They lost me forever. Never saw such a way to conduct business.
Steinberg has done it again!
Steinberg has done it again!
http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
They lost me forever. Never saw such a way to conduct business.
They lost me forever. Never saw such a way to conduct business.
that's typical for software and it's the customers who are to blame. blindy jumping on every innovation, while the original spec is not optimized is wasteful and inefficient. it's a good way for dishonest developers to make extra money. welcome 64bit computing! 32bit computing has not yet been exploited to even 50% of it's capability, but a new, better standard is introduced, even though there's no real need for it and even though most of it's alleged gains will be eaten by the ineffeciency of the lack of developement time.
if the consumers ate like epicures instead of pigs at the trough, this kind of bs couldn't go on. software and hardware would need to be optimized and finished! designs would last for years and years and provide flawless service in that time. business used to be run that way. any other type of business was thought to be immoral and worthy of the old tar and feathering.
just suck it up, because the current economics require that kind of behavior.
the great thing about this kind of thing, is that quantum, unnessessary shifts like this 32 to 64bit one have the effect that only the few biggest developers can afford to make the jump, leaving the industry in fewer and fewer hands, making it easier for the industry to dictate how the public will be forced to spend, buy and operate.
of course, i'll be right there with all the other suckas buying the newest because that's gonna be the best choice, even if i know that all this was unnessessary. finishing and optimizing the present system, would have brought the same or more benefit and been cheaper. now, why would business want to give you a better product and cheaper, when you'll be more excited by a newer, shinier product that needs to be fixed itself and will leave room for an even newer, shinier product? and what are the poor guys who are buying for the first time gonna do? they have no choice but to buy the current offering.....
rock and a hard place.
don't hate the playa, hate the game.
if the consumers ate like epicures instead of pigs at the trough, this kind of bs couldn't go on. software and hardware would need to be optimized and finished! designs would last for years and years and provide flawless service in that time. business used to be run that way. any other type of business was thought to be immoral and worthy of the old tar and feathering.
just suck it up, because the current economics require that kind of behavior.
the great thing about this kind of thing, is that quantum, unnessessary shifts like this 32 to 64bit one have the effect that only the few biggest developers can afford to make the jump, leaving the industry in fewer and fewer hands, making it easier for the industry to dictate how the public will be forced to spend, buy and operate.
of course, i'll be right there with all the other suckas buying the newest because that's gonna be the best choice, even if i know that all this was unnessessary. finishing and optimizing the present system, would have brought the same or more benefit and been cheaper. now, why would business want to give you a better product and cheaper, when you'll be more excited by a newer, shinier product that needs to be fixed itself and will leave room for an even newer, shinier product? and what are the poor guys who are buying for the first time gonna do? they have no choice but to buy the current offering.....
rock and a hard place.
don't hate the playa, hate the game.
You know I still have my hardware sequencers, which work perfectly, and never require additional funds. 2 x Roland MC500MKII's, and a Yamaha QX-1.
Now that I have Cubsase 4, I will cautiously follow their deceitful tactics. At least they were honest enough to make a comment. Giga 4, and GVI are going 64bit also. More, more, more. When I start collecting a union pension in 5 years, I hope I have mastered SFP by then. If it provides more memory addressing, and isn't full of bugs, we might like it, who knows. I do know that they can suck my ass, b4 I give them another dime.
Now that I have Cubsase 4, I will cautiously follow their deceitful tactics. At least they were honest enough to make a comment. Giga 4, and GVI are going 64bit also. More, more, more. When I start collecting a union pension in 5 years, I hope I have mastered SFP by then. If it provides more memory addressing, and isn't full of bugs, we might like it, who knows. I do know that they can suck my ass, b4 I give them another dime.
There's a lot more to blame than steinberg or consumers here. Blame the computer industry monopoly. That means all the major players in the industry. They are all to blame (well most of the big corporations anyway). 64-bit? What for? Gamers? Streaming video playback? It's the endless (and masterminded) loop of consumerism CREATED by the major technological players which is the spanner in the works. Always has been always will be. You can't blame the consumer for bying products when their bying behaviour is manipulated to the extent of forced upgrades & PR artistry tantamount to brainwashing.
I agree with all the critics to common marketing and business practices, but here we are at a simple, lower level. Steinberg sells a product ensuring that all the fixes will be made, announces a maintenance release (so more people jump in) then after more than a year, when a new payed version needs fixes, stops fixing the previous one.
they sell something they can't provide, that's like stealing chickens. For what I know not all the companies behave this way.
they sell something they can't provide, that's like stealing chickens. For what I know not all the companies behave this way.
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
-
paulrmartin
- Posts: 2445
- Joined: Sun May 20, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
-
Liquid Len
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Home By The Sea
Just say no!
Haha! I got off Steinberg's upgrade-de-jour a few years ago. I use SX 2, it's not bug free but it works, and I got tired of paying to upgrade to VST 5, SX1, SX2. When they announced SX3 before they had fixed the bugs in SX2, I just said NO. This kind of thing happens a lot in the industry, but Steinberg was pretty blatant about it, instead of releasing an update that would finally make their product work properly, they upped the version number, fixed some bugs and created some new ones, and made it a pay-to-upgrade.
-
Neil B
-
Counterparts
- Posts: 1963
- Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Bath, England
Steinberg haven't changed their tactics since the days of Atari versions of the software.
Their tactics are as follows:
o start
o make a major release of BUG-ridden software
o charge customers for this major release
o release a series of patches for the software
o the software remains BUG-ridden
o update the major version number
o goto start
I've already decided that I'm not going to upgrade my version of Cubase ever again. Steinberg left me with a BUG-ridden version of Cubase Audio 16 (for the Falcon, which cost £800 at the time ) and dropped development for that platform. Now they've left me with a BUG-ridden version of software for the PC and want me to send more money with them. Yeah, right
Their tactics are as follows:
o start
o make a major release of BUG-ridden software
o charge customers for this major release
o release a series of patches for the software
o the software remains BUG-ridden
o update the major version number
o goto start
I've already decided that I'm not going to upgrade my version of Cubase ever again. Steinberg left me with a BUG-ridden version of Cubase Audio 16 (for the Falcon, which cost £800 at the time ) and dropped development for that platform. Now they've left me with a BUG-ridden version of software for the PC and want me to send more money with them. Yeah, right
-
irrelevance
Now this is a situation unique to the software world (and software dependant "hardware") afaik. Where a product can be marketed with USP's (Unique selling points) that do not yet exist! Thing is, it's not just the companies that feed us this information, it's the magazines and review databases that feed us these promises. I've been burnt like this in the past by various companies. I did own a microwave xt for a time and got fed up of waiting for the promised os upgrade. . I also bought into some 3rd party software which controlled the yamaha sw1000xg because it promised integration beyond the yamaha supplied software. Unfortuanately development ceased...I didn't get a refundalfonso wrote:I agree with all the critics to common marketing and business practices, but here we are at a simple, lower level. Steinberg sells a product ensuring that all the fixes will be made, announces a maintenance release (so more people jump in) then after more than a year, when a new payed version needs fixes, stops fixing the previous one.
they sell something they can't provide, that's like stealing chickens. For what I know not all the companies behave this way.
I've certainly learnt from my mistakes and don't buy anything unless it provides what I need out of the box. However it's impossible to preempt bugs!
I use SX3 and I'm happy I upgraded from VST5 to SX, although I could have done without SX2 which seemed to be just a bit of a diversion; remember Pinnacle anyone?
it has become incredibly complicated to tell the 'real' experiences from fake 'reviews' (aka paid advertisements), possibly applicable to forum contributions as well...irrelevance wrote:...Thing is, it's not just the companies that feed us this information, it's the magazines and review databases that feed us these promises. I've been burnt like this in the past by various companies. ...
anyway, I still believe in the power of decision by the wallet
things may not always be as what they look like (or as what they are 'sold' publicly)
who knows the break-even economic figures of a given company ?
who can tell if the pretended omnipotence (aren't they all the greatest ?) is true and how many 'lost' customers their balance really can afford ...
cheers, Tom
-
irrelevance
In the recent ASB reviews in Sound on Sound most reviewers raised issues regarding bugs and certain inacuracies of operation. At the end of all of these reviews or mabye in a highlighted box somewhere on the page, there would be a comment from the reviewer telling us that Creamware was aware of these issues and were already working on resolving if they hadn't already done so.
Considering how well these products have been reviewed you can see that comments like this might just be the deal clincher for alot of potential customers.
My point here is that I feel quite sympathetic towards Creamware and imagine that under these situations they would have to make promises based on furthering sales/increasing revenue whether or not real thought has gone into how much time and money might be needed.
As someone else has already pointed out, this is just business.
Considering how well these products have been reviewed you can see that comments like this might just be the deal clincher for alot of potential customers.
My point here is that I feel quite sympathetic towards Creamware and imagine that under these situations they would have to make promises based on furthering sales/increasing revenue whether or not real thought has gone into how much time and money might be needed.
As someone else has already pointed out, this is just business.
Which was worse?garyb wrote:yes, the logic 5.0 pc thing. exaclty the same when apple took over emagic, but worse.
"Hey upgrade to our newest version if u want those fixes we promised for your current version" or "Hey upgrade your entire machine & software library if you want future updates!"Both are pathetic eh?
Steinberg lost me during Nuendo 1.x. Nuendo was NOT intially a steinberg product, and I was 'moved' over to Steinberg when they lapped up the codebase. Things were fine up through 1.4 although there were no virtual instruments. The company that had produced the original codebase had incredibly optimized multithreading (I could get 120-150% out of my dual xeons). By 1.5 Steinberg owned the codebase and attempted to integrate the VSTi spec, and system stability went out the window. After extensive testing on the older Cubase & Nuendo forums (much of which was deleted for v2 launch) it was obvious that instead of integrating VSTi processing into the current codebase it was just added on as a separate thread, which meant that when SMP (dual cpu) mode was enabled VSTi's would load down only one of the two cpu's and inevitably cause instability when workloads became high (when nearing the end of a track etc). The promised over & over to 'fix' this, and instead focused on porting a few additional MIDI functions over from Cubase VST and released Cubase SX. Further investigation on the forums revealed that Cubase SX also the same stability issues.
Mind you I was running the 'recommended' RME + Dual Xeon system that the pre-steinberg company had optimized the code extensively for. In the RME MUltiface was later even sold directly by STeinberg as the 'Nuendo' audio interface, and the steinberg website listed the top recommended PC specs as being a dual xeon with an RME multiface, exactly my machine. And yet to work reliably with Virtual Instruments (VSTi) I had to disable SMP support and run. with essentially only 1 cpu. Steinberg's response was that 'SMP Mode' was only for use during 'advanced tracking and mixdown' and stopped claiming a fix was forthcoming.
It's my understanding that in the v3 codebase 'improvements were made' by allowing VSTi's to still run in a separate thread but that thread now load balances, and finally in version 4 of 'coobase' they've done the audio engine rewrite which was promised to Nuendo 1.5x users back in 2000. Needless to say while I still own Nuendo 1.6 (current version for 1.x) I am not really feeling the loss of all the upgrades I never did to get what was promised to me years ago.
And then back to my reason for replying to GaryB. The reason I never upgraded to v2 (which wouldn't have fixed my issues with SMP mode in Nuendo anyway) is because I started using Logic 4.8 and then 5.x on PC, since win2k/Xp support was coming along so well. Even more interesting was that (given teh SMP issues under cubase) the differences between Logic's 'only when needed' and Nuendo (Cubase)'s "all the time" processing meant that I could achieve much higher plugin counts in Logic (which only used 1 cpu on PC under normal conditions). The ultimate Irony was that I moved from Nuendo to Logic due to Steinberg's crappy treatment of existing Nuendo customers, only to have Emagic sell to Apple.
At least Emagic was kind enough to give us a maintenance release (5.51) before moving on.
Most of the progress I've had over the last few years, rather than being my main DAW, have been in integrating Scope and interesting tools like Bidule & Usine into my studio workflow. And to be quite honest, since I don't have to resort to virtual audio cables and/or rewire to record virtual instruments I'm quite happy to run Logic for at least the next year or two.