Go Machy, indeed! We're all hoping and cheering.monkey man wrote:Who set the entry-date to this competition?
It's not MOTU's fault K became 2 when it did.
MOTU will take its starting position when it's good and ready.
Go Machy! K2 Killer! Go Machy! K2 Killer! Go Machy! K2 Killer! Go Machy!
But the gap between M5v1 and K2 isn't a small one, one which users have had to weigh very carefully. We're now 19 months post-facto with M5v2 announcements, and that's a long time to leave consumers hanging without even a verbal update. It demands more patience and it does challenge dedication. No doubt, some of the M5 faithful have defected, at least temporarily. It's those users who have ongoing deadlines to meet who are finding K2's updated features more productive and in turn they find themselves more lucrative in the process.
The movement with K2 is hard to ignore, is all. It only draws more attention to what appears to be relative stagnance with M5 development. I'm sure that's not entirely the case-- it's just that we don't know-- and we keeping hoping-- and keep cheering:
Go Machy, Machy!
And why do we keep cheering? Because given the choice of waiting for the M5 update or getting into K2 (or K3) is again the choice of meeting production deadlines, staying compatible with coworkers-- even if it does mean starting from scratch with getting huge sample libraries formatted and stored for easy use.
But when M5v2 does arrive, it will have to meet or beat K2 in features and function. Anything less would would be a let down.
C'mon Machy, Machy! C'mon... pleeeez?