John
The only thing posters like Mr. Particle do is distract us from those posts that are legitimate and could use our help. They also have a very negative impact on those of us trying to figure out the truth from fiction.
It doesn't help when posters that do have problems agree with very vague and unspecified issues that may in fact have nothing to do with the stability of X2. Often its user error but its hard to tell if we inundate a thread with vague agreements with vague issues.
In my experience those threads that focus on a single issue get solve or a bug gets reported.
What threads that just bash X2 do is confuse the forum an get members taking sides. Highly unproductive.
What can we members do to help fix this problem? My answer is read the OP an if its a bashing of X2 with no issue clearly specified we should just bypass it. Let it go. By us trying to engage with trolls all we do is cause conflict.
To me everyone here is a friend not counting the trolls. But the trolls are very few and come in packets. Greet them with a happy and friendly demeanor but don't engage. This is all they want.
I believe that X2a is a very good release but I also believe it still has bugs. I believe we should all pull together and do what this forum is best at. Which is finding solutions and helping each other.
Obviously this post is just me speaking. None of you are required to agree with it at all. I do however hope that you do agree.
Just a word regarding X2a.
Today, I received my Friday afternoon email from Cakewalk ( I was hoping that X2b was being announced, but no such luck).
Not much interesting in the email, so I decided to re-read the Noel's X2a blog from 12/21/12.
A couple of things which are probably obvious to most, but were refreshed in my mind:
- In the blog - "We shipped SONAR X2a, our brand new Windows 8 native version of SONAR. This was exhaustively tested with Windows 8..."
- On the main Sonar X2 Producer page, under System Requirements: "Windows 7 or Windows 8 (32 and 64-bit). XP and Vista are no longer officially supported. Future updates will not be compatible or install on XP and Vista as they are no longer officially supported."
So X2a is the first update to X2 which IS NOT COMPATIBLE with XP nor Vista.
Obviously there is some coding departure with this update. Could this be the one of the reasons that X2a is just fine for some users but not others?
Did the code changes as part of the update make X2 more sensitive to Windows or certain hardware (graphics cards)?
Just a thought.