Why has Cake Abandoned X1 as of March with it crippled? ATLEAST fix the ability to FASTBOUNCE timecode plugins, bouncing to clip with timecode/tempo plugins NOT working. Fastbouncing has always been where Sonar has had a leg up. Now, X1 D cannot Fastbounce with timecode/tempo based plugins. Even the included Gtr rig won't follow your host tempo changes when fastbouncing now. My most used plugins are timecode based ones. antares/melodyne/waves/gtr rig.

Never! X2 is the update. If you cant afford it then you're stuck with your bugs. That's the Roland/Cakewalk way.

Actually, that is pretty much the industry standard. Maintaining old code is a cost center; new paid versions are a profit center. There is no way to effectively finance that kind of maintenance unless the user is willing to pay an exorbitant servce fee subscription. Even Microsoft, which has a de facto monoploy on the basic program to run millions of computers stops supporting their OS after a couple of versions, leaving hundreds of millions of users with the same kind of choice. Arguably their profits (and billions of dollars of cash) could finance support for Windows 2000 in perpetuity. Cakewalk does not have that kind of option.

 I officially stopped recommending Sonar as of X1

You what?

Blogman


Why has Cake Abandoned X1 as of March with it crippled? ATLEAST fix the ability to FASTBOUNCE timecode plugins, bouncing to clip with timecode/tempo plugins NOT working. Fastbouncing has always been where Sonar has had a leg up. Now, X1 D cannot Fastbounce with timecode/tempo based plugins. Even the included Gtr rig won't follow your host tempo changes when fastbouncing now. My most used plugins are timecode based ones. antares/melodyne/waves/gtr rig.

X2 (like all other previous iterations) will sweep up various pending bug fixes rather than keep releasing umpteen frequent updates.  So I assume this fastbounce issue will be fixed accordingly. 

Bit of a puzzling thread.  Do some users really expect CW to continue parallel maintenance on a number of previous versions?  E.g. so users still on 8.5 can expect it to be subject to eternal bug fixes even though it's obsolete and no longer saleable?  

Blogman


Not a substandard piece of crap. Continuing down a path of COMPLETE disregard of the professional customers WILL result in the DOWNFALL and DEMISE of CAKEWALK.

Subject to hyperbole much?.. On a comparative competitive basis i think Cake does an oustanding job, and work better and more honestly in support of their customers and the improvement of the product than the majority of DAW manf..
FYI .. there is no perfect DAW, but if you think there is.. go buy it. or if you even just think that another one is better, then why have you not bought that instead?..... or you could be rational, logical and pragmatic and see the realities of software and if you cannot do that, take a trip to any other (or all)  DAW forum, see the issues bugs and complaints there and then perhaps some sense of reality will filter in.

Wow, people assume a lot. There are definitely bugs still present in X1d. And they're not just regulated to power users either. Bugs w/ automation and also the time based plugins bug are very much alive and kicking in X1d. Those are just off the top of my head. I'm sure there are probably others.

pjfarr

I'm not an expert on how this stuff is done, but if they fix some of the bugs from X1 in X2, couldn't they then put those fixes into a separate patch for the X1 users to download and install...? Or is that dumb?

Not a dumb question but its rarely as simply as that.
Software, unless its a dead product, is a continually evolving thing.  So a particular bug fix for X2 might have involve changes to code that didn't exist in X1 or relate to code that was modified for another reason in X2.


Even if the bugfix in X2 was applicable to X1 (and someone would have to spend the time to do an analysis to determine that) since people don't like to work for free you are taking about Cakewalk paying people to make the changes, to test the changes to make sure that they work as intended and don't cause new bugs, to create a release package, document the changes, update the archives, notify people (email,web update, etc), etc., etc.
It gets expensive fairly quickly - and how many new copies of X1 will it sell? or how many updates to X2 will they have to sell to cover the costs? What other projects will get delayed while the manpower is spent here instead of there.

I'm not saying that Cakewalk will or won't make create a patch - just that its not the simple process that many people assume that it is.

...Steven

If software stands still, it surely gets left behind.
I think Cakewalk is right in there with all the other DAWs duking it out for better sales.
Better sales are driven by new ideas, and certainly the new possibilities on the horizon of computer hardware, make it an ever changing marketing game.

If you're still using version 8.5 and turning a profit, perhaps you don't feel the need to upgrade endlessly.
X1, X2 . . . it's going to keep going, and eventually there will be a need for newer software, that keeps up to the new computers . . . so just pick a DAW that suits what your music needs, and support it.

Here's my take on it ...

I think Cakewalk charging for X2 is perfectly fine because there are a lot of new features and tools included (New amp sim, R-mix ... etc).

But ... X1 should not have been left in the state it's in. There should be enough resources to support a release for at least 1 or 2 future release cycles, which in Cakewalk's case would only be 24 ~ 36 months. I don't think that's too much to ask. I'm not talking about making it compatible with the latest greatest VST version or operating system, but I'm talking about making it work the way it was advertised to work when you bought. That should be every companies goal no matter what you are selling ... PERIOD.

There is nothing wrong with expecting that ...

The fact that they don't is a business choice they have made ... not everyone works that way ... it's a choice on their part to force their customers to upgrade. There is no written rule or law that states they have to operate their business this way.

They really had a chance to knock it out of the park with X1 ... being DAW 2.0 and all. If the Pro Channel would have worked reliably, if they would have kept color customization (for the life of me I will never in a 100 years understand why they took that away), wouldn't have crashed fast bounce, and a lot of other bugs, they would have been rock stars in the DAW business.

Anyway, I'll be jumping on the X2 bandwagon in hopes some of the things that got left unresolved in X1 will get fixed ...