SilkTone
Having the ability to specify install locations is a fundamental feature and should have been in C3 V1.0. I remember reading in a thread about the Braintree update, and either Noel or another CW employee mentioned that a particular feature was thrown into that update because they had some extra time available.

A significant amount of our customers never used the custom installer paths, and complained about download/install times. Another group of new users used to change things without knowing what they were doing, screwing up their install, giving them the impression our software was buggy, and created needless support cases. 
 
To resolve this, we needed to control what users were first presented. C3 was something completely new for us and we decided 'KISS' was the best plan of attack for 1.0. It'll mature, but instead of just shoehorning features into it, we'd like to do it in a thoughtful manner. That was why Willy asked for elaboration. If we just shoe horn the kitchen sink into it, without taking the time to design it right, we'll be back at square one.
 
As Ryan mentioned above, we understand power uses like to move some things around. That's why we still offer the traditional installers.

Re: 'some extra time available' in the latest update.

Noel's primary responsibility revolves around SONAR, and when he has spare time it goes into SONAR. He's not responsible for C3 development.  

Ryan, thanks for the detailed update! Yours is certainly the most informative on C3 from any CW employee I've seen to date, and it is much appreciated.
 
Sorry about the "why is it so hard". If I think about the complex problems that had to be solved when developing Sonar (the DAW itself), adding a per-project button to specify install location and passing this onto the installer (most if not all installers can take an install location parameter when doing a silent install), I guess I'm just wondering why this wasn't implemented. When forced to do a manual install, you lose the ability to use C3 to manage updates.
 
BTW, the Msiexec parameter to specify install location is: TARGETDIR=<user selected path> 
 
EDIT: Seth, thanks for the info. It's not about the kitchen sink. Right now for those that can't/won't install on the C drive (either due to space limitations or having dedicated drives), this excludes C3 and its benefits. Most of the requested C3 features are "nice to have", but surely you can't lump the ability to specify install location into either the "kitchen sink" or "nice to have" categories. That is a P0 feature.

Hi Steven,
 

SilkTone
EDIT: BTW, while there might have been some small amount of sarcasm in my reply to Willy (sorry), I was replying to his statement that "There are about 30 design questions in this one". I'm not sure why there would be a lot of unanswered questions with such a straightforward feature to allow per-product install locations.

Because it adds a layer of complexity between a new user making music right away. I'd hate to burst your bubble here - but you are in the minority. The vast majority of users don't specify custom paths. Muddying up the first time/new user experience because Steven doesn't like it is a poor design choice and counter-productive to one of C3's major goals: remove obstacles to firing up a project and making music fast (herein referred to as goal 1).
 
There are very real design considerations - it's not your job to acknowledge them but feedback is substantially more helpful for us than sarcasm. Let's walk through some of them since apparently I'm to dense to get them ...
 
a) We make a global option to run all installers silently and enable it by default
 a1) power users turn it off, they're happy
 a2) for the majority of users everything continues working as intended
 
b) We add the ability to choose and install multiple updates at once
 b1) power users now have to sit there and attend to every install - what happens if they want custom paths for only one of those?
 b2) for the majority all works well
 
c) To resolve the needs of b1, when updating multiple products at once we now add a check box next to each item to decide if they want to run silently
 c1) power users are happy
 c2) the majority of users are confused by this new 'silent' install checkbox - now we're making them make decisions, this conflicts with goal 1
 
d) To resolve the needs of c2 in respect to goal 1 and ALSO b1, we now only add check box next to teach to decide to run silently only if they disable the global option
 d1) power users are happy
 d2) majority is happy
 d3) ui state management code is not happy - but who cares we can kick that one down the road and the next dev working on it can deal with it.
 
e) We make it per-product by adding a new button
 e1) Nobody is happy because adding more buttons just makes it look ugly
 e2) New users are confused - which button do I click? Why would I click this button vs the normal button? We're back to missing Goal 1.
 
f) We make a context-menu or ctrl+click option or turn the install button into one of those nifty dropdown buttons with a mini-menu to allow non-silent installs
 f1) Power users are happy, they have an easy to do a non-silent install
 f2) Still simple 'install' button for the majority
 f3) discover-ability bonus - the drop button menu requires less documentation
 f4) Crap what about the 'pick and choose what to install' feature request?
 
g) We decide to go with the nifty drop-menu button, its wins for discover-ability and not cluttering the UI.
 g1) We add a few options in here:
  g1a) Install Silently
  g1b) Add to Install Collection
  g1c) Add to Install Collection silently
 g1b) Turns out power users hate having to click on every product to mass-install/update and add to collection
 g1c) majority doesn't care
 
h) So we scrap the nifty drop-menu button. It wins for UI prettiness, but its turns out not so powerful for power-users.
 h1) CTRL+CLICK now selects multiple products in the tree, clicking any install button anywhere will install them all. It follows the global option always
 h2) Everyone is happy
 h3) ....well not support or documentation. Now we have to teach this to all the power users in 7 languages and release is delayed while we wait for localization because our new 'feature' isn't discoverable.
 
There are 8 of them, in less than five minutes and I'm not the only person with thoughts on the topic. The sooner you accept there is a bigger picture here - the more productive a conversation about features and implementation can actually be.
 

 I remember reading in a thread about the Braintree update, and either Noel or another CW employee mentioned that a particular feature was thrown into that update because they had some extra time available.

 
The SONAR schedule has little to do with C3. Sure there are some shared resources, but for the most part the SONAR development team is not working on C3. Both SONAR and C3 can be updated independently of each other.
 

You forgot the fact that Willy does not own a Tardis 

Yes I do.
 
 

Willy Jones [Cakewalk]
Hi Steven,
 

SilkTone
EDIT: BTW, while there might have been some small amount of sarcasm in my reply to Willy (sorry), I was replying to his statement that "There are about 30 design questions in this one". I'm not sure why there would be a lot of unanswered questions with such a straightforward feature to allow per-product install locations.

Because it adds a layer of complexity between a new user making music right away. I'd hate to burst your bubble here - but you are in the minority. The vast majority of users don't specify custom paths. Muddying up the first time/new user experience because Steven doesn't like it is a poor design choice and counter-productive to one of C3's major goals: remove obstacles to firing up a project and making music fast (herein referred to as goal 1).

 
Wow. Sorry I bothered.

Willy,

That's a great post and illustrates the complexity.

I do think the initial assumption that the vast majority of users just want to get to making music and want a one click button for easy install is an over assumption.

I don't want to be a power user, but the majority of all installers provide a custom install option.

It's not normal and confusing to users not to have a custom install button in Command Center.

lawajava
Willy,
That's a great post and illustrates the complexity.

 
I don't agree with that. He purposefully overcomplicated something that is really simple. He could have stopped at a and would have solved the most serious of the problems. The rest of it is just adding all the "nice to have" features with a contrived set of resulting problems.
 
To say that giving users the option of choosing an install location will result in confusion is odd given that this is how all previous CW installers worked. How many threads can you find where people have issues because the old installer gave them a choice to override the default? And how many threads can you find with people either being confused or complaining about the lack of choosing an install location? Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.
 

I don't agree with that. He purposefully overcomplicated something that is really simple. He could have stopped at a and would have solved the most serious of the problems. The rest of it is just adding all the "nice to have" features with a contrived set of resulting problems.

 
Fair enough we can't please everyone all the time. The big picture though still is that we will probably add more than just this one checkbox to C3. Maybe they are just 'nice to have' and not for everybody but folks have been asking for them so we are going to think about how some of the 'nice to haves' fit into the bigger picture. In my example I only used two of the commonly requested features. I'm sure we can agree that more functionality introduces the potential to complicate things? 
 
FWIW none of that was contrived,  those were recollections from actual conversations we've had internally around the next C3 update. 

Willy, thank you for the update. It is good to hear that you guys are aware of these issues and thinking about ways to solve them. I think some of us just wanted to confirm what you just said.
 
Yes, agreed that more functionality can complicate things. C3 makes things so much easier, which is why it's frustrating in cases where it can't be used.
 
For my new system which I'm currently setting up, I opted to use C3 because of its benefits, and then afterwards use junction points to move the folders from the C drive to the drive where I want them to be. Not sure if this is a supported way of doing things (tech support if something unrelated breaks?), but it seems to be a compromise between the two officially supported ways of doing it.

If we're giving feedback, I would definitely like custom install paths too. I don't usually move Sonar itself but I'm not about to dump tens of GBs of samples and content on my C: drive, I have a dedicated SSD for that stuff. I believe most serious DAW users do, at least all of my colleagues do. We may still be in the minority within the Sonar user base, I'll take your word for that.

I don't see why, after initial install, "power users" couldn't click "update all". I would expect C3 to respect previously chosen locations. Every type of command center/multi-installer/service center I use does this. With NI you do actually have to click install for each product but you can download them all in one go and you don't have to go redefining custom install locations for every update.

I also find it a bit dumb that C3 doesn't figure out previous installations, but I suppose this is tied to the same issue. This actually makes things MORE complicated for existing users though, as it is completely unclear what is already installed and what needs to be updated, leading to increased chance of messed up installations, overwritten settings and general confusion, as proven by the numerous threads on this topic.

I am personally also of the opinion that these points are essential enough that they should have been day one features.

I don't think the sarcasm and angry speak on either end is very helpful but obviously this causes a lot of frustration. I hope these issues and feature requests are taken seriously. Right now I'm kinda ok, thinking things are still in infancy. I haven't updated/reinstalled ALL my content in the hopes that a C3 update will arrive that detects my excisting stuff. If it doesn't, I basically can't use it and if Sonar will come to rely on it completely I don't know what I'll do. I'm not looking forward to learning yet another DAW but I do need normal modern installation and file management.

Willy/Seth/Ryan - Thanks for showing up.  Being ignored is at least as frustrating as experiencing unnecessary obstacles.  Now at least that one can be crossed off the list  First, let me say that I started in '78 ...
 
I've been pretty vocal and not all that gracious in my comments about C3 so far.  My ungraciousness is driven by four things; a) an implementation that removes previously available functionality.  In this case, installation options.  b) The appearance that Cakewalk is ignoring the situation, and c) a condescending attitude when the situation is finally addressed.
 
C3 has now seen all three.  PLEASE don't make decisions based on simple majority math.  Especially when it comes to REMOVING functionality.  I can absolutely understand going by the numbers for new features -but in my experience- a new version (or approach) takes existing functionality as the initial set of requirements.  The ability to specify installation destinations was already there, but somehow didn't make the it into the C3 requirements.  This is one of the reasons for my comments in another thread that got another forum member's panties all twisted up.
 
I don't know who signs off on requirements in your organization, or who approves design decisions before they move to implementation, but from my perspective there is a lot being missed.  It pains me to say it, but there is a reason that Cakewalk is being handed off ... and continuing to do things the way they've always been done is not going to all of a sudden gain you greater acceptance as a real contender.
 
Why am I bothering to explain this?  Because I'm trying to get the background out there for my fourth and final reason for being miffed about things instead of just thinking, "Oh well, give 'em time ..."
 
That fourth reason is that I'm PO'd at myself for reinvesting in Cakewalk.  I bought X3 and then the  Platinum upgrade making some BIG assumptions, that things might have changed at Cakewalk is not the least of those assumptions.
 
As INDIVIDUALS, you folks obviously have some really great talent.  I sincerely hope you get somebody at the 10,000' level steering the TEAM before Cakewalk gets traded again.  Sonar is sooooo incredibly close ... but ... you won't get there with the "throw stuff at 'em" model.
 
I'm done ****ing.  I'm done adding FRs for stuff that's obvious to anybody that actually uses Sonar.  You have 11 months to win me over.  Good luck with that.