Who cares? Anyone?

[nigelpry]

So it appears to be over a month since anyone posted in this particular section of the DUC.

Is that an indication in the level of interest in Cloud Collaboration?

Or the level of confidence in it 'coming soon', or actually being a 'cool new feature'?

Avid has gone very quiet on the subject.

[mesaone]

Might be due in part to how the features haven't been implemented yet, so there isn't much to prompt discussion.

[YYR123]

zero desire for avid to continue investing in this type of design

[nigelpry]

Originally Posted by mesaone

Might be due in part to how the features haven't been implemented yet, so there isn't much to prompt discussion.

Please tell me this is the subtle humour I imagine it to be ;-)

Originally Posted by YYR123

zero desire for avid to continue investing in this type of design

+1

[Stereo Missile]

Collab features would potentially be of some use to me on some projects. The features that go along with it, being Track Freeze and audio archiving I would definitely use every day though I suspect.

[nigelpry]

Originally Posted by Stereo Missile

Collab features would potentially be of some use to me on some projects. The features that go along with it, being Track Freeze and audio archiving I would definitely use every day though I suspect.

Track freeze potentially yes, depending in how it works. If there is a multiple out bounce type limit for HD only, so you can only freeze one track at a time on 'vanilla' then it is simpler/quicker to record the outputs of thuevmultiple tracks to new tracks.

Auto-archiving could be useful if it is much more slick than what I already have in place .... the combinstion of Carbon Copy Cloner and Deltawalker give me a pretty good system alrady.

The collab feature itself I probably would have no use foor, and on the odd occasion that I might, it's probably not worth the hassle of setting it up on local and remote machines, as opposd to just sending the project via dropbox or similar.

[suicune]

Well since you've opened the discussion, here's my 2p.

I have a couple of clients who use a PT rig to run samples, synths and click tracks in their live set. The ability to make changes to the session on request whilst they were in another country would be very useful indeed. And I do some mixing for clients in Norway where I can also see benefits.

Having said that, these tasks make up a thoroughly minuscule proportion of my yearly workload. So would I use the feature? Yes. Would I encourage AVID to be putting money into developing it at the potential expense of other new features or stability? NO NO NO NO NO.

[YYR123]

Not exactly, track freeze would let you unfreeze and make changes then refreeze

[knothardly]

well i am pretty sure in the commit options you can make inactive and bounce the track... then if you wish to change things you can make active, change them (all parts including effects) then commit and make inactive again and use the new bounced audio. basically the same thing if i am not mistaken. so i really don't understand the fuss about 'track freeze'. not trying to start a commotion just STILL keep hearing about people wanting track freeze. maybe it is from folks that have refused to upgrade to v12 and the 'track freeze' would work on previous versions?

me? i am more than happy with the commit function and it's option window. cheers

[Wall2Wall]

Track freeze is cleaner. It freezes the track or bus in place. No new or extra audio tracks, needed. No need to make anything inactive or delete.

But...freeze has one issue. If you freeze a track, need to make a change. You unfreeze it, make the change and freeze it again. If you want to make another change. Unfreeze make second change, and freeze again. Now say you want to go back and fix change #1. You cannot do it.

With Commit you can because that track/bus is just inactive. I prefer commit.