Subject:Beta?

Posted by: justifiedalive

Date:8/20/2002 11:17:59 AM

Man, after reading these nightmare posts regarding 4.0 I have no intentions on upgrading until like version 4.0 g comes out. Where was the beta at? Perhaps I missed something, but using paying customers to post bugs is bad software practice. With an implimentation of something big like VST, this thing should have been tweaked many times before selling it. We have some really good users in these forums that are pointing out things that should have had red lights flashing on them before the designers released it. Functionality problems are one thing, but the numerous "crash" threads scare the dickens out of me and my wallet for now. The last thing I need to do is be a 99 dollar ginny pig that has to reformat his "buggy" machine and wait for 4.0 g. Thank you, but I'll let the brave users with downtime available tread these waters for now.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Iacobus

Date:8/20/2002 11:32:45 AM

Why not just try out the demo? (Click the "demo version" link on the right.) You could find out if your system will be OK with it that way.

Iacobus

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: justifiedalive

Date:8/20/2002 11:39:18 AM

Thanks, I'm aware of the demo page for products. But these pages are for demonstration of solid products for possible NEW and returning customers. Imagine 50 people downloading the "demo" of 4.0 today. Now we have 50 potential new customers that probably won't be coming back, if what is posted is true regarding the many bugs. What I was getting at was what happened to the good old days of Beta releases? This is just bad business.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Djipy

Date:8/20/2002 12:02:14 PM

I agree with Justifiedalive.

Read Another topic of mine.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: justifiedalive

Date:8/20/2002 12:40:16 PM

Thank you Djiyp. I hope that others can see through this type of production and release. Hopefully SF will not make this thier new practice. Remember the Forge 6.0 beta? That was cool. This is nonsense.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Iacobus

Date:8/20/2002 12:41:06 PM

I tend to take everything cum grano salis. Just because an apparent number of people are having a problem doesn't mean I will. These are PC's we're dealing with here. :)

Iacobus

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: SonicDHC

Date:8/20/2002 12:44:36 PM

.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Jessariah

Date:8/20/2002 1:35:02 PM

I've got a feeling SoFo's programmers aren't getting much sleep this week. I bet we see a lot of bug fixes in short time.

I agree, though: a Beta would have been a good idea. I grabbed teh Sound Forge 6.0 Beta, expecting some glitches, didn't get any -- and by the time it expired, I HAD to buy it.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:8/20/2002 3:01:11 PM

4.0 supposedly already had a beta run. This is clearly the CFO running the show here, it wasn't ready to ship. Creeping Microsoft-think. Ship it and they will come.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: PHATDRUMS

Date:8/22/2002 12:04:37 PM

maruuk you are so so right 4.0 wasnt and isnt ready to ship but i think its way late so they bypassed the beta test for normal
users hoping youll buy it and wait for fixes very microsoft indeed the midi is still toytown so what took so long! i think many of the reported bugs would have shown up quickly even with a very short beta run this poduct has the potential to blow away the competition yet it continues to play catchup frustrating indeed im sick of using two apps to do one job !

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:8/22/2002 12:16:40 PM

Yep. Apparently there was some beta in cooperation with a few other publishers, but it was severely truncated by market demands, and now the users have become the real unpaid SOFO QC testers. Do we at least get a dental plan? All the grinding of teeth is gonna take its toll.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: PHATDRUMS

Date:8/22/2002 12:41:14 PM

my major problem with all this is when a client is sat behind you and you are trying be proffessional and the app keeps crashing what do u do time really is money unless this so fo dont really consider this app for pro use you cannot tell the client oh it just sofo buggy software they dont care ! they just want it done and very often they want it yesterday acid three g still is
nowhere near ad solid a platform as acid 2 so how far off that is 4 the lack of abeta should be addressed it shows (A)a lack of confidence the product or (B)a supreme amount of confidence in the product or(C) they really dont care that much about the end user bugs and all
you decide

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: PHATDRUMS

Date:8/22/2002 12:43:27 PM

ps my local dentist has posted a special offer on dental veneers in line with this release

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Iacobus

Date:8/22/2002 3:13:14 PM

I have. ACID Pro 4.0 it is. It's your turn.

Iacobus

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:8/22/2002 3:17:50 PM

I think it's none of the above--they mean well, but they have very limited resources, and inevitably the bean counters will start to make the product decisions for the product managers when it's too little, too late on the content front. If the truth were told, not one of the SOFO folks who have justifiable pride in this product feels good about this train wreck. Leaving so many brave and faithful users to pick up their pieces does not a happy product-person make. Think of what a tough position that puts the SOFO helpers here in this forum in. They oughta be getting hazardous duty pay.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: chaircrusher

Date:8/23/2002 12:00:26 AM

Maruuk, have you ever worked on a large scale software project? You have internal testers, you have beta testers, and you have your users.

Internal testers are great for regression testing, but ultimately are too familiar with the program from the inside -- they use it the 'right' way, and they don't catch everything.

Beta testers are volunteers usually -- and in SF's case they definitely were.
Beta testers are like a vanishingly small sample of the user base -- usually the most friendly and committed users. Again there's the problem of them being too comfortable with the program and using it the right way.

And the fact is you can't prove the absence of bugs, only show empirically the presence of them. Which, unfortunately, means that until a program is released, you won't catch all the bugs.

As a user, you should always be cautious about adopting a new version of the program, unless you're willing to devote some time to testing it to qualify it for production use. The last company I worked at had all the developers on NT4 when I left in Feb 2002, for precisely this reason. We knew what it worked with, what it didn't, and weren't going to waste developer time until the pocket protector types at MIS had qualified the new version.

So if you want to be part of the solution, test it out and report any problems. If not, keep doing what you're doing and wait for a few patch releases. To blame it on the CFO is absurd -- I seriously doubt he's micro-managing when software gets released. More likely, a joint decision by development group managers, QA managers, and Marketing was made with input from the underlings as well.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Spirit

Date:8/23/2002 12:41:21 AM

This release isn't too bad IMHO. I've tried masses of this sort of stuff and the bugs in AP4 aren't showstoppers. I've had hardware with more bugs: anyone remember the Sequential Circuits "TOM" ? Great machine, but soooo buggy. SoFo are listening to user comments, promising solutions to various issues, and listening to improvement ideas - can't ask for much more than that.

Perhaps there's a magnifier effect here: the software is of course more buggy than the latest version 3 AcidPro; add that to some dubious PC setups and the problems start to blow out because of host configurations. Go to the UAD or Creamware or whatever sound card forums and it's always the same with every software update.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: PHATDRUMS

Date:8/23/2002 4:19:48 AM

spirit u seem very resigned to the fact when software is realeased that it wont work correctley that seems to be buying into very much into software company dictum as proposed by their pr/ maketing depts
perhaps ill put it other terms u pop down to best buy and puchase a tv or cd player you get home and said tv is only able to
tune into one channel what do you do you return it for a replacement or do phone the t v company who tell you sorry to here about the problem but if you hang on to it somtime in the future (soon maybe but unspecified) we may or maynot cure the bug
that is causing the the problem and until that time make do with one channel!
i do not beleive that you would put up with that for a minute a product is a product and even worse most stores if not all
will let you return unfinished software it should be a crime other companies are legally bound to produce goods of merchantable quality u me and other eager software gatherers wishing to improve their own end product have bought into the myth its time to stop it if its not finished its not ready for release
epecially microsoft

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Spirit

Date:8/23/2002 5:04:09 AM

It's a bit unfair to compare software to a "dumb" one-function consumer product like a TV...

In fact I think software releases are getting better: I remember spending hours fiddling with config.sys files just get to get some apps to run, let alone work perfectly.

But in theory I do agree: software shouldn't be released until it's perfect. But in reality, well....

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: PHATDRUMS

Date:8/23/2002 6:05:58 AM

the tv was just a product it could have been for example the ford explorer, recalls and lawsuits it could be any product
the fact is the law states that it must do exactly what it says on the box which is my point they beta test most things at so fo so why not this ? suspisions are aroused by this behavior and anyway a lot of reported bugs dont seem to stem from idiosyncratic
use of this product but just general day to day use of it

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Spirit

Date:8/23/2002 6:22:09 AM

The problem is that software is running on thousands of completely different environments, you just can't test for all of them. And once you add in another layer of variables like whatever else you happen to have installed, and what version, with what drivers, with what files overwritten, updated, modified or replaced, then it's just impossible to tell.

You could try a more controlled enviornment like a Mac, but that has its own restrictions and problems - and is certainly more expensive. And if a controlled environment like that was preferable with consumers then that's what we'd be using.

I believe there's a curve of diminishing returns with this stuff: it's vital to test to a certain degree; advantageous to go the next step; improved slightly at the next level; then just wasting your bloody time beyond that; the last stage is the release of a perfect but hopelessly redundant app. The question is at what point do you stop winkling out the bugs, and perhaps even more importantly: how can you tell exactly what point you're at ?

Considering the huge leap that SoFo has made introducing MIDI, ASIO and VSTi I think their 1.0 version is pretty good. But then I'm using a dedicated, speced-up DAW. Others with multi-purpose machines may be finding it not so entertaining...

After reading all these posts you just make a decision.

If you bought Acidpro4 the day it was released then you're taking a chance like any software release. There's ALWAYS the chance software may have some terrible bug.

I bought on day two: I read some intial bug reports, heard about some of the problems; ran the demo OK a few times and thought "looks OK". I knew about the VSTi host-tempo bug but am confident like many others it will be fixed.

If the reports make people nervous then they just shouldn't buy.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: justifiedalive

Date:8/23/2002 9:14:27 AM

That's right. I would never buy a release on the first day. Any soft head knows to wait 2-6 weeks for major bug fixes. This issue goes deeper than no public beta. I believe the Sofo is losing ground in the DAW community. No pro publications make mention of them anymore, except for the occasional blurb about forge and Acid, which is still regarded to many as a toy (I disagree with this of course). Everything these days is steinberg, logic, sonar and digidesign. I believe that the turn from Vegas audio to Video contributed to this. I just wish the company would focus on Pro Audio more and less on other markets. I support them, but how long will they support me? And why not just focus on solid releases every 18 months instead of buggy ones with too many afterthoughts every 9-12 months? I mean come on guys, I had to buy Vegas Video to get some basic features like a Master fader and Pan modes. Why not just put them in one of the many revisions of Audio? I'm sorry folks, but I'm concerned for the direction of this company and where they are or are not taking me.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: aress

Date:8/23/2002 10:36:31 AM

after using v4 for two days now, i am also coming to the conclusion that they released it too soon.

on files that were working great on v3, now i experience audio stuttering [with NO plugins on], cursors that dont flow smooth at times, slow reaction to stop/play type commands....

this is on a win2k pro, p4 with 512M rambus and 10000rpm cheetah drives, echo mia card, matrox dualhead, blah blah blah....

like i said, the same files were fine in v3 but are problematic in v4....

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: aress

Date:8/23/2002 11:40:23 AM

SF in the past had sent out the beta on older versions as far i recall, i had not heard word one about any beta tests, and then boom its now for sale!

i am so bummed that i converted major work to v4, and now cant go back to v3...

and i'm a stockholder!?!!?

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: PHATDRUMS

Date:8/23/2002 1:02:21 PM

mr justified am in total agreement about the vegas switch and sofo products being considered pro i think vegas video is a nice product as was vegas then vegas audio but in in pro terms it is light years behind protools in terms of integration and automation
anyone who has experienced tdms at work will know that yet i beleive acid and by design vegas s ui is much more friendly
but you cannot build apro audio fan base on interface alone and mr spirit adding a much trodden ground in for the second time of asking such as midi including graphic control of control info pitch mod etc should to any programmer be an absolute breeze
it can only be afloppy disc of code at the most you can have my old cubase discs as proof if you wish
it is still a toy to many (not me particulary) because apart from looping many simple and i mean simple functions
are not available when i try to get them interested ! these functions should have been finished in this release intead of toy town
comPROmises it says pro on the box does it not!

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:8/23/2002 2:04:34 PM

This discussion is really getting to the heart of the matter. Sure every release has bugs. But come on--4.0 is getting kicked down the chute 3 full months before it's due date. The coder/hobbyist/techfreaks are loving it because they get to have a field day playing bug reporters and self-diagnostic DIY gurus. Fine. But to the rest of us, 4.0 is a premature mess with unacceptable, almost absurd levels of dysfunction.

The code mods/patches we'll see in a-g will be actual implementations of 4.0 features, not just tweaks of incidental anomalies.

They are literally selling a table with 3 legs and responding with "You don't see the fourth leg? What optical system are you using? The table is crashing? Okay, the fourth leg is something we're going to be looking at in a subsequent revision. Those of you who feel you need to use the fourth leg for things like, say, putting something on the top of the table and having it be stable, you'll be very happy with what's coming up in 4.0a!"

Look, it'll all get fixed and working eventually, but folks who point to Acid as having unceremoniously slipped out of the pro arena are making a resoundingly good point. Cakewalk's Plasma is a $39 toy, and is as buggy and unrobust as a toy, and nobody cares a heck of a lot, they can upgrade or just throw it in the trash compactor. Acid costs $249. That's Sonar territory.

4.0 needed to have ReWire and basically work out of the box. SOFO needed a home run, and they delivered a pop foul out. How many outs do they have left? Nobody can say. But it is the bottom of the ninth. I'm staying in my seat rooting for the home team til the end. But look around--the exits are starting to back up.

Yeah yeah, Acid, love it or leave it, good riddance blah blah. But if you can get past that childish defensive bs, you have to admit this formerly excellent company has shown us something here. They felt compelled by internal financial pressures to ship a truly half-finished product. That's scary for us SOFO owners, as much as if we just bought a new Daewoo and found out the company had just gone BK. You start worrying about support and future development. Parts. Warranty coverage. Phrases like "acquisition target" and "mergers" start getting bandied about. Emagic's PC customers can tell the tale.

So I'm still rooting for the good guys as many of us are. But like Major League Baseball, contraction in the software world has passed from "if" to "when". The question is, is 4.0 handwriting on the wall, or a brief stumble on the road to Atlantis? It is an absolutely fair question for any music software consumer, and in SOFO's case, one who's answer may come sooner than later.

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Spirit

Date:8/23/2002 6:48:22 PM

Maruuk, while not necessarily disagreeing with what you're saying, I'm wondering whether you've actually used Acidpro4 ? Or are your assessments based on a dozen or so reports in this forum (which will naturally be biased towards the "I'm having problems" type), and two-minute demo sessions ?

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: DataCowboy

Date:8/23/2002 7:28:26 PM

Almost all software is released before it should be. Most companies and particularly (in my experience) most non-programmer managers undervalue testing and fail to appreciate the damage it causes to their users and their relationship with their users.

That said, there will always be bugs in point 0 releases. If users really want to discourage the habit of releasing software with unacceptable bugs, don't buy the point 0. Of course, some companies counter this approach with limited time special upgrade pricing (not saying present company has done this, just talking in general).

I generally buy point 0's and then don't install them unless they can co-exist with the previous version. I made a rare exception for Sonar 1.0 just because we couldn't get done what we needed to in CWPA 9, and it was by far the worst installation decision I ever made -- *that* was a horrible, horrible bug-ridden release that should never have seen the light of day.

If users feel strongly enough about it, users should band together and not buy the .0 for a day, a week, or whatever. Trust me, the companies will notice. It just takes the willingness of users not to feel compelled to have the "latest and greatest" right away.

Hexadecimal
of Freeside
P.S. These comments are general not directed at SF & Acid 4.0 -- I have bought but not installed it.

Subject:SF isn't in the press? Nah ...

Reply by: chaircrusher

Date:8/23/2002 7:47:08 PM

I don't know about that. In between major releases, press activity dies down.
I'm doing an article about Acid 4.0 for Grooves magazine (http://www.groovesmag.com),
and I've seen blurbs on Sound Forge and Acid in all the major magazines.

As for the comment about SF products being toys, that's just absurd. ANYONE who uses a PC for studio work has Sound Forge and Acid. Wavelab is popular too, but everyone I know who has to edit audio on a PC as part of their job uses Sound Forge every day. And loads of high profile musicians and remixers use Acid every day.
Hell, in a Rolling Stone article about Britney Spears, they mentioned B.T. (a huge Acid fan) teaching Britney to make beats on her laptop. What do you suppose she's using?

Not that I think Britney is the ultimate endorsement for the products, of course.
It's just that the core of Sonic Foundry's market are real musicians and producers. Most of them don't bother to arse around on these forums -- they've got work to do!

Subject:RE: SF isn't in the press? Nah ...

Reply by: pwppch

Date:8/23/2002 8:16:55 PM

I couldn't have said it better Chaircrusher! (And I have been wanting to for some time...)

Peter

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Maruuk

Date:8/23/2002 9:34:02 PM

Hex--Of course what you're saying is correct in general. But that was 1.0. This is 4.0. Yep, there's always issues, bugs, crashes, whatever. But this puppy is a true early beta-level rev, and beta tester types are having a field day. But adults who actually aren't on Summer vacation, who aren't techno-freaks, who don't enjoy trying to find weird tabs that appear only after you hit some other non-intuitive button ("we''ll have to fix that in 4.0a")--in other words, folks who actually have limited time and aren't interested in putting in endless unpaid QC work hours for SOFO should be insulted by the sheer sloppiness and inadequacy of this mess.

It's too easy to say "they all do it." They don't all crash like Hallie Berry on crack. They don't all lose sync in the one key feature added to the rev. They don't all have major driver issues so unresolved the 3rd parties are just now starting to communicate with SOFO about them. There are degrees of suckitude. This is a 9.3 out of 10.

Sonar 2.0 had nothing major busted, all the new features were functional. Minor bugs and issues, sure. But it basically worked out of the box. Does that make it a better program? No, separate issue. But it was released after proper beta testing that did not task the user with doing the majority of the tweaking. And all new features were fully implemented at the time of release, not fulfilled in the alphabet soup of revs to follow.

Sure, this will all work out in time. But time means different things to different folks. To a pro with deadlines, this level of product goofiness would be a disaster. I pulled Sonar 2.0 out of the box and it was stable and delivered on all new features. Again, not better per se, it just worked. Acid 3.0 met deadlines for me--stable and good and fast.

Sure, all even numbers are a little scary. Just 4.0 is a LOT scary. As in heart attack scary.

Subject:RE: SF isn't in the press? Nah ...

Reply by: Spirit

Date:8/23/2002 10:00:26 PM

Phew! Just put ol' Maruuk on "ignore this user" and life has really improved. I just couldn't stand listening to his same old stuff over and over and over again - what an unhappy man. Now it's like I've just eliminated all the annoying ads from a TV show :)

A few weeks ago he was doing his best to talk SoFo out of existence, then he was everyone's best friend and telling everyone to "buy, buy, buy" for the good of the company. Now he's trying to rip the guts out of SoFo again. Oh, and what about Rewire?

I suspect he's "ignoring" me too he he he, so what the hell, this is "detente" :)

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Studio_de_Lara

Date:8/24/2002 12:26:37 AM

"Almost all software is released before it should be"
This is a BIG problem. Along with "Vapor Ware". As a paying end user, I should not have to beta test a product that should be ready for release. It's one thing if you have a graphic bug or a UI bug, but a fully functioning bug (like the ASIO problem, which is major) is unacceptable. I paid good money for this upgrade based on claims from Sonic Foundry. I have projects going, that need smooth completion. I didn't sign up for a BETA testing program to help figure out which sound cards work and which don't.
To the people who have zero problems, God bless you. Alot of us have MAJOR issues, so telling us to "hang in there" is easier said (especially from your perspective) than done.
I hate spending money on something that isn't finished. If one item on an advertisement is not working, than the item is not comptete, period.
Regards,
Rich

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: PBSound

Date:8/24/2002 7:32:48 AM

I agree with justifiedalive

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: DataCowboy

Date:8/26/2002 10:24:24 PM

It's not my intention to excuse software bugs by saying "they all do it." Rather, I believe it is an indication of where the users of music production software have placed the threshold on bug-tolerance. We (as a whole) have not forced companies to product more bug-free software, and so we get what we demand - more features in exchange for reliability. You don't see too many ads where music software companies hype how reliable their software is, but they're all fired up to tell us they've added VST-this, DX-that, etc. Because that's what we (again, as a whole) are buying, all hoping we're not going to be that guy who's configuration is gonna have fits with the new software.

Sonar 2.0 has been a delightfully pain-free experience for me as well, however, I suspect this in almost entirely due to the near disaster Sonar 1.0 was for a large number of Cakewalk users. Cakewalk was burned very badly for releasing an extremely undertested product, and appears to have learned its lesson. Note the money-back garuantee offer they put out for people who bought the 2.0 -- I think their sales would have suffered tremendously without it. I for one, wouldn't have bought it, even after having used Cakewalk products for 11 years. If I hadn't had bad experiences with Steinberg support (worst support I've ever received from a company), there's a good chance I would've switched to Cubase just because of my fear that Cakewalk's mistake would be a permanent pattern of behavior.

I also believe that Cakewalk's behavior is the standard as well -- companies release undertested software until they are burned soooo badly by it that their product line is actually placed in jeopardy. Consider that Sonar 1.0 was actually the 10th major release of flagship software for Cakewalk. It's hard to believe they needed to learn a lesson on software delivery, but still it happened.

As I said, I haven't installed Acid 4.0 and can't comment on it, but I have had less trouble with SF releases that other companies, though I am one of many who were very disappointed for a couple years by the constant problems with MTC Sync in Acid.

I take it all the other bugs and defects with a grain of salt, and hope that slowly software will get more reliable, all the while telling companies how I feel about it.

Hex
of Freeside

Subject:RE: SF isn't in the press? Nah ...

Reply by: Beanstudio

Date:8/26/2002 11:27:21 PM

I almost never post. Why? Because I am having too much fun using Acid! What is going to make me get out there and start doing 5.1 mixes? SF should get a kickback because speaker sales are about to go up!

I already did an automated mastering job with 4.0 today.

Seriously, I trust Acid with my best clients. I also just used Acid to multi-track and edit an album for an artist who has sales past platinum. All these people want to do is work quickly and enjoy it at the same time. I never have been asked, "Where is Pro-Tools", or anything like that. It just works.

5.1, automated new effects, asio, etc. How could anyone in their right mind complain. Computers are extremely varied in their set-up, and hardware config. And don't forget user/abuser. 75% of our problems are user error. Imagine what it is like to code for software that would work with all of those ever changing users and conditions? I have complained a couple of times, and anything I was thinking about has been fixed or added to 4.0.

If there are a few things that need fixing, or adding, don't worry, SF will do it quickly. Just don't ask for too much, or we will get it!

Our society is quite spoiled and we demand everything with every bell and whistle yesterday. When we get new tools to use we scoff and cry for more.

I master audio for a living and use WaveLab for that, but I did use Forge for years. I do trust Acid with paying clients for those type of editing, looping jobs, and will continue to do so. I will also use it for 5.1 mastering. No problem.

Jim

Subject:SF isn't in the press? No, they are not ...

Reply by: waynegee

Date:8/27/2002 12:39:51 AM

SF is NOT in the press in the way that Cakewalk, CubaseSX, Logic(sweetest ads in the world), Digidesign and others are. They definitely don't have the "pro" exposure/presence that they once had. I subscribe to almost every major music mag out there and there has not been any ads(SoFo paid or otherwise) in about a year. Yeah there has been a review of Acid 3.0 and a couple of "shoot-outs" but that's because Acid set the bar that all "looping" tools must be judged against NOT because the presenc of ACID is relevant (it is for me, though). I got the "Loopalooza" article too but I don't remember there being a clear, clean-cut winner.

SoFo needs to make up their minds(audio, video or whatever) and go for it. Yeah, a lot of "pro" musicians use Acid (from BT to Tommy Lee...) but NOT in the way that it could be used. They don't look at it as a replacement for ProTools, Logic, DP3, etc but I do. Wouldn't use anything else.

But Acid is most definitely viewed as a toy. When some dipshit salesboy at Guitar Center asks me what I use and say ACID, his dipshit response should not be "heh...never tool it seriously...didn't know it could do that". When a client gets bummed cuz I use Acid and not ProTools...in the words of someone: Houston, we have a problem. It's basic brand awareness. Period. SoFo taking the stand of "it's not a DAW nor do we wanna compete in that space" is nonsense. Acid is a DAW just not a traditional MIDI + Audio one. A better stance would be "we're gonna dominate the DAW space OUR WAY...with our Looping + Audio + MIDI tools". By them saying "well, we're not trying to be Logic, Cubase, Sonar, etc...let Acid be Acid"...that's cool but if you are gonna offer features that these other products offer then it has to be as good if not better or it's just watered-down versions of what has come before. You won't get any new converts and you won't get respect and you WON'T get that coveted brand awareness thing we spoke of.

If you don't want the market or if it's just a cash cow, then sell it and let a company interested in dominating the space have it. No, nothing does what Acid does exactly like Acid...for now. That won't last forever. I'll stick up for SF too, but I'm gonna call like it is, not out of loyalty but the fact the product does what I need it to do. But as a pro, I'm always on the hunt for something better...competetion is fierce. Let's not confuse emotion with reality(something that is most prevalent here in these forums.) Dig?

Subject:arees?

Reply by: Jacose

Date:8/27/2002 10:07:46 AM

i am so bummed that i converted major work to v4, and now cant go back to v3

major work?

what kind of work are you getting if you are doing something as illogical as converting all your v3 projects to v4 without seeing the bugs first????

thats sort of dumb IMO.

That is a rule of thumb when it comes to software, dont you know that?

Subject:RE: SF isn't in the press? No, they are not ...

Reply by: aress

Date:8/27/2002 10:08:51 AM

i have a 32 channel pro stool...

until i get a mac os-x version i will hate using it after having used acid and vegas...

in fact my clients are sending me their prostool tracks and i work on them in acid/vegas....

i hate waiting to render [everything] and work with dual mono tracks, but the new audio cards and I/O s are great.....

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Jacose

Date:8/27/2002 10:10:40 AM

4.0 is a premature mess with unacceptable, almost absurd levels of dysfunction.



dont see it here.....

Subject:HEART ATTACK@!

Reply by: Jacose

Date:8/27/2002 10:14:10 AM

Sure, all even numbers are a little scary. Just 4.0 is a LOT scary. As in heart attack scary

wow...

heart attack huh? youre pathetic. You have some really great ideas, but youre such a freak about this stuff you cant just USE SOMETHING ELSE or.. FIGURE SOMETHING ELSE OUT then... get sONAR, get Cubase........whatever.

there are too many people here who are motivated by technology, not creativity. Merook, you sound like one of them.

you have now been ignored by one more person.

Subject:waaahahhahhaaa! I cant do music cause Acid dont work!!!!!!

Reply by: Jacose

Date:8/27/2002 10:17:08 AM

I have projects going, that need smooth completion

well, did you just start your projects after Acid 4 came out?

I doubt it.

SO, that means there was a way you USED to do it.

WHy dont you keep doing it this way until SOFO comes out with a better ACID and stop crying "this doesnt work mommy, so I cant do music anymore!!!!"


(although I wholeheartedly agree that if there were ASIO problems that would be a major problem to complain about.. I dont use ASIO so I wouldnt know.)

Subject:RE: Beta?

Reply by: Jacose

Date:8/27/2002 10:18:41 AM

true dat true dat...

beta is the way to go!

why didnt they do it?

nobody knows.