Aaaaaaaarrrrrrrgghhhhh! (software release schedules)

[Dan South]

I've been patiently waiting for Pro-53, FM7, and Kontakt to be released for OS-X. The site inditated that they'd be ready in July or August. I thought, "Fine. I'll take my vacation, come back, and they should be almost done." I've waited an extra couple of weeks thinking SURELY that they'll be ready by now, or at least that a shipping date would be announced. SURELY.

 

Forget it. The site now says September.

 

OS-X will be OS-XI by the time these stupid things are ready, and my computer will be over the hill.

 

This is so freaking frustrating! At least, when you buy a piece of hardware, it works right away. You don't have to wait for a new software release to run it. And it will work for the extent of its life. You don't have to continuously upgrade ever time your machine gets too slow or every time a new OS comes out.

 

SOFT SYNTHS SUCK!

 

COMPUTERS SUCK!

 

HARDWARE RULES!

 

SCREW YOU, NI, I'M TIRED OF WAITING! WHY DIDN'T YOU JUST SAY "DECEMBER" IN THE FIRST PLACE?

 

[Ed A.]

I know the feeling. I was waiting for what seemed like forever for Absynth 2. I downloaded the update as soon as it was available and I noticed that it wouldn't retain Audio and MIDI preferences. Suffice it to say that it wasn't a corrupted preferences file or permissions problem in OS X, it was a bug in Absynth 2. After months of delays, it still has problems, no AU as they promised, either. In fact I hear there are also a lot of disgruntled Reaktor users because the new version still doesn't work right. NI should take a lesson from Propellerheads. Reason 2.5 works great, seems bug free and they released it when they said they would.

[Superbobus]

Is B4 also not ready for OS X?

[b_3guy]

Seems like a terrible time. DP4 for OSX, but no AU until 4.1. I just stayed with DP3.11 & all my other plugs like Waves 3.2 that only run in OS9. I'm pretty comfortable with my recording setup, so I think I'll wait a bit longer before taking the leap. The graphics industry has just gone thru this, everyone waiting for Quark 6.0 for OSX. It's now available, but I'm still not sure if I'm good to go in OSX. I think I have to upgrade my Acrobat Distiller & the other day I was thinking we'd have to upgrade our Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, etc.) & our printer rip software. Maybe they would run OK in Classic mode, I really don't know . . .

[JimmieWannaB]

Is B4 also not ready for OS X?

I saw an announcement on NI's site yesterday saying that it's available for download. Unless you bought B4 recently, though, it will cost you $29 as an upgrade.

 

I too hate waiting for software updates but they have to take less time and come more often than hardware ones. (Maybe not. After 18 months NI is finally offering a promised upgrade from Dynamo to Reaktor for DXi support.) NI's recent slips aside, distributing software fixes is a heck of a lot easier than hardware. If a manufacturer finds a problem with hardware design, they have to decide whether to recall units for update (rare) or come out with a .x version that pisses off their existing customer base.

[Superbobus]

Geez, OSX stands or falls with software support! It's a shame that such a great OS still is not supported by everyone, but I'm already used to it. It's our fate being a Mac user.

[JimmieWannaB]

It's our fate being a Mac user.

There was a time in the not so distant past when a Mac was required for anything creative - music, graphics or video. Windows users like myself used to have the same complaint that Mac users are voicing today. Software releases for creative products for Windows were few and far between (if at all).

 

Companies that got their start on Mac software are now issuing Mac releases as an after thought. You'll know the end is near when Apple releases a Windows version of their video editor Final Cut Pro and then issues Windows updates first. Then it will be time for Mac heads to bow down to Darth Gates with the rest of us.

 

Luke, come to the dark side. It is your destiny.

[BP3]

Originally posted by JimmieWannaB:

I saw an announcement on NI's site yesterday saying that it's available for download. Unless you bought B4 recently, though, it will cost you $29 as an upgrade.

 

I know the NI and other companies want to make money, but they need to consider that those who bought in early to products such as the B4 are somewhat responsible for later sales by exposing other buyers to the product. For them, in turn to charge the first purchasers and upgrade while not charging the late comers, can cost them some of their more valued customers.

[burningbusch]

Originally posted by Dan South:

This is so freaking frustrating! At least, when you buy a piece of hardware, it works right away. You don't have to wait for a new software release to run it. And it will work for the extent of its life. You don't have to continuously upgrade ever time your machine gets too slow or every time a new OS comes out.

 

SOFT SYNTHS SUCK!

 

COMPUTERS SUCK!

 

HARDWARE RULES!

 

I love this thinking. Hardware rules becauses it's closed and can't be upgraded. Software/computers suck because they're open and upgradable. But, if you treat software/computers like hardware, i.e. don't upgrade them, they behave like hardware. There are still tons of people out there running PT Mix on ancient 9600 boxes, OS 8/9 something. They don't upgrade because their systems are rock solid and they have all the features/plugins to do what they need to do.

 

I upgraded to OSX only after 1) all the audio plugins I needed came available and 2) I moved all my soft synths to the PC. Otherwise I'd still be on OS 9. I wouldn't compromise what I can musically for an OS.

 

Busch.

[DJDM]

Sorry to hear that Dan. It is hard to wait for updates. For what it is worth NI is not the only manufacturer having problems with the updates to OSX.

The fact that OSX is a complete 180 from any previous version of the operating system and requires the software manufactures to completely redesign their software out of necessity based on a timeline from a company that they are partnered with but don't have any control over is causing more problems than anyone considered when venturing into this process. I know that as a small company I would be a little put off if I had to go back and redesign my software based on those criteria.

- DJDM

[DanS]

I'm still running everything on Win98se.

You need to chill Dan.

We musicians are the most fortunate in history to have all of these groovy gadgets available to us, and if all this technology comes at a price of upgrading the machine every couple of years, so be it. There's always analog 4 track cassette to keep you happy.

 

Soft synths are great. Except for Absynth, sucks way too much CPU power.

 

NI is my favorite SS producer.

[Dan South]

DJDM, I understand, and I should be reasonable, but it's maddening to be given one date and then have it pushed back again and again. NI should just say that they're working it and that they have no idea when it will be ready.

 

To NI's credit, I LOVE their products. If I didn't, I wouldn't care how long the releases take. Maybe I'll just abandon all hope until October or so.

 

Busch, I do appreciate upgradability, but it's a double edged sword. Let's say that you get a bunch of stuff working on your computer. Then one program, maybe your sequencer, comes out with a new release with more features, but you have to upgrade your OS to run it. But other programs lag behind in development for that OS, so you're moving forward in one sense but backward in another.

 

Also, that JV-1080 you bought in 1996 will still be running in 2006. The computer that you bought in 1996 will be a useless relic. You can't keep working on it. Nothing runs on it anymore. You have to upgrade. But not all programs will be ready to upgrade at the same time.

 

In both of these scenarios, there can be a stretch of months or even years where you're inconvenienced to the point where you can't work. What if everything works fine on your OS9 computer, but one day, it dies? Apple won't sell you a new OS9 computer. In fact, their new computers are designed to REJECT OS9 if you try to install it. You'll have to upgrade. But if you want to use DP or Pro-53, etc., you're shit out of luck.

 

This is a REAL problem, and it demands a REAL solution from Apple, Microsoft, and the soft instrument and plug-in vendors.

[Superbobus]

Originally posted by JimmieWannaB:

It's our fate being a Mac user.

There was a time in the not so distant past when a Mac was required for anything creative - music, graphics or video. Windows users like myself used to have the same complaint that Mac users are voicing today. Software releases for creative products for Windows were few and far between (if at all).

 

Companies that got their start on Mac software are now issuing Mac releases as an after thought. You'll know the end is near when Apple releases a Windows version of their video editor Final Cut Pro and then issues Windows updates first. Then it will be time for Mac heads to bow down to Darth Gates with the rest of us.

 

Luke, come to the dark side. It is your destiny.

Well, times changed when software houses found out that at least 90% of all computer users are using Windows. There was a whole lotta market out there to gain.

FWIW, Apple will NEVER bring out Windows updates first, if they are ever gonna release FCP for Windows, as sure as they'll never release OSX for PCs. They still have hardware to sell, remember? My experience with Macs has been great the past years, but if Apple keeps on passing the ball to others and keeps on releasing their own Mac-only software... who knows what's gonna happen.

Well, at least I don't have to worry 'bout hackers using MIDI files and breaking into my system.

[JimmieWannaB]

Also, that JV-1080 you bought in 1996 will still be running in 2006. The computer that you bought in 1996 will be a useless relic. You can't keep working on it. Nothing runs on it anymore. You have to upgrade. But not all programs will be ready to upgrade at the same time.

Step back a second and think about this often used statement.

 

The only reason to upgrade a PC is if you want to use next generation software. If what you bought on 1996 fits your requirements, there's no need to upgrade.

 

The same is true of a synth purchased in 1996. If its features fit your needs, there's no need to replace it. The fact that new features have been added to synths (or any hardware product for that matter) since 1996 is what keeps hardware manufacturers in business. They add new features for us to lust after. While you may still be able to use it, I guarantee that you'll consider your JV-1080 a relic in 2006.

[Geoff Grace]

Dan, it sounds like you're suffering from the old "two steps forward, one step back" scenario. This can indeed be frustrating. Here are the steps I'm taking to ensure the smoothest possible migration to OS X:

 

I'm not buying an OS X only computer ... yet

As for why, see below.

 

I'm not touching my OS 9 based music hard drive

This way, I have a secure setup in OS 9 that I can return to, both as a backup and for using OS 9 only apps.

 

For those who decide to do this, here is a very important tip: do NOT choose this drive as your OS 9 Classic environment under OS X! Doing so allows OS X to monkey with your OS 9 music drive without your knowledge. This makes it possible (at least with Pro Tools) to lose OS 9 authorizations, undermining the purpose of keeping an OS 9 drive. An extra security measure to keep OS X from touching your OS 9 drive can be taken by removing and trashing the following files from the OS 9 drive's system folder: Classic, Classic Support, and Classic Support UI.

 

I've set up a new OS X based hard drive from scratch

(I even formatted the drive using my OS X install disk.)

 

As noted above, the more distance one puts between OS 9 and OS X setups, the better. I've also created two user accounts under OS X - one for business and personal use and one for making music with.

 

There are several advantages to this dual user accounts setup. Even under OS X, apps crash; and I want to leave my music setup as pure as is possible. Also, my OS X personal and business information then becomes locked away from clients while logged in under my music account.

 

I've also been able to configure both iTunes and my browser settings differently for each account. In my business and personal account, iTunes has a library of MP3s of my favorite music for personal listening, while in my music account, iTunes will function as a library of AIFFs of my music and of my clients' music. Similarly, my browser bookmarks reflect my personal taste and business needs in my business and personal account, while my music account bookmarks take me straight to tech support pages for all of my hardware and software.

 

I realize that I've drifted a bit off topic here, so I'll finish with the main advantage I feel that hardware has over software: plug and play. It is much easier, for example, to use my E4XT Ultra with any recording software or hardware than it is to use my VST only HALion with Pro Tools or my never to be for OS X OASYS with OS X only apps. Don't get me wrong. I don't mean to imply that this advantage defeats the many advantages that software offers; but it is an advantage nonetheless.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[JimmieWannaB]

Even under OS X, apps crash

I've always been told that only Windows crashes.

 

Sorry, couldn't resist. Let's not start a Mac/Windows war. That subject was old ten years ago.

[Geoff Grace]

I'll add (for clarification only) that when an app crashes under OS X, the other apps and the OS itself remain unaffected. While it is theoretically possible to crash OS X itself, it is almost unheard of and will probably never happen to most users.

 

My understanding is that Windows XP is similarly stable.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[Dan South]

Guys,

 

Your suggestions are well-reasoned - don't upgrade until you need to, etc. - but, this is reality, man, and shit happens. My OS9 desktop suffered from some sort of bizarre power supply bug. I sent it back for repairs twice. Just about every component of the machine was replaced during one of those two trips, but the thing would still misbehave. At first, it would fail to reboot after a shutdown unless I left it there to "cool off" for an hour or two. Then later it started to spontaneously shut itself down while I was working on it. It became unbearable, and I had to buy a new machine. New machine = OS-X = I can't run a half of the programs that I need. Not to mention that you need OS-X for the latest and greatest version of Logic.

 

So much for the "get the machine working and never touch it" theory. It doesn't always work in practice.

 

Also, my OS9 laptop has a 400 MHz G4 and 256M RAM - not enough to run big sample libraries like the Sonic Implants strings for ESX24 that I just ordered. I'll have to upgrade THAT machine sometime, too, but for now I'm not touching it, because it still runs FM7 and Pro-52.

 

One more remark on theory vs. practice: maybe I should just shut up and use what I have working today, and in six months or so when NI delivers some OS-X upgrades, I'll incorporate them into my setup. Put up and shut up, and get some work done. Still, I feel a bit shackled by the fact that I can't run my old programs - for which I've paid licensing fees - on my current hardware.

 

Suck factor is high.

 

[Dan South]

Originally posted by JimmieWannaB:

Step back a second and think about this often used statement.

 

The only reason to upgrade a PC is if you want to use next generation software. If what you bought on 1996 fits your requirements, there's no need to upgrade.

 

The same is true of a synth purchased in 1996. If its features fit your needs, there's no need to replace it. The fact that new features have been added to synths (or any hardware product for that matter) since 1996 is what keeps hardware manufacturers in business. They add new features for us to lust after. While you may still be able to use it, I guarantee that you'll consider your JV-1080 a relic in 2006.

The point is that if I no longer like my JV-1080, I can run out and buy an XV-5080 or a V-Synth and start using it IMMEDIATELY. I don't have to be concerned that it might not work with my current computer operating system. A hardware synth is a closed system that works independently of anything else.

 

Imagine what it would be like if none of your MIDI synths would communicate anymore if you bought a new PC, of if old MIDI synths would communicate with new MIDI synths. It would drive you nuts. You'd have download OS upgrades for EACH SYNTH - if they were available - and verify all over again that everything works as expected. Luckily, with hardware, we don't HAVE ludicrous complications like that, but in the personal computer world, it's a constant reality.

 

THIS MUST CHANGE.

[dementia13]

There was a time in the not so distant past when a Mac was required for anything creative - music, graphics or video. Windows users like myself used to have the same complaint that Mac users are voicing today. Software releases for creative products for Windows were few and far between (if at all).

 

Companies that got their start on Mac software are now issuing Mac releases as an after thought. You'll know the end is near when Apple releases a Windows version of their video editor Final Cut Pro and then issues Windows updates first. Then it will be time for Mac heads to bow down to Darth Gates with the rest of us.

 

Luke, come to the dark side. It is your destiny.

Windows has come a long way. Companies are now able to tap into the Windows market, because now it's stable enough to be usable. That wasn't the case a few years ago. I still think that, with some of the features of OS X (and especially if the G5 is what it's cracked up to be), the Mac is a better choice. But Windows has improved a lot, and the Intel hardware is excellent.

 

The only reason to upgrade a PC is if you want to use next generation software. If what you bought on 1996 fits your requirements, there's no need to upgrade.

I still use a Nubus Mac for certain things. It's got some good Digi hardware, so it's worth hanging on to. Problem is, if there's a problem, I have to be my own technician. Parts get harder and harder to come by. In this case, I have to keep a working Quadra on hand as a spare. This is the evil plan which Apple, Intel, and MS share: to survive, they have to keep you on a perpetual upgrade path. And as the hardware gets better and better, the potential of the software gets greater and greater. That's why an FM7 is even possible now. So, they're able to keep you feeling like you need that newer faster machine.

[Geoff Grace]

Originally posted by Dan South:

Your suggestions are well-reasoned - don't upgrade until you need to, etc. - but, this is reality, man, and shit happens. My OS9 desktop suffered from some sort of bizarre power supply bug. I sent it back for repairs twice. Just about every component of the machine was replaced during one of those two trips, but the thing would still misbehave. At first, it would fail to reboot after a shutdown unless I left it there to "cool off" for an hour or two. Then later it started to spontaneously shut itself down while I was working on it. It became unbearable, and I had to buy a new machine. New machine = OS-X = I can't run a half of the programs that I need. Not to mention that you need OS-X for the latest and greatest version of Logic.

 

(snip)

 

Imagine what it would be like if none of your MIDI synths would communicate anymore if you bought a new PC, of if old MIDI synths would communicate with new MIDI synths. It would drive you nuts. You'd have download OS upgrades for EACH SYNTH - if they were available - and verify all over again that everything works as expected. Luckily, with hardware, we don't HAVE ludicrous complications like that, but in the personal computer world, it's a constant reality.

Dan, WOW! You have my complete sympathy for what you've gone through! First, you bought one of Apple's rare lemons (no pun intended). Then, this propelled you into jumping headfirst into the most dramatic Apple OS change since Apple's 1984 introduction of the Macintosh! You'll get no argument from me that this is a frustrating situation to be in!

 

While I agree that software-based studio compatibility issues are almost always a bigger deal than hardware-based studio compatibility issues, I would also caution against portraying the current transition problems from moving to OS X as the norm. Moving to OS X forced me to not only upgrade all of my software, it forced me to replace my serial MIDI interfaces and serial printer as well! Never before has an OS upgrade forced such an upheaval to my setup; and I began making music on Macs with a Mac Classic, running System 6, in 1991.

 

Even though I believe the current transition does not fairly represent the norm, I do agree that there is a problem arising from the lack of standardization in the software world. To extend your argument above - what if music hardware manufacturers hadn't agreed on standards for jack size, output levels, the MIDI spec, sample rates, etc.? Imagine how much tougher it would be to make music!

 

As I implied in my post above, my E4XT Ultra can be plugged into virtually every hardware mixing board on the planet. Thankfully, E-mu doesn't have to design and manufacture one type of E4XT Ultra to interface with SSL boards, another to plug into to Mackie boards, and yet another that would work with Sony mixers! And yet, this is the problem that exists in the computer world; it has no universal standard by which a single plug-in can actually be plugged into even most DAW software mixers. That's a shame! In this regard, Dan, I completely get and agree with your point!

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[RABid]

So when has NI been on time with ANY release? Reaktor 4 was delayed. ABSynth 2 was delayed. Kontakt was delayed. Every single update they have gets delayed. But it is better than releasing the software full of bugs.

 

Robert

[Jan Folkson]

My solution to this problem has been to set up an XP based system to run my soft synths alongside my Mac system to run my DAW. While it does mean more expense and maintenance (2 OSs compared to one) the benefits are many. I can run PC-only as well as Mac-only software and have significanly more power to run both being that I'm splitting up the workload.

 

I feel for ya Dan, I hate waiting on somebody else's timeline.

[b_3guy]

Originally posted by Geoff Grace:

WOW! You have my complete sympathy for what you've gone through! First, you bought one of Apple's rare lemons (no pun intended). Then, this propelled you into jumping headfirst into the most dramatic Apple OS change since Apple's 1984 introduction of the Macintosh! You'll get no argument from me that this is a frustrating situation to be in!

[/QB]

No kidding!!!! I've heard a few stories but Dan your's takes the cake. Sounds like a lawsuit or maybe that would be enough to make most people go postal. I remember your dongle story as well. Not very good luck

[RobT]

Originally posted by Dan South:

I've been patiently waiting for Pro-53, FM7, and Kontakt to be released for OS-X. The site inditated that they'd be ready in July or August. I thought, "Fine. I'll take my vacation, come back, and they should be almost done." I've waited an extra couple of weeks thinking SURELY that they'll be ready by now, or at least that a shipping date would be announced. SURELY.

 

Forget it. The site now says September.

 

OS-X will be OS-XI by the time these stupid things are ready, and my computer will be over the hill.

 

This is so freaking frustrating! At least, when you buy a piece of hardware, it works right away. You don't have to wait for a new software release to run it. And it will work for the extent of its life. You don't have to continuously upgrade ever time your machine gets too slow or every time a new OS comes out.

 

SOFT SYNTHS SUCK!

 

COMPUTERS SUCK!

 

HARDWARE RULES!

 

SCREW YOU, NI, I'M TIRED OF WAITING! WHY DIDN'T YOU JUST SAY "DECEMBER" IN THE FIRST PLACE?

 

If you are tired of waiting for the release of the software. Try working for the company that is WRITING the software. Most management has a habit of understating reality...

[Jeff Klopmeyer]

Dan the Man,

 

Two things:

 

1. Almost all hardware now has software (or at least firmware) inside that requires periodic updating. You can't escape anymore.

 

2. At my last company, I had a policy of avoiding missing software release dates by not announcing dates of availability at all until the software was imminently ready. Did that make people happy? NO! They hated me. But God help us if we did announce a date, only to have a technical glitch push it back.

 

Trust me, I understand your gripe, and I understand the manufacturer's woes. No winning this dilemma.

 

- Jeff

[JimmieWannaB]

2. At my last company, I had a policy of avoiding missing software release dates by not announcing dates of availability at all until the software was imminently ready.

What a concept! (Too many ideas like this and you'll have to relinquish your weasel title. ) Not one company I've worked for gets the importance of waiting for software to be substantially finished before announcing it.

 

Then there's the old "talking about a replacement product when it's still in the concept stage." Best way I know to kill an existing product. You'd think the Osborne II story in every Marketing 101 text would be required reading.

[Jeff Klopmeyer]

Originally posted by JimmieWannaB:

What a concept! (Too many ideas like this and you'll have to relinquish your weasel title. ) Not one company I've worked for gets the importance of waiting for software to be substantially finished before announcing it.

Sadly, my point was that it didn't work. In fact, most people started saying that the software in question was doomed, purely from the fact that we didn't announce a date of availability for the new version.

 

This story is still in progress. TASCAM gets beat up every day by people waiting for GigaStudio 3.0. Looking back, I should have just made up a fake release date and missed it a bunch of times like everyone else.

 

- Jeff

[Dan South]

I don't know what's wrong with a manufacturer saying, "Yes, we're working on Release X.Y, and we think that it may have features A and B, but we're not close enough to announce a release date. Please check back periodically for details."

[Jeff Klopmeyer]

Originally posted by Dan South:

I don't know what's wrong with a manufacturer saying, "Yes, we're working on Release X.Y, and we think that it may have features A and B, but we're not close enough to announce a release date. Please check back periodically for details."

Would you purchase the current version (the sales of which sustains the company's day-to-day operation) if they announced an exciting new feature set in an upcoming version, or would you wait?

 

If the answer is "wait", you know the answer to your own question.

 

- Jeff