Well it's a very fraustrating thread to read. No real facts anywhere apart from the driver error. We can't go down that path or explore other options as the OP isn't interested in discussing or trying to resolve the issue here. Without any real facts this thread has no balls to grip on.

It then becomes a discussion about how people 'feel' rather than hard facts which is apparently the OP's intention. A complete nowhere thread what is the point... It won't fix any problems or locate any bugs if they exist.. Hearsay layered upon hearsay. Choose you camp.. Fanboy or sceptic? Red pill or blue pill... Whatever it is make sure you paint a big white line in between... Ultimately the discussion is about nothing and does nothing.

You can see how many [word edited after silly complaint] start out this way..

The intent of this reply is to be educational, not confrontational.
 

BobF
Sonar is not some new, shiny piece of software that needs time to mature.  It is literally decades in the making.

 
SONAR was introduced in 2000. There has not been one consistent team making SONAR for the past 15 years, and it was re-invented for the X series. There is also a constant stream of new features being added that were not decades in the making. Each version of SONAR isn't like remixing the same song over and over until you get it right, it's more like during the mix you add tracks, remove tracks, change signal processors, do some additional overdubs, and re-patch the patch bay...and since 2000, there have been five major Windows operating system changes, several significant processor changes, a transition from 32-bit to 64-bit computing, and changes to the Windows driver structures.
 
These are not trivial changes, yet SONAR has to adapt to them and often be backwards compatible with older versions and hardware that is no longer being made. If people stopped using 32-bit plug-ins entirely they would have a better SONAR experience...but probably not a better creative experience, which is why SONAR accommodates that technology.
 

Take a look at the confirmed bug list for the past 20 releases.  Where do you honestly think initial su****ion should go?
 
A customer/user oriented company would recognize this and take responsibility instead of spending precious time playing defense.  Don't waste your breath explaining why it must be something else as your first response.  Actively listen, ask questions and help your users get to the place they bought your software to help them get to.

 
Well, if a company is fixing bugs, it's obviously listening to what users want and taking the responsibility to fix those issues. (Nor IIRC has anyone from the company been "playing defense" in this thread.)
 
People have been listening and asking questions, but Jamesyoyo said he didn't ask for help, and said he would contact tech support. Therefore no one really needs to listen or ask questions other than tech support, and their job is to "help your users get to the place they bought your software to help them get to." So Cakewalk already does what you think a customer/user-oriented company should do.
 

jeez ... simple concepts folks.  You want people to see you as a shining example?  Simple.  Shine!

 
It's difficult to shine when no light is being shed on the situation as to specifics. I have no reason to doubt that jamesyoyo has some degree of computer savvy, is a good guy, and is experiencing major problems. However there seems to be no interest in pursuing a solution via the scientific method, which is to:
 
1. Observe a phenomenon (okay so far - jamesyoyo states that SONAR has crashed precisely 24 times in the past week and specifies the precise track count and types, as well as some less specific descriptions of issues)
2. State a hypothesis to explain the phenomenon (again, so far, so good - the hypothesis is that SONAR is "a piece of crap")
3. Use the hypothesis to predict the results of new observations (a little less clear, but since he poses the idea of asking for one's money back, I think it's safe to assume his prediction is that new observations will produce the same results)
4. Have several independent experimenters test the hypothesis with properly performed experiments.
 
Here is where the method falls apart. We have quite a control group of independent experimenters here, and it's possible to point to post after post about a smooth installation, most stable version yet, no problems, love the upgrade, etc. etc.
 
 
Now, consider this. It's a fact that since installing Platinum right after NAMM last January, I have had only one freeze over countless hours of work on projects both huge and small, involving digital audio and MIDI. And, that one freeze was due to my deleting the file of impulses for REmatrix, which flipped out when I loaded a project that required those files, and froze SONAR in the process.
 
Therefore, based on the same kind of logic as the OP, I could post a thread that says "Verdict: SONAR Platinum Is Essentially Perfect." But of course, I know just because that's MY experience doesn't mean it's EVERYONE's experience. Therefore, if I test the hypothesis "SONAR Platinum Is Essentially Perfect" that test will fail because there are confirmed bug reports from a control group of independent experimenters that invalidate the hypothesis.
 
However, the hypothesis "SONAR Platinum Verdict: Bugfestapalooza" also fails due to the substantial number of experimenters in the control group who find that not to be the case at all.
 
Jamesyoyo said "I simply stated my disappointment and disbelief at the situation and wondered if anyone else felt the same way." Yet the thread title did not say "I'm disappointed, does anyone feel the same way?" Instead, it issued an unequivocal "verdict" stating something which many people find untrue. It would be like one person in a jury saying "Well I think he's guilty so that's the verdict, I don't care what the rest of you think and I'm not interested in any more evidence, I've seen what I need to know." That's valid from a solipsistic standpoint, but not necessarily from an objective one.
 
I think the negative reaction has less to do with a defense of SONAR than resentment the OP gave a "verdict" which did not represent the experience of a large number of people. People generally do not like others to speak for them, unless they agree. I think we all understand the frustration Jamesyoyo is experiencing, as I'm sure almost everyone here has experienced similar frustrations at one time. The object should be to relieve that frustration, but if someone doesn't want help, then they don't want help and that should be the end of it.
 
 

Well I wasted my time reading and writing in this thread. Where can I get a refund? ;)

Doktor Avalanche
Well it's a very fraustrating thread to read. No real facts anywhere apart from the driver error. We can't go down that path or explore other options as the OP isn't interested in discussing or trying to resolve the issue here. Without any real facts this thread has no balls to grip on.

It then becomes a discussion about how people 'feel' rather than hard facts which is apparently the OP's intention. A complete nowhere thread what is the point... It won't fix any problems or locate any bugs if they exist.. Hearsay layered upon hearsay. Choose you camp.. Fanboy or sceptic? Red pill or blue pill... Whatever it is make sure you paint a big white line in between... Ultimately the discussion is about nothing and does nothing.

You can see how many religions start out this way..

Comment unnecessary and offensive. Mods please remove that comment.

 

When X1 was released as usual, I was one of the first to update. I could barely get it to run on my PC in fact I never really got to use it for more than crashing my whole system.. Sonar 8.5 worked perfectly.

I was on this forum whinging and complaining but no one could replicate my problems and in the end I even got labelled a pest because I would interrupt every thread with my sad story.

Finally X1c was released and suddenly I could use Sonar. I still had to work through the drastic change coming from 8.5 and I really kicked and bucked against that transition.

Since then though I've had no major issue with Sonar. I'm now on a different PC but installed X1 with all the upgrades and all is fine with all the X series. I can't eplain why I had the problems with X1 that I had, but it is most likely that the combination of audio and video software ( I have a lot) I have on my PCs created some conflict that that particular version of Sonar exposed. I don't care now it's history.

But I have learned that the argument, "this version runs fine so the next version should run fine too is not logical". If the latest version doesn't work it must be a crap fest. Think logically. This forum would be overrun with posts about the problems. Rather, most of the threads are about how do I do this or that and help people getting their systems sorted out because they're newbies.

In my experience, the most likely cause of this kind of problem is down to a plug-in - I've seen a fair few times where plug-in X works in version n and not in n+1.  There are good and bad reasons for this:
 
Good - there's a genuine bug in the plug-in (eg. memory leak) which the latest version of SONAR traps to prevent file corruption (say) but the older version didn't.  You were essentially lucky that the older version didn't crash when using the plug-in (or it might have done, but not consistently as it's down to usage patterns)...
 
Bad - the VST Scanner is shared between different versions of SONAR, and until Platinum, the VST registry (in the Windows registry) was likewise shared between versions.  So if an update of the scanner changes how a plug-in is handled, and you've run a reset/rescan on loading a new version of SONAR (which is likely), the plug-in's details may now be incorrect when combined with how the new version of SONAR interprets said details (I've had this with two plug-ins, both commercial ones, where I've had to manually edit the registry to get the plug-in to work in SONAR once a new version of the scanner existed and had been run).  The scanner and VST registry should be SONAR version specific so this can't happen (this situation also means that you could end up with projects from version X not openable in version X after you've run the scanner from version X+1).

That last sentence has been my #1 concern with installing Platinum.

Anderton
The intent of this reply is to be educational, not confrontational.

If you want to educate, sit back and reread first.  You've missed the point entirely.  Yes, Sonar is literally decades in the making.
 
The point about shine isn't how the OP is being reacted to.  It's the overall impression of the product.  If Sonar's rep was that of 'Shining Example', people would be less inclined to generalize it in a negative way when they encounter problems.  Want an example?  Fix the horrendous installation process.  It is sloppy and as such, leaves a less than stellar first impression.  Sonar is in ver 21 something.  And we're still apologizing for sloppy installation.
 
That's one example.  You've seen the reports.  Lotsa' little stuff broken here and there.  It all adds up.
 
So now comes a new release.  You've hacked the registry, created FS links to get things sorted out.  A couple of bug releases are done ... finally.  Your system confidence is at a new high!  Can't wait to get those new goodies - wait a minute.  Not only did the installer scatter stuff randomly around my system, now it's broken - again.  No quick install and get back to using the system.  Time to tweak and troubleshoot - again.
 
So as a result, somebody posts about a bugfestapalooza ... you don't think people get frustrated?  You don't expect this kind of post to happen?
 
You can point out 'independent experimenters' in both camps all you like, but the fact remains that there are far too many with negative experiences to take claims of 'shining example' or 'flagship' seriously.
 
I want Sonar to succeed.  I had another great experience yesterday mixing a small, 18 audio track project.  I like the plugs and I'm warming up to ProChannel.  It's a nice piece kit.  In the back of my mind though, I know the areas I have to avoid.  And I would really like to use those things. 
 
And yes, I'm still waiting for the next work-losing problem to show up.  It might not happen.  I hope it doesn't happen.  The final questions to ponder are, "Will I be surprised when it happens?" and "Should I be surprised when it happens?"
 
Make of that what you will.  I'm informing and sharing perspective for Cakewalk to use to make their products better.  I'm not looking for an education. 
 
Here's a little education for you:  The toughest thing for company decision makers to learn is that they do in fact own the perception(s) others have of them and their products.  Telling people their perception is wrong won't make those perceptions change.  The actions you take and the experiences you create for your customers are the only ways to make perceptions what you want them to be.
 
 
 

mettelus
That last sentence has been my #1 concern with installing Platinum.

Kevin's absolutely correct. I've seen some weird glitches in X3 since installing Platinum. Nothing major, and no crashes, but weirdness that wasn't there before, like the entire track inspector going blank. I still haven't started using Platinum, though it is up to date. After I wrap up my current project, I'll start testing unfinished projects in Platinum and start using it full time.
 
Regards,
Dan
 

I primarily only use "analog" tracks.  Only occasionally a MIDI track. 
I've been using Platinum, for production, since I got it.  I've done several CD projects for clients.  No problems with any of them.  But, to be truthful I probably only use less than 5% of Sonar's capabilities and really didn't need to upgrade to Platinum, other than to have the current version.