Pro Tools M1 support - dec 27th (beta)

[LDS]

Originally Posted by gnjlee

I am taking a more positive spin on this. A public beta means that AVID is showing progress as opposed to promising ‘vaporware’. I don’t have anything pressing going on, I might try it out once I have plugin support from Waves, Plug-in Alliance, and Soundtoys.

Originally Posted by Eric Lambert

I'm with you on the positive approach. It's just a beta which we can try, or not. What's going to be challenging is your last sentence. Soundtoys (in particular) may take ages to become "supported."

It is very wholesome that you both think that way... but that is probably not what is actually happening. The details about the 'public beta' were mentioned in a confidential email sent solely to Avid Development Partners. Dave Derr was pretty quick to scrub any mention of it from the internet. Testing a beta application on the public, and the beta status of an application being public are two very different things.

If you ever felt like you are paying your yearly support fee to beta test software for Avid, you may have just unwittingly received a very concrete answer. It will be very interesting to see how Avid play their cards with this release given that the wrong 'public' now seems like it is 'public'.

[Sardi]

Originally Posted by LDS

Dave Derr was pretty quick to scrub them from the internet.

Not quick enough.

Don’t know what he was thinking writing that. Dave of all people should know better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[massivekerry]

Originally Posted by LDS

It is very wholesome that you both think that way... but that is probably not what is actually happening. The details about the 'public beta' were mentioned in a confidential email sent solely to Avid Development Partners. Dave Derr was pretty quick to scrub any mention of it from the internet. Testing a beta application on the public, and the beta status of an application being public are two very different things.

If you ever felt like you are paying your yearly support fee to beta test software for Avid, you may have just unwittingly received a very concrete answer. It will be very interesting to see how Avid play their cards with this release given that the wrong 'public' now seems like it is 'public'.

No matter what, it’s going to be kind of a public beta, even if it’s not. It’s highly unlikely that ALL 3rd-party developers will have AAX silicon native versions on the day that Avid launches. Which means that users will likely have a limited pool of plugins (if they rely on a lot of 3rd-party devs, like me) and the Silicon Native version of the PT app will probably be a “dipping the toe” experience for a lot of us at first, and undoubtably many of us will “dip” while we wait for all of our “must-haves” to port to do our real work. That’s fine. Rosetta seems to work well, at present.

[LDS]

Originally Posted by Sardi

Not quick enough.

Don’t know what he was thinking writing that. Dave of all people should know better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps. There is something beautifully innocent about it all. As though Dave was thinking too much with the integrity and transparency of Dave Derr, rather than approaching it from the perspective s&%t show that is Avid.

The world really needs more people like Dave, and more businesses like Empirical Labs. They would never release a public beta on the world, much less try and obfuscate the definition of what a public beta is.

[LDS]

Originally Posted by massivekerry

No matter what, it’s going to be kind of a public beta, even if it’s not. It’s highly unlikely that ALL 3rd-party developers will have AAX silicon native versions on the day that Avid launches. Which means that users will likely have a limited pool of plugins (if they rely on a lot of 3rd-party devs, like me) and the Silicon Native version of the PT app will probably be a “dipping the toe” experience for a lot of us at first, and undoubtably many of us will “dip” while we wait for all of our “must-haves” to port to do our real work. That’s fine. Rosetta seems to work well, at present.

Beta testing by its very definition is pre-release testing. Why would third party AAX developers be releasing AS native plugins when Avid doesn't even consider AS native protools ready for official release?

[its2loud]

Well, now it’s officially public. No thanks to Dave Derr who clearly violated his NDA.

https://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=422724

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by LDS

Beta testing by its very definition is pre-release testing. Why would third party AAX developers be releasing AS native plugins when Avid doesn't even consider AS native protools ready for official release?

Maybe because they would want to get more real world feedback than their internal beta testers can provide?

[gnjlee]

Originally Posted by LDS

It is very wholesome that you both think that way... but that is probably not what is actually happening. The details about the 'public beta' were mentioned in a confidential email sent solely to Avid Development Partners. Dave Derr was pretty quick to scrub any mention of it from the internet. Testing a beta application on the public, and the beta status of an application being public are two very different things.

If you ever felt like you are paying your yearly support fee to beta test software for Avid, you may have just unwittingly received a very concrete answer. It will be very interesting to see how Avid play their cards with this release given that the wrong 'public' now seems like it is 'public'.

I get what you are saying. So I, like many folks on this board, have been in the computer industry for a very long time, and have been an early adopter of software products many times, and have seen companies use this approach many many times. It is an accepted practice.

BTW If you have used a Microsoft product, chances are you also have unwittingly been an unpaid QA/QC subject.

[gnjlee]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Maybe because they would want to get more real world feedback than their internal beta testers can provide?

Bingo. I am NOT giving AVID a pass here, when I say ALL software has bugs, but when it comes to code from ANY company, we are all QA/QC of last resort.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by gnjlee

Bingo. I am NOT giving AVID a pass here, when I say ALL software has bugs, but when it comes to code from ANY company, we are all QA/QC of last resort.

You don't need to give Avid any pass here. Your question was about 3rd party plugin vendors. Avid just makes it possible for them to get more information from users, so in my book kudos.