Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Cubase pulls a Paris
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78523 is a reply to message #78516] |
Wed, 17 January 2007 08:46   |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least being
honest.
All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
though we tried, so we are
going to update the new version of the product."
I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed as
separate products
or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
latter. I guess this has been going
on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version of
Cubase to me - it's
much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would lead
you to believe).
My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase there
as a barometer for
Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
excuse for a forum
on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds imho. I
tried conversing reasonable
about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree with
the complainers that never
even tried the test at hand.
That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has a
hobbiest stigma today, and a big
reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
Regards,
Dedric
"Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>
> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>
> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>
> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>
> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
> features & bells & whistles.
>
>
> Neil
>
>
> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>Steinberg
>>has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users. I
>>can't
>>wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>stinking
>>customers !
>>
>>http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78525 is a reply to message #78523] |
Wed, 17 January 2007 09:26 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric,
I figured this would happen. . I really don't understand the expectation
that v3 would continue. I'm not having any problems at all with v3.1.1.994.
I'm going to go ahead and upgrade to V4, load it on my new Gigabyte based
comp, get myself a new dongle and be done with it. I'll likely go ahead and
upgrade WL while I'm at it. I'm intrigued by the Control room function in
Cubase 4. It looks like this might be the ticket to my getting comfortable
with tracking with this program. At some point I'm going to have to move
away from Paris. Not sure when yet, but I know it's inevitable. One of those
RME PCIe cards with 24 AD/DA's on a dual Quad core Intel might just be the
thing that tips the scales if it's got the horsepower to operate a low
latencies pretty much always. I like the Creamware cards a lot right now and
it's working great for me, but it's a lot like Paris in some respects and I
really don't have the confidence that it's gonna make the jump to PCIe/64
bit down the road.
Deej
"Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote in message news:45ae53a0@linux...
>I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least being
>honest.
> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
> though we tried, so we are
> going to update the new version of the product."
>
> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed as
> separate products
> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
> latter. I guess this has been going
> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version
> of Cubase to me - it's
> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would
> lead you to believe).
>
> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase there
> as a barometer for
> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
> excuse for a forum
> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds imho.
> I tried conversing reasonable
> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
> with the complainers that never
> even tried the test at hand.
>
> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has a
> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>
>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>
>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>
>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>
>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>> features & bells & whistles.
>>
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>Steinberg
>>>has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users. I
>>>can't
>>>wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>>stinking
>>>customers !
>>>
>>>http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78527 is a reply to message #78523] |
Wed, 17 January 2007 10:59 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least being
honest"
Agreed..To be honest, I thought when C4 was introduced, that spelled the
end for C3..
"Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least being
>honest.
>All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
>older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
>though we tried, so we are
>going to update the new version of the product."
>
>I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed as
>separate products
>or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
>latter. I guess this has been going
>on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version
of
>Cubase to me - it's
>much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would lead
>you to believe).
>
>My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase there
>as a barometer for
>Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
>excuse for a forum
>on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds imho.
I
>tried conversing reasonable
>about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
with
>the complainers that never
>even tried the test at hand.
>
>That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has
a
>hobbiest stigma today, and a big
>reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>"Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>
>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>
>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>
>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>
>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>> features & bells & whistles.
>>
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>Steinberg
>>>has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users. I
>>>can't
>>>wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>>stinking
>>>customers !
>>>
>>>http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78531 is a reply to message #78527] |
Wed, 17 January 2007 11:30 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Lamont,
Yes same for SX1 to 2, 2 to 3, etc.
Same as Pro Audio 9 to sonar 1, 1 to 2 , 2 to 3 etc.
And all the rest.
The folks on the Cubase.net forum panic at a moments notice. It seems
like most have nothing better to do and rarely offer any any
constructive criticism. I feel sorry of all the crap the Fredo and the
other moderators on that forum have to put up with. Personally I wish
they would not have one and just have a better knowledge base, FAQ and
tutorial section. Oh and only readable by registered users.
but thats just me..:)
Chris
LaMont wrote:
> "I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least being
> honest"
>
> Agreed..To be honest, I thought when C4 was introduced, that spelled the
> end for C3..
>
> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>> I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least being
>
>> honest.
>> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
>> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
>
>> though we tried, so we are
>> going to update the new version of the product."
>>
>> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed as
>
>> separate products
>> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
>> latter. I guess this has been going
>> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version
> of
>> Cubase to me - it's
>> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would lead
>
>> you to believe).
>>
>> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase there
>
>> as a barometer for
>> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
>> excuse for a forum
>> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds imho.
> I
>> tried conversing reasonable
>> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
> with
>> the complainers that never
>> even tried the test at hand.
>>
>> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has
> a
>> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
>> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>>
>>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>>
>>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>>
>>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>>> features & bells & whistles.
>>>
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>> For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>> Steinberg
>>>> has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users. I
>
>>>> can't
>>>> wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>>> stinking
>>>> customers !
>>>>
>>>> http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>
>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK Pro Audio
(859) 635-5762
www.adkproaudio.com
chrisl@adkproaudio.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78554 is a reply to message #78523] |
Wed, 17 January 2007 15:19 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Credit for being honest? I'm screwing you but I"m telling you I'm
doing it. Give me credit for that! SHIT !
Dedric Terry wrote:
> I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least being
> honest.
> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
> though we tried, so we are
> going to update the new version of the product."
>
> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed as
> separate products
> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
> latter. I guess this has been going
> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version of
> Cubase to me - it's
> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would lead
> you to believe).
>
> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase there
> as a barometer for
> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
> excuse for a forum
> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds imho. I
> tried conversing reasonable
> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree with
> the complainers that never
> even tried the test at hand.
>
> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has a
> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>
>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>
>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>
>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>> features & bells & whistles.
>>
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>> For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>> Steinberg
>>> has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users. I
>>> can't
>>> wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>> stinking
>>> customers !
>>>
>>> http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78555 is a reply to message #78531] |
Wed, 17 January 2007 15:21 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
It's not panic. The company just sucks at telegraphing to professionals
what they roadmap is. It's the roadmap to maximum profits and we hope
you don't get run over. Nice !!!
Chris Ludwig wrote:
> Hi Lamont,
> Yes same for SX1 to 2, 2 to 3, etc.
> Same as Pro Audio 9 to sonar 1, 1 to 2 , 2 to 3 etc.
>
> And all the rest.
> The folks on the Cubase.net forum panic at a moments notice. It seems
> like most have nothing better to do and rarely offer any any
> constructive criticism. I feel sorry of all the crap the Fredo and the
> other moderators on that forum have to put up with. Personally I wish
> they would not have one and just have a better knowledge base, FAQ and
> tutorial section. Oh and only readable by registered users.
> but thats just me..:)
> Chris
>
>
> LaMont wrote:
>> "I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least
>> being
>> honest"
>>
>> Agreed..To be honest, I thought when C4 was introduced, that spelled the
>> end for C3..
>>
>> "Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>>> I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least
>>> being
>>
>>> honest.
>>> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
>>> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
>>
>>> though we tried, so we are
>>> going to update the new version of the product."
>>>
>>> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed as
>>
>>> separate products
>>> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
>>> latter. I guess this has been going
>>> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest
>>> version
>> of
>>> Cubase to me - it's
>>> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net
>>> would lead
>>
>>> you to believe).
>>>
>>> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase
>>> there
>>
>>> as a barometer for
>>> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the
>>> worst excuse for a forum
>>> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds
>>> imho.
>> I
>>> tried conversing reasonable
>>> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
>> with
>>> the complainers that never
>>> even tried the test at hand.
>>>
>>> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has
>> a
>>> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
>>> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>>>
>>>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>>>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>>>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>>>
>>>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>>>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>>>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>>>
>>>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>>>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>>>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>>>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>>>> features & bells & whistles.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>> For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>>> Steinberg
>>>>> has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users. I
>>
>>>>> can't
>>>>> wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>>>> stinking
>>>>> customers !
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78561 is a reply to message #78554] |
Wed, 17 January 2007 17:37 |
chuck duffy
Messages: 453
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
So what the hell are software publishers supposed to do? Never introduce
a major version upgrade? And forgive me if I'm wrong, BUT YOU ALREADY OWN
CUBASE 4!!!!!!!!
Chuck
John <no@no.com> wrote:
>Credit for being honest? I'm screwing you but I"m telling you I'm
>doing it. Give me credit for that! SHIT !
>
>Dedric Terry wrote:
>> I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least
being
>> honest.
>> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
>> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
>> though we tried, so we are
>> going to update the new version of the product."
>>
>> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed
as
>> separate products
>> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
>> latter. I guess this has been going
>> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version
of
>> Cubase to me - it's
>> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would
lead
>> you to believe).
>>
>> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase there
>> as a barometer for
>> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
>> excuse for a forum
>> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds imho.
I
>> tried conversing reasonable
>> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
with
>> the complainers that never
>> even tried the test at hand.
>>
>> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has
a
>> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
>> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>>
>>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>>
>>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>>
>>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>>> features & bells & whistles.
>>>
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>> For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>> Steinberg
>>>> has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users.
I
>>>> can't
>>>> wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>>> stinking
>>>> customers !
>>>>
>>>> http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78571 is a reply to message #78561] |
Thu, 18 January 2007 05:24 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Yes, I already own cubase but I'm sure I too will be orphaned for Cubase 5
when all I will need is patches for 4. You are using the term Major Version
upgrade (which would have an upgrade price associated with it), not the price
of an entire new app. I doubt many spent more than $400 for their Cubase
3 which now costs $400 for the upgrade. It's like they want you to keep
buying the app over and over.
All I ever wanted was win98 that works, but NO, I had to get XP and now Vista
with all the DRM crap. Unfortunately when you buy software it's really just
a lease because your OS is gonna die and you'll have to buy the new one because
the new app you want to run wont' run on your old OS so you are forced to
upgrade a ton of crap just to move forward at any level.
Fix win98 and I'll go back !
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>
>So what the hell are software publishers supposed to do? Never introduce
>a major version upgrade? And forgive me if I'm wrong, BUT YOU ALREADY OWN
>CUBASE 4!!!!!!!!
>
>Chuck
>
>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>Credit for being honest? I'm screwing you but I"m telling you I'm
>>doing it. Give me credit for that! SHIT !
>>
>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least
>being
>>> honest.
>>> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
>>> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
>
>>> though we tried, so we are
>>> going to update the new version of the product."
>>>
>>> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed
>as
>>> separate products
>>> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
>
>>> latter. I guess this has been going
>>> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version
>of
>>> Cubase to me - it's
>>> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would
>lead
>>> you to believe).
>>>
>>> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase
there
>
>>> as a barometer for
>>> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
>
>>> excuse for a forum
>>> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds imho.
>I
>>> tried conversing reasonable
>>> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
>with
>>> the complainers that never
>>> even tried the test at hand.
>>>
>>> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has
>a
>>> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
>>> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>>>
>>>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>>>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>>>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>>>
>>>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>>>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>>>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>>>
>>>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>>>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>>>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>>>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>>>> features & bells & whistles.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>> For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>>> Steinberg
>>>>> has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users.
>I
>>>>> can't
>>>>> wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>
>>>>> stinking
>>>>> customers !
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78573 is a reply to message #78571] |
Thu, 18 January 2007 05:57 |
chuck duffy
Messages: 453
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi John,
I was using the term major version upgrade as in development, just meaning
the number before the dot. Commercial software is almost never bought as
you put it. You are actually purchasing a license, which gives you the right
to use the software.
"It's like they want you to keep
>buying the app over and over."
I think that's the point, make significant improvements to the app, add new
features, get paid. What's the alternative? Update an app free of charge
forever? I'm seriously asking you, what do you see as an alternative. The
only other thing I can think of is a subscription fee.
But anyway, after looking at the pricing for cubase 4 I do agree with you
one one thing. The pricing is CRAZY!
"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>Yes, I already own cubase but I'm sure I too will be orphaned for Cubase
5
>when all I will need is patches for 4. You are using the term Major Version
>upgrade (which would have an upgrade price associated with it), not the
price
>of an entire new app. I doubt many spent more than $400 for their Cubase
>3 which now costs $400 for the upgrade. It's like they want you to keep
>buying the app over and over.
>
>All I ever wanted was win98 that works, but NO, I had to get XP and now
Vista
>with all the DRM crap. Unfortunately when you buy software it's really
just
>a lease because your OS is gonna die and you'll have to buy the new one
because
>the new app you want to run wont' run on your old OS so you are forced to
>upgrade a ton of crap just to move forward at any level.
>
>Fix win98 and I'll go back !
>
>"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>>
>>So what the hell are software publishers supposed to do? Never introduce
>>a major version upgrade? And forgive me if I'm wrong, BUT YOU ALREADY
OWN
>>CUBASE 4!!!!!!!!
>>
>>Chuck
>>
>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>Credit for being honest? I'm screwing you but I"m telling you I'm
>>>doing it. Give me credit for that! SHIT !
>>>
>>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>> I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least
>>being
>>>> honest.
>>>> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
>>>> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
>>
>>>> though we tried, so we are
>>>> going to update the new version of the product."
>>>>
>>>> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed
>>as
>>>> separate products
>>>> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
>>
>>>> latter. I guess this has been going
>>>> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version
>>of
>>>> Cubase to me - it's
>>>> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would
>>lead
>>>> you to believe).
>>>>
>>>> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase
>there
>>
>>>> as a barometer for
>>>> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
>>
>>>> excuse for a forum
>>>> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds
imho.
>>I
>>>> tried conversing reasonable
>>>> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
>>with
>>>> the complainers that never
>>>> even tried the test at hand.
>>>>
>>>> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase
has
>>a
>>>> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
>>>> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>>>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>>>>
>>>>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>>>>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>>>>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>>>>
>>>>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>>>>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>>>>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>>>>
>>>>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>>>>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>>>>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>>>>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>>>>> features & bells & whistles.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Neil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>>> For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>>>> Steinberg
>>>>>> has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users.
>
>>I
>>>>>> can't
>>>>>> wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>
>>>>>> stinking
>>>>>> customers !
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78575 is a reply to message #78573] |
Thu, 18 January 2007 07:19 |
IOUOI
Messages: 38
Registered: June 2007
|
Member |
|
|
John's got a point about that zig-zagging upgrade cycle,
though... here's an example: I'm fine with SX v3.1.1, and my
current DAW machine, and Windows XP, so let's say I don't feel
the need to upgrade either one of those three things; but at
some point, I just know Windows XP is going to download an
update that's going to be so big & so bloated that it
(purposely?) causes me to need to upgrade to Vista - well, then
I'll need to upgrade to a Vista-compatible version of Cubase,
and at that point, realistically will probably have to build or
buy a whole new machine. In my case, I've been DAW-ing for
(IIRC) about six years, and I'm on my fourth mobo/CPU/RAMset
combo for my main DAW (been able to recycle PC cases a couple
times, though... WOO-HOO! lol).
The ironic part, is - although Thad considers me an "early
adopter", despite the fact that the Pulsar stuff I "early-
adopted" has been out for quite a few years, I make it a point
to NOT be on the bleeding edge of this stuff... I always
wait 'til the first bugfix version of any software comes out
before I buy it, and I NEVER jump on the newest CPU's - I'm
always a generation behind on that stuff so I can wait for the
price drops to happen. I don't even have a full version of
WinXP, it's an upgrade version that I installed over WinME.
If I wanted to stay on the leading edge, I'd be on my eighth or
tenth mobo/CPU combo by now, I'm sure; and I'd be dropping the
bucks for SX4, Auto-Tune5 (just released), and who knows what
else I'd have to change to accomodate that, right now.
I may have to build or buy one last current-generation DAW
that's on the cutting-edge of what's out there now, and buy a
full version of WinXP just in case I ever need a reinstall, and
see if that can get me through the next 3 or 4 years - I'd hate
to have to migrate to Vista & the overly-agressive DRM issues
that might not even permit me to re-record one of my older songs
because it sounds like something that's copyrighted to a guy
named Neil Henderson LOL and judging from that M-Soft guy's
interview that LaMont posted a couple weeks ago, also comes
across like they're going to force me to use something like
their own version of GarageBand instead of SX or whatever to
make music.
It may be time for DAW'ers to look into something like Linux,
and a solid, versatile DAW app that'll work with it - it's not
like we use our DAW PC's for anything but audio, so who the
fuck cares if it can run Microsoft Office or not? No automatic
updates, once you've got it set up a certain way, it stays that
way unless you purposfully do something to it. No trying to
hijack your IRQ settings & swap them around when you turn your
back like Windows does, and on & on.
Hmmmm.....
Neil
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>
>Hi John,
>
>I was using the term major version upgrade as in development, just meaning
>the number before the dot. Commercial software is almost never bought as
>you put it. You are actually purchasing a license, which gives you the
right
>to use the software.
>
>"It's like they want you to keep
>>buying the app over and over."
>
>I think that's the point, make significant improvements to the app, add
new
>features, get paid. What's the alternative? Update an app free of charge
>forever? I'm seriously asking you, what do you see as an alternative. The
>only other thing I can think of is a subscription fee.
>
>But anyway, after looking at the pricing for cubase 4 I do agree with you
>one one thing. The pricing is CRAZY!
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>Yes, I already own cubase but I'm sure I too will be orphaned for Cubase
>5
>>when all I will need is patches for 4. You are using the term Major Version
>>upgrade (which would have an upgrade price associated with it), not the
>price
>>of an entire new app. I doubt many spent more than $400 for their Cubase
>>3 which now costs $400 for the upgrade. It's like they want you to keep
>>buying the app over and over.
>>
>>All I ever wanted was win98 that works, but NO, I had to get XP and now
>Vista
>>with all the DRM crap. Unfortunately when you buy software it's really
>just
>>a lease because your OS is gonna die and you'll have to buy the new one
>because
>>the new app you want to run wont' run on your old OS so you are forced
to
>>upgrade a ton of crap just to move forward at any level.
>>
>>Fix win98 and I'll go back !
>>
>>"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>So what the hell are software publishers supposed to do? Never introduce
>>>a major version upgrade? And forgive me if I'm wrong, BUT YOU ALREADY
>OWN
>>>CUBASE 4!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>>Chuck
>>>
>>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>Credit for being honest? I'm screwing you but I"m telling you I'm
>>>>doing it. Give me credit for that! SHIT !
>>>>
>>>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>> I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least
>>>being
>>>>> honest.
>>>>> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
>>>>> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the product,
>>>
>>>>> though we tried, so we are
>>>>> going to update the new version of the product."
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed
>>>as
>>>>> separate products
>>>>> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
>>>
>>>>> latter. I guess this has been going
>>>>> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest version
>>>of
>>>>> Cubase to me - it's
>>>>> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would
>>>lead
>>>>> you to believe).
>>>>>
>>>>> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase
>>there
>>>
>>>>> as a barometer for
>>>>> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
>>>
>>>>> excuse for a forum
>>>>> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds
>imho.
>>>I
>>>>> tried conversing reasonable
>>>>> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
>>>with
>>>>> the complainers that never
>>>>> even tried the test at hand.
>>>>>
>>>>> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase
>has
>>>a
>>>>> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
>>>>> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>>>>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>>>>>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>>>>>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>>>>>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>>>>>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>>>>>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>>>>>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>>>>>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>>>>>> features & bells & whistles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neil
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>>>>> Steinberg
>>>>>>> has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users.
>>
>>>I
>>>>>>> can't
>>>>>>> wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need
no
>>>
>>>>>>> stinking
>>>>>>> customers !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78577 is a reply to message #78571] |
Thu, 18 January 2007 08:36 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi John,
I upgraded to Cubase 4 yesterday for $200.00. It's been four years since SX
came out. I understand your frustration, but people have to make a
living/companies have to make money to stay in existence and I would imagine
that more and more copies of Cubase SX 3 weren't flying off the shelves so
Steinberg can either get slagged for charging for updates or for calling the
application by a new name and charging for it. I think it is a bit
weasel'esque for them to tell their users that SX 3 was going to be
maintained in parallel to SX 4 which will also have to be maintained. I
really never believed this would happen once Cubase 4 was announced. Cubase
SX 3.1.1.944 is working great here. There are some new features in Cubase 4
that I think might make my life easier. The contol rom feature looks like
something I could really use if I want to start tracking in Cubase
(something I don't do now) and I like the idea of being able to have channel
presets. The rest ot the upgrades appear to be of less value to me. I did
hear somewhere that using audio loops was a bit improved. I haven't even
tried that yet in Cubase. I've been using ACID via rewire instead, but doing
this in Cubase would be preferable if it's not a PITA.
Regards,
Deej
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45af6709$1@linux...
>
> Yes, I already own cubase but I'm sure I too will be orphaned for Cubase 5
> when all I will need is patches for 4. You are using the term Major
> Version
> upgrade (which would have an upgrade price associated with it), not the
> price
> of an entire new app. I doubt many spent more than $400 for their Cubase
> 3 which now costs $400 for the upgrade. It's like they want you to keep
> buying the app over and over.
>
> All I ever wanted was win98 that works, but NO, I had to get XP and now
> Vista
> with all the DRM crap. Unfortunately when you buy software it's really
> just
> a lease because your OS is gonna die and you'll have to buy the new one
> because
> the new app you want to run wont' run on your old OS so you are forced to
> upgrade a ton of crap just to move forward at any level.
>
> Fix win98 and I'll go back !
>
> "chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>>
>>So what the hell are software publishers supposed to do? Never introduce
>>a major version upgrade? And forgive me if I'm wrong, BUT YOU ALREADY OWN
>>CUBASE 4!!!!!!!!
>>
>>Chuck
>>
>>John <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>Credit for being honest? I'm screwing you but I"m telling you I'm
>>>doing it. Give me credit for that! SHIT !
>>>
>>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>> I read the announcement and had to give Steinberg credit for at least
>>being
>>>> honest.
>>>> All they said was " we don't have the manpower to update an
>>>> older version of this product *and* update a new version of the
>>>> product,
>>
>>>> though we tried, so we are
>>>> going to update the new version of the product."
>>>>
>>>> I don't know if Steinberg intended for SX 3 and Cubase 4 to be viewed
>>as
>>>> separate products
>>>> or its' the Cubase.net users that decided that. More than likely the
>>
>>>> latter. I guess this has been going
>>>> on though since Cubase VST, etc. Cubase 4 looks like the latest
>>>> version
>>of
>>>> Cubase to me - it's
>>>> much better despite a few bugs (though not as many as Cubase.net would
>>lead
>>>> you to believe).
>>>>
>>>> My advice, though, don't bother with Cubase.net, or use the userbase
> there
>>
>>>> as a barometer for
>>>> Steinberg as a company or Cubase as a product. It has to be the worst
>>
>>>> excuse for a forum
>>>> on the planet - lots of angst ridden teens and overaged 2 year olds
>>>> imho.
>>I
>>>> tried conversing reasonable
>>>> about C4 once and got flamed for just posting results that didn't agree
>>with
>>>> the complainers that never
>>>> even tried the test at hand.
>>>>
>>>> That forum is really insane, and they are most of the reason Cubase has
>>a
>>>> hobbiest stigma today, and a big
>>>> reason why I'll never tell my clients I even have a copy of it.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> "Neil" <OIOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:45ae3639$1@linux...
>>>>> Wow... that whole thread looks VERRRRY familiar.
>>>>>
>>>>> These fucking software companies. Almost makes you long for the
>>>>> day when you could buy a tape machine & have it run for 20
>>>>> years or more with one investment upfront & a few reparis.
>>>>>
>>>>> OTOH, you can do $300 to $400 periodic upgrades for quite some
>>>>> time before hitting the $30k to $50k zone of what a new 2"
>>>>> machine would've cost back then, depending on the model.
>>>>>
>>>>> Still, it sucks. I don't have a need to upgrade at this time,
>>>>> so I'm fine with 3.1.1, but I sure wish someone could come out
>>>>> with a solid release that would last five or so years before
>>>>> one felt they needed to buy something with a bunch of new
>>>>> features & bells & whistles.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Neil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>>>> For all the suckers that were waiting for a new version for SX 3
>>>>>> Steinberg
>>>>>> has chosen to chase the money and say Bu Bye to all the SX3 users.
>
>>I
>>>>>> can't
>>>>>> wait to be orphaned with my Cubase 4. Customers? We don't need no
>>
>>>>>> stinking
>>>>>> customers !
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78598 is a reply to message #78592] |
Thu, 18 January 2007 18:03 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
A moderator (or rep) at Cubase.net said they would release a final
maintenance release for SX 3,
but in the most recent announcement they said they met and figured out they
had overestimated their
resources. So instead of working on SX 3.x.y they were going to work on
64-bit capability for Cubase 4/Nuendo.
For some reason, that makes a lot of sense to me - work on the new release,
rather than the old one, then
duplicate that work again in the new release later.
And then factor in that users have been crying just as loudly about 64-bit,
Vista, keeping up with Sonar,
ProTools and the Joneses. What if SB had said, due to the time it took to
complete SX 3.x.y, we will
have to delay Cubase 4.x and Nuendo 4another 2 months. The response would
have been identical -
furor, anger, cries of broken promises, etc. It never changes on
Cubase.net. Only the logic conveniently changes,
but never the discontent.
The best thing Steinberg could ever do for marketing would be to hit the
delete button on Cubase.net.
They need a lot of work in other areas, but that would be a good start,
imho.
I can think of a lot worse treatment of users by other companies than the
Cubase world is crying about now.
Regards,
Dedric
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45afece4$1@linux...
>
> In the Cubase case my understanding is that the users were promised a
> patch.
> I could be wrong but that's what I think I'm hearing. I think this guy
> named Edmund told them SOON. hahaha
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78618 is a reply to message #78598] |
Thu, 18 January 2007 22:40 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Totally agree on the deleting the Cubase.net.
Steinberg let way to many "users" get out of control. They made the
common mistake of being intimidated by the yellers and screams always
demanding and insisting. The site should be run like a private users
support forum not public forum. It seems to have ended up like RAP did a
few years ago. Chock full of bullies and little or no constructive ideas.
BTW Sonar 32 bit works better on 64 bit than sonar 64 bit does. Sonar 64
bit's bit bridge scam has so many performance bugs in it its hilarious.
Cubase works great on windows 64 pro and can use the extra ram. They do
need to get the full 64 bit version going and I sure hope they don't
pull any of the crap Sonar did in claiming to be fully 64 bit.
And the UAD stuff is working great on win 64 so far.
Chris
Dedric Terry wrote:
>A moderator (or rep) at Cubase.net said they would release a final
>maintenance release for SX 3,
>but in the most recent announcement they said they met and figured out they
>had overestimated their
>resources. So instead of working on SX 3.x.y they were going to work on
>64-bit capability for Cubase 4/Nuendo.
>
>For some reason, that makes a lot of sense to me - work on the new release,
>rather than the old one, then
>duplicate that work again in the new release later.
>
>And then factor in that users have been crying just as loudly about 64-bit,
>Vista, keeping up with Sonar,
>ProTools and the Joneses. What if SB had said, due to the time it took to
>complete SX 3.x.y, we will
>have to delay Cubase 4.x and Nuendo 4another 2 months. The response would
>have been identical -
>furor, anger, cries of broken promises, etc. It never changes on
>Cubase.net. Only the logic conveniently changes,
>but never the discontent.
>
>The best thing Steinberg could ever do for marketing would be to hit the
>delete button on Cubase.net.
>They need a lot of work in other areas, but that would be a good start,
>imho.
>
>I can think of a lot worse treatment of users by other companies than the
>Cubase world is crying about now.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45afece4$1@linux...
>
>
>>In the Cubase case my understanding is that the users were promised a
>>patch.
>>I could be wrong but that's what I think I'm hearing. I think this guy
>>named Edmund told them SOON. hahaha
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78627 is a reply to message #78618] |
Fri, 19 January 2007 05:38 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
If the moderators were ACTIVE there would be sanity there. Instead it's a
romper room. I love how you guys defend companies for changing their positions
and refer to the customers who expect the companies to do what they promise
as whiners.
Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>Totally agree on the deleting the Cubase.net.
>Steinberg let way to many "users" get out of control. They made the
>common mistake of being intimidated by the yellers and screams always
>demanding and insisting. The site should be run like a private users
>support forum not public forum. It seems to have ended up like RAP did a
>few years ago. Chock full of bullies and little or no constructive ideas.
>
>
>BTW Sonar 32 bit works better on 64 bit than sonar 64 bit does. Sonar 64
>bit's bit bridge scam has so many performance bugs in it its hilarious.
>
>Cubase works great on windows 64 pro and can use the extra ram. They do
>need to get the full 64 bit version going and I sure hope they don't
>pull any of the crap Sonar did in claiming to be fully 64 bit.
>
>And the UAD stuff is working great on win 64 so far.
>
>Chris
>
>
>
>Dedric Terry wrote:
>
>>A moderator (or rep) at Cubase.net said they would release a final
>>maintenance release for SX 3,
>>but in the most recent announcement they said they met and figured out
they
>>had overestimated their
>>resources. So instead of working on SX 3.x.y they were going to work on
>>64-bit capability for Cubase 4/Nuendo.
>>
>>For some reason, that makes a lot of sense to me - work on the new release,
>>rather than the old one, then
>>duplicate that work again in the new release later.
>>
>>And then factor in that users have been crying just as loudly about 64-bit,
>>Vista, keeping up with Sonar,
>>ProTools and the Joneses. What if SB had said, due to the time it took
to
>>complete SX 3.x.y, we will
>>have to delay Cubase 4.x and Nuendo 4another 2 months. The response would
>>have been identical -
>>furor, anger, cries of broken promises, etc. It never changes on
>>Cubase.net. Only the logic conveniently changes,
>>but never the discontent.
>>
>>The best thing Steinberg could ever do for marketing would be to hit the
>>delete button on Cubase.net.
>>They need a lot of work in other areas, but that would be a good start,
>>imho.
>>
>>I can think of a lot worse treatment of users by other companies than the
>>Cubase world is crying about now.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dedric
>>
>>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45afece4$1@linux...
>>
>>
>>>In the Cubase case my understanding is that the users were promised a
>>>patch.
>>>I could be wrong but that's what I think I'm hearing. I think this guy
>>>named Edmund told them SOON. hahaha
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>ADK
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>(859) 635-5762
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78628 is a reply to message #78627] |
Fri, 19 January 2007 05:39 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
BTW, I'm glad I didn't BUY any DirectX plugs or I would be mad !
"John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>If the moderators were ACTIVE there would be sanity there. Instead it's
a
>romper room. I love how you guys defend companies for changing their positions
>and refer to the customers who expect the companies to do what they promise
>as whiners.
>
>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>Totally agree on the deleting the Cubase.net.
>>Steinberg let way to many "users" get out of control. They made the
>>common mistake of being intimidated by the yellers and screams always
>>demanding and insisting. The site should be run like a private users
>>support forum not public forum. It seems to have ended up like RAP did
a
>
>>few years ago. Chock full of bullies and little or no constructive ideas.
>>
>>
>>BTW Sonar 32 bit works better on 64 bit than sonar 64 bit does. Sonar 64
>
>>bit's bit bridge scam has so many performance bugs in it its hilarious.
>>
>>Cubase works great on windows 64 pro and can use the extra ram. They do
>
>>need to get the full 64 bit version going and I sure hope they don't
>>pull any of the crap Sonar did in claiming to be fully 64 bit.
>>
>>And the UAD stuff is working great on win 64 so far.
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>
>>>A moderator (or rep) at Cubase.net said they would release a final
>>>maintenance release for SX 3,
>>>but in the most recent announcement they said they met and figured out
>they
>>>had overestimated their
>>>resources. So instead of working on SX 3.x.y they were going to work
on
>
>>>64-bit capability for Cubase 4/Nuendo.
>>>
>>>For some reason, that makes a lot of sense to me - work on the new release,
>
>>>rather than the old one, then
>>>duplicate that work again in the new release later.
>>>
>>>And then factor in that users have been crying just as loudly about 64-bit,
>
>>>Vista, keeping up with Sonar,
>>>ProTools and the Joneses. What if SB had said, due to the time it took
>to
>>>complete SX 3.x.y, we will
>>>have to delay Cubase 4.x and Nuendo 4another 2 months. The response would
>
>>>have been identical -
>>>furor, anger, cries of broken promises, etc. It never changes on
>>>Cubase.net. Only the logic conveniently changes,
>>>but never the discontent.
>>>
>>>The best thing Steinberg could ever do for marketing would be to hit the
>
>>>delete button on Cubase.net.
>>>They need a lot of work in other areas, but that would be a good start,
>
>>>imho.
>>>
>>>I can think of a lot worse treatment of users by other companies than
the
>
>>>Cubase world is crying about now.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Dedric
>>>
>>>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45afece4$1@linux...
>>>
>>>
>>>>In the Cubase case my understanding is that the users were promised a
>
>>>>patch.
>>>>I could be wrong but that's what I think I'm hearing. I think this guy
>>>>named Edmund told them SOON. hahaha
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>Chris Ludwig
>>ADK
>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>(859) 635-5762
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78635 is a reply to message #78628] |
Fri, 19 January 2007 07:40 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Get mad anyway!!! I can definitely send you some so you'll have a reason to
be pissed that you can't use them. ;o)
I agree that the moderators seldom showed up though, unless someone posted
something that might lead them to believe that cracked software was being
used. then they showed up big time. The "romper room" factor was large (good
analogy). I never had the problems that some had with SX and did try to help
a few folks from time to time, but the place was so ugly, I didn't post
there much. That's the job of the Steinyfolk, IMO. BTW, from what I've seen,
the only DAW interface uglier than Pro Tools is probably Cubase 4. Did they
get their inspiration from Tomb Raider, or what?
;o)
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45b0bbf8$1@linux...
>
> BTW, I'm glad I didn't BUY any DirectX plugs or I would be mad !
>
> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>
>>If the moderators were ACTIVE there would be sanity there. Instead it's
> a
>>romper room. I love how you guys defend companies for changing their
>>positions
>>and refer to the customers who expect the companies to do what they
>>promise
>>as whiners.
>>
>>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>>Totally agree on the deleting the Cubase.net.
>>>Steinberg let way to many "users" get out of control. They made the
>>>common mistake of being intimidated by the yellers and screams always
>>>demanding and insisting. The site should be run like a private users
>>>support forum not public forum. It seems to have ended up like RAP did
> a
>>
>>>few years ago. Chock full of bullies and little or no constructive ideas.
>>>
>>>
>>>BTW Sonar 32 bit works better on 64 bit than sonar 64 bit does. Sonar 64
>>
>>>bit's bit bridge scam has so many performance bugs in it its hilarious.
>>>
>>>Cubase works great on windows 64 pro and can use the extra ram. They do
>>
>>>need to get the full 64 bit version going and I sure hope they don't
>>>pull any of the crap Sonar did in claiming to be fully 64 bit.
>>>
>>>And the UAD stuff is working great on win 64 so far.
>>>
>>>Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>
>>>>A moderator (or rep) at Cubase.net said they would release a final
>>>>maintenance release for SX 3,
>>>>but in the most recent announcement they said they met and figured out
>>they
>>>>had overestimated their
>>>>resources. So instead of working on SX 3.x.y they were going to work
> on
>>
>>>>64-bit capability for Cubase 4/Nuendo.
>>>>
>>>>For some reason, that makes a lot of sense to me - work on the new
>>>>release,
>>
>>>>rather than the old one, then
>>>>duplicate that work again in the new release later.
>>>>
>>>>And then factor in that users have been crying just as loudly about
>>>>64-bit,
>>
>>>>Vista, keeping up with Sonar,
>>>>ProTools and the Joneses. What if SB had said, due to the time it took
>>to
>>>>complete SX 3.x.y, we will
>>>>have to delay Cubase 4.x and Nuendo 4another 2 months. The response
>>>>would
>>
>>>>have been identical -
>>>>furor, anger, cries of broken promises, etc. It never changes on
>>>>Cubase.net. Only the logic conveniently changes,
>>>>but never the discontent.
>>>>
>>>>The best thing Steinberg could ever do for marketing would be to hit the
>>
>>>>delete button on Cubase.net.
>>>>They need a lot of work in other areas, but that would be a good start,
>>
>>>>imho.
>>>>
>>>>I can think of a lot worse treatment of users by other companies than
> the
>>
>>>>Cubase world is crying about now.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Dedric
>>>>
>>>>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45afece4$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In the Cubase case my understanding is that the users were promised a
>>
>>>>>patch.
>>>>>I could be wrong but that's what I think I'm hearing. I think this guy
>>>>>named Edmund told them SOON. hahaha
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Chris Ludwig
>>>ADK
>>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>>(859) 635-5762
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78641 is a reply to message #78627] |
Fri, 19 January 2007 08:06 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
John,
I understand your frustration, but it isn't so much about defending the
company as taking an objective perspective on what they really did say,
rather than what a forum likes to think they are saying - SB did apologize,
and were honest about the specific reason they weren't updating SX3 anymore,
and it makes a lot of sense. I would do the same if I were in their shoes,
except I would probably be a bit less tactful when the users whined like
that on Cubase.net....phrases like "get a job, if you are old enough" or
"call us when you are making a living with our product" come to mind.
If I worked for Steinberg, there is not way I would step foot on the Cubase
forum. I don't bother there anymore. I've seen many professional users
attempt to post logically and respectfully, only to get flamed for no good
reason. You can't blame Steinberg or moderators. To clean it up would mean
deleting 90% of the users registered there. Companies can only change their
products - not the people who buy them.
Would the response be any different if they said "In order to release on
last maintenance update for SX 3, we will have to delay the release of
Cubase 4.1 and Nuendo 4 by 3 months"? No, it would be just as vehement and
just as unrealistic. I read both announcements by Steinberg, as well as the
announcement about Nuendo 4 posted this morning - all three are to the
point, truthful and realistic. They aren't trying to pull the wool over
anyone's eyes.
No offense, but it really comes down to deciding if you can get work done
with what you have, or you can only work with what you don't have.
Nuendo 3 works beautifully here. It's paying my bills where worrying about
an unfulfilled promise never will. If Cubase 4 doesn't suit you and SX 3
doesn't work for whatever reason, then perhaps you should consider upgrading
to Nuendo 3.
Regards,
Dedric
On 1/19/07 6:38 AM, in article 45b0bbcc$1@linux, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
> If the moderators were ACTIVE there would be sanity there. Instead it's a
> romper room. I love how you guys defend companies for changing their
> positions
> and refer to the customers who expect the companies to do what they promise
> as whiners.
>
> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>> Totally agree on the deleting the Cubase.net.
>> Steinberg let way to many "users" get out of control. They made the
>> common mistake of being intimidated by the yellers and screams always
>> demanding and insisting. The site should be run like a private users
>> support forum not public forum. It seems to have ended up like RAP did a
>
>> few years ago. Chock full of bullies and little or no constructive ideas.
>>
>>
>> BTW Sonar 32 bit works better on 64 bit than sonar 64 bit does. Sonar 64
>
>> bit's bit bridge scam has so many performance bugs in it its hilarious.
>>
>> Cubase works great on windows 64 pro and can use the extra ram. They do
>
>> need to get the full 64 bit version going and I sure hope they don't
>> pull any of the crap Sonar did in claiming to be fully 64 bit.
>>
>> And the UAD stuff is working great on win 64 so far.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>
>>> A moderator (or rep) at Cubase.net said they would release a final
>>> maintenance release for SX 3,
>>> but in the most recent announcement they said they met and figured out
> they
>>> had overestimated their
>>> resources. So instead of working on SX 3.x.y they were going to work on
>
>>> 64-bit capability for Cubase 4/Nuendo.
>>>
>>> For some reason, that makes a lot of sense to me - work on the new release,
>
>>> rather than the old one, then
>>> duplicate that work again in the new release later.
>>>
>>> And then factor in that users have been crying just as loudly about 64-bit,
>
>>> Vista, keeping up with Sonar,
>>> ProTools and the Joneses. What if SB had said, due to the time it took
> to
>>> complete SX 3.x.y, we will
>>> have to delay Cubase 4.x and Nuendo 4another 2 months. The response would
>
>>> have been identical -
>>> furor, anger, cries of broken promises, etc. It never changes on
>>> Cubase.net. Only the logic conveniently changes,
>>> but never the discontent.
>>>
>>> The best thing Steinberg could ever do for marketing would be to hit the
>
>>> delete button on Cubase.net.
>>> They need a lot of work in other areas, but that would be a good start,
>
>>> imho.
>>>
>>> I can think of a lot worse treatment of users by other companies than the
>
>>> Cubase world is crying about now.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45afece4$1@linux...
>>>
>>>
>>>> In the Cubase case my understanding is that the users were promised a
>
>>>> patch.
>>>> I could be wrong but that's what I think I'm hearing. I think this guy
>>>> named Edmund told them SOON. hahaha
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Chris Ludwig
>> ADK
>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>> www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>> (859) 635-5762
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78654 is a reply to message #78641] |
Fri, 19 January 2007 09:52 |
Rich[3]
Messages: 132
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Well put Dedric
- I own SX3 but understand updates can not continue forever. If it works
keep it and use it - if not there is an upgrade path aval. The entire product
line was not dumped and left hanging...
Microsoft does this all the time....
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>John,
>
>I understand your frustration, but it isn't so much about defending the
>company as taking an objective perspective on what they really did say,
>rather than what a forum likes to think they are saying - SB did apologize,
>and were honest about the specific reason they weren't updating SX3 anymore,
>and it makes a lot of sense. I would do the same if I were in their shoes,
>except I would probably be a bit less tactful when the users whined like
>that on Cubase.net....phrases like "get a job, if you are old enough" or
>"call us when you are making a living with our product" come to mind.
>
>If I worked for Steinberg, there is not way I would step foot on the Cubase
>forum. I don't bother there anymore. I've seen many professional users
>attempt to post logically and respectfully, only to get flamed for no good
>reason. You can't blame Steinberg or moderators. To clean it up would
mean
>deleting 90% of the users registered there. Companies can only change their
>products - not the people who buy them.
>
>Would the response be any different if they said "In order to release on
>last maintenance update for SX 3, we will have to delay the release of
>Cubase 4.1 and Nuendo 4 by 3 months"? No, it would be just as vehement
and
>just as unrealistic. I read both announcements by Steinberg, as well as
the
>announcement about Nuendo 4 posted this morning - all three are to the
>point, truthful and realistic. They aren't trying to pull the wool over
>anyone's eyes.
>
>No offense, but it really comes down to deciding if you can get work done
>with what you have, or you can only work with what you don't have.
>
>Nuendo 3 works beautifully here. It's paying my bills where worrying about
>an unfulfilled promise never will. If Cubase 4 doesn't suit you and SX
3
>doesn't work for whatever reason, then perhaps you should consider upgrading
>to Nuendo 3.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>On 1/19/07 6:38 AM, in article 45b0bbcc$1@linux, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> If the moderators were ACTIVE there would be sanity there. Instead it's
a
>> romper room. I love how you guys defend companies for changing their
>> positions
>> and refer to the customers who expect the companies to do what they promise
>> as whiners.
>>
>> Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>> Totally agree on the deleting the Cubase.net.
>>> Steinberg let way to many "users" get out of control. They made the
>>> common mistake of being intimidated by the yellers and screams always
>>> demanding and insisting. The site should be run like a private users
>>> support forum not public forum. It seems to have ended up like RAP did
a
>>
>>> few years ago. Chock full of bullies and little or no constructive ideas.
>>>
>>>
>>> BTW Sonar 32 bit works better on 64 bit than sonar 64 bit does. Sonar
64
>>
>>> bit's bit bridge scam has so many performance bugs in it its hilarious.
>>>
>>> Cubase works great on windows 64 pro and can use the extra ram. They
do
>>
>>> need to get the full 64 bit version going and I sure hope they don't
>>> pull any of the crap Sonar did in claiming to be fully 64 bit.
>>>
>>> And the UAD stuff is working great on win 64 so far.
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>
>>>> A moderator (or rep) at Cubase.net said they would release a final
>>>> maintenance release for SX 3,
>>>> but in the most recent announcement they said they met and figured out
>> they
>>>> had overestimated their
>>>> resources. So instead of working on SX 3.x.y they were going to work
on
>>
>>>> 64-bit capability for Cubase 4/Nuendo.
>>>>
>>>> For some reason, that makes a lot of sense to me - work on the new release,
>>
>>>> rather than the old one, then
>>>> duplicate that work again in the new release later.
>>>>
>>>> And then factor in that users have been crying just as loudly about
64-bit,
>>
>>>> Vista, keeping up with Sonar,
>>>> ProTools and the Joneses. What if SB had said, due to the time it took
>> to
>>>> complete SX 3.x.y, we will
>>>> have to delay Cubase 4.x and Nuendo 4another 2 months. The response
would
>>
>>>> have been identical -
>>>> furor, anger, cries of broken promises, etc. It never changes on
>>>> Cubase.net. Only the logic conveniently changes,
>>>> but never the discontent.
>>>>
>>>> The best thing Steinberg could ever do for marketing would be to hit
the
>>
>>>> delete button on Cubase.net.
>>>> They need a lot of work in other areas, but that would be a good start,
>>
>>>> imho.
>>>>
>>>> I can think of a lot worse treatment of users by other companies than
the
>>
>>>> Cubase world is crying about now.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45afece4$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> In the Cubase case my understanding is that the users were promised
a
>>
>>>>> patch.
>>>>> I could be wrong but that's what I think I'm hearing. I think this
guy
>>>>> named Edmund told them SOON. hahaha
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Ludwig
>>> ADK
>>> chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>> www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>> (859) 635-5762
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78661 is a reply to message #78635] |
Fri, 19 January 2007 10:33 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I already have them ALL. I am in love now though. The Princeton Digital
Reverb Stereo Room / Vocal Chamber setting has stolen my heart. hehe
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>Get mad anyway!!! I can definitely send you some so you'll have a reason
to
>be pissed that you can't use them. ;o)
>
>I agree that the moderators seldom showed up though, unless someone posted
>something that might lead them to believe that cracked software was being
>used. then they showed up big time. The "romper room" factor was large (good
>analogy). I never had the problems that some had with SX and did try to
help
>a few folks from time to time, but the place was so ugly, I didn't post
>there much. That's the job of the Steinyfolk, IMO. BTW, from what I've seen,
>the only DAW interface uglier than Pro Tools is probably Cubase 4. Did they
>get their inspiration from Tomb Raider, or what?
>
>;o)
>
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45b0bbf8$1@linux...
>>
>> BTW, I'm glad I didn't BUY any DirectX plugs or I would be mad !
>>
>> "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>If the moderators were ACTIVE there would be sanity there. Instead it's
>> a
>>>romper room. I love how you guys defend companies for changing their
>>>positions
>>>and refer to the customers who expect the companies to do what they
>>>promise
>>>as whiners.
>>>
>>>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>>>Totally agree on the deleting the Cubase.net.
>>>>Steinberg let way to many "users" get out of control. They made the
>>>>common mistake of being intimidated by the yellers and screams always
>>>>demanding and insisting. The site should be run like a private users
>>>>support forum not public forum. It seems to have ended up like RAP did
>> a
>>>
>>>>few years ago. Chock full of bullies and little or no constructive ideas.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>BTW Sonar 32 bit works better on 64 bit than sonar 64 bit does. Sonar
64
>>>
>>>>bit's bit bridge scam has so many performance bugs in it its hilarious.
>>>>
>>>>Cubase works great on windows 64 pro and can use the extra ram. They
do
>>>
>>>>need to get the full 64 bit version going and I sure hope they don't
>>>>pull any of the crap Sonar did in claiming to be fully 64 bit.
>>>>
>>>>And the UAD stuff is working great on win 64 so far.
>>>>
>>>>Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>A moderator (or rep) at Cubase.net said they would release a final
>>>>>maintenance release for SX 3,
>>>>>but in the most recent announcement they said they met and figured out
>>>they
>>>>>had overestimated their
>>>>>resources. So instead of working on SX 3.x.y they were going to work
>> on
>>>
>>>>>64-bit capability for Cubase 4/Nuendo.
>>>>>
>>>>>For some reason, that makes a lot of sense to me - work on the new
>>>>>release,
>>>
>>>>>rather than the old one, then
>>>>>duplicate that work again in the new release later.
>>>>>
>>>>>And then factor in that users have been crying just as loudly about
>>>>>64-bit,
>>>
>>>>>Vista, keeping up with Sonar,
>>>>>ProTools and the Joneses. What if SB had said, due to the time it took
>>>to
>>>>>complete SX 3.x.y, we will
>>>>>have to delay Cubase 4.x and Nuendo 4another 2 months. The response
>>>>>would
>>>
>>>>>have been identical -
>>>>>furor, anger, cries of broken promises, etc. It never changes on
>>>>>Cubase.net. Only the logic conveniently changes,
>>>>>but never the discontent.
>>>>>
>>>>>The best thing Steinberg could ever do for marketing would be to hit
the
>>>
>>>>>delete button on Cubase.net.
>>>>>They need a lot of work in other areas, but that would be a good start,
>>>
>>>>>imho.
>>>>>
>>>>>I can think of a lot worse treatment of users by other companies than
>> the
>>>
>>>>>Cubase world is crying about now.
>>>>>
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45afece4$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In the Cubase case my understanding is that the users were promised
a
>>>
>>>>>>patch.
>>>>>>I could be wrong but that's what I think I'm hearing. I think this
guy
>>>>>>named Edmund told them SOON. hahaha
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Chris Ludwig
>>>>ADK
>>>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>>>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>>>(859) 635-5762
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase pulls a Paris [message #78682 is a reply to message #78669] |
Fri, 19 January 2007 17:12 |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thanks, I joined a couple days ago but it's pretty slow there. Great to
have more resources though. Thanks !
John
"Dedric Terry" <dedric@echomg.com> wrote:
>100% agreed.
>
>BTW - if you want a more civil forum for Nuendo and/or Cubase, try
>here: http://aavimt.com.au/phpBB/index.php
>
>It isn't without opinions, but it's privately run, so there are no wrong
>opinions. The main idea is to allow users to freely help one another.
>It's getting there. Flaming really isn't acceptible there, which is nice.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:45b10097$1@linux...
>>
>> I actually love cubase 4 and think it kicks the snot out of paris but
I do
>> wish the moderators would take charge of their forum. I would.
>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Dec 28 09:10:21 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.08095 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
