MOTUnation.com

Well, wIt for what? 6 months for a fully functional version, good for 6 months then another semi-functional DP 10 release and no real bug fixes while MOTU develops their hardware side? That's the last time I jump on a DP upgrade. It used to be a bit better than this but it seems to be going down hill when it comes to clean releases and .1 bug fixed releases.

Best new feature with DP9 is that it doesn't overwrite DP8.

My rig was going along well with DP9, even with a big project.. but last night I tried to do some pitch automation.. crashed several times, always from making one to a few simple pitch automation edits.

Went back to DP8, and all my docs work correctly, even after saving in DP9, so, at least there's that.

Killahurts wrote:Best new feature with DP9 is that it doesn't overwrite DP8.

My rig was going along well with DP9, even with a big project.. but last night I tried to do some pitch automation.. crashed several times, always from making one to a few simple pitch automation edits.

Went back to DP8, and all my docs work correctly, even after saving in DP9, so, at least there's that.

Agreed and then some. Only thing now is DP9 becomes the default program to open a DP session if DP isn't open and you double click on the session. Of course that can be changed.

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:Well, wIt for what? 6 months for a fully functional version, good for 6 months then another semi-functional DP 10 release and no real bug fixes while MOTU develops their hardware side? That's the last time I jump on a DP upgrade. It used to be a bit better than this but it seems to be going down hill when it comes to clean releases and .1 bug fixed releases.

Yeah, I have to admit, this release is not a very good value. Should have been DP8.5 but then they could not have charged for that, really.

I don't feel completely ripped off because I'm going to stick with this DAW, and DP9 will be better in the future.. just feels like I gave MOTU a $200 loan, that's all.

Well put, but I'm not in a position to make a loan to a company. It wasn't exactly a "sacrifice" but if I knew it was going to be unusable I certainly wouldn't have been so quick to fork over my $$$.

I suppose if you wanted MX4, that was worth the price of admission alone.

Value is in the eyes of the beholder. It's hard to please everybody, when it comes to feature priorities.

Stability should come first though. Unfortunately, the current climate does not support that; I have seen it across the industry. I've been warning people about this for years. It isn't sustainable though, so at some point, the pressure to deliver bells and whistles at all costs, will diminish.

When I worked at Autodesk, after one disastrous release (with an unlucky number), it was decided that the best policy would be to alternate stability releases with feature releases.

I don't know if they have stuck with that philosophy over the years (and I still use AutoCAD -- including the code I wrote for it -- daily in the 16 years since I left the company), but there does still seem to be this idea that the native file format should only change in alternate releases.

Anyway, it gets back to the pyramid of optimizing for two out of three amongst time-to-market, stability/reliability, and features/enhancements. It's just a way of managing projects so that there is less chance of focus drift, feature creep, mission creep, etc. Everyone benefits.

Unfortunately, few people today realize that you can't have all three at the same priority level. I have seen this downward trend in professionalism and overall degradation of engineering principles across the tech industry.

Having said that, I have no reason to think that MOTU is sliding down that slippery slope themselves.

The trend has been towards pseudo-subscription models via more frequent updates and higher pricing for updates, from folks like iZotope and others.

So I think each company comes up with their own strategy to try to balance perception vs. reality in terms of value and bang-for-buck in what is essentially a long-term departure from traditional release models for software. Continuous development is the norm now. Companies struggle with the naming thing (e.g. year-based revisions, ".5" releases, other point releases, major releases, etc.).

Anyway, I'm not trying to make excuses if DP9 is as bad as people are saying -- I haven't worked with it enough yet to have run into these issues. But I think it's premature to conclude that MOTU is being sloppy and/or will make us pay again for DP10 in order to get fixes vs. putting out more point releases as in the pre-DP8 days.

My guess is that DP8 had few updates because there was a huge resource drain to focus on the Windows launch and stabilizing that platform. So that was hopefully a one-off in terms of "surprise; no more DP8 updates, but here's DP9 now".

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:Well, wIt for what? 6 months for a fully functional version, good for 6 months then another semi-functional DP 10 release and no real bug fixes while MOTU develops their hardware side? That's the last time I jump on a DP upgrade. It used to be a bit better than this but it seems to be going down hill when it comes to clean releases and .1 bug fixed releases.

I don't recall it being better in the past. 6 wasn't. 7 and 8 had bugs, and these were addressed over a few .0x updates. IIRC, it was 7.1.2 and 8.06 before things tightened up. Anyway, I don't think we're going to be waiting 6 months. Elsewhere on the forum is the message that the 9.01 update is on its way.

Maybe I'm just disappointed in getting such a buggy release l.

Should have been DP8.5 but then they could not have charged for that, really.

It wouldn't be the first time. DP 4.5 was a paid release.

Well, I wrote earlier that I struggle to see compelling reasons for upgrading right now.
I still see it that way.

8 isn't buggy.
MX4 isn't worth $200.
And the rest?
Meh.

BKK-OZ wrote:Well, I wrote earlier that I struggle to see compelling reasons for upgrading right now.
I still see it that way.

8 isn't buggy.
MX4 isn't worth $200.
And the rest?
Meh.

I think MX 4 cost more than 200 when they sold it. I wonder if they still DO sell it for DP 8 and other DAWS?

Dunno if they still sell it seperately.
There are a number of VI's that I would invest in before spending $200 on MX4.

mikehalloran wrote:

Should have been DP8.5 but then they could not have charged for that, really.

It wouldn't be the first time. DP 4.5 was a paid release.

I had not forgotten that.. but IIRC, the 4.5 update was significant, well worth the price for what it offered. The problem with some here seems to be paying $200 and getting a buggy release that doesn't have enough new features to merit an entire numeral upgrade (8 to 9).

If any number of people still paid more than $200 for MX4, it wouldn't be free with DP.