> Is the average user really expected to do this?

See post #126

> I think Cakewalk's DAW Lab 'Certification' is quite misleading

See post #118

> I've done all that. That's computer setup 101. That's not DAW tweaking.

That is configuration. I though you said you weren't going to update your BIOS's and drivers as it's rocket science or something, and Windows update should never be run (good luck with that then)... ah well.

Also try disabling CPU power management in BIOS i.e. Intel speedstep. There's one tweak for you. Plenty of others in the forums, I'm not going to spell all of them out again when google can do that for you.

I work with software where as part of the installation program, the first step is to check system prerequisites, such as UNIX kernel parameters, etc. to ensure optimal performance.
 
Perhaps Cakewalk could employ more of this kind of thing as part of the Sonar installation process.

pbognar


I work with software where as part of the installation program, the first step is to check system prerequisites, such as UNIX kernel parameters, etc. to ensure optimal performance.
 
Perhaps Cakewalk could employ more of this kind of thing as part of the Sonar installation process.

it does a number of checks,for bit configurations,.Dot net framework,Visual studio,exc.
but it would be almost impossible to basically troubleshoot someones sytem or run compatibility sweeps
on each individual custom daw.
if we were dealing with unmodofied computers all shelf supplied models than maybe but were not that far into the future yet.  :)

"Stability" means various things to different people.  I think it means more than just not crashing.  The program should function properly without hiccups or dropouts.

I had recorded eight complete projects in X1, all of which ran flawlessly and were ready to allow many more tracks to be recorded.  I opened each one of those projects in X2 and X2a, and saw significant performance issues in X2a.  No more tracks could be recorded in X2a--immediate dropouts.  (This was not the case for X2, which was buggy in other ways, mostly dealing with take lanes.)

I do keep some unused tracks archived--just for kicks.  I'd say I average about 20 tracks archived.  My theory is that X2a cannot ignore archived tracks the way X1 (and X2a) could.  Just a theory, but the fact is I can't use X2a to continue working on older projects.  I'll see about new projects.

> "Stability" means various things to different people. I think it means more than just not crashing.

Actually in software development it specifically means not crashing however much we'd like it to mean something else.
There are also performance bugs, workflow bugs, documentation errors, design flaws... etc etc.

Sure, but it's not really the end user's job to stick to agreed QA and engineering terms. How could they even know what standards are being applied. End users are always going to talk in more generalised terms. Doesn't get us anywhere to get pedantic about it.

Not accusing you of being pedantic, just making a general point.

Fair enough John...

But when I wrote stability I meant the true definition. I've got no issues with people wanting to call an apple a pear as long as they understand that the other person understands the apple is a pear... but that's er... that's when things get quite confusing esp in threads like these where multiple people are involved... that's why it's important to be as specific as possible and use the right terminology. Easier to call an apple an apple. It's not because everything has to be correct, it's about getting specific things communicated across that's all.

I might be wrong, but I think the working definition of "unstable" round these parts covers crashes and drop outs.

CakeAlexS


> "Stability" means various things to different people. I think it means more than just not crashing.

Actually in software development it specifically means not crashing however much we'd like it to mean something else.
There are also performance bugs, workflow bugs, documentation errors, design flaws... etc etc.

Fair enough.  I will stick to saying X2a has performance bugs/issues that did not occur with X1d on some systems.