SampleTank 3 will cost 60% of what SampleTank did when released in 2003 and there will be upgrade pricing, including an extra discount for early adopters of SampleTank 2.

 
I'm curious about what will what it will take to qualify as an ST2 early adopter.  Hopefully it will be those who got ST2 sometime before the recent fire sales and who paid more or less retail prices - not those who purchased ST2 in its first year of availability.

I love the bit about rewarding ST2 early adopters. Sounds great, except, well, aren't they all dead by now?

dmbaer

SampleTank 3 will cost 60% of what SampleTank did when released in 2003 and there will be upgrade pricing, including an extra discount for early adopters of SampleTank 2.

 
I'm curious about what will what it will take to qualify as an ST2 early adopter.  Hopefully it will be those who got ST2 sometime before the recent fire sales and who paid more or less retail prices - not those who purchased ST2 in its first year of availability.

This exact topic was also a thread at KVR and below is a quote from someone who did the research:
 (this must have been the era before DVD's came out?)
 
 

"SampleTank L
4 CDs of sound content (over 500 sounds). Costs $299 SRP ($229 @ eSoundz).
 

SampleTank XL
8 CDs of sound content (over 4.5GB - 1500 sounds). Costs $499 RRP ($379 @ eSoundz)."

Mesh

"SampleTank L
4 CDs of sound content (over 500 sounds). Costs $299 SRP ($229 @ eSoundz).


SampleTank XL
8 CDs of sound content (over 4.5GB - 1500 sounds). Costs $499 RRP ($379 @ eSoundz)."

So will ST3 be 60% of $299/$229 or $499/$379 or simply $X?

64-bit only seems like a very strange choice to me. I mean I personally am all 64-bit all the time but it seems there are still a number of users that aren't. When you've properly written your software to deal with arbitrary pointer sizes, it isn't that hard to compile to both targets. That's why so many companies do it, there is not a lot of extra development effort. Cakewalk, NI, etc wouldn't support both if it was a significant cost increase.

MachineClaw

cclarry
This is the same EXACT thing we've heard for MONTHS....ad nauseum...
Blah blah blah...
 
Face it...the vast majority of "Pros" are pretty much done with SampleTank based on 
the MAJOR LACK OF SUPPORT over the years.  I'm sure you'll pay off many "top guys"
to promote your program to increase sales.  As I've stated over and over...there will
be MARKETING HYPE TO BEAT THE BAND!!! (lterally)

Most have moved on to "other" products, that ARE supported, and where, when they INVEST
THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY... the don't have to wait 11 years to get a return...
AND listen to crap for years about the "next version".

Seriously....you better sell this for PEANUTS.....and HOPE that SOMEONE buys it...
The "Newbies" that you GAVE ST 2.5 to will "fall for" your hype.  But those of 
us who have been around won't.  Sorry.

I invested FAR TO MUCH to be "left hanging" for so long, as did many others...

I wish ST3 the best...but if ANYONE out there has ANY sense...they'll PASS.

Sorry I JUST do not get it, why you are on such a crusade.

Head over the Sampletank thread over at KVR, and you'll see a member called "neverenoughfunk" who constantly lambasts any Sampletank thread.
 
See if the posting style seems remarkably similar.   Always with ellipsis (three dots) between phrases, for example. Always the most frequent poster in those threads and mostly only adding combative words and comments about how it'll be terrible and no one should care. 
 
Seem familiar? 
 
Yes, it's weird to get that worked up over it. 
 
(Note:  I do get users frustration with IK's marketing and long development time with Sampletank.  Heck, it annoys me too, but to take it so far as to be unable to just speak your piece and let it be is a bit much.)

Funny, GC just sent me a mailer with ST3 listed.... but it ain'y for sale at IK's website.

Sycraft
64-bit only seems like a very strange choice to me. I mean I personally am all 64-bit all the time but it seems there are still a number of users that aren't. When you've properly written your software to deal with arbitrary pointer sizes, it isn't that hard to compile to both targets. That's why so many companies do it, there is not a lot of extra development effort. Cakewalk, NI, etc wouldn't support both if it was a significant cost increase.

I thought this was odd as well......not having both platforms. Considering it took 10+ years to get to 64 bit, 32 bit possibly was just a waste of time?

I got that same GC mailer.  Tee Hee.

Sycraft
64-bit only seems like a very strange choice to me. I mean I personally am all 64-bit all the time but it seems there are still a number of users that aren't. When you've properly written your software to deal with arbitrary pointer sizes, it isn't that hard to compile to both targets. That's why so many companies do it, there is not a lot of extra development effort. Cakewalk, NI, etc wouldn't support both if it was a significant cost increase.

It's not a strange choice at all, IMO.  Anyone running sample-heavy music-production processing is going to be on a 64-bit platform already if they're serious about what they're about.
 
True, the coding shouldn't be all that much more expensive to deal with both 32 and 64-bit.  But testing costs effectively double.  It would not surprise me if IK had done a cost/benefit analysis and determined that the added expense would not produce a worthwhile ROI.