DrLumen
How many here think the name CakeWalk might have had a little something to do with their demise? That name always causes me to cringe a bit. If you had a mega studio trying to attract business would you want to be known for using software named after a child's game?

 
Personally I don't think there was anything wrong with their name and it probably had nothing to do with their demise. What about Fruity Loops - despite being named after a child's breakfast cereal, it's been one of the most popular DAW's of all time and is quite often seen in pro studios. 
 

THambrecht
I always wondered why Cakewalk is "by" Roland. But there was nowhere to be read that Cakewalk is "by Gibson".
So I thought always that Cakewalk is a independent company with a a parent company.
For me it is mysterious that Roland or Gibson don't sold the software as "Roland SONAR" or "Gibson SONAR".
Therefore, I first thought this days, that Cakewalk can be a company by itself. But if they ever had made profit, they had never need a parent company.

I guess whether or not a company calls a child company "Child Company BY Parent Company" depends on the company. Roland will have made the decision to attach their name to Cakewalk, and Gibson will have made the decision not to. 

kitekrazy1
 Professional studios are a small speck in the software industry.  

Small spec though they may be, they have influence on market trends. Often within a group of musician friends, at least a few will do work with commercial facilities. Those particular individuals will tend to gravitate toward a DAW which is supported by the commercial studios they work with. While that's only a few individuals among any particular group of friends, they will also tend to be most prolific and most well seasoned. The others in that group will fall more into the category of semi-pro and hobbyist.

So when those semi-pros and hobbyists are in the market for a DAW, what are they gonna do? They're going to look at what everyone else they know is using. They will especially look at what their pro friends are using. Thus a speck on the industry though pro studios are, they have influence. Sonar was never a player in that market and it definitely had an impact on sales.

cityrat
They're $500 mil in debt for a reason.  They make products that aren't competitive and the management cant figure out how how to fix things and at the same time not spend as much.
 
So the only avenue left is to somehow increase stock price.  They cant do it by actually MAKING things, so the only thing left is to say that by doing xyz they will generate more growth.  Thats the only thing that you cant actually (yet) measure, so it's easier to "make stuff up" about how doing xyz will blacken the skys with some new consumer product.  Lather rinse repeat.  Always keep moving, dont let them actually see the smoke and mirrors.
 

 
You do know that Gibson is a closely held company i. e. they do not sell stock to the public. Since free money has been easily available since 2008, the idea of selling stock to raise cash has become a quaint affectation most companies no longer bother with. The new model is issuing bonds or private lending. Public companies have to disclose all kinds of information, and if the stock is sufficiently distributed the management falls prey to the potential of having its judgements second guessed by shareholders. It appears that Gibson's problems are at least in part due to borrowing the money needed for a bunch of acquisitions which have not returned the profits they had hoped for. In that sense Cakewalk was part of the problem, and simple abandonment of Cakewalk makes sense as a gesture that Gibson management has finally come to grips with the reality of their mistake in hopes that new money can be found who will trust them in the future. I expect that without Gibson's willingness to carry a losing asset, we would have been here years ago.

I always thought "Cakewalk" meant "using this software is so easy, it is like a cakewalk."

How did you come to name the software Cakewalk?
Right before I placed the ad, literally two days before the deadline, I had picked another name for the program, and I found out it had been used by other software. I think it was something like Opus. So I had this little dictionary of music terms, and I saw Cakewalk. And I thought, wow, that’s nice. It’s a simple English compound word, you know how to spell it, and it has this connotation of ease of use even if you don’t know the musical history.
 
And what about “12 Tone Systems?” Because who doesn’t like twelve-tone music, I guess, right?
So the name of the company was 12 Tone Systems — because it’s everyone’s favorite, most accessible style of music. [laughs] I thought it was kind of fun. For many years, people would call up and say, “is this Cakewalk?” I decided, instead of correcting people, we’d just change the name of the company to Cakewalk and that’d be simpler.
 
Greg Hendershott
    ~Interviewed in 2007

paulo
Unfortunately, all we ever got was the head cheerleader constantly telling us all how great things were going and how bright the future was for CW so it's hardly surprising that users became complacent and waited for the sales before buying anything.

I assume by "head cheerleader" you're referring to me, and of course, thinking you're oh-so-clever.
 
Try to locate some recent posts by me telling you all how great things are going and how bright the future was for CW (i.e., since I found out that the plans in place that I thought would keep Cakewalk solvent were not going to be followed through, which was at least several months ago). Then compare that to all the posts I've made that unlike yours, present useful, fact-basedinformation to users, including tips and product support. Then look up the word "constantly" to find out what it means, and while you have a dictionary open, look up the word "exaggerate." 

cityrat
They're $500 mil in debt for a reason.  They make products that aren't competitive and the management cant figure out how how to fix things and at the same time not spend as much.
 
So the only avenue left is to somehow increase stock price.  They cant do it by actually MAKING things, so the only thing left is to say that by doing xyz they will generate more growth.  Thats the only thing that you cant actually (yet) measure, so it's easier to "make stuff up" about how doing xyz will blacken the skys with some new consumer product.  Lather rinse repeat.  Always keep moving, dont let them actually see the smoke and mirrors.
 
Its a generic trend all over the industry.
 

So then... they are part of the Government?? 😮

jbow
That’s nice but I fail to see the connection with this and Cakewalk.

From published statements originating in the Roland days it appears Cakewalk was losing money and increasingly so. Any business must be profitable to survive, Gibson especially.

jbow
...If Gibson doesn’t see profits in continuing Cakewalk products because they made the dumb move (or crooked move) of selling Lifetime updates...

We have it now from two inside sources that the idea came from the Bakers and it was only offered to Platinum users who form a small segment of Sonar users. IIRC, this was also clarified at the time the deal was offered (I was one of the skeptics). It is also not without precedent in the industry, apparently.

jbow
...unless you assume they planned to sell the lifetime updates, offer some... for a while, then take the money and run while lying about the reason to avoid liability.

Again, the insider source (where is that reddit AMA link?) said the motives were well intentioned but the execution lacking. Gibson was not involved.

jbow
This Phillips is not the reason, rather it’s an excuse.

Gibson presumably feel this is where they can generate income and move forward.
 
Philips is a Dutch company and yes, they are big in Europe.

Sadly I think the simple truth is that Sonar just was not popular enough and in spite of the many efforts made to change that like the bundling of third party VST and content along with some great innovations like ProChannel and the creation of instruments and effects that could be sold separately it never sold as well as it should have.
 
I resigned myself years ago to owning a DAW that most other musicians that I met had not heard of.