Please Avid We All Really Want You to Be Successful

[Dave Lang]

Are you really going to compare being able to automatically update twitter with being able to use third party interfaces? Really?

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by Dave Lang

Are you really going to compare being able to automatically update twitter with being able to use third party interfaces? Really?

Yes, really. Technically speaking -- from the perspective of not using 3rd party interfaces -- there is very little in PT9 that made me smile. Actually, I kept using PT 8.1.1 until PT10 was released with Disc Cache.

As I said, this is my opinion and I kind of get it if people are thinking of PT12 the same way I disliked PT9. Because for me, allowing 3rd party interfaces meant nothing.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by JFreak

for me, allowing 3rd party interfaces meant nothing.

Always nice to quote oneself, but since my following point is so another story, I think it's best to have it on its own post.

So.

The 3rd party interface thing would become valuable for me (I use a laptop and don't always carry my studio on the backpack) if the PTHD license could be installed to the system drive like some 3rd party plugins (Eventide for example). If I could take my laptop and open PT anywhere, that would make me happy. I don't want to move the iLok anywhere, especially since there is no backup license waiting on the iLok account since PT9 (another "feature" that I really hated about that release).

[Dave Lang]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Actually, I kept using PT 8.1.1 until PT10 was released with Disc Cache.

Well, lucky for you, you won't have that option anymore. You can just pay every year like everybody else whether you like it or not.

Seriously - you sound like the hostage in the back of the bank yelling "yeah, but the food has been really good you guys, come on now!"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by Dave Lang

Seriously - you sound like the hostage in the back of the bank yelling "yeah, but the food has really good you guys, come on now!"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

You can think what you like, but I'm not complaining because there is zero reason to do so. HD licensing options are not announced and PT12 software is not released, so I only have PT11.3.1 like every Tom, Dick, and Harry. I'm quite happy with this system and if only things added in first PT12 release are the collaboration system and track freeze, I'm quite happy with it too. I consider this similar name change than PT8-->PT9 for the reason I posted. I don't expect a hundred new features for a major release. There is no technical obstacle to release a -say- PT11.5 for bringing in the collaboration feature, but it's easier to remember you need PT12 for it, instead of a point release. How well you remember which features were added in which release? I can name a few important point-release features ([email protected], [email protected], [email protected]) but it usually takes a major release to bring in a new feature.

[paul007]

Originally Posted by Bruce Paine

Certainly an overwhelming response from some users, like the user with over 100 posts on this and other similar threads in the last 3 weeks, and only 6 posts on unrelated threads.

Just trying to give some perspective.

Still a response showing a large degree of (deserved) passion for Pro Tools, acquired over many years.

It might be a worthwhile investment to consolidate this passion for the future by handling it delicately.

Call it "securing perpetual goodwill" so the Avid strategists will understand ;-)

[@tention]

Originally Posted by Bruce Paine

Certainly an overwhelming response from some users, like the user with over 100 posts on this and other similar threads in the last 3 weeks, and only 6 posts on unrelated threads.

Just trying to give some perspective.

Wow, they just can't stop. They just don't get it!

To give you some perspective:

On other forums (Steinberg, Apple, Image Line, Ableton etc.) people discuss new features or bugs. On this forum you get thousands of posts complaining about your business model.
And that is why? Because your users are all stupid?

Way to go AVID, way to go!

[noiseboyuk]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Yes, really. Technically speaking -- from the perspective of not using 3rd party interfaces -- there is very little in PT9 that made me smile.

Brief tangent - didn't PT9 bring in the Field Recorder track in CPTK / HD? It felt like an important release for post - you could import AAF, conform and use 3rd party hardware all in one hit. It was the release where coming from another DAW in post, it felt like Avid were getting competitive feature-wise - I know that sounds silly given its market share, but in terms of features for the price, there were far better options prior to PT9.

Of course, as quickly as they did it, they reigned it right back in and swung even further back the other way. I see parallels with Media Composer here - I upgraded a very old XpressDV license to MC7 for absolutely peanuts at around the same time, and the retail price had dropped too. Suddenly they Avid were super competitive, and giving users what they'd asked for. And likewise, soon after everything very heavily swung back.

So stepping back, it looks to me in the post sector anyway, strategically Avid made a big land grab, and then when it had increased its user base sought to squeeze the supposedly captive market as hard as it can. Add in some tasty one-time deals to get everyone on the new program and all the while it can report good news to shareholders, nothing else matters. Unless the shareholders are all lurking on DUC, they have no clue what the longer term implications of this foolishness are very likely to be.

[Bill Denton]

Originally Posted by paul007

Still a response showing a large degree of (deserved) passion for Pro Tools, acquired over many years.

It might be a worthwhile investment to consolidate this passion for the future by handling it delicately.

Call it "securing perpetual goodwill" so the Avid strategists will understand ;-)

And that's what a lot of people here fail to realize...

Passion is meaningless in this context...because true professionals don't operate off passion!

A true professional really doesn't give a rat's azz whose "name is on the tin"...all they care about is "Does this product provide a more cost-effective means of doing what I need to do than does any other product?"

Sure, like most humans, some would prefer to see "Old Faithful" change it's ways so they can stay with it, but if their competition uses a product that allows their competitors to consistently underbid them, "Old Faithful" will soon be rapidly getting smaller in the rearview mirror.

As the American mob guys tell you right before they give you one between the eyes, "It's just business".

And those folks who worry about passion instead of business will soon not have any business to be passionate about...

[paul007]

Originally Posted by Bill Denton

And that's what a lot of people here fail to realize...

Passion is meaningless in this context...because true professionals don't operate off passion!

A true professional really doesn't give a rat's azz whose "name is on the tin"...all they care about is "Does this product provide a more cost-effective means of doing what I need to do than does any other product?"

Sure, like most humans, some would prefer to see "Old Faithful" change it's ways so they can stay with it, but if their competition uses a product that allows their competitors to consistently underbid them, "Old Faithful" will soon be rapidly getting smaller in the rearview mirror.

As the American mob guys tell you right before they give you one between the eyes, "It's just business".

And those folks who worry about passion instead of business will soon not have any business to be passionate about...

Please allow me to disagree strongly, and sorry for the OT intermezzo

Without passion there would be no succesful companies.
(and most companies driven by a passion for money may be the least succesful of all)

You have a point about the harshness of survival, but I don't think your idea applies to all; short,mid and long term business strategies.

What do you risk losing in the long term, being succesful in the short?
*Good* accounting does not only focus on the short term.

The stock market isn't your backbone, the quality of your goodies and customers are.
Stock markets were invented as a mean to finance and facilitate business.
For the past decade they have been wrongly regarded as a goal in itself.

We have seen the global results ;-)