SONAR OS X Alpha

SONAR OS X Alpha FAQ

John
Digital performer was a huge disappointment when they ported it to Windows. 

John
It was buggy and I had expected a fully mature DAW. What I demoed was a half baked Apple reject. I don't often say negative things about other DAWs. Here I was so disappointed I have no problem saying so. I too had heard so many good things about it. One was that many composers use it. Its notation is just barely better than Sonar's. Logic and Cubase run rings around it. On a Windows machine Sonar is a prince in comparison. Heck Reaper is a far better choice. It reminded me of Pro Tools free from the 90s.
 
It also has a very convoluted way of doing things. need I say more? You did ask.
 

tzzsmk
I'm pretty sure Cakewalk will release it as xmas or newyear's gift,
on the other hand since I switched to Mac (Hackintosh), I've started getting used to Reaper and I must admit I start to like it more than Sonar - features which Cakewalk has been promising to implement for literally 10 years, are implemented in Reaper already and they just work...

...wicked

John
 
It also has a very convoluted way of doing things. need I say more? You did ask.

It DOES have a unique workflow for sure. It always had a few features I really covet. Like key-on record starting and a centered Now Time. I also liked it's windowed workflow, but that was a LONG time ago and I know it's changed quite a bit since then.

tzzsmk
ripple editing,
stretch markers (similar to sonar's audio snap),
track (+plugin) processing load balancing and performance monitoring (of individual tracks),
batch export (using for ex. region matrix),
actions and programming functions (for ex. you can define custom actions to be performed when reaching desired marker etc. - this one is really advanced stuff, one of reasons for ex. Ubisoft is using Reaper when developing audio for games),
grouping and folders unified (sonar implementation of folders and mix bus groups is sadly schizophrenic, for ex. you cannot solo bus and different track to listen simultaneously in sonar)
audio/midi/instrument/group/whatever tracks/items/clips unified (no matter what you put in the track, it works - you can even put midi and audio clip/item into one track, or multiple tracks into one track)
borderless customization options (not just visual layout, keyboard shortcuts, but literally everything)
portability (possible to install on usb stick and carry around)
settings migration (possibility to move entire Reaper settings across multiple PCs, everything is stored in files, not some silly Windows registry)
project files are plain text (unlike Sonar project files, even without having an access to actual daw software, it is possible to check or even edit Reaper project files)
multiplatform interoperation (Windows, Mac, Linux)

Anderton
Well, this is why different DAWs exist...some features are important to some people but not to others. In that list, the only feature that's really important to me is ripple editing. Also, SONAR does some of the others in a perhaps more limited way, but sufficiently for my needs (e.g., the recent Clips export function handles what I would need batching for, aux buses and patch points unified tracks/folders/buses well enough for me, the combination of AudioSnap/Groove Clips/ctrl+shift+stretch takes care of my stretching needs, etc.). 
 
OTOH SONAR has features that are really important to me, like ARA integration, Matrix View, Mix Recall, VocalSync, the ability to create and edit Acidized files (which I need very much for video projects), pitch markers, etc. So that's why I use SONAR.