Teksonik

Anderton
 It's absurd not to place value on the contributions Cakewalk's developers can make on their own -

And I'll call you back out for missing the point.  I said:
"To place a higher value on the opinion of those who work for CW than on the opinions of those who purchased the software"
 
I said higher value.....not that the developer's contributions have no value.

 
I never said you dd. By quoting and referencing my post, you implied that I put a higher value on what Cakewalk wanted to do than what the users wanted to do, which is obviously not true to anyone who read the entire paragraph.
 

I've been on enough Beta Teams to know that a lot of the best ideas come from users not the developers.  It doesn't mean the developers don't have any ideas but everybody works differently.  No one can possibly know what's best for such a wide range of workflows without input from the people who actually have those workflows.

Then how can you possibly argue with my opinion that responding to user needs and coming up with original ideas are equally important? I don't understand why you can say what you said, but have a problem with me saying the same thing.

Teksonik

charlygNor do the users.... Aye, there's the rub.

But the users pay the bills..........especially with a "membership" paradigm.
 
Ok I'm done.  You can't reason with people who are in "Defense of DAW mode". You see it on every DAW forum.

Users pay the bills for the program that comes closest to doing what they want to do. I don't think they care where a great feature came from as long as it's a great feature. 
 
And this has nothing to do with defending a DAW. This has to do with correcting misinformation and discussing the process behind how, why, and in what way programs advance.
 
This all started because someone was clueless about the membership program and that was clarified. Then you claimed that Cakewalk wasn't responding to what people wanted and going in the opposite direction, and that was wrong (as shown by the list of what was done specifically in response to user requests) so it needed clarification too. Then you selectively took half of a paragraph to justify an argument against something that expressed the same opinion you did. That's okay, misunderstandings happen, but I really don't see the big difference between you saying community input is important and me saying that community input is important. I just happen to consider the developers to be part of the community and their input is important, as has been proven by their introducing features no one "clamored for" yet have been extremely well-received. 

Song filter time...
 
You can't roller skate in a buffalo herd.

charlyg
 
You can't roller skate in a buffalo herd.

You can, but not for long.
 
 
 
Don't ask me how I know, I just do.  Okay?     

forkol
 
Sadly, I agree, Teksonik.  Seems like if you are anywhere reasonably critical of the software or company actions, it does seem like people jump all over you, and "you're so wrong, how dare you be so critical, and you should feel lucky that you even get a chance to pay for and USE the software". 

People are critical all the time without anyone jumping on them. However, if people are critical based on not understanding something or overlooking/missing facts that have a bearing on their criticisms, they will likely be corrected. Where this becomes problematic is when someone is not willing to say "now that you mention it, I do remember that all the things you listed were requested in the forums prior to their being implemented, so I guess in at least some respects Cakewalk is indeed responding to community requests." Then you're perfectly entitled to go ahead and say you feel not enough user requests were implemented, or that they weren't of relevance to you, or that Cakewalk isn't moving fast on the most recent requests, or whatever, but then those opinions would be based on accurate data instead of being based on data that's not accurate.
 
I don't want to get personal here, it's not about who's "right" or "wrong," it's about what the facts are. Once you have the facts, any conclusion you draw will be "right" because you will decide what conclusions you want to draw from that data. But if you draw conclusions based on things that aren't true, the odds of drawing incorrect conclusions increase.
 
It's all good. I just think it's important that accurate information be presented. For example no one is going to jump on you if you say "Sheesh, Rapture Pro sure takes a long time to load when I start up," because...well, Rapture Pro takes a long time to load when you start up, and that's a fact. Cakewalk not paying attention to user requests...not a fact.

Teksonik

dwardzala
The people who write the software are experts in its use and understand far more of what's going on under the hood and can leverage that knowledge into new feature ideas a lot better than most of us.

The guys who write the code know the code but that doesn't mean they know how everybody else uses that software or that their ideas are better than those who spend all their time using the software not writing the code. Sometimes the people who write the code can't see the forest for the trees.  That's why user input is so important to the development of any software. The developers can't have all the ideas nor do they necessarily always have the best ideas.

Yes, and in my opinion there is an appropriate balance of user input and developer input into the choice of which features to implement in what priority.  Your post implied to me that you dismissed any input from the developers and that all user input was ignored (which I don't agree with), which is why I stated your position was short sighted.
 
It should also be noted that most (all?) of the coders at Cakewalk are musicians (and recording musicians at that.)  That's not necessarily the case with other software development (say graphics software, or business software.)  This is a somewhat unique situation.

Another amazing thread about the same stuff being explained again.
 
Someone should create a sticky that has every response and when these types of posts are created the sticky is referenced.

How is it THE CRAIG does not have blisters on his finger?
 
And his word count has to be close to that of THE BAPU.
 
These threads are a waste of THE CRAIG's time.

"You cannot change the opinion of someone who has stupid on their side."

I don't know how it works at Cakewalk but I do know how it works at the companies I worked for as a software developer. It is generally not the developers who make feature decisions, it is subject matter experts in the discipline toward which the product is marketed that collate the requirements and develop feature priorities. At Microsoft we called them Program Managers, and while it varied from team to team, they typically developed the feature specifications very completely for their area before the developers began coding, right down to the user interface design, including artwork by graphics designers.
 
PM's spent a lot of time traveling and talking to customers and analyzing competitive offerings as part of the process of feature development and prioritization. The more technical PM's often built feature prototypes (often with customer groups) for validation of ideas and proposed workflows.
 
At another company we built software for civil architects and engineers and our PM's were without exception credentialed civil engineers or architects (not the software kind.) I would expect that Cakewalk has a similar approach and no doubt has a cadre of musicians, engineers and producers making these kinds of judgments.
 
The bottom line is that if a feature appears in the product, you can bet that a critical mass of demand has been fully demonstrated to company leadership complete with ROI established before a nickel of development resources were allocated.
 
It's kind of axiomatic in the business that the most vocal customers almost always advocate for what research ultimately shows to be the least needed set of features. While everyone makes mistakes, I personally trust that Cake's feature decisions are in the best interest of the most users.
 
Cheers, all!