DP & Leopard... UPDATE: DP 5.13 is out!

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:08 am

kassonica wrote:stiefelmusik

Has anyone on this board ever beta tested DP, or been approached by MOTU -- or volunteered?! Just curious.
Indeed a very good question and since is was ported to OSX as i know some here have beta tested much older versions.

AFAIK, if there ARE testers on this board, they're probably not allowed to tell you as they are generally required to sign non-disclosure agreements that have differing levels of restrictions.

kassonica · Post by **kassonica** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:49 am

James I know very little about beta testing but is this standard?

I can see the reasons why (copyright etc) but after the fact why couldn't one at least admit that they were.

Sorry if i'm pushing a point here but I'm just a very curious person and i find it interesting tis all.

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:04 am

It may vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, but from what I've heard most of them would prefer their beta testers not publicly identify themselves as such. The rationale I suspect is that those people might then find themselves asked questions and pushed for information that legally they cannot give.

kassonica · Post by **kassonica** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:10 am

Makes sense I think

Thanks for your reply though.

Frodo · Post by **Frodo** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:22 am

grimepoch wrote: 5) I do not think it is a UAD problem because I duplicated a song ENTIRELY in logic and no kind of rewind lock ever. I asked UAD about it as well and they said it wasn't something they were aware of and that they suspected DP as DP does not fully follow the AU spec. .

The AU spec issue is something I've heard before from several other developers.

From what I gather, it's not 100% necessary to stick to the spec to make things just work. But, there appear to be issues where getting one third-party bit of software to work with another if one developer chooses to bend the rules while another chooses to follow the rules to the letter.

The problem here is that there is less concern with third-party developers to make their software fully compatible with one another rather than to stay competitive.

The gray area now is in redefining is meant by "competitive". Seems to me that being competitive increasingly means staying compatible. If these two levels of approach could be reconciled, we might start seeing OMF working as it should or fewer VIs battling for CPU/RAM/Core Audio domination.

grimepoch wrote: I asked MOTU and didn't get anything from them about it.

hmmm...

stiefelmusik · Post by **stiefelmusik** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:30 pm

James Steele wrote:It may vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, but from what I've heard most of them would prefer their beta testers not publicly identify themselves as such. The rationale I suspect is that those people might then find themselves asked questions and pushed for information that legally they cannot give.

It must vary from manufacturer to manufacturer then, because a friend of mine is a beta tester for Propellerheads and while he isn't allowed to discuss the program he's testing, he can at least acknowledge he's a beta tester. I sometimes jokingly taunt him to let me in on some secrets (he never does though LOL), but there appears to be no such non-disclosure clause that would require him to deny even being a beta tester if asked. I have to confess I find the concept odd, that theoretically such a non-disclosure agreement would force you to LIE if confronted. Kind of goes against the standards of honesty and integrity as a beta tester, does it not?

In any case, I'd certainly volunteer to beta test, if MOTU ever offered. I'd love to have a hand in making such a fantastic program even better!

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:22 pm

stiefelmusik wrote:It must vary from manufacturer to manufacturer then, because a friend of mine is a beta tester for Propellerheads and while he isn't allowed to discuss the program he's testing, he can at least acknowledge he's a beta tester. I sometimes jokingly taunt him to let me in on some secrets (he never does though LOL), but there appears to be no such non-disclosure clause that would require him to deny even being a beta tester if asked. I have to confess I find the concept odd, that theoretically such a non-disclosure agreement would force you to LIE if confronted. Kind of goes against the standards of honesty and integrity as a beta tester, does it not?

In any case, I'd certainly volunteer to beta test, if MOTU ever offered. I'd love to have a hand in making such a fantastic program even better!

I don't think it's spelled out within the NDA, I just think that some manufacturers would prefer that in public forums people did not identify themselves as beta testers. For example, I assume there are probably a number of people who beta test on this list, but you won't find many who are going to respond publicly to "has anyone on this board ever tested DP?"

I don't think denying one's beta tester status would necessarily go against any standards of honest and integrity, since refusing to give an answer will be construed as confirmation. If someone doesn't want it known that they are a tester to avoid "friends" pushing them for info and they lie about it, I don't think that's some huge character flaw.

MIDI Life Crisis · Post by **MIDI Life Crisis** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:20 pm

James Steele wrote: I don't think denying one's beta tester status would necessarily go against any standards of honest and integrity...

Not saying anything isn't necessarily dishonest (unless you're under oath or before Congress). I can honestly say I haven't beta tested any commercial software since my Atari days.

auptown · Post by **auptown** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:35 pm

I have been a beta tester, not for MOTU, but for other industry audio software folks. I did have to sign a rather lengthy agreement where I was explicitly banned from revealing that I was a beta tester, and that I would not reveal anything about the stuff I was testing.

So yeah, at least in this case they were pretty insistent on privacy. For this, I got to get their stuff early, and had discount offers, and so forth.

So there could be beta testers amongst us.

I have a hunch that MOTU uses this board as a pool of beta testers -- I sure would! But that's just a guess.

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:21 pm

My line when pushed about something covered in a non disclosure agreement has always simply been "I'm not at liberty to discuss it," a line I borrowed from a russian character on the space station in 2001, A Space Odyssey. An NDA almost got me in trouble one time: I was working on a project in the little town of Fountain Hills, Arizona, and was not allowed to even say that it was a musical project, much less what it was about. I'd get lonely and go to a bar to be around people. They started inviting me to parties after-hours, so I went. Then they started asking me what I did. I couldn't tell them. Some girl said I must be a narc. Pretty soon they all thought so. It got kinda scary. A guy showed up in gold chains and all the trappings of the bigshot dealer, and he looked me over and asked me if I was a narc. I said no, but I was in the entertainment business and I'd signed an NDA and could not talk about my job. He told everyone to relax, that I was telling the truth. I don't know how he thought he knew, but I was glad of it, and I got out of there and never went back. That was the end of my social life in Fountain Hills!

stiefelmusik · Post by **stiefelmusik** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:32 pm

auptown wrote:I have been a beta tester, not for MOTU, but for other industry audio software folks. I did have to sign a rather lengthy agreement where I was explicitly banned from revealing that I was a beta tester

That's interesting. I really had no idea NDA's for beta testing software can go so far as to ban you from even revealing that you're a beta tester. I figured you just couldn't discuss any details, or reveal any secrets about the program you're testing, but at least could answer your wife or girlfriend when she walks into the room and asks "Honey, why have you been spending so much time at your computer lately? And why are you covering up the monitor with your hands like that? Are you downloading porn again?!"

stephen1212b · Post by **stephen1212b** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:40 pm

I sometimes feel that we are all beta testers. I only know of one company, Gallery the author of Metacorder that maintains a stable bug free version while offering a beta version with the latest and greatest bells and whistles. Unfortunately the added features are irresistible, so everyone always uses the beta version, but it is still reassuring to know that for basic recording you have a program that is as stable as a dedicated piece of hardware. You get to pay through the nose and are burdened with a dongle for this privilege

I have mentioned this before, but I wish all software companies would operate in this fashion. It is the implied promise that a piece of software will work as advertised. I don't expect that it ever will the first time, ,but shouldn't there be a requirement that eventually a fully functional version be released. The wheel of endless progress requiring constant upgrading and never having time to stabilize and become fully functional is not the model of productivity or the hallmark of professionalism, it is just the begrudgingly accepted norm.

All that said 5.13 is as close as things have been to a trusted working environment in a while.

stiefelmusik · Post by **stiefelmusik** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:43 am

stephen1212b wrote: All that said 5.13 is as close as things have been to a trusted working environment in a while.

That's good to hear! I'm in the process of backing up all my files at the moment, with the intention of updating to 10.4.11 and DP 5.13. I've heard quite a few positive reports about this combination, so I figure it's worth a go. Over the holidays I don't plan on doing much work as it is, so I reckon it's as good a time as any to take the update plunge.

As far as all of us being beta testers as it is, I unfortunately have to agree with you. The whole pace of the software industry is such that most companies just don't have the time and resources to devote to testing and fixing bugs as they should. Just like most everything else these days, it's all about The Bottom Line.

Because companies can release updates so quickly and easily over broadband internet, it's no wonder so much software is put out there in an unstable or unfinished state. The entire user base of a program essentially becomes a huge team of beta testers, willingly or unwillingly. Quite a smart move by the software developers, actually, as irritating as it is. They can collect revenue from an initial release, and use this fresh capital to fix the bugs once the user reports come in and begin developing the next project. It's a business model I see no way to fight as a Mortal End User without a great deal of sacrifice on my part (in other words, boycotting software I might need or want just because a company follows this trend).

It's all too easy for me to become cynical and jaded about this trend, so to try and stay positive I tell myself NOT to expect too much out of software, and rely on a combination of many tools (including PEN and PAPER) to get work done. I suppose there will always be a trade-off when it comes to progress in technology (or in any field for that matter): you gain something, you lose something else.

For example, I miss the stability (and incredibly tight MIDI timing) of my Atari 1040 ST, but I would never want to give up what I have now, bugs and all!

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:43 am

I find DP 5.13 to be a bit buggy. There are new , little annoyances I never had before such as the click turning on at strange times after hitting stop, and play when I didnt have it clicked on....and having to jog the MIDI input in prefs to get MIDI to start recording and a few other new "gifts" from MOTU...

I will have to start paying attention to th bugs so I can be even more specific..In general, DP 5.13 is still pretty damn stable but I find DP 5.13 to be a bit of an annoyance and step backwards..why why why why?..lol...

martian · Post by **martian** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 1:23 am

ditto!

why why why are we all beta testers ?!!

I wished they would release a modular version - no polar - VI's - score facility - you simply pay for the parts you need..

Actually I would be reallyy happy to pay for an upgrade that added nothing! This thing is already complicated enough! what's next a fully integrated version of mac 5 -

How much would I pay? Right now DP for me is awesome - all it has to compete with is US$10K of protools rig - it's actually doing that kind of work for me - so I'd be happy to pay upto US1000 for a stable version - and I think they could make some inroads!

Mind you I saw some serious horribleness in cubase in my time....