Problem with maximum Voices/Tracks in Pro Tools 2020.9

[JFreak]

Creating a new build is just as simple as that, but if they want to test it that is completely another story. Back in the day we used to have CS releases that were not tested, some liked them and some never used them. You can never please everyone whatever you do.

[deanrichard]

While there is no reason to suspect a conspiracy theory, there is plenty of reason to question the QA process that Avid has in place. Typically a QA team has a set of regression tests in place (usually automated) that will test various system and software limitations. Failing to catch the track count error in QA is not a good sign.

Originally Posted by K Roche

Yes indeed the DUC is almost as entertaining as the internet at large

What never ceases to amaze me is those who (may) otherwise be at least somewhat logical people, can jump all over such convoluted "conspiracy" notions apparently with out ever bothering to think them through to a logical conclusion

Like what would be actual point of intentionally reducing the "TRACK" count of vanilla by 1/2, and hiding it ????
In terms of writing the code, it would not reflect a reduction in cost to AVID, in fact intentionally RE -writing that portion of the code to reflect a reduce track count, and then re-re writing to put it back up, would increase costs for labor for the time an spent to re-write and then re -re write and make absolutely no business sense

And if the intention is to dump vanilla altogether (as per the, convoluted "AVID wants to dump vanilla users " theory" suggests BTW unsupported by any facts at all ), it makes no sense to "surreptitiously" 1/2 the track count, then backpedal and put it back. When simply announcing a reduction in track count for Vanilla from the start , would be much much more efficient in business terms, for intentionally causing Vanilla users to jump ship.

And given the fact that almost always, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one,,, like oh say for example ( human error resulting in an unintentional FU) ,, embarrassing ? YES,,,, sinister? pretty unlikely .

[Teej]

Originally Posted by deanrichard

While there is no reason to suspect a conspiracy theory, there is plenty of reason to question the QA process that Avid has in place. Typically a QA team has a set of regression tests in place (usually automated) that will test various system and software limitations. Failing to catch the track count error in QA is not a good sign.

My guess is Vanilla isn't tested as much as Ultimate, or maybe at all. There was another show-stopper bug last year in which Vanilla sessions could become corrupted and only open once again in Ultimate. I worked with support tracking that one down, they were fantastic and it was fixed quickly. On Ultimate now anyway but it doesn't lend a sense of security to the Vanilla licence holders.

[JFreak]

It is the same software, without locked Ultimate features. Problem is, there is no way to boot PT into standard mode if you have Ultimate license. Which is why standard feature set gets less attention at beta team.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by musicman691

I don't think it's as convoluted as you're making it out to be. They only needed 2 code writes: the original with no change to track count and a second one with reduced track count. Keep both builds - that would account for Avid saying they have a fix the same day (or so) as release. It could be as simple as someone released the wrong code write. Or not.

Except that what is "convoluted" is the logic or lack thereof, in imagining there would be a some objective logical business reason or goal for Avid to do so.
Think about it , if Avid's goal is get rid if Vanilla then what they would do is simply reduce the track count and post that fact in the "What's new" or "Read Me " for the new version

[JFreak]

If Avid's goal is to get rid of standard software, they just stop selling it. Choose between First and Ultimate then.

Their only problem is the amount of support and update plans sold. If there is a customer that has bought plans for next 10 years, then they need to support standard software for that period. Even if they would not sell any new licenses or renew existing standard support plans.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by deanrichard

While there is no reason to suspect a conspiracy theory, there is plenty of reason to question the QA process that Avid has in place. Typically a QA team has a set of regression tests in place (usually automated) that will test various system and software limitations. Failing to catch the track count error in QA is not a good sign.

Except your subjective assessment of Avids quality check process, is a different discussion and not what my post, or the post I was replying to, was about. It's about the notion that Avid would do so intentionally and secretly when there is no logical reason for them to.

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by K Roche

Except your subjective assessment of Avids quality check process, is a different discussion and not what my post, or the post I was replying to, was about. It's about the notion that Avid would do so intentionally and secretly when there is no logical reason for them to.

Avid has never had a logical reason for doing anything. Period.

[Obsidian Dragon]

Originally Posted by musicman691

Avid has never had a logical reason for doing anything. Period.

Both Logic and Reason are not Avid products. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by musicman691

Avid has never had a logical reason for doing anything. Period.

Cogent argument there