Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

Avid’s Series of Unfortunate Events

Avid has made some poor decisions throughout the 8.x to 12.x transition. Some in haste, selfishness and some in panic.
I sympathize with companies in this new software climate. I truly do.

I know most of us enjoy editing, mixing and creating in Pro Tools. And many of us feel we have invested time and money into Pro Tools. But we don’t have the influence or control other users have over their DAWs. Should we? I truly don’t know. But I know a company who listens to its users is often regarded as a great company.

We’ve received features like “Track Freeze” that are sometimes great implementations but are so late to the field we don’t appreciate them as much as we should, even though we paid for them. We need to somehow gain control of this software we so dearly depend on. I have defended Avid at other moments — today is not that sort of moment.

I waited quite a while to transition from 8.x to 12.x. I had massive reservations. I made my upgrade exactly a year ago — 10.02.2015. My $99.00 renewal fee is ready to be purchased. And again, I have massive reservations.

I despise this new model. I despise it on a logical, mathematical and financial bases. Because it forces people to play Double Dutch. One ends up obsessing about how to purchase software at the right moment. One ends up obsessing about maximizing their own “renewal-to-feature ratio”. It sucks.

How does one recuperate losses if they happened to be the poor idiot who purchased between the same renewal period as me? How can we as users enforce a truly qualified and quantifiable worth of this software and its features? So many boring questions one should never have to ask when buying a “professional product”.

The reason why I pose the above is because in my renewal period there was a loss. A loss that many others have suffered and will receive no guarantee of recuperation of time, features, functionality or money. We’ve just lost — so many headaches with 12.5.0, 12.5.1, 12.5.2.

Some will argue that Avid does not guarantee “functionality”, “bug-freeness”, “renewal satisfaction”, “features in other DAWs” — etc.
I say, then what the hell are we paying for ever year? Are we paying for new features that destroy basic functionality? Are we paying for “support” that most professionals may never use? Are they going to extend out renewal periods for users when they release flawed code, when they are at fault, when it is blatantly obvious their “product” does not work for its advertised purpose? So many unanswered questions.

The Fundamental Flaws In The Current Model

A few statements I must make:

• Hardware and Software are different.
• A Company’s choices and Users’ desires are often different.
• Software guarantees (Written Guarantees) are becoming nonexistent.
• My expectations as a programmer make me biased and harsh on other developers.
• I believe in supporting frequently used features with settings when new features break said functionality.
• I respect the pressures developers are under, but will not disregard their responsibility to speak up when they release inadequate software or participate in “unethical” practices.

Flaw 0

my_renewal != your_renewal Confusing by design.
A. Details:

1. Unfortunately this flaw is full of so much subjectivity it is mostly invalid — But something just feels wrong.
2. There is a fundamental flaw because of the uneven nature of feature-worth within the renewal period.
3. Features can be released infrequently or frequently.
4. Vital features can be released days after a renewal period may have expired and hence increasing user dissatisfaction. Also, it creates a false sense of urgency to pay the full price just for a vital feature that was missed. This could be by design.

B. Solution(s):

1. See solutions in Flaw 4.

C. Rationale(s):

1. Increases user satisfaction.
2. Will help Avid to produce a more even feature release. Maybe.

Flaw 1

Avid’s Failures/Bugs cost users money and time. A.K.A. - Avid does not provide bug-fixes to users that haven’t renewed their “support plan” or “active update plan”.
A. Details:

1. Debilitating bugs such as: Click II, UI Lagging, -9173 [http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=379480]…
2. Users have to download and install flawed releases.
3. Users have to roll back to older releases when it fails.
4. Users are expected to pay for a year of releases, but some releases end up flawed — resulting in a failed exchange of money for goods/services.

B. Solution(s):

1. Easy! Don’t present flawed software as flawless. And when it is flawed, give bug-fixes to ALL users REGARDLESS of RENEWAL STATUS.
2. Stop hiding release downloads. If someone opens a session and it only “functioned” with a specific version, no user should have to open a ticket to download previously PAID-for releases. Keep them easily accessible.
3. See other solutions in Flaw 8.

C. Rationale(s):

1. OUR CREATIVITY and TIME must become EQUALLY as important as OUR MONEY is to you.
2. Scenario: Tesla releases a new feature that heats users’ cold steering wheel but made their brakes useless. Avid, do you think they should give their users a free update even though they are outside their “feature renewal” period?
3. We create, work, make money, spend time with Pro Tools — it is unacceptable when you won’t fix debilitating bugs YOU CREATED for ALL USERS at ALL RENEWAL STATUSES.

Flaw 2

CPUs/Hardware are less of the DSP/Latency bottlenecks they once were and HD will probably die. HD users will be hurt if not already wounded.
A. Details:

1. Killing off the HD-concept might be good for everyone.
2. Just an unfortunate reality of Moore’s Law and the market.
3. HD users are struggling to recuperate from previous price issues and upgrades.

B. Solution(s):

1. Create plug-in coupons or other credits for HD users.
2. Prorated refunds.
3. Sell inexpensive “à la carte” industry unique features.
4. Establish a true Pro Tools minimum feature set that matches Cubase, Studio One, Sonar and others.

C. Rationale(s):

1. These users helped make Pro Tools an industry standard and are vital to Avid’s future.
2. Reduces Avid’s codebase.
3. Helps reduce bugs.

Flaw 3

Vanilla users are becoming used to HD features trickling down. HD users are disenfranchised by HD features trickling down.
A. Details:

1. For the cost Vanilla users pay — they honestly expect more when compared to Cubase, Studio One, Sonar and others.
2. For the cost HD users pay — they prefer a vast feature gap between them and Vanilla. That gap currently isn’t quite as vast and narrows yearly. See Flaw 2.

B. Solution(s):

1. See solutions in Flaw 2.

C. Rationale(s):

1. See rationale in Flaw 2.

Flaw 4

Missing a renewal is purposefully financially detrimental.
A. Details:

1. Vanilla users have to pay $299.00 to “reinstate” their account to receive bug-fixes and features.
2. HD users have to pay $999.00 to “reinstate” their account to receive bug-fixes and features.

B. Solution(s):

1. Abolish renewals altogether.
2. Implement a late fee scheme based on the (outright cost divided by the number of months + renewal price). Scenario: A user misses their $100 renewal by two months. They have to pay $125 = (300/24) x 2 + 100.
3. Reduce the price of renewals significantly.
4. Allow users reentry at any time for a standard upgrade price. And release bug-fixes. (The traditional scheme!)

C. Rationale(s):

1. Humans make mistakes, miss deadlines, go on vacation, are subjected to bad weather, lose power, lose internet and are sometimes lazy. The financial penalty doesn’t fit the “crime”.
2. The reinstatement fee doesn’t necessarily mean you will receive anything good or useful. See Flaw 0.

Flaw 5

There isn’t a properly written or implemented grace period for renewals.
A. Details:

1. If a user fails to renew within a few days the cost is too high.

B. Solution(s):

1. See solutions in Flaw 4.

C. Rationale(s):

1. See rationale in Flaw 4.

Flaw 6

There isn’t a “Written Guarantee” that an Avid failure within a renewal period will result in a financial recuperation or renewal extension for a user.
A. Details:

1. Avid doesn’t give users a “Written Guarantee” that their failures will not affect users’ costs or their renewal periods.

B. Solution(s):

1. Get feedback from users on how they would like to be protected.
2. Implement and write a guarantee that reflects Avid’s respect for its users and its desire to produce quality software.

C. Rationale(s):

1. Will raise users’ moral and respect for Avid.
2. Will help users to trust that the integrity of releases will be maintained.

Flaw 7

“New Features” are destroying or hurting historical workflows.
A. Details:

1. Historical features and workflows are losing significance. Example: [http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=384591]

B. Solution(s):

1. Consider asking users for feedback prior to such features being implemented.
2. Allow users to select the new feature via preferences.

C. Rationale(s):

1. Avid will reduce alienation.
2. Avid will treat users’ TIME and WORKFLOW HABITS as an important consideration when implementing a “workflow breaking change”.

Flaw 8

No public Alphas, Betas or Release Candidates.
A. Details:

1. Alphas, Betas and Release Candidates are distributed to a small number of users; Internal Employees, Forum Moderators, Pro Tools Expert Staff, and other Partners.

B. Solution(s):

1. Open Release Candidates to EVERYONE at a minimum.
2. Open Betas and Release Candidates to EVERYONE is preferred.

C. Rationale(s):

1. Hardware, interfaces and system configurations are vast.
2. Avid will be able to expand their feedback prior to releases.
3. Avid will be able to reduce edge cases.

All of the above may seem like commonsense. But many of the users are so used to not receiving some of this from Avid — it doesn’t seem warranted to them.
I recognize historically companies such as Avid are afraid to give such direction and power to its users. But this fear must die. It must die, because we aren’t gnats that annoy Avid — we are INFORMED PRODUCT SPECIALISTS that pay, help, drive and support Avid. And we must have some FIRM requirements to continue to do so.

— C


Revision: 00

SOME LINKS:
Pro Tools Expert
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home...t-of-bug-fixes
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home...ll-have-issues
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home...f-pro-tools-12
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home...party-plug-ins
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home...party-plug-ins
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home...ptions-are-bad

DUC Forum
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=381717 - Click II Work-arounds.
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=379480 - -9173 Error/Issues.
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=384641
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=384766
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=384591 - Fine breakpoint adjustments in 12.6.
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=384812 - Advice on a stable version of 12 to use.
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=384719 - 12.6 MIDI Latency.
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=384918 - 12.6 Bug List Thread.
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=359634 - Mono Bus Highlighting Bug (2+ years old)
http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=384964 - Mono Bus Highlighting Bug Still Exist 12.0

AVID LISTENING:
http://duc.avid.com/showpost.php?p=2...&postcount=133

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

I should clarify. At my studio I purchased all flavors in between. Personal usage was a different story. Apologies for lack of clarity.
And it was $300-- I think you are confused, $99.00 is Vanilla's renewal cost etc.

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

I'm with you. I feel like everyone with an active support plan should be offered a free 6-month extension. 12.5 is a no-go for me and apparently many others (can you say -9179?). Haven't tried 12.6 yet since I'm at the tail end of an album project which I don't want to disrupt. I wish Avid was proactive and helpful to its customers, especially when it comes to rectifying their mistakes.

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

Nope but I can say "9173" ... what is a 9179 error ??

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

I edited my post from (9171 to 9179) as I was asking what he meant with a "9179" error hehe I posted the wrong number.

Thanks though. Have seen 9171 errors here before aswell but 9179 erros, never seen that.

I think he meant 9173 error ..

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

Just a typo.
I did correct it to 9173, post and pdf. I see it was moved from Pro Tools 12 Discussion. I do believe it maybe belongs there because the crux of the issues are 12 related either way I hope it makes sense.

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

Yes, it was a typo. :-) -9173 engine stops are what I was referring to.

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

Yeah Thats what I thought you meant aswell :-)

I agree that 9173 errors are a real pain and have a hard time understanding why it is soo hard to sort out really :o

Re: Avid's Series of Unfortunate Events
 

I believe the pressure created on the devs by
the renewals and subscription model and the lack
of truly public testing is the main reason these bugs
and "corner cases" crop up. And Avid then releases,
then failures, then rollbacks... And the cycle continues
with no true ramifications, recuperation for money already spent.