wst3
If I might... a parallel tale from long ago.
 
The first computer to make it into my studio for real was a Commodore Amiga 3000 tricked out with the Sunrize Audio Card. By today's standards it was pretty crude, but mostly I locked it to time code and let Bars&Pipes Professional drive my MIDI gear. And for that it was outstanding.

An Amiga 3000 with Bars&Pipes locked to a 1/2" 8 track was my first setup. Loved the MIDI routing capabilities.

chuckebaby
good comment Rod.
My only hope is the code becomes open source. I hate thinking this is the end. I use Region Fx and drum replacer quite a bit.

Superior drummer 3 is your friend

I like to think I'm naturally pretty good with software, and although I've only been messing around with them for a couple of weeks, I'm beginning to feel at home fairly quickly in both Studio One 3 and Cubase Pro 9.5. They have lots of great features, some nice design ideas, etc. There are some neat tricks up their collective sleeves, and some clever innovations, etc yada yada yada...and its true. They are deep and capable, and I'll have no difficulty switching to either of them full time, when that day comes...
 
But even the fairly easy and intuitive things in SO3 and Cubase often have that one extra step, or that one additional and largely unnecessary detail that Sonar didn't have when it came to doing stuff. Bouncing midi tracks, is one example. All the DAWs can bounce midi tracks -- it's a pretty fundamental ability -- but none of them do it with the simple "select, click and done" efficiency of Sonar. I find that is a common theme when I'm comparing other DAWS to SPLAT. Sonar had a certain straightforward elegance in its implementation. "Why click three things, when you can get the same result by clicking two things?" seemed to be one of the governing principles of Sonar's bakers, it seems.
 
Cubase and SO3 always seem to have that one extra requirement, or that one additional toggle to select. And then there's Samplitude, where the guiding principle for bouncing and rendering seems to be "why use two steps, when we can use 27 steps in submenus they'd never expect, using menu items that aren't entirely clear in what they do, and then try not to laugh when they export 12 midi tracks to one file in a folder they can't find?"
 
But I digress...
 
Sonar wasn't perfect at everything, and there are things about both Cubase and SO3 that I like better (SO3's obsession with drag-and-drop everything is actually pretty nice), and I think Cubase's PRV editing tools are brilliant and about as close to perfect as I can imagine. But I will miss Sonar when it is no longer a viable product to use. 
 
Just my half cents worth of thoughts on the topic. 

In Studio One you can simply select a midi track and do a CtrL B. It will bounce it to audio. (Fast!) No extra steps required.  Agreed though you can do it from a menu too which might require another step or two.  In those situations you have more options in terms of converting to audio. But for the fast way, the CtrL B is simple and fast. 
 
What is still very clear to me is that many of you still don't know Studio One very well. And rightly so.  Once you have been using it for 6 years you sort of know all these little things that many of you simply do not now.
 
There are many DAW's out there that can do everything that you have been doing now. And more, more than likely.  It still all comes down to your talent, experience and ability.  Any DAW will get you there if you have got all those things. 
 
Comparing something you know for 5 minutes to what you have known for years is simply ridiculous. 

I agree with the OP on this.  I went out and bought Studio One about 2 days after the CW announcement and have been trying to get into it ever since.  The Studio One GUI is lacking so much that is just a single click or key-press in Sonar.  It feels like I've gone back in time about 10 years.  And don't even get me started on the MIDI deficits.  I just can't quite get my head around the fact that the best all-round DAW in the world is dead.

Jeff Evans
 It still all comes down to your talent, experience and ability.  Any DAW will get you there if you have got all those things. 

Still, there are some things some programs do that others just don't do. For example try creating a loop library and export Acidized files in anything other than SONAR or Acid Pro, even though virtually all DAWs can read those files. Try doing the same kind of Song/Project mastering linkage that S1 does in anything else, or Live's Session view / Arrangement view linkage. Try doing the 4-point broadcast editing that Sequoia does...or sharing work on film projects with anything other than Pro Tools...you get the idea. There are some features that are deal-breakers or deal-makers for people, and are unique to particular programs.
 
One reason I switched to SONAR was because I wrote a book on Mixing and Mastering with Cubase SX and the publisher wanted a follow-up. I said how about SONAR? They said great, but do the same page count, contents, cover the same topics, etc. When I submitted the manuscript they were upset because it was much shorter, like 25-30% fewer pages. "Didn't you hear what we said?" I couldn't figure out why there was the disparity until I compared the step-by-step instructions to do various things. By and large, SONAR took fewer clicks.
 
Of course times have changed since then, but nonetheless, one DOES need to consider workflow as it relates to the type of projects they do. The reason why I'm using S1 as SONAR's successor is because it is fast once you learn the shortcuts and such, however there are some things I can do only in SONAR. For example, is there any way to specify 52 or 53% swing in S1? I haven't found it, but it's something I use in just about everything MIDI-based.

Double click on a midi event. You will see it below in the lower pane. Select the events in question. Up at the top left of the lower pane is the letter Q. (next to the speaker icon) Click on that. A new panel drops down. The swing slider is now visible. You can set it to any value from 0 to 100%. Just set it for 52 or 53 % swing right there. 
 
If you have only been using Studio One for certain functions then you cannot know the full detail of it.   The reality is in this program anyway there are lots of things that are not well documented either and I can certainly agree that could be better.
 
A great video to watch is the Groove 3 vid on Recording and Editing in Midi. It will seriously change the way people think in terms of midi capabilities that is for sure.
 
I agree there are things that are important for your work flow.  For example Sonar never really had an arrange ruler like it exists now in Studio One.  If you are one to be changing your arrangement around then this is a revelation. (Noel even admitted you need a very well designed audio engine to be able to play back arrangement changes like this, perfectly and seamlessly. It was well designed from the start) So are scratchpads too.  
 
The way clip gain adjustments are instantly effected visually in Studio One. If you are one to be doing a lot of this for example, Sonar was hopeless in this regard. This is a serious deal breaker for me. 
 
Also the way Studio One records midi on the fly while looping and jumping tracks. Sonar can not even approach this. It falls over.  In Studio One this is a seamless operation. Data just gets added in as you land on tracks. (for me and the way I sometimes like to record midi data this is a revelation) The stuff you can also do while it is in play is also quite amazing. The audio engine is truly gapless in this regard.  Sonar never quite made it in that department either.  
 
 

olemon

rodreb
While looking around at prospective candidates to replace Sonar, I've come to one big conclusion.... Nothing else looks as good, has all the features, is as intuitive, or has as good of a workflow. Oh, I know, they probably all sound fine but, I also know I'm gonna have to shell out extra $$$ on plugins to achieve the sound I now get in Sonar.

 
+1
 
I always thought that the Console View was first-rate.  It looks like a real mixer and the routing makes sense to me.  I'm used to it now of course, but the gui's in some other daws appear cartoonish to me.

Totally agree Olemon.
Sonar was a GUI Gem.
Interestingly . and I discovered this because of  another post I made a couple of days ago, there are some out there who see Sonar's latest GUI expression/s as the reason they left  the Cakewalk fold..."esp 'SKYLIGHT' " (quote).
I anticipate we will hear more on this now that I have raised it ;).
Cheers Frank

chuckebaby
good comment Rod.
My only hope is the code becomes open source. I hate thinking this is the end. I use Region Fx and drum replacer quite a bit.

Hear Hear !! Chuckebaby

Anderton
 
 however there are some things I can do only in SONAR. For example, is there any way to specify 52 or 53% swing in S1? I haven't found it, but it's something I use in just about everything MIDI-based.

This will indeed be a steep learning curve for us CW stalwarts........ and I imagine 'the course of time' will resolve and  eventually heal any damage to our studios, our workflows,our cash-flows, and particularly our 'Sense of Trust'.
 
BIG PS: Thanks so much Anderton for your 'Faith' and intense/incredible help over the years...........you epitomize a 'True Believer'.
Cheers Frank in OZ