Dear Bakers, please increase FX Bin width by 30 pixels. It would mean a lot to me and it should not be too risky one minute change. A few pixels, nothing more...

I would be happy if they did. However we can now place a VST into PC with X2. Still a wider FX bin would be a nice touch. It was never wide enough before. In X1 they narrowed it.

not going to happen. X2 is what it is... and is likely exactly what it has been for over a month.. final products need to be tested y'know.

I hope it's possible without extensive testing. FX bin is too narrow for most plugin names. Of course it's possible to edit shown names in the registry but giving a few more pixels would make everyone's life easier.

EDIT: Wider FX bin would not cause any problems because displays are nowadays generally quite wide anyway and you can adjust header pane width.

Alternative solution: Please make full plugin name be shown as a tooltip when hovering mouse in the bin.

Really...just one little change before it goes out the door? Would you run your business that way? How about waiting for the next patch release at least. And this from a guy that actually codes. I don't want to seem harsh but you should know better.

scook


Really...just one little change before it goes out the door? Would you run your business that way? 

Yes,  most definitely yes,  and i do everyday.  Just ask one of my clients how i handle last minute changes and tweaks.

So you are honestly are advocating that CW should start honoring customer requests this close to delivery? I wonder if they have started their publishing process? Do you shrink wrap your product(s) too?

I don't know what is so wrong with a member proposing a suggestion. It will most likely not happen but do we need to dump on a good idea just because it may not be in the first release?

Its a great idea and if our efforts are aimed at CW and not finding fault with the timing of the suggestion we might just see it sooner rather than later.

There is nothing wrong in not liking an idea but we are seeing too much animosity lately.

It may be a good idea. I do not know how you read what I thought of the enhancement from my posts. I would agree that we are all want CW to produce the best product they can. But I am of the opinion that including last minute enhancements of any type are generally a bad idea for any software company to entertain.

Scook I don't think its our call to decide what can and can not be done. Nor do I think its good for the forum to find fault in a rather tame proposal. If CW decides it can't do it, fine. But why on earth would a forum member make another member feel uncomfortable over it and make that member have to defend the idea?

Some ideas need defending but this is not one of them.

Although Panup has done a great many things for us I don't defend him on that basis but rather that the idea is good and I can't see any good purpose in knocking it.

Because I did bring it up; we all owe Panup a great deal of respect for his hard work on our behalf. I say that because he has in fact done what he is asking CW to do. A last minute change. And done it multiple times.

If you are fearful it could cause problems with the program then I think you should be assured that CW will not do something that would do that.