Are we not due an update??!!

[JingleDjango]

Originally Posted by Sardi

I said the same thing x amount of posts/pages back.

I totally agree. You want us to pay a yearly fee? Sure thing. Deliver the goods and I don’t have an issue.

You want us to pay up front on the promise that you’ll deliver the goods and then don’t? Hmmmm... Something’s missing.

This is my feeling as well. I have no problem paying yearly to keep up my license. I don't even mind the price increase, in theory. It still comes in as a reasonable expense for my business. My only gripe is we are not seeing the kind of lively development we were led to expect, in my opinion.

[zion]

Originally Posted by DOZ

Let's not give Avid any more excuses. We need to hold them to their words. There is a lot of Excuses in this thread for Avid to use. My money has a Vote. If by December 30th I'm not Happy; I will wait 2 years to get back on.

Well said!

[Eric Lambert]

Originally Posted by JingleDjango

My only gripe is we are not seeing the kind of lively development we were led to expect, in my opinion.

It's not just your opinion, it's the opinion of nearly all, and when those standouts allow themselves to speak their minds (instead of spouting the fuel of their ulterior motives) it becomes everyone's opinion. No one truly prefers stagnant feature implementation any more than they'd prefer an uglier wife. What you say in public isn't the same as what you think in private.

[jpsexton]

Originally Posted by Eric Lambert

It's not just your opinion, it's the opinion of nearly all, and when those standouts allow themselves to speak their minds (instead of spouting the fuel of their ulterior motives) it becomes everyone's opinion. No one truly prefers stagnant feature implementation any more than they'd prefer an uglier wife. What you say in public isn't the same as what you think in private.

I'd like to believe that but in every thread that someone post's about their dissatisfaction someone else will come to Avids defense and it usually spirals downhill from there.

Apparently there are some that prefer an uglier wife.

[jasonkalman]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Software as a Service

Thanks JFreak!

[jasonkalman]

I think the majority of us are still with Avid, well not Avid, but Pro Tools because there is no other system that offers .7ms RTL like an HDX system does. I've looked at all the options and there just isn't such a beast. So basically my subscription plan is to keep me current so I can update my OS within a reasonable amount of time 6-8 months after release and use HDX.

I do enjoy using Pro Tools software, I am still annoyed at the inability of Pro Tools to use all of a host's native power to run plugs. Avid needs to figure out how to tap into the raw power of these multi-core machines. With the new Mac Pro coming out, there is no excuse for Pro Tools to ever run out of CPU power. That is the one thing I think Avid needs to heavily invest engineering hours on. It is one thing to run out of voices, but to run out of CPU power on a massively powerful computer way before you run out of voices is unacceptable. If they fix nothing else but this, I'm a happy camper.

[coolbass]

Originally Posted by xrekcor

Yeah like the prompts you get whilst installing a new Waves plug, that ask you if you want to include the current updates not apparently installed, and you take the install updates later option only to find when you go back to find these apparent updates no longer exists.... perhaps they didn’t exist in the first place..... perhaps they are imaginary updates..... yup gotta love those Waves updates.

This is nonsense.

[moshuajusic]

We probably won't see an update till after Catalina arrives. Hopefully they qualify 2019.6 with it as well. Otherwise, I'm PARKED parked.

[jpsexton]

Originally Posted by jasonkalman

I think the majority of us are still with Avid, well not Avid, but Pro Tools because there is no other system that offers .7ms RTL like an HDX system does. I've looked at all the options and there just isn't such a beast.

Studio One with the Quantum is close at 32 samples and even better at 16 samples but on my system 32 seems to be the practical limit. With a more powerful machine 16 wouldn't be a problem.

[Sardi]

Originally Posted by jpsexton

Studio One with the Quantum is close at 32 samples and even better at 16 samples but on my system 32 seems to be the practical limit. With a more powerful machine 16 wouldn't be a problem.

You need to add the input and output latency to compare RTL. When you do that, you’re at 3 times the quoted HDX figure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk