HI
Reading through the 'Muzzy's' post about the possibility of a return to host deopment I could not but help wonder if mostly it is a waste of time asking for feature requests or even bug fixes?
I mean look at the constant and relentless pressure that many people have put on say Tracktion, Live & Acid for certain MIDI features - yet months if not years down the line the companies fail to listen, and then throw in a couple of completely different featuresthat bear no relation to the original issues!
But then again no two people want the same thing - I do believe that there are 'foundation' features that any host/sequencer needs and a failure to deliver them relegates that program to the scrap heap for many potential users.
I know of 2 developers that are currently working on two completely new host/sequencing programs - I know for sure that one of them has a clear idea of the shape and direction their program will take, this person was almost insulted when I asked him if he was going to do some market research!!!
Oh well ... we live in hope!
Porpoise.
Do (some) developers ever really listen!!!
-
- KVRian
- 1022 posts since 7 Sep, 2004
I think that if people could see first-hand the thousands and thousands of lines of code that go into the more basic sequencers, they would understand a little bit about why developers are reluctant to keep throwing features at an application.
We are becoming less and less tolerant of workarounds thesedays (I think it was Pink Floyd who used to do delay effects on "Us and Them" via different tape speeds!). We expect everything to be loaded onto the sequencers and never more than 2 shortcut keys away.
Also, as a certain host dev put it, most user suggestions are downright crap.
But I'd suggest development time and the sheer tedium of implementing users suggestions as high on a list of reasons why they take months to appear.
We are becoming less and less tolerant of workarounds thesedays (I think it was Pink Floyd who used to do delay effects on "Us and Them" via different tape speeds!). We expect everything to be loaded onto the sequencers and never more than 2 shortcut keys away.
Also, as a certain host dev put it, most user suggestions are downright crap.
But I'd suggest development time and the sheer tedium of implementing users suggestions as high on a list of reasons why they take months to appear.
-
- KVRAF
- 8389 posts since 11 Apr, 2003 from back on the hillside again - but now with a garden!
My main Seq programs are Podium and Ntrack, both of which are developed by one person teams. For both, feature requests can be mooted in the forum and in the field within a week (I've seen this happen with both), equally requests are made and put 'on the list' for a rainy day. Both put bug fixes high on their priorities, but it can take a while to trace some things.
These are both very small enterprises compared to the giants. eXT has similar support, as do a couple of others. It's when the central dev or dev's get taken out of the front line that work ends up being prioritised differently.
This has been seen quite dramatically with Tracktion. Long gone are the days when Jules would just release a beta because he'd been up all night with it and wanted a break. I remember when he decided to completely rewrite the audio engine one weekend and released it sunday night/ monday morning for testing. He could do it since he was in charge of his own work. Now I suspect he has a number of priorities ordered for him, even tho' I imagine he still has a reasonably freehand. But one off releases are not so easy when a shrink wrapped product is out there.
I'm not quite sure what point I'm making.. I think it has something to do with the difference between, shall we say 'Cottage Industry' and 'Heavy Industry' or Corporations. A small outfit can respond much more quickly to the requests of its userbase, just because the lines of communication from userbase to dev are far fewer than in a larger one. It is still worth letting the authors and/or publishers of software know your feelings. If long standing issues aren't resolved, then vote with your feet (as it were).
There are larger companies that listen to grass roots, sadly not many of them seem be in the audio industry!
DSP
These are both very small enterprises compared to the giants. eXT has similar support, as do a couple of others. It's when the central dev or dev's get taken out of the front line that work ends up being prioritised differently.
This has been seen quite dramatically with Tracktion. Long gone are the days when Jules would just release a beta because he'd been up all night with it and wanted a break. I remember when he decided to completely rewrite the audio engine one weekend and released it sunday night/ monday morning for testing. He could do it since he was in charge of his own work. Now I suspect he has a number of priorities ordered for him, even tho' I imagine he still has a reasonably freehand. But one off releases are not so easy when a shrink wrapped product is out there.
I'm not quite sure what point I'm making.. I think it has something to do with the difference between, shall we say 'Cottage Industry' and 'Heavy Industry' or Corporations. A small outfit can respond much more quickly to the requests of its userbase, just because the lines of communication from userbase to dev are far fewer than in a larger one. It is still worth letting the authors and/or publishers of software know your feelings. If long standing issues aren't resolved, then vote with your feet (as it were).
There are larger companies that listen to grass roots, sadly not many of them seem be in the audio industry!
DSP
-
- KVRAF
- 12235 posts since 18 Aug, 2003
The Muzys thread is a little bit different in that Jo, the developer, is participating in it, actively looking for some ideas.
I think users have to be reasonable. Don't get your hopes too high if you ask ReFX to turn Vanguard into a sampler. I know of two features I've requested for Audiomulch that were implemented the next release. I've had others implemented in other software packages, too, sometimes over night (that was probably Jorgen at eXT, he's half-machine, you know).
It's easier with smaller companies/development teams because there are fewere (often one) people to consider the change. If you send a feature request to NI, for instance, it'll have to pass through a committee of 20 people before it's considered, and likely, since they're paying the 20 people already, they would rather hear their own ideas for features than from users.
Also don't expect features that seem dear to you but irrelevant to others to get in, or features that would require an extensive rebuild of the software.
I think users have to be reasonable. Don't get your hopes too high if you ask ReFX to turn Vanguard into a sampler. I know of two features I've requested for Audiomulch that were implemented the next release. I've had others implemented in other software packages, too, sometimes over night (that was probably Jorgen at eXT, he's half-machine, you know).
It's easier with smaller companies/development teams because there are fewere (often one) people to consider the change. If you send a feature request to NI, for instance, it'll have to pass through a committee of 20 people before it's considered, and likely, since they're paying the 20 people already, they would rather hear their own ideas for features than from users.
Also don't expect features that seem dear to you but irrelevant to others to get in, or features that would require an extensive rebuild of the software.