Staff View Bugs

I was following that thread and I'm going to guess it was deleted because it got too personal. There was politics and insults and words were exchanged that you can't take back, although forum moderators can delete 'em.

I suspect that Craig himself may have pulled it realising it was not helping. Speculation is just that. I'm sure if we need to know we'll be told. Other than that it's not my business as are so many things.

jatoth
In this new era of transparency why can't Cakewalk at least tell us WHY they have abandoned Staff View. That would go a long long way toward stopping all the speculation.
JG, haven't you noticed, CW staff are pretty much absent from any threads about Staff View.
Were they told not to respond? Or are they just embarrassed? We may never know, unless CW decides to start talking about it.
What is obvious is they have not worked on it in way too many years, and do not have any current plans to work on it. That is all we have heard.
 
 

That question was answered by Bill Jackson from Cakewalk. You'll have to find the thread yourself though as I don't remember which one it was in but a fair bet would be the one where notation was discussed.

I renamed the subject title in order to facilitate a Sonar discussion.

This was Bill's answer?
 
"We frequently (annuallyish) investigate Staff View improvements, or even an overhaul. It's not "dead" nor "abandoned." It has just been "deferred" due to other priorities that impact a larger group of customers. Don't lose hope. We understand there is room for improvement and intend to tackle it eventually. Our new release model will allow us to budget time and resources more easily, so it's more realistic now than it has been in years. Thanks for being patient."
 
Followed up with ..
"In the spirit of being totally honest, though... I will admit that there are no current developments to the Staff View in progress."
 
REALLY!
I know of no work done on Staff view since at least Sonar 8.5 that's 2009.
Not "abandoned"? "room for improvement"?  Patient? We have spent hundreds of dollars on new releases for over 6 years. I think WE have been patient.
I still don't think CW has been TOTALLY honest about Staff View.
And as with all the other Staff View threads, this one too, will just wither away without a meaningful response from CW.
 
Please Cakewalk, PROVE ME WRONG!
 

Kamikaze,
We've been there, done that. CW knows what the issues are, and we have requested new features over and over. With every release, we ask again. Our pleading falls on deaf ears year after year.
I would just like to know why, so I can stop asking.
 

I trawled through the Features and Idea page a couple of days ago, couldn't see anything.
 
This 're-model' says we are members, lets test that.
 
In the next 12 months they are going to make features that makes us think we can expect good things for the year we subscribe. This year is unique, we have the past 12 months of features plus 12 months more to come. In 12 months they have to demonstrate enough that we will be will to invest again in them. We'll only getting 12 months development next time, and if we are still miffed about staff view and colour customisations the 2 things that are requested again and again, then we can show it. 
 
There is a serious lack of discussion from cake about these 2 aspects, and the new model requires more transparency, because it requests  more faith from us in them

I looked at the Coffee House 'Staff View" thread and it is not the one in question. The "Conspiracy and Paranoia Thread" seems to be gone. I had last posted to the "Conspiracy and Paranoia Thread" seconds before if disappeared. If i look in My Posts, I see none of the posts I made to this thread and I was actually trying to be concilatory. The thread had degenerated to singling out a guy as a troll with alt ID's. (He was a pita for sure). A few others chipped in with the corporate conspiracy meme. If it were a bar, there would have been a fight for sure. It seemed like things were calming down then it was gone.

TomHelvey
I think people would be disappointed but the answer would be a lot better than what we've gotten from Cakewalk so far which really has amounted to "we don't care".

 
What was actually said:
 

Bill Jackson [Cakewalk]
We frequently (annuallyish) investigate Staff View improvements, or even an overhaul. It's not "dead" nor "abandoned." It has just been "deferred" due to other priorities that impact a larger group of customers. Don't lose hope. We understand there is room for improvement and intend to tackle it eventually. Our new release model will allow us to budget time and resources more easily, so it's more realistic now than it has been in years. Thanks for being patient.

Bill Jackson [Cakewalk]
In the spirit of being totally honest, though... I will admit that there are no current developments to the Staff View in progress.

 
Might not be the answer you want, but <> we don't care.
 

I try to avoid saying much in these threads becaue i really do feel some compassion for the frustration of this issue.  I can't  help but think the only way anything significant will ever happen with staff view is if third party  is acquired and integrated into Sonar. It just doesn't  seem like the number of people who would switch to sonar solely due to staff view improvements  is large enough to justify the resource expenditure.  I would be curious as to what the numbers are for any DAW as far as the number that use staff view as primary means of creating midi data. Perhaps some raw numbers, even if informal, would be more convincing  than repeating the same rant annually.

microapp
The new model does not lend itself to new complicated features.

Why not?
 
Features can be developed in parallel.
Month 0           Month 1                                Month 2    Month 3                        Month 4
Feature 1----------------------------------------------------->Complete
Feature 2------Complete     Feature 3--------->Complete     Feature 4-------------------
 
I'm pretty sure the whole dev team does not work on one feature at a time.

dubdisciple
I try to avoid saying much in these threads becaue i really do feel some compassion for the frustration of this issue.  I can't  help but think the only way anything significant will ever happen with staff view is if third party  is acquired and integrated into Sonar. It just doesn't  seem like the number of people who would switch to sonar solely due to staff view improvements  is large enough to justify the resource expenditure.  I would be curious as to what the numbers are for any DAW as far as the number that use staff view as primary means of creating midi data. Perhaps some raw numbers, even if informal, would be more convincing  than repeating the same rant annually.

Ok, here some "facts" (and guesses) to use to maybe help you derive your own conclusions.
 
There are 1580+ pages in the form member list. Quite a few pages are users with 0 post count.
 
I did a rough page count of users with 100 or more posts (arbitrary I know). That is ~5000 users.
 
So let's say there are 1000 users that never created a forum account.
 
Let's say there are 1000 (near A level) producers or studio owners that chose not open a forum account.
 
I heard it quoted (more than 10 times in the last five years) that "many" want staff view fixed and/or enhanced.
 
What is the definition of "many" when we are talking 5K-7K (arbitrary guess on my part) users? 1%, 3% or 5%?
 
5% would be 350 users (using my arbitrary high end guess which means those 2K of non forum users need to be "heard"). Has anyone seen 350 individual members actually band together and "demand" staff view be #1 priority?
 
My (arbitrary) observation since 2007 is that maybe 35 users have expressed disdain over the lack of staff view changes. That's about 1/2 of 1% (again using my arbitrary guess of the user base).
 
Now suppose that the user base is actually 20K users (another VERY HIGH END arbitrary guess). 35 users isn't really all that "many", is it?
 
let the calculation bashing begin....

Or maybe 19,765 users will not upgrade until staff view is worked on.
 
Now that is "many".