FL Studio 20.8.4 Released inc. Apple Silicon Support

[hoxclab]

IL gives Apple M1 support but not skins. I see IL priorities do not include what their users want at all. Though I’m never surprised by their priorities.

I definitely have had updates where I wasn't that impressed, but in general it's always good to look at the bigger picture. Image Line have gained and keep customers by adding M1 support, probably I would guess without hesitation at a higher rate than people who hate the default skin. Plus, Image Line don't charge for upgrades, so it's definitely a gift horse in the mouth thing here. Don't buy anything with an expectation for what it will be in the future.

That said, skins also might generate sales, so you could still get your wish. Either that or IL are happy with the way FL looks and you're SOL.

They have stated it will be a thing. They went on a witch hunt and burned at the stake anyone who used an FL skinner a while back. They don't care about customers simple requests. They don't have a M/S EQ, they don't have MPE functionality, they don't have comping, they don't have a M4L type of community which is another lacking quality due to their restrictiveness.

You know they will probably chime in here that they want to attract users of the market from Apple but it's always interesting they spend more time on that than on actually providing what users want. Their Mac version I heard is full of issues as well. Who was these voices wanting a Mac FL anyways? Never saw them.

[machinesworking]

IL gives Apple M1 support but not skins. I see IL priorities do not include what their users want at all. Though I’m never surprised by their priorities.

I definitely have had updates where I wasn't that impressed, but in general it's always good to look at the bigger picture. Image Line have gained and keep customers by adding M1 support, probably I would guess without hesitation at a higher rate than people who hate the default skin. Plus, Image Line don't charge for upgrades, so it's definitely a gift horse in the mouth thing here. Don't buy anything with an expectation for what it will be in the future.

That said, skins also might generate sales, so you could still get your wish. Either that or IL are happy with the way FL looks and you're SOL.

They have stated it will be a thing. They went on a witch hunt and burned at the stake anyone who used an FL skinner a while back. They don't care about customers simple requests. They don't have a M/S EQ, they don't have MPE functionality, they don't have comping, they don't have a M4L type of community which is another lacking quality due to their restrictiveness.

You know they will probably chime in here that they want to attract users of the market from Apple but it's always interesting they spend more time on that than on actually providing what users want. Their Mac version I heard is full of issues as well. Who was these voices wanting a Mac FL anyways? Never saw them.

Considering that music has been roughly 50/50 Mac/PC forever now it's always a strange thing when someone thinks there's no market there. Plenty of people switch to Mac these days, and the downside is if you use FL, then you used to lose that DAW. Logic is about the only DAW on Mac that's Mac only these days and that's for obvious reasons.

Sucks about the skin thing, companies ban or stop things like third party skinners because they get tired of tech support questions for the GUI issues the skinner brings, simple as that. Digital Performer got skins years ago, that's always a good thing to me. Reaper without a skin for instance...

[pdxindy]

They don't care about customers simple requests. They don't have a M/S EQ, they don't have MPE functionality, they don't have comping, they don't have a M4L type of community which is another lacking quality due to their restrictiveness.

So adding something like M4L is a simple request?

It's funny... every DAW forum has users making the exact same complaints as you... different features, but the same complaints.

[hoxclab]

They don't care about customers simple requests. They don't have a M/S EQ, they don't have MPE functionality, they don't have comping, they don't have a M4L type of community which is another lacking quality due to their restrictiveness.

So adding something like M4L is a simple request?

It's funny... every DAW forum has users making the exact same complaints as you... different features, but the same complaints.

Nah dude. It's something that would be nice to see though. I mean how many times has someone created something for FL only for them to be reactionary against it? Or how many people request something simple as skins only to be ignored for decades. But let's rush out and work on Mac ports that amount to a tiny amount of users and many who don't even use FL on Mac because it's so unstable.

[machinesworking]

But let's rush out and work on Mac ports that amount to a tiny amount of users and many who don't even use FL on Mac because it's so unstable.

Again there are multiple reasons to do a port, and yeah, when it's done so late in the game it takes years to stabilize across platforms. Digital Performer is in a similar state, the PC version isn't as stable as the Mac version.

Again though, you really have no idea what amount of users IL are getting for the Mac version, it's just conjecture on your part, and if anything will bring them more users than ever it would be early M1 adoption. I think that's not even a questionable assumption, if FL is among the first on to M1, they win some converts.

[pdxindy]

I mean how many times has someone created something for FL only for them to be reactionary against it? Or how many people request something simple as skins only to be ignored for decades. But let's rush out and work on Mac ports that amount to a tiny amount of users and many who don't even use FL on Mac because it's so unstable.

That may have to do with the pricing model. Adding features that you want does not make any money for them. They have little incentive to give you what you want and you have no leverage. You cannot sell or refuse to buy a paid upgrade.

Porting to Mac adds potential new users which means cash.

[hoxclab]

I mean how many times has someone created something for FL only for them to be reactionary against it? Or how many people request something simple as skins only to be ignored for decades. But let's rush out and work on Mac ports that amount to a tiny amount of users and many who don't even use FL on Mac because it's so unstable.

That may have to do with the pricing model. Adding features that you want does not make any money for them. They have little incentive to give you what you want and you have no leverage. You cannot sell or refuse to buy a paid upgrade.

Porting to Mac adds potential new users which means cash.

Always has to do with their crippled pricing model. LOL
That same worn out excuse gets so old dude.

[antic604]

That same worn out excuse gets so old dude.

It can't be worn out if it's true. Even in the post-modern world.

[Tronam]

But let's rush out and work on Mac ports that amount to a tiny amount of users and many who don't even use FL on Mac because it's so unstable.

Image-Line is not a charity. They're not bending over backwards to port FL Studio out of the goodness of their hearts and wouldn't keep working on it if there was no return on investment. There are over 100 million active Macs on the market and for a company whose flagship application's business model is built on lifetime free updates, it's pretty obvious they view it as a huge growth opportunity. PC users should be glad to see FL Studio ported to as many platforms as possible because those sales go back into development which benefits everyone in the end.

[antic604]

EDIT: Sorry, wrong DAW

The on-line manual has been updated with more info, high-res pictures and ...YT links!
https://s1manual.presonus.com/StudioOne ... Manual.htm

[Dionysos]

Who was these voices wanting a Mac FL anyways? Never saw them.

LOL. You must've not been looking; AND you must be out of your mind if you think that skins/themes are a more popular or important request than the Mac port was. In any case your whining is a bit surprising as the devs have not only confirmed that they're working on themes already; they've also posted teasers of work-in-progress FL themes in the official forum.

[EnGee]

It seems to work fine on my Air m1, but one thing I couldn't do is to bring the main window to the external monitor I have! Strange! Although I could bring the option window to the external monitor, but the main window + Harmor + Sytrus + other native FLS plugins can't be moved to the other monitor. They are stuck on the laptop monitor!

[Image-Line]

They went on a witch hunt and burned at the stake anyone who used an FL skinner a while back. They don't care about customers simple requests.

Our main objection to FL Skinner was almost entirely technical. FL Skinner modifies the runtime code. This was a red flag. The last straw was when they released a version that hacked our copy protection systems.

The method FL Skinner uses is incredibly dangerous as it is open to exploitation by bad actors and is a gateway to methods associated with piracy.

As FL Skinner violated the EULA, re decompiling and reverse engineering our code we took action. All developers of commercial software invoke similar restrictions.

We reserve the right to protect our IP and customer security. We make no apologies for that and have always pursued threats to our business with prejudice. Wouldn't you?

Re: we "don't care" - I would suggest you haven't looked at, or chosen not to accept, what we are doing. We have stated numerous times Themes are coming with FL Studio 21.

About Apple Silicon. I am not sure why this is in any way a talking point. We spent 2 years and 1000's of man-hours developing our own VCL, development tools and porting millions of lines of code to run on ARM. Why would we throw that away while Apple transitions away from x86 CPUs?

That would be crazy.

[Image-Line]

That may have to do with the pricing model. Adding features that you want does not make any money for them. They have little incentive to give you what you want and you have no leverage. You cannot sell or refuse to buy a paid upgrade.

Always has to do with their crippled pricing model. LOL
That same worn out excuse gets so old dude.

Sigh indeed.

Are the following statements true?

• New DAW customers do not want the same features incumbent customers want.
• Market forces and competition do not influence the features DAWs include.

Only if you say yes to the above can hoxclab's & antic604's premise also be true.

Its not.

[Teksonik]

Me after asking for a Linux version.....

frank.jpg