by drawing upon logic and experience without hyperbole!  What has this forum come to?

Anderton

williamcopper
ok I read the whole thread.   good grief.    a "feature". 
 
Insert (number of) (type of) tracks (following/before) track number (X).  
 
In ONE and ONLY ONE place and ONLY ONE way, and that a clear way for the beginner and a fast way for the expert.
 
This is why Sonar is so widely hated, or despised, or neglected,  in a nutshell.  

You have just described what Add Track does, except for the "following/before" option. However, I guarantee that if this function was implemented as you describe, the complaints would be quick to arrive, loud, and numerous...
 
"That sucks!! How come I can't specify the track's output? You want me to insert a track that goes nowhere?"
"Those idiot Cakewalk developers seem to have forgotten that tracks need inputs. C'mon, guys!"
"Wow Bakers, how stupid can you be to let me create 10 tracks AND THEN HAVE TO DRAG THEM INTO A FOLDER?!?"
"I play through amp sims, where do I enable input monitoring?"
"What if I don't use the same MIDI controller all the time?"
"Simple instrument tracks suck!!! Why can't I split the track and put it in a folder LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE DO?!?"
"Look, I get you want to make things simple, but why can't I insert a track that's already record-enabled, monitoring the input, and ready to record? Why does your stupid simple approach make me do MORE clicks AFTER inserting the tracks?"
"This new way of inserting tracks is really, really dumb and is why SONAR is so widely hated, or despised, or neglected...the only improvement is being able to choose following/before, and in the process you're crippled all the rest of the functionality we need a whole lot more. Way to go, Bakers."
 

Have we sunk to this? Sounds like a couple of school boys.

ampfixer
 
Have we sunk to this? 

Well, most people haven't. Certainly not you 

williamcopper
ok I read the whole thread.   good grief.    a "feature". 
 
Insert (number of) (type of) tracks (following/before) track number (X).  
 
In ONE and ONLY ONE place and ONLY ONE way, and that a clear way for the beginner and a fast way for the expert.
 
This is why Sonar is so widely hated, or despised, or neglected,  in a nutshell.  

SONAR is not widely hated or despised. In fact people who are using the current version overwhelming love it. We have data to back that up. And neglected? Have you seen the amount of updates we have done this past year? I am all for a good debate and people will always have opinions either way, but when you say a program is neglected, and it's clearly not, it makes it hard to take any of the statement seriously. 
 
As far as the Add Track Menu goes. I, personally, think this is a good feature and will be a time saver for all customers. Realize though that any feature we put in will always have scrutiny. If you don't use MIDI, you aren't going to care much about any MIDI enhancements. But people who do MIDI every day will likely be happy. If we were to put in only features that were universally loved by 100% of the customer base, there would be no new features because that is impossible.

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]

williamcopper
ok I read the whole thread.   good grief.    a "feature". 
 
Insert (number of) (type of) tracks (following/before) track number (X).  
 
In ONE and ONLY ONE place and ONLY ONE way, and that a clear way for the beginner and a fast way for the expert.
 
This is why Sonar is so widely hated, or despised, or neglected,  in a nutshell.  

SONAR is not widely hated or despised. In fact people who are using the current version overwhelming love it. We have data to back that up. 

Not just you, actually. Take a look at the December MI SalesTrak data for DAWs if you want to elevate your mood