I think it should come disabled and then the user will have the option to turn it on.
 
Updated 3/5/16
(Me thinks postings were tampered with).  When I replied to this posting, it wasn't Yesterday as noted  in the beginning of each response.  "Re: Cakewalk Analytics Coming To SONAR Yesterday (permalink)".  I actually responded to this post on Wednesday. so why is it listed as "yesterday" for every reply post in the discussion?
 
Also, I was the first to say, "I think it should come disabled and then the user will have the option to turn it on".
 
Now, I see another post before mine, post 19 which says, "Default should be turned off with incentive to participate."  Why is a new post there now changed to incentive to participate?   HHMMMMmmmm?    My response was initially on the first page, not the second page
 
JS = Just Saying, ..... Bakers,  JS
 
 
 
 
 

Will those of us off-line be able to participate?
 
 

Not directed at anyone in particular but I would like to request that everyone please keep this thread respectful and factual so that it doesn't degenerate into another low signal to noise ratio thread as witnessed recently. 

Analytics? 
Yes!
Great idea!  I will definitely participate.
 
Opt-In?  
No!
The default should always be opt-out.  Despite my decision above to participate, I dislike it when software pre-empts my opt-in stance
 
Rewards?
No!
Worth asking, but I think it'll backfire.  You want people to opt-in because they see value, and my guess is that you'll attract the "right kind" of information that way
 

Anderton
People are already being tracked in lots of ways they don't know about. The difference with Cakewalk is they're saying they plan to introduce analytics, and provide a way to turn it off. I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with a friend asking me to pick up some dog food because they're sick, so I look for the nearest Petco and from that day on, Chrome thinks I want dog sweaters, leashes, and chewy treats.
 
 

 
Craig you don't have it so bad!  I do all of the ordering on my Internet computer.  This includes for my daughter, wife and my wife's shut-in friend.  This includes bras, panties, blouses and such.  Thus all of these sites send me stuff thinking that I must be one weird cross dresser!
 

Another thought is that there is a problem report section of your forum stacked with posts from users who took the time to analyse and report bugs. That might be a good place to start if you are looking for relevent feedback that will vastly improve Sonar!

John T
An achievements system doesn't appeal to me. I use Sonar to get work done. I'm not interested in earning badges, and the thing that would send me running for the hills almost immediately would be any kind of nag or notification telling me I could get some digital trinket for using EQ a certain way. I struggle to imagine anything more irritating and distracting, and I know a lot of guitar players.
 
More generally, and more seriously, the idea of rewards for participation sounds totally reasonable. But incentivising certain behaviours is not only annoying, it's the exact opposite of analysis.

Good feedback and if we ever did this it would certainly not be something that would apply to all users. 
One thing to look at is that the definition of DAW's is changing and we need to cater to all classes of users who use the program completely differently from you and me. Producers and mix engineers are a relatively small segment of those who use music software. If we want to stay relevant we need to satisfy a wide set of users. We have some very good ideas about how we can do this without adversely affecting any one set of users. And user analytics is one step in helping us with that goal.

VariousArtist
The default should always be opt-out.  Decide my decision above, I dislike software pre-empting my opt-in stance

 
Peter it defaults to opt in with anonymous data. However there is a sticky clear toast notification that tells you this so its not done without your consent at all.

I have no problem with Sonar analytics at all and don't see any privacy issues. I think we have to get the whole privacy thing in perspective and differentiate between the kind of personal info that companies/the government could sell or use against you, and this kind of perfectly innocent data which for the life of me I cannot even begin to imagine a nefarious use for. 

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
 
One thing to look at is that the definition of DAW's is changing and we need to cater to all classes of users... Producers and mix engineers are a relatively small segment of those who use music software.

Completely agree with all of that. And it's really nothing new or even especially complicated. Fender wouldn't have a business if they only catered to people who make their living playing the guitar. Same thing applies here.