mettelus
I didn't read through this all, but the "rewards" idea could be made even simpler and useful IMO (only caught a few comments on this before typing this post).
 
Example... someone who puts 40+ hours a week behind the wheel of SONAR should get higher precedence in both bug reporting and feature requests over those who have used SONAR for 15 minutes combined in the past 3 months. This does not imply that they "go to the head of the line" and trump everyone else outright, but that their opinions and votes count for "more value" (2:1, 5:1, whatever...) Even a simple "hours logged" multiplier (with fudge factor to keep numbers reasonable) would be a wiser metric for sorting inputs/feedback (plus CW can specifically focus surveys to different groups to bucket "legacy woes" versus "new user hurdles" and such).
 
In this regard, it could highly sway (for the better) the "squeaky wheel gets the oil" syndrome that occurs often in here.

Hmm.
 
I easily go way over 40 hours in any given week, and I reckon I disagree.Weighting data is always tricky, because it means adding presumptions to what the data means.
 
And the tricky thing here is, the number of hours put in won't always mean broad usage.
 
For example, up until a new project starting a week or so ago, all I'd done for several months was mix audio. Easily working 70 hours a week, for weeks on end. But in that time, not a single plug in instrument used, no MIDI features used, no step sequencer, no matrix, no staff view... huge areas of the program going untouched. 

So the last six months of data from me would say MIX FEATURES ARE SUPER SUPER IMPORTANT AND MIDI IS NOT.
 
Except now I'm stuck into a project that requires lots of synth programming, sequencing, virtual instruments all over the place, loop construction, you name it. So that 70 hours a week of data from before doesn't even represent me, and it's going to take me six months to amass enough data for this other pattern of use that does.
 
 
 
 
 

Brando

John T
Well, they're not saying "we're now going to base all decisions on this new analytics data and disregard all other input".

No they're not - but honestly, how would you assess the rate of implementation of user submitted feature requests to date? IMO, I don't think I could give them a C grade in that respect (but concede they scored a couple of A's for features that were not User originated.) I see analytics as a further step backwards from the vantage point of a user still holding out hope that there will be a concerted effort to implement user submitted improvement ideas. (My 2 cents).

My view exactly.  In effect, the user's voice is removed.  It's like those surveys with multiple choice questions, but your response really needs qualifications.  No more essays to explain WHY you're doing something the way you're doing it.  OTOH, if you're going to continue using Sonar, it's pointless (IMO) to turn this off unless you want to have zero input.  The Information Age *should* make communication easier and more complete, not provide the ability to build walls.
 
My enthusiasm for Sonar was stoked to the max by the end of '15.  If I'm going to be honest, I have to say that that enthusiasm is on the decline.  The FR subforum is overflowing with user requests for basic features that are no-brainers for improving Sonar.  Add this to Noel's comments implying unbalanced input from the forum and this doesn't look good from my perspective at all.
 
Sorry, but this is my view on it.
 
 
 
 

dwardzala

Brando
I'll opt out. FWIW the feature I most want improved in SPlat is notation, and it's also the feature I almost never use (in Sonar), because, frankly, well... you know (insert dead horse emoticon here). How is someone going to gauge how to improve this, and other less-than-optimally implemented features (like, say, touch), for example from "analytics"? The suggested fix for Video issues in Sonar is commonly "Get Vegas". As a result, analytics might suggest that video in Sonar is rarely used, when in fact it's implemented state has caused users to move on to use something else, either in conjunction with, or instead of, Sonar. Step Sequencer? ("Use FL Studio (Reason/Geist)") Substitute your own example of a feature you don't use much but, which, if it was better implemented, you would use a lot.
In my estimation analytics will tend to drive improvements on features that are already well implemented and used (and while I agree that this should result in an improved focus on workflow of the most commonly used features - I am afraid the result will be more "Add Track" buttons), and away from user Feature Requests.

It sure feels that the feature requests users have been submitting/posting/waiting for have been a waste of time. I am frankly disappointed in the implementation rate of user feature requests - as I see it emphasis on "analytics" is going to further escalate the slide.

Sorry but the whole thing seems like a(nother) gimmick to me.
I know - just shut up and turn it off. Will do.

Actually Brando's point is why you can't just skew the data toward "power users."  The new users won't know about the ineffectiveness of [insert your feature here] and will try to use it.  The analytics collected from them will show the workstream they are trying to use and potentially result in improvement to those features.
 
 

I'm not suggesting any such thing with all due respect. Please don't paraphrase - my words are what they are.
To clarify:
I (personally) just don't want analytics (my own opinion only) to become a new "feature" that becomes a preoccupation and consumes person-hours of development time. CCC and the Start Page are two such features that weren't even part of the program a year ago, and have seen numerous fixes, changes, criticisms. There may have been a small minority of users who requested something like a start page - if so, great - they got what they hoped for(?). I have my own list of things I wish got more attention but am not presuming that my list is the same as everyone else's. Users are users, new or "power". I have voted on several Feature Requests - of different types from a range of folks, including new users. It seems to me that not one of the most popular has (as of yet?) been implemented- I honestly don't know if any in their submitted form have been(?) maybe Start Page in one form or another.
What concerns me most about this roll out is that it is another "bolt-on" that (IMO) does nothing to address core functionality. (I said nothing about new versus power users.) I simply feel analytics will be ineffective at illustrating how a range of users WOULD use certain features in Sonar if those features worked properly. This will inevitably lead (IMO) to tweaks to those features that see the greatest use by all users ( while this seems great and even democratic, my concern is that this will lead to "features" like the Add Track button - as an example of a "better" way to do something which I, at least, have never had a problem with).
FWIW I am anything but a power user.
Cake can prove me wrong in my opinion by actively rolling out feature requests and resolving issues identified in the Problem Reports. (Cue posts about 2015 rollout of features, fixes etc, none of which I am debating or even disagreeing with - I renewed my SPlat membership for a year).
I understand that some/many/most(?) users may want analytics, and may want tweaks to commonly used functions. I am simply stating an opinion that relates to my use of Sonar -

Brando, sorry if you interpreted my post as paraphrasing your words.  Someone earlier in the thread expressed an opinion that power user data should be weighted more heavily.  I was just pointing out that your (good) point about power users not using poorly implemented features is a reason not to weight power user data over new user data.

If the analytics are going to guide development then that's cool. But how do analytics help Cakewalk identify when I can't find a feature I want or I'm confused as to the order of operations for getting something done? I'll contribute, but they won't learn anything about my frustration or inability to do something in Sonar. They will only learn about what I'm able to do now. Doesn't seem so useful.
 
Will analytics tell Cakaewalk I want the skins feature or the new mastering plugs a lot more than feedback portals and analytics?

No, but other ways of communicating that are not being stopped.
 
I dunno, are people looking at the title of the thread and seeing "CAKEWALK TO CUT OUT USERS' TONGUES THIS SPRING"?

My point is that Cakewalk will only know what I can do. They wont learn that I can't figure out how to do something. They won't learn that a process is confusing me  or that I don't use a feature because I don't understand it. The analytics will just tell them that I never use take lanes, but not WHY I never use take lanes.
 
I don't think anyone is trying to remove the voice of the customer.

ampfixer
 
...I don't think anyone is trying to remove the voice of the customer.

That is one key point I've picked up from this thread - these analytics are an addition to existing means of collecting user data, not a substitution.   If can they provide something that the other means cannot, more power to them.
 

Just a quick antidote.
I've been developing/writing code for 35 years. The single most effective thing I have ever done to improve our software, was to have the development team answer technical support calls. They learned first hand from the actual user's mouths what was confusing, buggy, cumbersome, annoying, etc. Intimately knowing the code behind the user's issues made for very effective updates. We were able to reduce our tech support calls by over 95%. Most of our current user base has been with us since the early 90's. Why? They tell us "The software just works!"

ampfixer
My point is that Cakewalk will only know what I can do. They wont learn that I can't figure out how to do something. They won't learn that a process is confusing me  or that I don't use a feature because I don't understand it. The analytics will just tell them that I never use take lanes, but not WHY I never use take lanes.
 
I don't think anyone is trying to remove the voice of the customer.

So the logical next step would be to query the customers on why a feature isn't being used.  They did a survey last year on Sonar usage.  The analytics could provide data to help them generate even more meaningful questions.