kevinwal
Yeah, I don't hear you complaining about the release cycle, only that they're not doing it right.

Will you please quote me in future! I never come up with comments like that at all in these sort of discussions.

I'm certainly not saying they aren't doing it right, I'm asking for the model to be tweaked to accommodate for customers who would rather wait out for stability releases (so they can get less agro), rather than just for those who install so they can get shiney new features that haven't been been put out in the field. I believe both sorts of customers can be accommodated for, they can have their cake and eat it.

Anyway thanks for a sensible discussion enjoyed reading your posts.

Doktor Avalanche

kevinwal
Yeah, I don't hear you complaining about the release cycle, only that they're not doing it right.

Will you please quote me in future! I never come up with comments like that at all in these sort of discussions.

 
You see the smiley, right?
 

Doktor Avalanche
I'm certainly not saying they aren't doing it right, I'm asking for the model to be tweaked to accommodate for customers who would rather wait out for stability releases (so they can get less agro), rather than just for those who install so they can get shiney new features that haven't been been put out in the field. I believe both sorts of customers can be accommodated for, they can have their cake and eat it.

Anyway thanks for a sensible discussion enjoyed reading your posts.

Sigh. The point I've been making is that stability releases may well be just as agro as regular ones. Then what? Anyway, you're welcome.
 

kevinwal
Sigh. The point I've been making is that stability releases may well be just as agro as regular ones. Then what? Anyway, you're welcome.

And I'm disagreeing with you. All you are suggesting here is that all code when altered can produce bugs which is true.

Cakewalk has done unscheduled stability releases in the past (looks like there might be one for the 64 bit precision engine issue coming up) with no further issues. If another major issue cropped up as a result from such a patch they would probably be forced to do yet another unscheduled release. Releases concentrating on existing regression and no new features of course will be less agro to the end user. And I already made the point several times about an iterative cycle here and the target. It's not rocket science and has been part of software development for decades.

Doktor Avalanche

kevinwal
Sigh. The point I've been making is that stability releases may well be just as agro as regular ones. Then what? Anyway, you're welcome.

And I'm disagreeing with you. All you are suggesting here is that all code when altered can produce bugs which is true.

Cakewalk has done unscheduled stability releases in the past (looks like there might be one for the 64 bit precision engine issue coming up) with no further issues. If another major issue cropped up as a result from such a patch they would probably be forced to do yet another unscheduled release. Releases concentrating on existing regression and no new features of course will be less agro to the end user. And I already made the point several times about an iterative cycle here and the target. It's not rocket science and has been part of software development for decades.

Yes, you are certainly making your points over and over and over..... Relentless.
You, sir, are the one reason I am beginning to stay away from this forum.
Incredible.

Well, if the original poster is anywhere in this neighborhood, I would like to suggest that you (OP) post each issue you are experiencing as a separate thread, and give us forum folks a chance to help you get things resolved.
 
I would like to know what issues you are having with Boost11 - one common issue that comes up with it, and others, is that it is meant to be used AFTER a given project has finished recording - it is meant for use in mixing, due to its need for a much larger buffer.
 
Boost11 and Perfect Space, and plugins that either use a type of processing called 'look ahead processing', or chew up a lot of CPU and and do add large amounts of DPC Latency, and need the ASIO Buffer Size jacked way up in order to have enough 'room' to properly work without audio problems.  
 
When I track/record, I run with an ASIO Buffer Size of either 128 or 64, but when I mix - I change my ASIO Buffer Size to 1024 or 2048, which gives the heavy duty plugins meant for the mixing stage enough buffer to process properly.  MANY times, folks discover all of this the hard way - they either track without effects, OR swap out effects like Boost11 with others until they finish the recording of their tracks, and then after they move into mixing and reset the ASIO Buffer Size way up, THEN they will add plugins like Boost11, and then they don't have problems.
 
Another possibility had been pointed out way early in this thread, was that 32-bit third-party plugins can and do SOMETIMES cause stability issues, when loaded into projects that are running in a 64-bit Sonar.  BitBridge and even JBridge do NOT always completely work for some plugins, and IF you see either Bitbridge or JBridge in memory, you DO have one or more 32-bit plugins loaded, and you may need to swap one or all of those out for 64-bit equivalents, OR work in a 32-bit Sonar for that project.
 
Anyways, lots of folks are getting lots of things done with Sonar, and there are a bunch of folks in these forums that will work with you to help you resolve issues you may be having - IF you engage in the forums by posting each issue in a separate thread.  Hang in there with it :)
 
Bob Bone
 
 

coolbassYes, you are certainly making your points over and over and over..... Relentless.
You, sir, are the one reason I am beginning to stay away from this forum.
Incredible.

Only reason I'm staying is that's I am still wearing a 64 bit precision bullet proof vest and a helmet. Thank you for your contribution to the thread.

Oh good, the Dok is back again to tell Cakewalk how to develop properly. Indeed, it's like he's never been away.
 
Keep it up, it's RIVETING stuff. And as I've said before, I think they're all ready to do it your way. They're almost persuaded. Just a few hundred more threads.

From what I've seen a LARGE number of the "shiny new things" are separate downloads/installers from the core program.
 
Yes there have been some major additions to the program as well but those do NOT happen every month. There was month 1 (Allston) which had most of the new stuff which was a culmination of the previous year's development.
 
Since then we've had very few major additions to the CORE program.
 
Upsampling (shouldn't interfere with much unless it's used)
 
Aux Tracks/Synth recording (huge but had been CONSTANTLY requested for YEARS)
 
aaand... well IDK but there is probably one more that I'm forgetting
 
So the idea that the core program is being mangled EVERY month by new features doesn't really hold up.
 
They do seem to however be doing a lot of under the hood stuff to streamline the code and allow more avenues for future development (this was stated by the Bakers... essentially a lot stuff was impossible due to old, clunky code).
 
That is likely where these few, relatively minor bugs are coming from but likely better for the program in the long run.
 
We have gotten at least 3 completely solid releases that were as stable (or more so) than X3. Probably more. That is more than any previous incarnation under the old system where we would get a bunch of half baked releases/patches until we got one useable version (and in the case of X2 that even didn't happen).
 
We have ON TOP of that gotten quick patches to deal with problems that were affecting a largish section of users.
 
When we look at the big picture (not getting bogged down in the monthly minutia) this is a perfectly reasonable development/distribution system that overall has greatly improved MOST user's experience.
 
Nothing is perfect though. Things can always be better and the Bakers should (and are AFAICT) keep trying to make the program a solid as possible but we are most DEFINITELY not worse off than we were before.

John T
Oh good, the Dok is back again to tell Cakewalk how to develop properly. Indeed, it's like he's never been away.
 
Keep it up, it's RIVETING stuff. And as I've said before, I think they're all ready to do it your way. They're almost persuaded. Just a few hundred more threads.

Here we go again... Thank you for your contribution. Any more?

I'd like to buy an argument please.
 
No you wouldn't.
 
...