I would say so. They have the oldest grown codebase, and yet managed to add a "meta signal" modulation system recently, which is a completely different layer of abstraction that you have to integrate into the engine. Also their DAW is the fastest available. Maybe they are slow in development, but it seems to me that they are not afraid of adding / improving core features, instead adding layers of (often crappy) stuff which you could easily can substitue with much better third party software.Igro wrote: Sat Jan 24, 2026 8:22 am Steinberg is doing well? Could you tell me where? Cubase 15 hasn't even released any update since its release (the most bugy release ever). They are very slow, seriously...
But this discussion was about brands and the public visibility/credibility of a company. Here Steinberg did it right, at least in my perspective, after doing it wrong before. Maybe Fender is a good corp, I can't tell, but investing dev time into a complete rebranding seems to be a waste of resources, in multiple ways. And it looks like a typical US corp way of thinking, when you start to produce bullshit products, e.g. faking a renew just to sell the same again, or deprecate it, just to sell new stuff. This is the mindset of people which have no connection to nature, lack of social skills and are mainly driven by greed and stupidity. Is this happening here, too?
