I've been a Cakewalk user exclusively for well over a decade and have immensely enjoyed their product offerings over that span of time.  Despite this, I have admittedly mixed feelings about where things are right now...
 
On one hand, I am exceedingly happy to hear that SONAR's legacy will live on. 
 
On the other hand, I do feel a bit burned by the circumstances surrounding lifetime updates (felt like a very dishonest cash grab and almost a betrayal) and the fate of Cakewalk. 
 
Given the nature of Cakewalk's inability to sustain itself with its product offerings, I am looking at Bandlabs with extreme caution.  Can they really do what Cakewalk could not (stay afloat on their own terms)?  Is the SONAR's successor really a DAW for a life-timer like me to stick with and expect longevity from (when that same DAW could not save its previous owners)?
 
I want to see SONAR thrive, believe me, but a part of me also feels I may be better off going with a more stable and long-lasting/committed/secure/honor-proven company.
 
Just wanted to post my thoughts somewhere, but I wish Bandlabs all the luck in the world and hope they do justice to the SONAR name as it was in its hayday (no matter what the new name will be).
 
 
Cheers and Warm Regards

I don't think Bandlab would have purchased Cakewalk if it didn't think it would succeed.
It would be a waste of every ones time and while taking chances are nice, Gibson was/is just not in a good place right now. They are selling off property, trying to pay their debts. And what better way to lose some of that over head than cut a company who was not a huge profit maker ?
 
Cakewalk makes money no doubt, but its following I believe is loyal, word of mouth and long standing users such as yourself, myself and many others.
This company has been brought down to a much smaller crew from what I imagine (Noel+Ben)
And along with Bandlabs help, I believe this company will do fine. It will make money and continue to sell.
 
I don't see it being the next Cubase but I happened to like Sonar very much.
It has always been stable (well X1 was a little rough) It has always been easy to grasp, even the deep features have been easy to grasp.
 
I wouldn't worry much. After all...
 
What do we have to lose ? This company was a ghost just 3 weeks ago.
Im just happy to see them back with a new plan.

Me too.  
Been working with cubase on a new project, sounds good, much to like, afew quirks… hmm, sounds like a description of tdfkaSonar… (the daw formerly known as) 
I looked at other daws too. The new team should too. See what's out there… 
I'll be back to the new product, I've got 30 years of cwps… 
my two wishes, much greater core stability and higher-end internal plug-ins 

Thanks for the replies and you both make good points. I look forward to seeing what Bandlab has in store for us before making any major decisions. Thanks again.

chuckebaby
Cakewalk makes money no doubt, but its following I believe is loyal, word of mouth and long standing users such as yourself, myself and many others.

Maybe I am not reading your comment correctly.  But I think it is safe to say that Cakewalk has not been profitable throughout the Roland and Gibson eras.  Gibson has its problems for sure, but they are not in bankruptcy today.  If Cakewalk was making a profit, they would have looked for a buyer rather than unceremoniously shutting it down.
 
I think the questions are:
 
1) Does Bandlab have the resources and desire to keep an unprofitable DAW in its stable for the long haul?  They may have the resources, but I doubt they would want to do that.
 
2) Is there a different product direction or business plan that could make the Cakewalk assets pay for themselves?
 
That second question is the more interesting one.  This is an extremely crowded market.  I like SONAR and all the people surrounding the product.  But honestly, SONAR doesn't do that much more than a $60 Reaper license.  As a traditional DAW, I'l go out on a limb and say the probability of this being sustainable long term is very low, maybe 5% odds.
 
But I don't think that is the plan Bandlab has in mind.  If you look where they are investing, it is all about the creation end of the process.  They have been trying to create a "cloud DAW" so to speak.  I suppose some of the Cakewalk technology could be useful there.  But they have also said they intend to keep SONAR as a desktop app.  I doubt we will ever see (not for a long time anyway) high quality commercial grade music mixed and mastered with cloud-style computing, but it can be a terrific way to collaborate and to evolve music projects during the creative phase.
 
So the desktop DAW gives Bandlab reach from end to end, from creative to final production.  That hints at where the development priorities will be, and that is probably a bit different from the priorities many old-time Cakewalk users have in mind.  But if successful, that means a CWT-compatible DAW will remain available and supported, and that is surely a good thing.

cparmerlee
This is an extremely crowded market.  I like SONAR and all the people surrounding the product.  But honestly, SONAR doesn't do that much more than a $60 Reaper license.  As a traditional DAW, I'l go out on a limb and say the probability of this being sustainable long term is very low, maybe 5% odds.
 

I'll go out on a limb and suggest that Reaper does a lot more than Sonar and is a superior DAW in almost every way. However, Reaper has an image problem. It doesn't look as "flash" out of the box as more expensive DAW's, doesn't come with any goodies and is a little intimidating to new users. Plus there is the perception of "how good could it be at only $60?"

cparmerlee
 If Cakewalk was making a profit, they would have looked for a buyer rather than unceremoniously shutting it down.
 

Sadly, Gibson has a very long history of buying technology ( hardware and software) companies and then doing just that. Not sure why. If they had stuck to building instruments, their position might be a lot different than where they are today.

Well I must say I was not surprised to hear another company is buying the Cakewalk code, changing the program name and abandoning the lifetime subscription users.  This is exactly what I thought would happen.  Trick your loyal base into forking over some cash right before you dissolve the company and then sell the code (not the obligations) to someone else.  I saw Marriott do this years ago when they split their company into two entities, one with the assets and the other with the debt thus screwing over their bond holders.
 
What surprises me is the totally blind loyalty of so many folks with "kind words" for those who pulled this whole shenanigan.  I've switched to Presonus Studio One and I'm never going to do business again with anyone associated with this scam.  Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

I'm one of the doubters.  If Sonar had been sold to an established company, such as Presonus that sells both hardware and a DAW, I would have a better feeling.  However, selling to a basically "cloud" company doesn't do much for me.  BandLab probably bought Sonar at a relatively cheap "fire sale" price.  Only hiring two ex Sonar employees doesn't seem like much for quick code development.
 
I too have bought another DAW (I've been on the edge for quite a while about another DAW and the Gibson abandonment was the impetus to make a decision). But, Sonar is still my production DAW and probably will be as long as it works. 

fireberd
I'm one of the doubters.  If Sonar had been sold to an established company, such as Presonus that sells both hardware and a DAW, I would have a better feeling.  However, selling to a basically "cloud" company doesn't do much for me.  BandLab probably bought Sonar at a relatively cheap "fire sale" price.  Only hiring two ex Sonar employees doesn't seem like much for quick code development.
 
I too have bought another DAW (I've been on the edge for quite a while about another DAW and the Gibson abandonment was the impetus to make a decision). But, Sonar is still my production DAW and probably will be as long as it works. 

The number of coders doesn't matter. Look how fast new features and bug fixes are incorporated into Reaper - it has an extremely fast development cycle with just one or two guys working.