Chris, I agree with the above entirely. I've worked around development of large projects, and you're absolutely right. One bad manager, a bad call by a VP, a seemingly good decision in a meeting that turns horribly wrong in the real world, having to choose what you "can" do with the resources and constraints you have versus what you want to do...all these things can sink a project. I'm sympathetic to that aspect of it.chrisby wrote:I don't want to be confrontational but I think I can offer some possible insight into why a lot of people might take some exception to your comments regarding Sonar's underlying technology and dev team. Basically anyone that has worked as a developer contributing to any large system will tell you that it only takes a few bad calls to make everything look bad. Not that Sonar is huge but it's not a "small" app by any stretch either. I don't want to type a lot here but I will say that you can have great devs writing great code and still there are a hundred ways to end up looking bad. Bad QA policy/strategy, over ambitious marketing, pushy sales, a few poorly placed team leads are just the more obvious ones but really just the tip of the iceberg. One bad hire in a good team alone can do a ton of damage. Cake's most likely problem is resources vs ambition if I had to guess.TheoM wrote:I do care but I don't get why what I'm saying is so off the mark.. It's bad code...
A lot of people here recognize what I'm saying I'm sure 'cause there are a lot devs that hang at KVR. Lastly I'd add that years ago I saw some financials for Cakewalk. I was amazed at how little the income was considering what they managed to put out. Nobody (or few if any) were getting stinking rich. And there's a lot of clearly talented people there 'cause as many here have commented (including often the disgruntled ex users) if the app was more stable it would be great. These guys aren't hacks. I'm sure they could get well paying jobs elsewhere. My personal conclusion was that yes, there are some bad decisions being made that affect stability, but that said I'd bet that most likely the guys/women at the core of the dev team are very competent and that they stay there (as opposed to going elsewhere and probably making more money) because their love of music and the technology. Or at least without knowing for sure that that I'm wrong I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt (and that is separate from whether I remain a customer).
What Cakewalk needs to understand, is that the people posting on forums about bugs are end-users. It's not an end-user's job to determine why something's not working, or what the underlying politics or economics were that went into something not working, the end-user just knows that they're not getting the results they want. The "why" isn't really their problem.
It's Cakewalk's (or now Gibson's) job to fix those kinds of problems. And if not, the end-user's will put their money elsewhere.
