I know you're not a support abuser, but the purpose of support is support for things that aren't working or causing problems for users, not free lessons. Superfluous support inquiries fall into three main categories.
 
1) A lot of those support slots are booked by people with "how to" questions. For example they say they have a problem with TH3. The "problem" turns out to be "How can I get a good Mesa Boogie sound?" not "It doesn't show up in the browser, even after a reset and rescan." Often the same questions are asked over and over by people, like how to get a good vocal sound, or whether they should use a condenser or dynamic mic. This is not the purpose of support, yet these how-to questions are the majority (yes, the majority) of support inquiries that Cakewalk support receives.
 
2) Another common scenario is: "SONAR doesn't work." "Have you done all the recent Windows updates?" "Yes." "Okay, let's do a remote desktop" at which point support finds out there are 31 Windows updates that haven't been applied, some which are essential for a variety of programs to run.
 
3) Then there are those who consider a support phone call the first thing they should do, not check the FAQs.
 
There was a thread in here a while ago when someone was complaining about how he needed a number to call Cakewalk support. When the usual group of helpful and intelligent people offered to help, instead of accepting their offers he sent me a PM demanding Cakewalk's phone number. I asked what his problem was and that I would help, and if I couldn't help, I'd personally escalate it to someone at Cakewalk and get an answer. He never responded. Apparently complaining was his priority, not fixing the problem. 
 
And you wouldn't believe some of the calls Gibson support gets about their guitars.
 
Anyway, if the three types of "support" users mentioned above went away, I think there would be plenty of slots. I can't do anything about (2) or (3) but after talking with support while I was visiting, it opened my eyes as to how many calls fall into category (1). So, I've asked support to give me the most common "how-to" questions they receive, and I can write a blog post or article or whatever so they can just say "Click here for the answer, bye" and move on to the next person.
 
Type "terrible customer service" with a DAW name and you'll get hits on Avid, Cubase, Universal Audio, Logic Pro, Teenage Engineering, MOTU, Native Instruments...then I ran out of patience, but I'm sure Cakewalk is in there somewhere. All these companies have to deal with the same issue of "support abuse," which is why at just about any given moment, there's a complaint on a forum about a company's support.
 
I've often said Cakewalk should do 90 days free support and after that, pay per incident to provide an incentive for people who don't really need support to look elsewhere for solutions. That way the support team's time can be spent on...well, support. Cakewalk's response is they want to keep support free. My contention is that what they really want to do is keep support free and available for those who actually need support, and IMO the easiest way to do that is to put up some kind of barrier to those who don't need what support is intended to offer.
 
 
 

How come my Gibson has 6 strings - I only know how to play with 4?

Anderton
I've often said Cakewalk should do 90 days free support and after that, pay per incident to provide an incentive for people who don't really need support to look elsewhere for solutions. That way the support team's time can be spent on...well, support. Cakewalk's response is they want to keep support free. My contention is that what they really want to do is keep support free and available for those who actually need support, and IMO the easiest way to do that is to put up some kind of barrier to those who don't need what support is intended to offer.
 

I believe you've posted much, if not all, of this before. I'm not sure what the takeaway is supposed to be. Are we supposed to feel sorry for Cakewalk because they have a disproportionate amount of dumb/ignorant customers?
 
The problem is that Cakewalk hasn't delivered on what they promised on service and support (see post #25), and from the customer side, there doesn't seem to be any progress.

telecharge

Anderton
I've often said Cakewalk should do 90 days free support and after that, pay per incident to provide an incentive for people who don't really need support to look elsewhere for solutions. That way the support team's time can be spent on...well, support. Cakewalk's response is they want to keep support free. My contention is that what they really want to do is keep support free and available for those who actually need support, and IMO the easiest way to do that is to put up some kind of barrier to those who don't need what support is intended to offer.
 

I believe you've posted much, if not all, of this before. I'm not sure what the takeaway is supposed to be. Are we supposed to feel sorry for Cakewalk because they have a disproportionate amount of dumb/ignorant customers?
 
The problem is that Cakewalk hasn't delivered on what they promised on service and support (see post #25), and from the customer side, there doesn't seem to be any progress.

Please post the specific issue you are having and maybe we can help. Perhaps while you are waiting for Cakewalk Tech support, the helpful forum members could help you find the answer you need.

Sylvan
Please post the specific issue you are having and maybe we can help. Perhaps while you are waiting for Cakewalk Tech support, the helpful forum members could help you find the answer you need.

Thank you, Sylvan. I appreciate your offering to help, but my problems are not the issue.
 
This is about service and support as a whole and what it will be (or won't be) going forward.

telecharge

Anderton
I've often said Cakewalk should do 90 days free support and after that, pay per incident to provide an incentive for people who don't really need support to look elsewhere for solutions. That way the support team's time can be spent on...well, support. Cakewalk's response is they want to keep support free. My contention is that what they really want to do is keep support free and available for those who actually need support, and IMO the easiest way to do that is to put up some kind of barrier to those who don't need what support is intended to offer.
 

I believe you've posted much, if not all, of this before. I'm not sure what the takeaway is supposed to be. Are we supposed to feel sorry for Cakewalk because they have a disproportionate amount of dumb/ignorant customers?

 
The takeaway is supposed to be you saying "Hey that's a great idea Craig, Cakewalk should do it!" If enough people say that, they'll do it, problem solved, end of complaints about support.  
 
Another option is to ramp up the support staff so it can indeed accommodate everyone for free. This means considerable added expense, which would have to be passed along to the customers as a whole. I don't think most legit customers with legit support issues want to pay for people who don't know what kind of mic to buy. (And even if everyone had their questions answered within 24 hours, that still wouldn't end all complaints about support. Trust me on this - Waves has superb support, and people still complain about it.) 
 

The problem is that Cakewalk hasn't delivered on what they promised on service and support (see post #25), and from the customer side, there doesn't seem to be any progress.

 
Separate issues, I think. The promise did not take into account lots of new customers thinking "support" meant free education. Cakewalk probably should have anticipated that, but they extrapolated the past into the future. It was a flawed assumption that support demands would not increase above and beyond the amount that would normally accrue from more sales. But, it is difficult to predict the future if there was nothing done in the past (i.e., lifetime updates) that could provide useful data for making valid predictions.
 
From the customer side, there has definitely been progress. Those with long memories will remember when this forum was packed with complaints about support. That number of complaints has tapered way down, and most of the backlog is gone.
 
I've offered two ideas on how to solve the problem. If you prefer one or the other, or have another practical idea on how to ramp up support without penalizing legitimate customers with legitimate support issues, I think Cakewalk would be interested in your thoughts. I'll also add that while I don't think support should be a profit center as it is with many companies, if there were per-incident payments coming in, that would allow hiring more support people so the entire process would be faster for all.
 

telecharge

Anderton
I've often said Cakewalk should do 90 days free support and after that, pay per incident to provide an incentive for people who don't really need support to look elsewhere for solutions. That way the support team's time can be spent on...well, support. Cakewalk's response is they want to keep support free. My contention is that what they really want to do is keep support free and available for those who actually need support, and IMO the easiest way to do that is to put up some kind of barrier to those who don't need what support is intended to offer.
 

I believe you've posted much, if not all, of this before. I'm not sure what the takeaway is supposed to be. Are we supposed to feel sorry for Cakewalk because they have a disproportionate amount of dumb/ignorant customers?
 
The problem is that Cakewalk hasn't delivered on what they promised on service and support (see post #25), and from the customer side, there doesn't seem to be any progress.

Anderton

telecharge

Anderton
I've often said Cakewalk should do 90 days free support and after that, pay per incident to provide an incentive for people who don't really need support to look elsewhere for solutions. That way the support team's time can be spent on...well, support. Cakewalk's response is they want to keep support free. My contention is that what they really want to do is keep support free and available for those who actually need support, and IMO the easiest way to do that is to put up some kind of barrier to those who don't need what support is intended to offer.
 

I believe you've posted much, if not all, of this before. I'm not sure what the takeaway is supposed to be. Are we supposed to feel sorry for Cakewalk because they have a disproportionate amount of dumb/ignorant customers?

 
The takeaway is supposed to be you saying "Hey that's a great idea Craig, Cakewalk should do it!" If enough people say that, they'll do it, problem solved, end of complaints about support.  
 
Another option is to ramp up the support staff so it can indeed accommodate everyone for free. This means considerable added expense, which would have to be passed along to the customers as a whole. I don't think most legit customers with legit support issues want to pay for people who don't know what kind of mic to buy. (And even if everyone had their questions answered within 24 hours, that still wouldn't end all complaints about support. Trust me on this - Waves has superb support, and people still complain about it.) 
 

The problem is that Cakewalk hasn't delivered on what they promised on service and support (see post #25), and from the customer side, there doesn't seem to be any progress.

 
Separate issues, I think. The promise did not take into account lots of new customers thinking "support" meant free education. Cakewalk probably should have anticipated that, but they extrapolated the past into the future. It was a flawed assumption that support demands would not increase above and beyond the amount that would normally accrue from more sales. But, it is difficult to predict the future if there was nothing done in the past (i.e., lifetime updates) that could provide useful data for making valid predictions.
 
From the customer side, there has definitely been progress. Those with long memories will remember when this forum was packed with complaints about support. That number of complaints has tapered way down, and most of the backlog is gone.
 
I've offered two ideas on how to solve the problem. If you prefer one or the other, or have another practical idea on how to ramp up support without penalizing legitimate customers with legitimate support issues, I think Cakewalk would be interested in your thoughts. I'll also add that while I don't think support should be a profit center as it is with many companies, if there were per-incident payments coming in, that would allow hiring more support people so the entire process would be faster for all.
 

Craig - I love the idea of paid support.  There are zero resources that are immune from abuse if it doesn't cost the user per use.  Even small amounts of cost will curtail abuse.
 
I'm sure there are tons of folks out there that genuinely need help, but are caught up behind a queue full of hand-holding requests.
 
Jeez people ... learn your machine+interface, your OS and your DAW.  Expend a little effort. 
Yes, I'm flame proof.  Go for it.
 
 

BobF
 I love the idea of paid support.  There are zero resources that are immune from abuse if it doesn't cost the user per use.  Even small amounts of cost will curtail abuse.
 
I'm sure there are tons of folks out there that genuinely need help, but are caught up behind a queue full of hand-holding requests.
 
 

 
I can't really see how paid support could be justified unless the software is completely free of all faults/bugs which we have already been told is "not possible".
 
It's one thing to be asked to pay up front for future releases/bug fixes in software that you've already paid for in the hope/expectation that the investment will turn out to be worth it, even though it might be considered reasonable not to have to pay at all to fix faults that already existed when you bought it or indeed those caused by subsequent modifications, but quite another to be charged again only to be told that the reason that something doesn't work properly is because of a bug that has been known about for years but hasn't been fixed because its not considered to be important enough to bother with / we've been too busy fixing all the other bugs.
 
 

paulo

BobF
 I love the idea of paid support.  There are zero resources that are immune from abuse if it doesn't cost the user per use.  Even small amounts of cost will curtail abuse.
 
I'm sure there are tons of folks out there that genuinely need help, but are caught up behind a queue full of hand-holding requests.
 
 

 
I can't really see how paid support could be justified unless the software is completely free of all faults/bugs which we have already been told is "not possible".
 
It's one thing to be asked to pay up front for future releases/bug fixes in software that you've already paid for in the hope/expectation that the investment will turn out to be worth it, even though it might be considered reasonable not to have to pay at all to fix faults that already existed when you bought it or indeed those caused by subsequent modifications, but quite another to be charged again only to be told that the reason that something doesn't work properly is because of a bug that has been known about for years but hasn't been fixed because its not considered to be important enough to bother with / we've been too busy fixing all the other bugs.
 
 

Faults/bugs don't fall in the hand-holding category, so maybe genuine fault/bug calls get credited back.

pauloI can't really see how paid support could be justified unless the software is completely free of all faults/bugs which we have already been told is "not possible".
 

 
Well, first of all you already know it's not possible if you've used any software of even medium complexity. So it doesn't matter who tells you it's not possible to have bug-free software, because they're right. Yet plenty of companies justify paid support for software that has plenty of bugs. This is because the two are not related.
 
Support encompasses issues like why did my payment not get processed, install issues, compatibility issues or questions, and so on. The purpose of support is to get customers up and running to the extent allowed by the software, the operating system, the host hardware, and the users acumen.
 
The typical start of a true support call is "I can't get XYZ working." Now, that may be due to a bug, in which case support logs the bug and it joins the queue of things to be fixed. But it could also be due to any one of a number of issues, which can include pilot error, computer problems, defective RAM, badly written graphics drivers, not updating an operating system, a different program that overwrites something another program needs, a plug-in that doesn't follow a spec properlly (remember, the VST spec is more like "suggestions," not mandates), and so on. Sometimes the problem may be due to a software combination, and support from one company has to work with support from another company to find out WTF is going on.
 
For example in theory, there's no reason why some programs shouldn't work with MIDI BLE. So you try it and it doesn't work properly. But the problem is at Microsoft's end and won't be fixed until the next Windows update. In a case like that support can't fix your problem, but it can tell you what the problem is, and what to look for to find out if it's solved. Or in the case of SONAR, you could be trying to run a 32-bit plug-in in a 64-bit environment yet the plug-in is known not to work well with a bridge. Cakewalk's support can't fix your problem, but they can tell you not to waste any more time because it's known not to work.
 
This is why I find the web the most efficient form of support, because there's a shared knowledge among manufacturers and users. 
 
What you pay for if you pay for support is not bug fixes. Support people are not developers. Bug fixes are built into the price of the software and of updates. If you doubled the price of software, the number of bugs would be reduced dramatically. You can't expect to pay the lowest possible price yet still enjoy the highest possible performance. This is why all music software has a significant amount of bugs; it's very competitive and margins are razor-thin. If Logic still cost $999 instead of $199, it might be a different world. But now everyone has to compete with that kind of pricing.
 
When you pay for support, you are paying to have a human being at the other end of the phone line or email address who can answer your question. You're not paying them to fix your bug. However with a good support team, if it is a bug you are paying them to ask you more about the problem so they can reproduce it, and pass it along to the developers so they can fix it. But still, this is NOT paying them to fix the bug. It is paying them to do their part in helping to produce more bug-free software, which will always have a cost attached, whether you want to accept that or not. I guarantee you it is true.
 
The day musicians release perfect mixes, never flub in a note in concerts, always start concerts on time, never break a string, never play a grand piano that's out of tune, and write songs that everyone likes will be the day there are no bugs in music software. I'm not holding my breath. 
 
The entire world is imperfect. People can choose to complain about it, strive to improve it, accept it for what it is, or give up on it.