Why is Ableton so slow to release updates?

[machinesworking]

Hundreds of important changes to the core programm, new or much improved devices in the same developing time...

If you're happy to pay a subscription to be a beta tester for a program that needs hundreds of improvements that's up to you. Why so obsessed with telling people who use a different program how great your choice is?

You're stooping to his level here.

Personally I'll be happy with Live when it gets MPE and happy with Bitwig when they implement the remote collaboration code they said they were going to when they started.

All the little features here and there are cool, just give me the ones you've talked about developer people!

[thecontrolcentre]

Hundreds of important changes to the core programm, new or much improved devices in the same developing time...

If you're happy to pay a subscription to be a beta tester for a program that needs hundreds of improvements that's up to you. Why so obsessed with telling people who use a different program how great your choice is?

You're stooping to his level here.

I don't think so. Maybe if I was posting about how superior Live is in a thread about Bitwig.

I really don't care what Bitwig does or doesn't do, and I'm happy with Lives pace of development. They regularly release new betas, which any Live user can access by signing up. There was a new one released today.

[machinesworking]

I don't think so. Maybe if I was posting about how superior Live is in a thread about Bitwig.

The topic title screams comparing development pace between DAWs, it's not titled, "Ableton's update pace rocks!"

I really don't care what Bitwig does or doesn't do, and I'm happy with Lives pace of development. They regularly release new betas, which any Live user can access by signing up. There was a new one released today.

Well to be entirely fair, you're going to hear a lot about Bitwig here because KVR is their semi official forum host.

Looks like the last few betas, mainly bugfixes.
I know it's a smarter format, but I like the package deal, where updates come out with a host of new features, this whole trickle theory (that both Live and Bitwig do), that makes for more stable systems means a lot of nothing in individual updates.

[middle_color]

I would like to see track inspector added to Live. Switchable between browser and track inspector.
And full hotkeys customization.

[revvy]

Out of curiosity, why are some Bitwig users hellbent on trying to convince others of "how much better Bitwig is than Live" or that "in direct comparison, Bitwig 'wins'"? In the end, it's about personal workflow, not feature list length or development speed (if so, there would ever be only one product for any particular need).

Some are, just like some Live users won't miss an occassion to point out how Bitwig copied Live, how it doesn't have M4L or how much smaller and lower profile its user base is.

Most are reasonable & usually use or were using multiple DAWs.

The pure BW FBs swarm over Live threads on KVR. Like PC users in Logic threads, no real reason to be there apart from frothing. Lucky me I use L and L so get to see both sorts of exited posting behaviour

Of course, most BW, PC, Cubase, Reason etc. users are sweet, I'm talking about a small minority that gum up discussions here.

BTW, Bitwig obviously did copy Live (I'm in a Live thread so can happily make that comment)

[machinesworking]

BTW, Bitwig obviously did copy Live (I'm in a Live thread so can happily make that comment)

It's deeper than that, most of the Bitwig team left Ableton to form their own company. Copy doesn't really cover it when you're responsible for some of what you "copy". I want all of them to copy the best parts of each other.

[revvy]

BTW, Bitwig obviously did copy Live (I'm in a Live thread so can happily make that comment)

It's deeper than that, most of the Bitwig team left Ableton to form their own company. Copy doesn't really cover it when you're responsible for some of what you "copy". I want all of them to copy the best parts of each other.

I was being glib but I was an Abes customer and regular forum poster at the time and recall well the backstory of Dom and co. The BW FB gushing started before the product even came out...

[antic604]

Copy doesn't really cover it when you're responsible for some of what you "copy".

I always wondered if there ever was some legal dispute between Ableton & Bitwig?

I mean even if Bitwig's founders were the original inventors or creators of some of the Live's defining features (I'm not saying they were, just using it for the sake of the argument), then employment law pretty much always says the company one works for owns the rights to what they've produced during work hours or using work computer, etc. Were things like clip launcher, horizontal devices chain, racks, etc. never patented - or at least trademarked? - by Ableton? Or were there earlier implementations of such features and therefore they couldn't do it? I never really looked into it.

[dreamstate42]

Copy doesn't really cover it when you're responsible for some of what you "copy".

I always wondered if there ever was some legal dispute between Ableton & Bitwig?

I mean even if Bitwig's founders were the original inventors or creators of some of the Live's defining features (I'm not saying they were, just using it for the sake of the argument), then employment law pretty much always says the company one works for owns the rights to what they've produced during work hours or using work computer, etc. Were things like clip launcher, horizontal devices chain, racks, etc. never patented - or at least trademarked? - by Ableton? Or were there earlier implementations of such features and therefore they couldn't do it? I never really looked into it.

I'm no lawyer by any means, but if I remember correctly, with both being German companies, software is really hard to get a patent for, and even if so, you usually get a patent for implementation (i.e. algorithms for specific tasks), and not for a general idea. Even more, to get a patent on any kind of software, I think you need to get an EU patent, because German patent law explicitly excludes software from being eligible for a patent.

[dreamstate42]

This is false assumption to me anyway. workflow is great, important for sure, but features are the deciding factor.

(...)

Are the features you need or regularly use part of your workflow, to an extend? In a sense, that if a DAW doesn't have a particular feature, but some kind of workaround, you would chose the one with that feature because it better supports your workflow?

But maybe that's just me, I really was just curious to know, no "wrong answers" really

[antic604]

I'm no lawyer by any means, but if I remember correctly, with both being German companies, software is really hard to get a patent for, and even if so, you usually get a patent for implementation (i.e. algorithms for specific tasks), and not for a general idea. Even more, to get a patent on any kind of software, I think you need to get an EU patent, because German patent law explicitly excludes software from being eligible for a patent.

That's a fair point, actually!

[revvy]

^ re. legal battle: back then with so much BW discussions on Abes forum, it always felt like the remaining Abes were decent folk who accepted the 'fork' in their SW.

[antic604]

Are the features you need or regularly use part of your workflow, to an extend? In a sense, that if a DAW doesn't have a particular feature, but some kind of workaround, you would chose the one with that feature because it better supports your workflow?

But maybe that's just me, I really was just curious to know, no "wrong answers" really

Again, good point. For sure there are people - not pointing fingers - that will engage in a list wars of some sort, i.e. which DAW has the most features, even if they themselves use 10% of them.

I was thinking along those lines not too long ago, for example I went out and bought Cubase 10.5 Pro being sure that because it has the most features, it's likely the best DAW for me. Well, it definitely isn't because huge part of my workflow revolves around complex device chains and elaborate, usually random modulation. I can't do those things in Cubase (or they're very, very hard). If the things Cubase is great at - e.g. editing midi & audio, comping, etc. - are 5-10% of what I do, why would I want to get stuck with it, instead of choosing an environment that's fast, fun and inspiring when doing things I spend 80% of my time with? That's why I'm leaning towards Live, Bitwig, Reason or even Studio One (as a compromise between "old" linear workflows and more creative DAWs).

And once you've identified the features that are important for your workflow, you should look at how they're implemented. For Bitwig vs. Live you could say that they overlap in 75-80% and probably even more - like 90-95% - for the features that I care for, but it's the execution that's different. Live tends to get sophisticated and more flexible, whereas Bitwig focuses on say 80% of potential functionality but tries to make it easier, more intuitive to use. Good examples are modulation system, where Live doesn't impose the same restrictions (you can attach the LFO on track #1 to anything on track #2 with no fuss), but Bitwig - while more restrictive - beats it in how fast, easy and creative you can get stacking simple, pre-defined components. Similarly with M4L vs. Grid, where the former is incredibly deep and powerful, but the barrier to entry is way higher than in less sophisticated Grid. So it's only natural some people will go one way, while others will go the other - even though on the surface both cover the same functionality.

[antic604]

^ re. legal battle: back then with so much BW discussions on Abes forum, it always felt like the remaining Abes were decent folk who accepted the 'fork' in their SW.

Gotta dig out those posts over the weekend

[Trancit]

Out of curiosity, why are some Bitwig users hellbent on trying to convince others of "how much better Bitwig is than Live" or that "in direct comparison, Bitwig 'wins'"? In the end, it's about personal workflow, not feature list length or development speed (if so, there would ever be only one product for any particular need).

Do not forget this whole Bitwig vs. Ableton discussion began after somebody stated how much more powerful M4L would be against Bitwig´s Grid... so this time is was more the other way round!!