irvin

Anderton

irvin
I personally would prefer a "no more 'content', only bug fixes and new features (in that order)" approach. I don't need 7000 useless guitar loops - I need 'pre-roll recording'. Virtually every other DAW has had it for years and it's a great time-saver and workflow (that's why all major DAWS chose to implement it).

Content is done by third parties or people at Cakewalk who aren't involved in engineering, so it has zero impact on development.

It does - because whatever resources are allocated to obtaining and providing this "content" (in the form of employee salary, outright purchase from third parties, etc.) could be allocated to engineering. Bug fixes and mainstream features ('mainstream' meaning features common to other major DAWs, like pre-roll recording) are far more useful than 'content' of dubious value.

Anderton

irvin

Anderton

irvin
I personally would prefer a "no more 'content', only bug fixes and new features (in that order)" approach. I don't need 7000 useless guitar loops - I need 'pre-roll recording'. Virtually every other DAW has had it for years and it's a great time-saver and workflow (that's why all major DAWS chose to implement it).

Content is done by third parties or people at Cakewalk who aren't involved in engineering, so it has zero impact on development.

It does - because whatever resources are allocated to obtaining and providing this "content" (in the form of employee salary, outright purchase from third parties, etc.) could be allocated to engineering. 

 
No, as I said before it has zero impact on development (well technically, it needs to be included in the installer so people can download it, but that's trivial).
 
Here's why. I create almost all of the content, and it's for projects that I do. As a result this content is created on my own time (weekends and evenings) for projects that have nothing to do with Cakewalk. I make them available to the community because of the positive comments in this forum from people who've tried content like the Hardgroove Steinberger virtual instrument, percussion loops, Monitorizer, VoxTools, Amp Sims, etc. Some people really like them, so why be selfish and keep them solely for myself?
 
Cakewalk does not pay me for the content I create. Third party content is obtained for free not because it's worthless, but because being included provides more visibility for the company. For example, the Boz ProChannel plug-ins brought his company attention that resulted in people checking out their other products. You can think of it as trading content for advertising; both the content and advertising have value.
 
Some of the non-SONAR-specific content I create, like the Gibson Bass Collection, is not included with the membership program but is sold through the Cakewalk store. I do not receive any money for that either, so Cakewalk keeps what they make, and those resources ARE available for engineering.
 
So now that I think about it, I stand corrected...my content creation can have a positive impact on engineering by allowing engineering to have more resources. Cakewalk recently hired two more engineers so it must be working
 

charlyg
And I am happy with the content.IT  does what I need to create drums and keys to go along with our "live" bass,guitars,and vocals. All it does is take up hard drive space.which is now cheaper than dirt.
 
And generic is better than specific.......more folks will use generic stuff in generic music....since there is more of it.

irvin
I firmly believe that the majority's opinion should rule.

M@
That way I don't have to worry about being faced with a potentially unstable system every month.

As it is now I've been skipping every two updates but also been missing out on the content/features to play with.

M@
Would be interesting to see what people would 'pay' for.
Say CW would offer a 'bugfix' membership a 'content' membership and a 'features' membership all separately. Most probably viewed over a say 3 years period the percentages of purchases for each category will end up pretty even.

irvin
You kept the record reviews because it did not cost you much to keep them - the 85% found value in other areas of the magazine, while the 15% more than covered the cost of keeping the reviewer around. So, that's like an apples to oranges comparison.

Anderton

M@
That way I don't have to worry about being faced with a potentially unstable system every month.

 
Cakewalk is kicking around an idea that may solve that issue. Nor ready for prime time yet, though.